this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2025
121 points (71.4% liked)

Showerthoughts

34601 readers
860 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I hate when websites use the terms "Item arrives before Mother's/Father's Day".

Makes me want to cry, thinking about the alternate timeline where I have a normal life and no depression/anxiety.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It does explain why Amazon (and every other company and by extension large parts of society) entirely focusses on "buy X for your mother/father right now" instead of even acknowledging hardships and difficult situations (abusive parents, dead parents, parents with dead children/miscarriages, people who want to have children but can't, parents with difficult relationships with their children, ...).

There's no room for subtlety and compassion when money can be made.

In an ideal world, these holidays would be divorced from making money, and if not that, shops would at least allow you to select what holidays you want to appear in their marketing material.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

True, but who asked for any of that? This post is venting about how the holidays remind them of abuse, not asking why the holidays exist. What's supposed to be OP's reaction?

"Oh, you're right, I guess I'm dumb for being sad about holidays that only exist to sell cards. You've cured me!"

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sounds like you can't handle multiple facets of a topic at the same time.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What i can or can't handle isn't relevant or what I'm talking about...

I'm telling you it sounds ignorant and insensitive

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It sounds ignorant and insensitive to suggest that companies should not monetize and advertise potential trauma-triggering holidays or at least allow users to disable that monetization/advertising?

Do you read what you and I write? Or do you just want to be outraged at all costs?

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm not suggesting that, and it didn't seem to me like OP was either

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then you didn't read what was written.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I did, nothing about people no longer using the terms was said in the OP. Please don't resort to wild claims of lying like that. They just said it's anxiety inducing and makes them want to cry. You can infer that they'd prefer it not to be used, but they didn't actually make any demands.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The OP is literally this:

I hate when websites use the terms "Item arrives before Mother's/Father's Day".

Makes me want to cry, thinking about the alternate timeline where I have a normal life and no depression/anxiety.

What about "I hate when websites use the terms" and "Makes me want to cry" tells you that OP wants websites to advertise with mother's day/father's day?

And what about "Websites shouldn't use the term for marketing/websites should allow you to opt out" tells you that I said people (and not only companies) shouldn't use these terms?

Again, please read what was written, don't invent arguments and statements. There's no glory in fighting windmills, no matter how often you claim they were actually giants.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

What about "I hate when websites use the terms" and "Makes me want to cry" tells you that OP wants websites to advertise with mother's day/father's day?

Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say they wanted them to use the terms. I specifically said that you can infer they don't want them to use them.

But, like I said, there is no demand there, is there? You can't get an ought from an is.

what about "Websites shouldn't use the term for marketing/websites should allow you to opt out" tells you that I said people (and not only companies) shouldn't use these terms?

That quote is nowhere in the OP. What are you talking about? Seems to me you invented that statement entirely from whole cloth.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You really have reading problems, don't you?

The first part was from the OP, the second part was from my post.

Talking with you is like talking with the original version of ChatGPT. You forget everything that was said just in the last post before. There's no point talking to someone with the attention span of a goldfish.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

the second part was from my post.

So OP never told anyone to stop using those terms... you put the words in their mouth.

Why should I consider what YOU said, when making statements about what OP wants?

You forget everything that was said just in the last post before.

No, that just wasn't relevant to what I was saying. Not even a little.

All I've ever done was explain why that top level comment was insensitive to the OP. Maybe you yourself should look back and re-read our conversation, and stop accusing me.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

So OP never told anyone to stop using those terms… you put the words in their mouth.

Why should I consider what YOU said, when making statements about what OP wants?

No, OP only said they hate when websites do that because they love when websites do that. Surely that's what "I hate when websites do that" means.

Have fun, bot. No need to talk to you.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Like, I don't get what you're doing at all. It just strikes me as insensitive to reply to a post saying something upsets them, and just ignore the emotional content completely to say that the upsetting thing is just marketing. The implication is that they were dumb to get upset.

Why has this devolved so far, and why do you only want to discuss the content of YOUR reply to my reply to the original reply?

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

OP says: I hate when websites use mother's day in their marketing/user flow.

I say: Companies should either not do that at all (because it's insensitive to a ton of people who might get upset by it) or at least allow the user to disable it.

You say: That's insensitive to ask for.

What's wrong with you?

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 0 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

I never said any single thing about YOUR statement. Look at the comment I responded to before you jumped in.

