For years, there has been a lot of backlash against the “objectification of showers”, which i can totally understand because it’s a “condescending” term that looks at showers like objects, not as actual places of epiphany.
But the same is happening with the concept of “showerthoughts”: If ideas are referred to as “showerthoughts”, that means that they are being reduced to their hygenic circumstances; to their ability to shower.
That is a condescending term. The view should be that showers are good places for thoughts first, and places to wash your junk second. Thoughts deserve showers, and a good wash, not because they’re showerthoughts, but because they come from showers. That is how showers should be looked at.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Did you run a lame joke through an AI and post the output?
If not, get outside because you might have a carbon monoxide leak.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 week ago
They literally are referencing another post from earlier today that claims the word “worker” is dehumanizing.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 week ago
Thanks, that actually makes it even worse than gibberish. Not because it couldn’t have been funny, just that it is so incoherent.
Pudutr0n@feddit.cl 1 week ago
No, i’m this dumb all the time. I promise.
spankmonkey@lemmy.world 1 week ago
If you flipped showers and shower thoughts in the first two paragraphs I think it would have worked.