"Just go watch Porn!" (Probably NFSW, duh)

[I can't enter my old name]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

OP is not objectively wrong, nor is he making positive statements. He says "I feel its incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves." He never said that all porn is fake and people aren't enjoying themselves. He says from his experience this is the case.

Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

Probably because that's not actually an 'argument', per se. It's just a question.

His argument is why this argument is not persuasive. It may not be an argument in the technical definition, but let me say my argument. Internet porn and ecchi is different. One has a different goal in mind when watching both.

we still have an issue that the people who seem to be most interested in considering this an attack frequently criticise and judge other people's taste in media. Especially as it related to video games. If this really is something that they consider an attack, then maybe they shouldn't do it either.

Yeah... it's bizarre for sure.

Made even more bizarre by the way that it's usually the "SJWs" who are normally the ones who are accused of constantly finding offense in other people's words and having 'thin skins' and all that jazz.

It's because the "SJWs" are finding offense in other people's tastes, and they use flimsy reasoning to justify their beliefs. OP's argument is literally an example.

 

[StatusNil]

StausNil literally comparing everyone criticizing the game to Hitler

Guppy pls, a comparison was made to "zealous cultists" who think everybody is either them or Hitler. Do we have to whip out our respective dictionaries again, this time concerning "literally"?

Not to mention it wasn't "everyone criticizing the game", it was the people who reduce everything to simplistic binaries like "porn" vs. "not porn", and want everything representing the type at its most elementary. "This falls under the category "porn" because the boobies present cross the 'non-sexualized' size threshold and exposure percentage. Yet it shows no close-ups of genitalia, thus FAILING as porn!" That kind of mindset.

Speaking as a Cultural Critic, I'd say this is an example of a tendency a quarantine the erotic into a distinct zone that is forcefully marked as separate from other aspects of culture. Probably a symptom of profound anxieties arising from the alienation inherent in post-Cartesian splitting of the subjective experience and the often debalanced valuation of the constituent elements, resulting from the usual auto-generated biases of perspective.

This, to be sure, is merely a humble overture to stimulate discussion. But it does point to urgent priorities in our analytical mission, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Ikasury]

sooooo... 'porn is boring because no one looks like they're having fun and it seems fake' as well as 'also not pretty/appealing' and 'not into my kink'...

i think that basically explains why i watch hentai if i bother with porn at all... at least then its fucked up and in some way hilarious XD

though harem stuff is just bland...

but yea, sure, if you like DoA for its jiggle physics then why not? its enjoying the view and working with voyeurism, which can lead to more brain-kink later... while regular porn which is JUST mechanical sex... ugh, that's boring and probably a quick way to end any mental-boner...

though i take it the wording is the finicky thing *shrugs* well they can watch their bland porn, i'll go watch my murder by tentacles, kthxbi!

 

[Techno Squidgy]

Well there's shitloads of amateur stuff out there (which is what I generally go for).

Just to point out, a lot of amateur porn is about as authentic: people staging for the camera.

That may be true, but there's something a lot more "real" about 2 people, a camera, and some humpin', than 2+ people, 1 or more cameras, a film crew, multiple takes, shot transitions, etc. etc.

It just seems more genuine.

 

[JamesStone]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Guppy pls, a comparison was made to "zealous cultists" who think everybody is either them or Hitler. Do we have to whip out our respective dictionaries again, this time concerning "literally"?

Actually I did misread (you'll have to forgive me, I was speeding through posts), you were detailing "zealous/cultist progressives" who draw distinctions between themselves and "super Hitler". So while you did feel it was necessary to evoke Hitler to establish your straw man, you did not actually level the distinction at people criticizing the game. I will downgrade your blanket pejorative from "Hitler" to "Cultist".

Not to mention it wasn't "everyone criticizing the game", it was the people who reduce everything to simplistic binaries like "porn" vs. "not porn"

Yes, I do find it very exhausting when people reduce things to simple binaries. For example right thinking individuals like yourself, and the zealous progressive cultists you oppose.

This, to be sure, is merely a humble overture to stimulate discussion.

