If you could eliminate one thing in the world, what would it be?

[Barleymower]

Fully agree Barleymower.

If I had to choose only one then it would be clothing - freedom of choice, expression and individuality for all.

Having said that I could happily be without people! They are the route of all problems via religion, politics, bigotry, hypocrisy... Then I would not be here so that is a bit drastic! Will need to find away to to achieve Barleymowers choice, harmony, that will, hopefully deal with society and people.

I am very lucky to be supported by my family. It such a simple thing and as many here point out; society barely bats an eye and yet it can be very painful for others.

[Coder]

I hope everyone here replying has read The Lathe of Heaven before contemplating their answer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lathe_of_Heaven

[Barleymower]

Hell's teeth, what a pickle.

[TheSkirtedMan]

Fully agree Barleymower.

If I had to choose only one then it would be clothing - freedom of choice, expression and individuality for all.

Having said that I could happily be without people! They are the route of all problems via religion, politics, bigotry, hypocrisy... Then I would not be here so that is a bit drastic! Will need to find away to to achieve Barleymowers choice, harmony, that will, hopefully deal with society and people.

I am very lucky to be supported by my family. It such a simple thing and as many here point out; society barely bats an eye and yet it can be very painful for others.

Only one of my wife's cousins raised concerns, families are OK as well as a good group of friends. In my own world I go about skirted and only challenged directly twice in 11 years. However, body language, looks by a minority give a message. General comments on social media give a negative message. Society with its clothing expectations via restrictions for men, not for women, give a negative message. I do not doubt many privately will and do mock men like us and say nothing to us but I can and do go about as a man in a skirt publicly as mentioned on this forum before and on the whole well received and have many positive interactions. My volunteering role puts me in direct contact with the public in the thousands, not passing by and it is within this role two visitors decided to challenge of which they lost! Many enquire politely why, and are very understanding when told freedom of choice, expression and individuality. However, the fact that they enquire of men, never of women, signifies a message. I acknowledge that a few that I encounter within my life do gracefully disappear, they say nothing but body language speaks volumes when seen or it comes out. Their loss, not mine - its another negative. But in my own world, time forbids knowing the whole UK, the whole world, I am proactive and well received as a MIS.

My choice of clothing as the one thing to eliminate was for the benefit of those men who dare not do it and have partners that forbid it. At the end of the day, what is good for the goose is good for the gander and it is just cloth, it does no harm to others. I have recently got to know a man who is involved in Men's Health both UK and International. He has said to me that I am, and others like me, very brave. He has met many who simply would not dare do it.

At the end of the day, people are the route of all problems in the world from major issues, national and international politics and religion down to local politics, communities and gossip. Your suggestion of harmony is what the majority of people lack. I do accept there are good people around but most will niggle about something or someone even if it is very minor in the great scheme of things and say nothing in your presence. It is human nature! I have many years behind me of listening to the gossip of many about many behind closed doors. Gossipers never realise that they too are part of others gossip. MIS, despite my positive encounters is no exception.

People is not really a serious answer to your lighthearted post, but clothing choice for all is and I make the clothing suggestion for the benefit of others, others who dare not or are not allowed to do what I do, and some others do, in reality.

[Jim]

Sin (but not people).

[TSH]

I genuinely think the inverse of this question would be easier to answer, because there's just so many things I hate about this awful, terrible rock of a planet.

I meant the thread as something lighthearted but it turned into something a bit deeper.

That's the sort of impression I got from reading the first couple of posts; I suspect it's the reason why it's in this sub-forum, and not the "Off Topic" one, where more serious topics like world hunger would be expected.

I mulled over this for a bit, deciding if I could remove the need for humans to eat to sustain themselves, or just remove humans from Earth altogether (not killing per say; just taking all of them in rockets, and sending them into the sun). As someone pointed out, many, MANY of the problems are borne from our own ignorance, hypocrisy, stupidity, selfishness, greed, and so on.

I also thought about less insignificant issues like how dumb people sound when they talk, ridding the English language of obnoxious overuse of filler words, people not know how to punctuate their sentences, and other pedantic tripe most people won't even care about, or notice.

Looking at all the responses, here, I think the best answer is religion. It's the nadir of humanity, encompassing every single negative attribute of people. I'll gladly abate this auto-deceptive, institutionalized, dogmatic plight if I could. It offers NOTHING useful, and makes people slaves to their own lack of critical thinking skills. I can't believe I didn't think about this until it was suggestion, but it's probably the biggest outlier to so many things wrong with this world.

Sin (but not people).

I don't mean to put anyone here on the spot, but "sin" is vague, and is strictly a religious concept. It's been used as a tool to demoralize people, so eliminating religion would also eliminate this poorly-defined, victim-blaming technique. A net positive.

So here's my serious take on the subject;
We all start start out female in the womb. Man is formed from the woman,.we are formed from
women but we are men. I would like to see a world where men sit and laugh with women without all this masculine / feminine nonsense. We are the same.

Hasn't that been falsified? Since this concept is contested, my doubt is as far as I'll go in discussing it, as this requires a bit research I'm not compelled to do at the moment. Even if it were true, we fundamentally AREN'T the same, but that doesn't mean we should strive for equality, anyway.

[new2skirts]

Football, The Soccer kind.

Tom

Agree !

FOOTBALL
The American version - the ball kicked on kick-off and the extra point attempt -
otherwise the ball is handled by hand -
so much for the foot-ball-work !

The other TRUE - Football - Soccer - the ball is kicked about until scoring a goal in a net -
only the goal keeper has the use of hands option to ward off this scoring into the net and returning the ball into play.

So what part of Football Soccer is not fully understood ?

???
Oh and why aren't skirts worn as the uniform part of the activity ?

