Okay, apologies for saying this, since I try to avoid being too political here.
But... I think some people need to understand why countries have a police force.
Because in recent times, I've seen a few... somewhat extreme reactions to certain events, with some people outright saying they should abolish the police entirely.
And I get it. I really do get the logic here. The situation in many places is pretty damn bad, and there's a lot of corruption and brutality in the police, especially in the United States. Way too many of them get away with crimes that a civilian would go to prison for years for, way too many of them are racist, and far too few of them know how to handle a protest or criticism without resulting to mindness, needless violence for the sake of it.
So we definitely need reform there, and we need a lot of it.
However, that doesn't mean we can have a society without one altogether. A society without a police force (or any form of law enforcement) wil quickly turn into a dystopian nightmare of the type that'll make the recent protests look like a peaceful day at the park.
Don't believe me?
Go check out how things are doing in certain parts of South America. Or the middle east. Or Africa.
Many places there are basically war zones due to a non existent, poorly funded or utterly outgunned police force. Without the police, they end up overrun and controlled by organised crime, with results far worse than police brutality in the states could ever be. If no one keeps crime in check, the role of the police will end up taken up by organised crime (cartels, mafia, yazuka, triads, etc), street gangs, vigilantes or mobs, with no interest at all in reasonable force, innocence until proven guilty, human rights, etc.
Or alternatively, they end up going martial law and calling in the army to deal with things, which is probably not much better.
So no. You really do not want to literally abolish the police/law enforcement. They need a lot of reform for sure, and that reform might involve hiring new police to replace pretty much all the old ones to try and root out systemic corruption or what not, but you need some sort of law enforcement none the less.
Not to mention what some of these armed forces over here are doing to these protesters! Literally pushing them to the ground, making them bleed and injuring their eyes! What is happening?!
studies have shown that those dumbass "reminders" actually do increase the chances of a given viewer subscribing. Really it's the only thing that keeps me from outright despising those moments.I know this is extremely minor, but my gosh am I tired of having every YouTube video I watch be flooded with "MaKe sUrE tO hIt tHaT beLl aNd sUbScRiBe!!". If people want to subscribe they don't need to be reminded, people aren't stupid. Some channels even show statistics that the majority of their viewers aren't subscribed when I don't even think the subscriber count is an accurate portrayal of how successful a channel is there. When you first enter the site, it shows you random videos (with subscribed stuff mixed in), which I assume is what most people watch, so of course it would make sense for not a lot of them to be subscribed since they probably just randomly came there. Plus, think of how many people have been subscribed to someone and totally forget about them, leading to "dead subscribers" as they are sometimes called, not to mention the big kids channels that are probably just all filled with bots anyways. It's just all a weird system.
Talking of YouTube, I'm getting sick of every video there seemingly being padded out to no end, likely for similar reasons. Like, a recent video I watched about Paper Mario talked about how many coins you needed to beat the game, but ended up spending about 25 minutes of a 30 minute video just recapping the entire game, plot spoilers and all.
I get why (advertising, engagement and promotional setups are better for longer videos), but damn it was clear the creator was just trying to fill out space without regard to whether the extra content was remotely relevant.
Yes yes, this has definitely trended this year! Karen is another term that has trended. With certain people, they will call you Karen if you have an opinion they don't like. It's funny because I read an argument earlier this year where both sides were calling each other Karen multiple times, and its supposed insult loses its meaning.I haven’t been in a “ranty” (pardon the nonce word) mood for a time. Not because there’s nothing for me to rant about, since there are more than enough things that I can, and probably will, do a future rant about, given the current state of affairs of the world, but more because I had other things to mind. Anyway, for now I will keep it fairly shallow:
Despite generally liking neologisms (recently coined words or meanings to words), like Karen for example, I have a strong aversion to the word simp, or at the very least to how extremely loose the term has often come to be applied in recent times.
It used to be a term to describe guys and men who are overly devotious to a girl or woman to the point that they worship them as much as, or possibly even more than, misogynists dislike them. Hence the origin of the word as a shortening of simpleton, as these kind of people are often incapable of seeing the faults of their objects of obsession, i.e. the famous “love makes blind”.
But nowadays, the term is often used to describe almost any act towards a woman that is considered to be even a tiny bit above-averagely generous. Even things that used to be a completely normal social standard (and I’m not calling about standards of decades or even years ago, but just about things that were considered normal before this whole “simp” madness took off, about half a year ago or so) are now viewed as something that is strange or makes one look a weirdo by both men and women alike, although, interestingly, this whole “simp” thing per se seems to be an almost exclusively male phenomenon. I guess it has something to do with gender stereotypes or something like that (I don’t know, I’m not a sociologist), but I’m sure it has almost certainly something to do with how quickly people are offended these days, and how there are lots of snowflakes (Another neologism that I like) that will call anyone and everything sexist if it doesn’t confirm to their extremely strict standards.
Of course, being mostly an internet phenomenon, the whole thing is to be taken with a large dose of irony, and I’m very well aware of that. But sadly, as with almost any instance of irony, there are always people who still take it seriously, or mistake others for taking it seriously.
(Also see my post above this one, which is somewhat related to this.)
Anyway, I’m probably ranting about something that isn’t even worth ranting about, but just for the sake of having something to rant about, I will post this anyway, whether people may agree with it or not. I just hope this whole rant doesn’t make me look like some male Karen. But I don’t think it will.
TL;DR: The word simp has become a really crappy term.
Yes yes, this has definitely trended this year! Karen is another term that has trended. With certain people, they will call you Karen if you have an opinion they don't like. It's funny because I read an argument earlier this year where both sides were calling each other Karen multiple times, and its supposed insult loses its meaning.
Same thing with simp. Yes there are people who joke about it. Yes there are people who will do literally anything for someone who doesn't even know them. However there are now people who will call someone a simp because they were nice to someone (mostly female). Ah yes, how dare someone display a kind gesture amongst an individual they care about? What a simp, am I right?
Simp and Karen are two buzzwords people use nowadays that quickly lose any meaning when used over and over.