Thank goodness, because at first read it felt like a bemusingly transparent attempt to obfuscate discussion by pillaging your first year philosophy textbook. I would definitely agree that this thread is revealing of an unusual level of anxiety, but it primarily seems to manifest as the anxiety of people who don't deal well with having their taste in media questioned or criticized.

It's almost as if that's some kind of ongoing theme.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

 

[StatusNil]

Yes, I do find it very exhausting when people reduce things to simple binaries. For example right thinking individuals like yourself, and the zealous progressive cultists you oppose.

Hmm? This isn't about who's "right thinking", that's a vain ambition, and I certainly wouldn't pose as some exemplar myself. The idea is ludicrous, I'm merely MOAR right than one of them zealous cultists because I at least get that.

Thank goodness, because at first read it felt like a bemusingly transparent attempt to obfuscate discussion by pillaging your first year philosophy textbook. I would definitely agree that this thread is revealing of an unusual level of anxiety, but it primarily seems to manifest as the anxiety of people who don't deal well with having their taste in media questioned or criticized.

What's so bemusing about transparency? Anyways, it's obviously a relatively anxiety-free pursuit to question, criticize, and indeed cynically harrumph at, people's taste in media, so maybe we should just all do that, instead of getting caught enjoying something for whatever reason. Though some say such life lacks true zest, at least we'll have the dignity of our sour rectitude.

 

[JamesStone]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

"All niggers/chinks/[whatever the slang for jew is]/retarded/non-aryan people are the scum of the Earth and deserve nothing but painful execution".


Feel free to invoke Godwin's law. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion, and I'm starting to believe that bullshit about PCness gone wrong or whatever if we truly reached an age where every opinion is supposed to be this precious little thing that can never be wrong. If you think the Earth was born 6000 years ago, that's all fine and dandy, it's your opinion, but your opinion is wrong, and being an opinion does absolutely nothing to prevent it from being wrong.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

"All niggers/chinks/[whatever the slang for jew is]/retarded/non-aryan people are the scum of the Earth and deserve nothing but painful execution".


Feel free to invoke Godwin's law. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion, and I'm starting to believe that bullshit about PCness gone wrong or whatever if we truly reached an age where every opinion is supposed to be this precious little thing that can never be wrong. If you think the Earth was born 6000 years ago, that's all fine and dandy, it's your opinion, but your opinion is wrong, and being an opinion does absolutely nothing to prevent it from being wrong.

In the case of YEC's, it's a fact that can be disputed. They're just incorrectly using the word "opinion".

As to the first statement, that's an opinion that not many people agree with, but it is an opinion nonetheless. It can't be right or wrong, by definition.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

This isn't about who's "right thinking", that's a vain ambition, and I certainly wouldn't pose as some exemplar myself.

I would probably hesitate to fling hostile labels around, in that case. People who live in glass houses, etc, etc.

Anyways, it's obviously a relatively anxiety-free pursuit to question, criticize, and indeed cynically harrumph at, people's taste in media, so maybe we should just all do that, instead of getting caught enjoying something for whatever reason. Though some say such life lacks true zest, at least we'll have the dignity of our sour rectitude.

Yes, because to criticize one thing is to be unable to enjoy anything. If it heartens you to believe that those who dislike Dead or Alive Xtreme are embroiled in "sour rectitude" or are possessed of fundamentalist puritan zeal that is your prerogative, I suppose. Surely there can't be any other, less sensational reasons.

 

[Something Amyss]

That may be true, but there's something a lot more "real" about 2 people, a camera, and some humpin', than 2+ people, 1 or more cameras, a film crew, multiple takes, shot transitions, etc. etc.

It just seems more genuine.

But a good chunk of the pro stuff now looks like that, too. Worse, pizza guys and pool boys have practically been put out of business!

 

[JamesStone]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

"All niggers/chinks/[whatever the slang for jew is]/retarded/non-aryan people are the scum of the Earth and deserve nothing but painful execution".


Feel free to invoke Godwin's law. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion, and I'm starting to believe that bullshit about PCness gone wrong or whatever if we truly reached an age where every opinion is supposed to be this precious little thing that can never be wrong. If you think the Earth was born 6000 years ago, that's all fine and dandy, it's your opinion, but your opinion is wrong, and being an opinion does absolutely nothing to prevent it from being wrong.