It would depend on the type of skirt... Jurgen Klopp on the touchline pacing up and down in a pencil skirt raging because one of the Spurs players it taking too long to adjust his stocking garter before taking a corner as they want to drag out time to hang onto a narrow lead might be interesting, as the referee takes a yellow card from his cargo skirt pocket

[SkirtsDad]

Clothes!!

There are so many issues created by the fashion indutry and the subsequent disposal of surplus and old clothing. Plus you'd no longer need to argue about skirt wearing for men

[Jim]

I don't mean to put anyone here on the spot, but "sin" is vague, and is strictly a religious concept. It's been used as a tool to demoralize people, so eliminating religion would also eliminate this poorly-defined, victim-blaming technique. A net positive.

I think you don't understand "sin". It is based on selfishness, caring about oneself more than others. It includes greed, pride, hate, lust ... and the bad aspects of religion.

[Barleymower]

I genuinely think the inverse of this question would be easier to answer, because there's just so many things I hate about this awful, terrible rock of a planet.

I meant the thread as something lighthearted but it turned into something a bit deeper.

That's the sort of impression I got from reading the first couple of posts; I suspect it's the reason why it's in this sub-forum, and not the "Off Topic" one, where more serious topics like world hunger would be expected.

I mulled over this for a bit, deciding if I could remove the need for humans to eat to sustain themselves, or just remove humans from Earth altogether (not killing per say; just taking all of them in rockets, and sending them into the sun). As someone pointed out, many, MANY of the problems are borne from our own ignorance, hypocrisy, stupidity, selfishness, greed, and so on.

I also thought about less insignificant issues like how dumb people sound when they talk, ridding the English language of obnoxious overuse of filler words, people not know how to punctuate their sentences, and other pedantic tripe most people won't even care about, or notice.

Looking at all the responses, here, I think the best answer is religion. It's the nadir of humanity, encompassing every single negative attribute of people. I'll gladly abate this auto-deceptive, institutionalized, dogmatic plight if I could. It offers NOTHING useful, and makes people slaves to their own lack of critical thinking skills. I can't believe I didn't think about this until it was suggestion, but it's probably the biggest outlier to so many things wrong with this world.

Sin (but not people).

I don't mean to put anyone here on the spot, but "sin" is vague, and is strictly a religious concept. It's been used as a tool to demoralize people, so eliminating religion would also eliminate this poorly-defined, victim-blaming technique. A net positive.

So here's my serious take on the subject;
We all start start out female in the womb. Man is formed from the woman,.we are formed from
women but we are men. I would like to see a world where men sit and laugh with women without all this masculine / feminine nonsense. We are the same.

Hasn't that been falsified? Since this concept is contested, my doubt is as far as I'll go in discussing it, as this requires a bit research I'm not compelled to do at the moment. Even if it were true, we fundamentally AREN'T the same, but that doesn't mean we should strive for equality, anyway.

I concede that my limited information is not fully based in fact. The jury is out on that one.

[Brad]

Hate.

[r.m.anderson]

Clothes!!

There are so many issues created by the fashion indutry and the subsequent disposal of surplus and old clothing. Plus you'd no longer need to argue about skirt wearing for men

But SD what would wear instead - surely you can't return to the Garden of Eden to retrieve the former wardrobe ? LOL !

[Jim]

Clothes!!

There are so many issues created by the fashion industry and the subsequent disposal of surplus and old clothing. Plus you'd no longer need to argue about skirt-wearing for men

An excellent point, but maybe not the number one priority.

It would be good in warmer environments but would take quite some getting used to, if possible, in the cold. But fashion freedom definitely should include the option of going clothes-free. Nudists are more discriminated against in public than skirt-wearing men.

[Kirbstone]

....and with good reason.
Fortunately on this Sainted Isle, in the absence of year-round equatorial heat, nudism isn't a problem.

Tom

[TSH]

I don't mean to put anyone here on the spot, but "sin" is vague, and is strictly a religious concept. It's been used as a tool to demoralize people, so eliminating religion would also eliminate this poorly-defined, victim-blaming technique. A net positive.

I think you don't understand "sin".

People have varying "understandings" of the concept of "sin". Don't presume I don't understand what it is when people often throw it around as a buzzword towards something they think is "immoral", rather than measure out if the thing they're labeling as a sin is actually sinful or not, anyway. Also, "sin" is most commonly referred as a transgression against divine law, so it holds no value to someone who doesn't believe in any deity. Yes, it's not strictly a religious term; I'll concede to that in my earlier post, but it's the definition most people logically conclude to because it's based almost exclusively on religion (Abrahamic religiosity, specifically).

It is based on selfishness, caring about oneself more than others. It includes greed, pride, hate, lust ... and the bad aspects of religion.

Selfishness, greed, and pride aren't even bad things in of themselves. The former two especially helped humanity survive during our rough beginning, and brought about new ways to make our lives easier — at the expanse of other animals. Pride only becomes an issue when it takes over your personality — making you arrogant. How would, for example, being glad that one of your family members graduated college be a "sin"? Hate could very well be a "sin", if we're talking about a sort of prejudice to marginalize a person or a group of people. Is that what you mean by "hate"? Lust is simply a sexual passion. And it happens involuntarily. It's only a "sin" if you "give in to the temptation" without considering if the person is already married, or even wants it in the first place. That's adultery and rape, which actually are sinful acts, and not a thought, like lust is. Just because lust can lead to those things, it doesn't mean lust, itself, is wrong. That's just faulty, backwards reasoning I see all the time with religion.

There's so many "bad aspects" of religion that I know humanity would be much better off burying it in the past, so we can move forward without dogmatic, theistic institutions trying to instill flawed belief systems and concepts which actually serve to hurt our own morality and corrupt our knowledge.