When you take Disney movies as a source to understand... anything really, you're going to be disappointed.
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2025
10 points (60.9% liked)
Unpopular Opinion
8284 readers
27 users here now
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
6. Defend your opinion
This is a bit of a mix of rules 4 and 5 to help foster higher quality posts. You are expected to defend your unpopular opinion in the post body. We don't expect a whole manifesto (please, no manifestos), but you should at least provide some details as to why you hold the position you do.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well it was just an example of a cultural stereotype.
To be honest, it's not about looks, income or a gazillion other superficial things. It is about attachment style and how much work we've done to heal our own old wounds, regardless of who hurt us or whose fault it is.
Exactly, I'm not attractive either but I don't think I'm a better person for it. Being good in a relationship is about being mature enough.
I agree and also I think that older people and attractive people have something in common - they have most likely had more practice being in relationships. My relationships have been much nicer and enjoyable since I got to my late 30s and older.
Not everyone wants to work on themselves though, and it's important to try notice the signs early on in the dating process.
Attractiveness is a boon (among other things, and even then it's kinda low on the list, at least for guys), and the less you have of it the worse your life will be (everything else being equal, ofc) and the more you have to deal with emotionally, consequently. I don't condone lashing out or just being an immature prick in a "hurt people hurt people" kinda way, but I understand it. 🤷
I think those movies were made to counteract the bias that ugly men are also ugly on the inside. But yeah, appearance isn't a very good indicator of personality. I actually didn't know this was a common belief, but I'm a man.
The myth that nerds are all wonderful people who are mis understood is just that, a myth.
I have known many nerds who are total assholes and treat people like shit. Is that because of how they were treated is how they learned to treat others? maybe. Thing is it doesn't matter why someone is an asshole.
The other side of this is that when it comes to someone treating you right or treating you better is really almost all about how you define that.
I would turn it around:
When a guy is very good looking on the outside, then there's a good chance that he has never learned how to be nice (to a girl or to anybody), because he never needed any specific behaviour in his life.
Belief in physiognomy was a cultural fact for quite a long time, in one form or another.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiognomy
It's interesting that you think that's what the message was though because it was saying the inverse, that ugly looks don't determine an ugly character, or good looks a good character.