In the case of YEC's, it's a fact that can be disputed. They're just incorrectly using the word "opinion".

As to the first statement, that's an opinion that not many people agree with, but it is an opinion nonetheless. It can't be right or wrong, by definition.

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment:
to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.:
to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6.
a favorable estimate; esteem:
I haven't much of an opinion of him.


Notice how absolutely nothing in the DEFINITION of opinion says it can't be right or wrong. It can, and many are. If you think the sky is blue, that's your opinion, and you're wrong and possibly sick.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

"All niggers/chinks/[whatever the slang for jew is]/retarded/non-aryan people are the scum of the Earth and deserve nothing but painful execution".


Feel free to invoke Godwin's law. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion, and I'm starting to believe that bullshit about PCness gone wrong or whatever if we truly reached an age where every opinion is supposed to be this precious little thing that can never be wrong. If you think the Earth was born 6000 years ago, that's all fine and dandy, it's your opinion, but your opinion is wrong, and being an opinion does absolutely nothing to prevent it from being wrong.

In the case of YEC's, it's a fact that can be disputed. They're just incorrectly using the word "opinion".

As to the first statement, that's an opinion that not many people agree with, but it is an opinion nonetheless. It can't be right or wrong, by definition.

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment:
to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.:
to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6.
a favorable estimate; esteem:
I haven't much of an opinion of him.


Notice how absolutely nothing in the DEFINITION of opinion says it can't be right or wrong. It can, and many are. If you think the sky is blue, that's your opinion, and you're wrong and possibly sick.

Are we really at the dictionary point? Alright then, how do you prove an opinion wrong?

 

[I can't enter my old name]

I'm here to defend OP's tastes. Some people think anime girls are weird, and regular porn is fine. Neither are weird, both are fine.

Again, is the issue about his tastes, or his frustration and depression around real women? That's not a taste, that's a disability.

Disability? Perhaps OP got tired of watching real porn and now prefers anime girls or something. Maybe he was like "I've seen it all, I want something new" or something like that. I don't know anything about his life, so i'm not going to make any assumptions or judge.

Perhaps it would be better to ask OP for clarification what he meant by his frustration and depression with real women. It might not be as bad as it sounds.

 

[Callate]

It's more than a little weird to me in general that so many people seem to want everything sexual in media to be ghettoized into the pornography category. Honestly, it seems kind of unhealthy; it's like pretending that sex has absolutely no role in our lives except for this one little hidden room in the back where anything goes.

One more strange side-effect of the Internet, I guess.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

It's more than a little weird to me in general that so many people seem to want everything sexual in media to be ghettoized into the pornography category.

Why is it a presumption that "pornography" indicates a ghetto category? Certainly there is problematic pornography, but it's an extremely generalized label that covers an extremely wide range of erotic material. It's not a default snarl word. There's an entire thread of people here shrugging at pornography and saying they have no problem with it, and yet we still have people chiming in to share their distress at the designation. It's baffling.

 

[JamesStone]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

"All niggers/chinks/[whatever the slang for jew is]/retarded/non-aryan people are the scum of the Earth and deserve nothing but painful execution".


Feel free to invoke Godwin's law. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion, and I'm starting to believe that bullshit about PCness gone wrong or whatever if we truly reached an age where every opinion is supposed to be this precious little thing that can never be wrong. If you think the Earth was born 6000 years ago, that's all fine and dandy, it's your opinion, but your opinion is wrong, and being an opinion does absolutely nothing to prevent it from being wrong.

In the case of YEC's, it's a fact that can be disputed. They're just incorrectly using the word "opinion".

As to the first statement, that's an opinion that not many people agree with, but it is an opinion nonetheless. It can't be right or wrong, by definition.

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment:
to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.:
to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6.
a favorable estimate; esteem:
I haven't much of an opinion of him.


Notice how absolutely nothing in the DEFINITION of opinion says it can't be right or wrong. It can, and many are. If you think the sky is blue, that's your opinion, and you're wrong and possibly sick.

