Wearing socks *is* a social construct
-
The cotton will dry as the wool absorbs the sweat from it
Could save you a toe
I've always been warm with my socks. Thank you
-
Hygiene is not a construct regardless. I swear people just go on the internet and say things.
I'd say hygiene is a construct. From that wiki article:
As mind-dependent objects, concepts that are typically viewed as constructs include the abstract objects designated by such symbols as 3 or 4, or words such as liberty or cold as they are seen as a result of induction or abstraction that can be later applied to observable objects or compared to other constructs.
With this in mind, hygiene itself cannot be seen directly, and thus abstract. We can see the effects of hygiene (such as a clean body, lack of body odor, or opposite of hygiene, such as athlete's foot or other diseases), but we cannot see hygiene itself.
-
Hygiene IS a social construct, but that doesn't mean it isn't there for a good reason.
That's only if you include pointless hygiene like shaving legs and armpits. You'll legit get skin issues, infections, and possibly attract pests if you don't wash your ass.
-
I'd say hygiene is a construct. From that wiki article:
As mind-dependent objects, concepts that are typically viewed as constructs include the abstract objects designated by such symbols as 3 or 4, or words such as liberty or cold as they are seen as a result of induction or abstraction that can be later applied to observable objects or compared to other constructs.
With this in mind, hygiene itself cannot be seen directly, and thus abstract. We can see the effects of hygiene (such as a clean body, lack of body odor, or opposite of hygiene, such as athlete's foot or other diseases), but we cannot see hygiene itself.
I can see my maxi pads.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Your feet are nasty. I don't need to see them.
Also. The world is nasty. Go raw dog the world and see how long you make it
-
Not that I advocate violence, but not beating your kids, selling them on the street, or making them work in a factory is also a social contract.
Contract yes, as it pertains to laws, but I would argue construct no- since protecting one's offspring is a natural/biological impulse. It's non negotiable from a survival viewpoint, and some people have better survival instincts than others.
-
I'm betting crocs.
I'm giggling at the idea of ancient people's wearing socks with Crocs, but I can't help but feel that clogs specifically might leave a different footprint.
-
Hygiene is not a construct regardless. I swear people just go on the internet and say things.
hygiene, engaging in a practice until hygienic, is a construct. the act of scrubbing your skin might not be
-
Feet will naturally build up thick, tough, resilient calluses in natural environments. There have been some interesting studies done on this topic with indigenous groups.
Which indigenous groups don't wear shoes? Genuinely curious. In North America, moccasins are pretty well-known. I understand that part of the need stems from climate though. I'm more curious about what terrain an indigenous group might live in that can be safe to live barefoot.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
everyone replying that socks have a practical use, as if social constructs arent practical???
my issue is that even though "clothing" is a social construct, the stuff that socks are made out of is not. calling that stuff a sock is a social construct, but choosing to put the fabric on your body is not. becoming "clothed" is a social construct, but the unspecified uncategorized state of having that fabric on your body is just a physical state, not a construct. the meaning we apply to it is the thing that wouldn't exist without socially constructed systems of meaning.
It's kinda sad, i guess. I'm usually the first one to champion XYZ is a social construct, and have to deal with morons not understanding it, but here? no one is willing to say it?
Socks are not a social construct.
-
Contract yes, as it pertains to laws, but I would argue construct no- since protecting one's offspring is a natural/biological impulse. It's non negotiable from a survival viewpoint, and some people have better survival instincts than others.
You cannot invoke biology to generalize here. There are many mammals who use their offsprings as projectile decoys when they are in danger.
-
Your feet are nasty. I don't need to see them.
Also. The world is nasty. Go raw dog the world and see how long you make it
Aren't hands much more nasty?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Vegetables are a social construct too.
Afaik, botanically, there is no such thing as a "vegetable". Only fruits. What we perceive as "vegetable" differs between cultures worldwide.
-
You cannot invoke biology to generalize here. There are many mammals who use their offsprings as projectile decoys when they are in danger.
Are homo sapiens one such mammal?
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
I get that it's a joke, but wearing socks is not a social construct-- it's a social convention, but its utility is driven primarily by non-social factors. A social construct is an idea created and maintained by society specifically for its social function, which neither socks nor the act or wearing them nor the idea that wearing socks is good, are.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Health care is a social construct too.
-
Your feet are nasty. I don't need to see them.
Also. The world is nasty. Go raw dog the world and see how long you make it
Your feet are nasty. I don't need to see them.
Then don't look.
-
Vegetables are a social construct too.
Afaik, botanically, there is no such thing as a "vegetable". Only fruits. What we perceive as "vegetable" differs between cultures worldwide.
The botanical definition is just "edible parts of a plant". The culinary definition however does differs per culture.
-
You cannot invoke biology to generalize here. There are many mammals who use their offsprings as projectile decoys when they are in danger.
Typically those are mammals with larger litters and shorter gestational periods. Human offspring are too resource intensive to be widely used as decoys.
This is a weird conversation.
-
Are homo sapiens one such mammal?
As long as one person in history has done it once, yes. Just because people around us doesn' do it, doesn't mean it's not "natural". I don't know how tribes with 11 disposable children behave.
We used to be night active but if you ask anyone nowadays they'd act like waking up to the sun is THE "natural" thing.
