And I don’t mean things you previously had no strong opinion about.

What is a belief you used to hold that you no longer do, and what/who made you change your mind about it?

  • 31415926535@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    I used to identify as Libertarianian. Resented taxes, overreaching, infiltrating my life, all about independence, don’t want to be interfered with.

    Then I became homeless. Realized how the social services, ssi, Medicare are important. Sure there are lazy people, but also those who genuinely need help, who want to get back on their feet. Care a lot more now about wanting to live in a society that actually cares about the people in it.

  • 🦄🦄🦄@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Eating animals. I used to be the Making-fun-of-vegans, I-will-never-be-vegan type of person until I realised that 1) I don’t have to eat animals to be healthy and 2) if there is no need to do it, killing animals for taste pleasure is fucking evil.

  • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    For a long time I thought the whole pronoun /name /being outta the closet thing didn’t personally matter to me to make the effort to attempt to change it.

    Yeah I figured out I was trans at age 21 in the quite distant past but like my partner had sex characteristic preferences that meant that as long as I prioritized him in my long term goals I wasn’t physically changing. I figured you know boo hoo I was ugly and people didn’t really get me most of the time but you know… Big deal? I was stable enough. I wasn’t under particular hardship because aside from some vague presentation pressure from time to time everyone just basically accepted I was quirky and liked me enough without putting much emphasis on my gender anyway… I ended up trying gender neutral pronouns basically as a lark, a way of proving to myself that I was fine.

    Turns out I was not fine.

    I didn’t realize how shit I felt on a regular basis nor how much less energy all my social connections would need once I made the changeover. I really didn’t realize that such a tiny thing was subtly poisoning every single interaction I had with people. I stopped experiencing stress heartburn and headaches after time spent with friends. I was usually pretty quiet and withdrawn but I actually started being generally more gregarious and active. I stopped feeling invisible and lonely. I went from low key disliking people to actually liking them. It was like someone suddenly replaced my batteries. I never expected something so small to make so big a difference.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Elon Musk.

    Sure, I thought, the guy’s probably an ass hole considering the amount of exwives he has. A rich cunt billionaire. But Steve Jobs wasn’t a nice guy either, but without his… Uh… “special” nature certain aspects of computers would’ve been decades behind.

    But then I started listening to engineers, ones who could see through the hype that Elon Musk seems to create for everything he does, because they understood the numbers behind everything he claims and promises.

    And I realised, Elon is full of shit. He’s not doing anything that manufacturers didn’t already know how to do, and he’s selling it like he invented it.

    This realisation came well before he bought twitter. When he did buy Twitter and started using it as his own… Plaything, I realised he’s actually an immature idiot.

  • UnPassive@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I was raised Mormon, am now atheist. Regret every conversation I had in high school about gay marriage. And evolution.

  • Nollij@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    The McDonald’s hot coffee incident.

    It’s a trivial example, but it reflects all sorts of issues in modern society.

    I had bought into the McDonald’s PR, believing it to be a symptom of an overly litigious society, people blaming all of their issues on others, etc.

    But then I actually looked into it, instead of taking it at face value. The face that was created by a very interested party (most notably the defendants in that same lawsuit, but also right-wing pundits pushing a narrative)

    When I did, I saw for the first time the claims made by the plaintiff. These were never included in any media coverage. I hadn’t considered that the coffee was abnormally hot, and to a significant level (industry average is about 130F, this was around 180F). I had no idea about the 3rd degree burns in 7 seconds. The words “Fused Labia” had never been seen together. The multiple other similar lawsuits. The offers to settle for medical expenses. And so on…

    And the worst part (in my mind), that forced me to take a 180 on the issue?

    The entire reason for the coffee being that hot was to save money. This had nothing to do with personal responsibility, or a free payday. This was a megacorp selling a known dangerous product, selling pain and suffering, just to put a few extra pennies in their coffers. This had more in common with the lead/cadmium mugs (also McDonald’s) and tobacco than anything to do with freedom.

    I’m not going to say it radicalized me, but it was definitely an Emperor’s New Clothes moment.

  • trolske@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Trigger warnings.
    I used to think they are for overly sensitive people, then life happened and now I have my own triggers and would like a trigger warning for certain topics.

      • ChexMax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Duh doy! That’s the point of them! They let people know who’s experiences lead them to be over sensitive to things so they can choose whether or not they avoid media. And that’s a good thing! Trigger warnings hurt no one and if you can’t spare literally three seconds at the start of something to protect someone else’s peace, you’re selfish and probably not a good community member.

        • OneLemmyMan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          how, how is it possible for me to know each persons triggers so i can warn them? even this discussion could be a trigger, did u preface ur comments with a warning? Its arrogant and only for spoiled privileged people to ask for trigger warnings. It takes 0 efford to stop talking or listening to what “triggers” you. just because ur entitled ass thinks that you are the center of the world and everyone should care about ur silly sensitivities doesn’t mean its going to happen. I swear only rich (relatively to the rest of the world) first world people have these arrogant and entitled demands.

          • other_cat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Let me put things in this perspective.

            It’s not realistic to expect to be able to put trigger warnings for a large population of strangers on the internet. You’re right; when putting it in blanket terms like that, it is silly.

            However, there are two things where you could be mindful of others. The first are talking about highly prevalent and violent topics in detail: rape, csa, domestic abuse springs to mind. Things where you probably either know of, or have heard of, someone suffering long term as a direct result of the trauma these events inflict.

