this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
1243 points (99.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

9129 readers
2247 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 202 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Socks keep your shoes from absorbing sweat and help prevent blisters. They’re useful beyond the social construct.

[–] lunarul@lemmy.world 75 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Not wearing stinky shoes is a social construct.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I got me some of them washable insoles

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Arguments like these don’t work with kids. Let them experience themselves what is best for them. And have spare socks ready in case they change their mind afterwards

[–] osaerisxero@kbin.melroy.org 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sure, if that's a reasonable option, but letting the kid hurt themselves isn't always practical. Letting the kids find out 'messing with the pot of boiling water is bad' the hard way, as an example, is not what I would consider good parenting.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 33 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think it's pretty clear they're referring to uncomfortable stuff, not dangerous stuff. Obviously don't let them do dangerous stuff.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 months ago

Exactly. Always protect your little ones. It is okay if they experience negative consequences, as long as it doesn’t harm them.

Trying to drink from a glass of water and get fully soaked is okay, even if the experience is not entirely positive.

Touching a hot oven is not okay. Here you have to protect them. The best you can do is try to explain why it is not okay to touch it.

[–] myslsl@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Even if the argument doesn't persuade them at the time it still makes sense to point it out to them so that they are (hopefully) aware of it later.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago

Fully agree. Always verbalize your thoughts and intentions. Give the kids the ability to learn.

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Ok but wearing shoes is a social construct. People didn't wear shoes for thousands of years before shoes came along and they were just fine and full of blisters.

[–] red_bull_of_juarez@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Wearing shoes is definitely not just a social construct. They protect your feet.

[–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Protecting feet is a social construct.

[–] red_bull_of_juarez@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 5 points 2 months ago

And brother, I'm about to collapse.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

To some degree that's true. But these days the ground contains more dangerous objects than it used to. Specifically hazardous man-made stuff

If it was just nature and we still mostly had like forest floor and such, then probably for the most part it'd be safe yeah. Well, with the exception of plants or animals that could damage your feet or bite you

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

The cholla cactus:

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 months ago

When Moses was walking through the desert for 40 years, he wasn’t just trying to fit in.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I don't know what the social aspect is apart from how the socks appear, but this isn't why they exist.

Edit: Damn. Some of you are threatened by not knowing what a social construct is but really want to argue about socks instead of asking DDG so you can understand wtf is going on before leaving a comment.

I'd be proud of this shit show, OP 🤣

[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I love when people say "ackchyually you're wrong" without offering an alternative.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

Replying to wrong comment?

You'll have to explain otherwise, since it makes no sense based on what I said.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] VoidJuiceConcentrate@midwest.social 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

if you didn't wear socks then you'll have to wash your shoes daily or risk getting something like a yeast infection of the foot or athletes foot.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Right, so what Boomer already said.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Warmth, protection, hygiene.

If you were born the only person on earth, you would eventually have something like socks on your own accord. This is function, not social. They wouldn't be Xmas themed though, since no society exists to have invented Xmas and to show off your socks to.

Social constructs are, by definition, ideas or concepts.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

The guy they found frozen in a glacier in the Alps had grasses stuffed into his moccasins as primitive socks.

[–] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Functional construct