Are we really at the dictionary point? Alright then, how do you prove an opinion wrong?

Case by case analysis. In my previous example, we prove the sky isn't red (said blue my mistake) by goddamned looking at it. We prove black people aren't inheritly inferior by scientific analysis.

And yes, when you're going around appropriating words and needlessly change their meaning just to fit an agenda/argument, we get to the dictionary point.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

I have to admit. When I watch or read something with a good plot but heaps of sex scenes in it like Game Of Thrones or Spartacus I tend to get annoyed, sex is only interesting when you are horny. I like to be tittilated as much as the next guy but once we have established these characters are in love/are promiscuous/having an affair/whatever, you are just wasting time for me that could be spent on plot or whatever. I much prefer it when they just show a bit of making out, give us some boobs for eyecandy and then quickly move on, rather than long awkward scenes of them bouncing on top of each other in various positions.

Mind you Im probably a hypocrite saying that because I enjoy gratuitous violence and action but that could have the same thing said of it.

Oh and dude go to Pornhub, its free and theres plenty of pretty girls there for free. Surely a guy who likes boobs as much as you cant turn down Mia Khalifa.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The responses are attacking him.

Nah, not really. Only someone with remarkably thin skin would deem these responses as personal attacks.

OP literally describes (IRL) porn as "incredibly fake, and most of the time people aren't actually enjoying themselves". If the OP scoured the internet for porn and came to the above conclusion, then the OP is both objectively wrong and also he didn't look very hard.

Pointing this out is not a personal attack on him.

Is it? That's the view he gets from looking at porn and you're saying he's wrong about his tastes. It is a ton of posts just saying the OP's opinion is wrong, he doesn't know what he's talking about, he has emotional problems, etc. Very few people are actually addressing his argument (which is "why is he told to "just go watch porn" when this is what he wants" in case anyone forgot).

So what? An opinion can be wrong, and many are. I'm honestly flabbergastered every time I hear this argument. It's like when someone tries to justify a crappy play/book/whatever entire class of entertainment the pseudo-intellectuals cluster around by saying "It's a metaphor!". So what? There is such a thing as a shitty metaphor, and there is such a thing as a shitty, wrong opinion.

That is not at all true. There are opinions you don't agree with. There are opinions that not many people agree with. There are poorly researched opinions. But there is no such thing as a wrong opinion.

"All niggers/chinks/[whatever the slang for jew is]/retarded/non-aryan people are the scum of the Earth and deserve nothing but painful execution".


Feel free to invoke Godwin's law. There is such a thing as a wrong opinion, and I'm starting to believe that bullshit about PCness gone wrong or whatever if we truly reached an age where every opinion is supposed to be this precious little thing that can never be wrong. If you think the Earth was born 6000 years ago, that's all fine and dandy, it's your opinion, but your opinion is wrong, and being an opinion does absolutely nothing to prevent it from being wrong.

In the case of YEC's, it's a fact that can be disputed. They're just incorrectly using the word "opinion".

As to the first statement, that's an opinion that not many people agree with, but it is an opinion nonetheless. It can't be right or wrong, by definition.

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
2.
a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
3.
the formal expression of a professional judgment:
to ask for a second medical opinion.
4.
Law. the formal statement by a judge or court of the reasoning and the principles of law used in reaching a decision of a case.
5.
a judgment or estimate of a person or thing with respect to character, merit, etc.:
to forfeit someone's good opinion.
6.
a favorable estimate; esteem:
I haven't much of an opinion of him.


Notice how absolutely nothing in the DEFINITION of opinion says it can't be right or wrong. It can, and many are. If you think the sky is blue, that's your opinion, and you're wrong and possibly sick.

Are we really at the dictionary point? Alright then, how do you prove an opinion wrong?

Case by case analysis. In my previous example, we prove the sky isn't red (said blue my mistake) by goddamned looking at it. We prove black people aren't inheritly inferior by scientific analysis.

And yes, when you're going around appropriating words and needlessly change their meaning just to fit an agenda/argument, we get to the dictionary point.

So you prove facts. What about opinions?