this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2025
1232 points (99.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

8400 readers
2292 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 198 points 4 days ago (5 children)

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

[–] lunarul@lemmy.world 73 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Not wearing stinky shoes is a social construct.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 17 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I got me some of them washable insoles

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 15 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago

theyd be less likely to be incels if they were washable

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 4 days 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 14 points 4 days 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 31 points 4 days 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 9 points 3 days 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 4 days 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 3 days ago

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

[–] garbagebagel@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days 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 4 days ago (1 children)

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

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

Protecting feet is a social construct.

[–] red_bull_of_juarez@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] RickyRigatoni@retrolemmy.com 5 points 3 days ago

And brother, I'm about to collapse.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 4 days 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 6 points 3 days ago

The cholla cactus:

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 5 points 4 days ago

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

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days 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 4 days ago (1 children)

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

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world -1 points 4 days 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 4 days ago (2 children)
[–] VoidJuiceConcentrate@midwest.social 8 points 4 days 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 4 days ago

Right, so what Boomer already said.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days 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 3 points 3 days 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 4 days ago

Functional construct