Hyperreality
No, that's a genuinely good and well informed reason to not use windows.
Villains don't always think they're evil and don't often do evil things just because they're evil.
Often they think they're doing what's necessary for what they consider the greater good. For example, an evil character might think that strength is key to survival, is a higher good, so the weak should be punished or eliminated. For example, if you come across a camp of nice but weak innocents, you might side with those attacking them, because you don't believe the weak deserve to survive.-
Or maybe they think they're being kind. Those poor villagers were going to get killed by the monsters anyway! Let's be kind and make it quick by helping the monsters make a quick job of it. Let's kill the eldery crone or the children who are hungry. It's a kindness.
Or they might follow a god and do things to appease that god. Serving your god is good, so anything you do that pleases your god is good, whether it's human sacrifice or killing fluffy animals. Similar to the weak villain, who is too scared of their god or master to oppose them. Like Renfield in Dracula, they (think) they have no choice but to do the evil things their master wants them to do. Often they're in denial about how they actually enjoy doing these evil things.
Then there's villains who have no morals or who are nihilists. They do evil things because they're bored, because it's easy, and/or because they don't believe it matters either way. Burn the village down? Why not? Everyone dies anyway. Corrupt someone good? That's a fun game to play. Someone powerful but good comes along? I'll help them, because to do otherwise would be dangerous or disadvantageous.
Then there's villains with delusions of grandeur. They think they're better than everyone else and will do everything in their power to ensure that anyone who might be better than them, gets cut down to size. Or they like to get involved in evil plots and schemes, because it means they get to feel like they're influential. Someone wants to overthrow a kingdom? Time to get involved so that people know me as having changed the course of history.
Or there's the evil characters, who are deeply cynical. The world is evil, nothing is fair, I'm just doing what's necessary to survive. If I don't kill/rob them, they'd do it to me. They probably deserved it anyway.
Also that Sartre quote:
Never believe that [they] are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. [They] have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
This being said, the Socratic method sometimes works. Just keep asking them questions and let them argue with themselves.
Obviously not everyone online is a troll.
How are you supposed to fine 7 vulernabilities in an hour anyways?
Threaten the interviewer with a knife until they give you at least 7 vulnerabilities. tapsheadmeme
I'm sure that's just a coincidence, and that anyone who mentions Dworkin is just very well read.
And if Sir Chauncey Barksalot kills enough infants, his carbon pawprint will be negative.
People concerned about climate change never suggest to reduce the worldwide pet population
It's a widely known issue. For example:
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/15/us/pets-climate-impact-lbg-wellness/index.html
https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/22375369/comic-pets-climate-change-environment
https://ideas.ted.com/the-environmental-impact-of-dogs-and-cats-and-how-to-reduce-it/
Ie. you are wrong that people never suggest it.
This being said, I'll assume your unpopular opinion is about a pet genocide for the greater good, and upvote accordingly.
I’m not driving the dogs to school and soccer practice every day, sitting in traffic, nor buying them new clothes every year.
You're a monster.
I dunno man. I think I'll start by wearing a condom, rather than curb stomping puppies.
Mr Grace first made his concerns known in a letter to Tom Tate, mayor of Gold Coast, earlier this month saying he had become distracted by women wearing triangle bikinis on the beach, Australian news site news.com.au reports. He wrote: "One young lady in particular was walking on the footpath on the main road and had the tiniest triangle in front and was as close to naked as anyone could be.
Mr. Grace has base urges and bad thoughts. He likes to think of himself as a Nice Guy and upstanding citizen, maybe even pious and religious. So this makes him uncomfortable, and hurts his ego. He also can't be both a Nice Guy and perv over young girls in bikinis.
He is angry at himself, but this makes him feel bad. He engages in what is called psychological displacement. Rather than be angry at himself, he decides to be angry at the young women he was perving over. "I'm not a perv. It's the young women I'm perving over who are sluts!"
See also Andrea Dworkin on right wing women: right wing women are unable to be angry at the men who (are likely to) hurt them. The men in question are family members, boyfriends, or in positions of (religious) authority. To be openly angry at them is dangerous, and could result in more abuse. So instead they displace that anger onto a safe target which can't fight back: racial and sexual minorities, like trans women.
Eg. JK Rowling, a victim of domestic abuse by her heterosexual former husband, who spends all day on twitter banging on about the incredibly rare members of a tiny sexual minority going to the toilet in a public ladies bathroom, even though the overwhelming majority of rapists of women are heterosexual men.