            But if that’s still too broad for you, then you should keep your close friends and family into consideration and talk to them if you know one of them has gone through an extremely difficult life event. If nobody in your personal circle has experienced such things, then like the other commenter said: I’m very happy for you and them. If someone has, then even just saying “Hey do you want a heads up if this topic comes up in our group chat?” is enough. Maybe they’ll say yes. Maybe they’ll say no. But now you know what their wishes are and can act accordingly with respect to that.

            Honestly that’s all people really want, I think.

  • mathemachristian@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The ussr and china were evil and nato were the good guys fighting for freedom.

    Boy was I wrong on that one. What changed my mind were the tankies on hexbear who consistently were the most knowledgable on a topic and kept being correct with (what I thought at the time) the most obviously incorrect takes.

    • Thorny_Insight@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’d be curious to hear your justification for the attack on Ukraine then or the treatment of Uighurs in China.

      • mathemachristian@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That comes after very in-depth reading. What got me that far to even trust their judgement that this kind of research would be worth my time was the fact that they were consistently right about takes on the USSR that seemed ludicrous. Just that they seemed to really know their stuff about USSR history especially the Stalin era. So I started reading

        Michael Parenti - Blackshirts and Reds

        a rather short book about anticommunism in the west. I already had very left views but what stuck with me was that I required a revolution to be “perfect”, the outcome sure and everyone had to be happy, an unrealistic standard considering the kind of fundamental change I envisioned. Or in Parenti’s words:

        The pure socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.

        Once I had conceded my previous “anti-tankie” views and thought of the USSR not as a failed revolution that started of well-intentioned but was led astray by power hungry dictators, but as a successful revolution that had to endure a constant onslaught, physical as well as political, I was “through the looking glass” so to speak.

        Then the genocide in Gaza happened and I kind of looked at the countries we were allied with, who were consistently some of the worst offenders of human rights. The whole supporting violent dictatorships in former colonies wasn’t news to me, but when put into perspective I had a “Damn we really are the baddies aren’t we” moment.

        I realise that this doesn’t answer your question on Ukraine and the Uighurs but that’s because I don’t have the time right now to get into a debate on that, and the original question was on what changed my mind about it which was less the actual research I then put into, but the heavy-lifting on even questioning the western narrative was done before that.

        To answer your question in a nutshell however: The reason the situation in Ukraine deteriorated this far, to the point that the ethnic russians in Ukraine had to even put up “self-defense” forces was meddling of western capitalist forces. The article that I keep referencing on that is ( CW for pictures of dead bodies and gruesome descriptions of fascist violence):

        https://covertactionmagazine.com/2022/07/29/what-the-u-s-government-and-the-new-york-times-have-quietly-agreed-not-to-tell-you-about-ukraine/

        The open fascism in the paramilitary groups that later got put under the umbrella of the Ukrainian army was an open question mark for me, this article gives a very detailed answer to that. The details in that report post 2014 are corroborated in the UN reports as well:

        https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents-listing?field_geolocation_target_id[1136]=1136&field_content_category_target_id[180]=180&field_content_category_target_id[182]=182&field_entity_target_id[1349]=1349&field_entity_target_id[1350]=1350&sort_bef_combine=field_published_date_value_DESC

        As for the so-called “genocide” of Uighurs in China, the “evidence” is very very circumstantial especially considering the scale alleged. Millions of people are alleged to be held in internment at some point, a scale that should be visible from space. I mean manhattan has a population of 1.7 million, where are all these people interned?? As an example of one of the oddities about the whole allegations. The only countries that seem to care are outspoken anti-communist countries, with the whole muslim world not considering the crackdown on religious extremism in Xinjiang a genocide. All the articles I kept getting linked were “oh how terrible the situation there is, what an evil evil government” with no one seemingly caring about the actual people. It’s all just treated as an abstract talking point. And the only references boiling down to two reports by Adrian Zenz

        https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02634937.2018.1507997

        https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02634937.2021.1946483

        a person with some questionable viewpoints

        https://books.google.de/books?id=lRtSQB3HHJcC&printsec=frontcover&hl=fr&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

        All the stuff around it seems to be pushed by Washington based anti-communist thinktanks trying to establish an “east turkestan”. The whole movement is heavily US-financed. See here for more info:

        https://hexbear.net/post/2361

        That’s what changed my mind about it all anyway, but like I said I probably will not be able to go into more depth about this, as I have spent too much time on this already.

  • intensely_human@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Weapons as a human right.

    I was on the fence about it before. But then I was homeless, got attacked by a stranger and beaten pretty badly, was saved by some other strangers because the guy showed no signs of stopping.

    After that I went to buy some pepper spray to carry with me, and was notified it required a license. Being a homeless man I couldn’t get licenses for things.

    I realized that it’s a problem if weapons are treated like something you need to earn privilege to own, because the underprivileged then won’t have them.

    That’s why I realized it’s important we treat weapons as a human right, not as a privilege to be earned if you’re nice.

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I was homeless (thanks to 2008). My mom got attacked by a nutcase over fresh water. A metal pipe that was lying about seemed to work just fine.

      See, having weapons as a human right just creates escalation. Nobody died that day. People got hurt, sure, but nobody died. Now imagine the same situation, my mom getting attacked over fresh water, but everyone involved was armed with weapons.

      Yeah, that would’ve been a bloodbath.

  • Thorny_Insight@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    For me one of the most recent things I’ve changed my mind about was my stance on (Finland) joining NATO. I used to oppose the idea because I was uninformed and thought that if a member state somewhere far away gets attacked that means I’m almost guranteed to be sent there fighting. I also didn’t think an actual hot conflict was a realistic threat in the civilized western world or atleast that the possibility of something like that was extremely small. Suffice to say I was proven wrong.