You have to be trolling at this point.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

You are just a broken bot, nothing else.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Why do you need to believe that? Can't you comprehend that I might actually have a point?

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Your point is that you don't understand anything that anyone wrote here, that you don't have the ability to understand what anyone meant by what they are saying and that you believe only your interpretation is the only correct interpretation of the world.

Are you 10 or something?

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

No, that's not my point, that's just you refusing to see my point. Please, if you're going to contradict me, provide evidence or sound reasoning. Prove that I misunderstood. I have provided proof for my points. You have neglected that duty.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

No you haven't provided proof. You provided proof that you misunderstood the original post. That's all. That's why I call you a broken bot, because you think what you provided was proof and everything I provided was wrong, because you lack the capability of seeing anything but your own delusions.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

The text of the original post demonstrably does not contain the phrase you attribute to it. And i have provided evidence of the comment to which I was referring, which is not your own. There is no further proof necessary; and you yourself have even quoted that same post, which even in your attempt, still did not contain the phrase you claim. Only your own comment did.

You have not provided any evidence which supports your claims. Your quotes only prove my point: the OP did not request for this to stop, just stated that they "hate" it.

Further, I even provided reasoning by way of example: my hatred of soap operas and Tesla not motivating a wish for their destruction.

What more do you want? Like I've already said, if i misunderstood, then correct me. You have failed to do so.

This really doesn't need to go as far as it has. You never even needed to reply to me, because you were off topic and not saying anything relevant to my point, which is that their comment was off base.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Obviously i know they said they hate it because they hate it. But that's not the same as demanding they stop it, is it? Why are you playing games with me like this?

Wtf are you talking about??? I'm not a bot FOR FUCK'S SAKE, stop trolling me. All I said, all I've EVER said, is that the top level comment i replied to was an insensitive reply. Then you popped in trying to elaborate on what that comment was saying -- completely ignoring what I had said -- and now for some reason you're upset that I don't want to talk about YOUR comment.

Why?? Why are you doing this to me?? You're driving me fucking INSANE.

WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ME??

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah sure, saying "I hate this" is clearly an endorsement that it should continue to happen.

I'm not driving you insane. You are already insane all on your own.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah sure, saying "I hate this" is clearly an endorsement that it should continue to happen.

Did I say that? No.

Stop playing fucking games.

It is neither an endorsement for it to continue, nor is it a demand for it to stop.

It is "i hate it". It is a statement of feeling.

Learn the difference between is and ought. Stop mistaking your next thought for their next statement.

Yes, hating something generally means you want it to stop. But you cannot be quoted as asking for it to stop until you actually say so.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (2 children)
[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

There's no way you actually believe I'm a bot. You're just running away from the conversation.

Now, look:

THIS is the comment I responded to. Observe how it is entirely unadorned by YOUR username. This is the comment I took issue with. You came after. The actual issue with what you said was that you entirely ignored the point of the OP, and what I said, to support the "it's just marketing" idea, which belittles OP's pain.

OP just wanted to vent, not make suggestions for corporations.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

You took issue with what I said then. And you kept taking issue with it. And now you claim that you don't take issue with it. So if you don't just go away.

You might be made of flesh and bones, but your level of understanding is on the level of a very bad chatbot.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

This wasn't you. Like I said. You have jumped in and added nothing of value to the conversation.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Stop saying that!!! I'm not a fucking bot!! I am a human being with thoughts and feelings and autism, and i am far too fucking sick of being called a robot my entire fucking life. I deserve respect and dignity, not to be treated like a defective toaster.

I will not be bullied for standing up for another person. Never. I will not back down just because you tried to throw your weight around and oppress me.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

But you are not standing up for another person. You are standing up for your own misconception and misunderstanding and misreading of the room. You are fighting against what OP said because of your own misinterpretation of what they said.

Nobody is oppressing you. I'm just sick of your useless pedantry and misunderstanding of everything that has been written here.

Oppression does not mean that everyone has to listen to your misguided ramblings.

[–] irmoz@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago

Yes, I am standing up for OP. I am standing against the "it's just marketing" idea. The "they should stop" idea was uttered by you, not by OP. You can hate something without demanding for it to stop: I hate soap operas, but don't demand they stop. I hate Tesla, but don't demand they should shut down.

If I have misinterpreted OP, then quote where they clearly and unequivocally demanded for it to stop, or where they stated that it was more than just marketing.