this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2025
32 points (92.1% liked)

Showerthoughts

38359 readers
773 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
 

We all know the pattern by now. Something minor happens. One of the affected parties doesn't want people talking about it. So they go on a crusade against anyone tha makes a small mention about the thing which ends up making the thing super famous.

It is called the Streisand effect after Barbara Streisand who famously went through such a thing. But for all the fame the effect has, how many people actually still remember what it was originally about, without looking it up?

I certainly don't. I'm pretty sure I looked it up once but apparently it wasn't interesting enough to remember. This just proves once again that ignoring the thing is much more effective than trying to silence talk about the thing.

Kind of similar to the Watergate scandal and all subsequent -gates. I think it's about some spy drama revealing the president's crimes at the Watergate Hotel that led to Richard Nixon resigning but that's about it. And that's probably wrong.

Now that I think about it (I should really get out of this shower) there are probably tons of idioms that are even further removed from their origin. I bet some are so far removed that we don't even register them as being idioms. They're just words.

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hello_there@fedia.io 17 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Streisand didn't want aerial images of her house to be available on the internet. The subsequent outrage made it so those pictures got on newspapers nationwide.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 10 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

Well, that actually doesn't seem unreasonable.

"Please stop photographing my private property."

Pictures of property go in newspapers instead

I mean......she has a point.....

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Thing is, it wasn’t labeled as HER house; I don’t even think the photographer knew. They just took a picture of a large house on a beachside cliff.

Once she began making a big deal out of it though, every newspaper and website had it published. She made it worse by making it a thing. It was the original celebrity self-own of the internet era.

[–] radix@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

And it was inside a huge (10k+) batch of pictures documenting the entire California coastline. Basically nobody had even seen it at the time she, or at least her lawyer, threw a fit about it.

[–] Trex202@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Victim blaming and gaslighting

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

??? How am I blaming her? Am I misunderstanding you?

[–] Trex202@lemmy.world 0 points 2 hours ago

The Streisand effect itself is victim blaming

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It was about Barbara Streisand trying to keep her house(?) out of the media or something. I can't remember what it was she was trying to hide, but I am 70% certain it had something to do with a property.

[–] popekingjoe@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago

Some photographer took a picture of a random cliff that looked amazing in the sunlight and that picture just happened to include her home at the time. Except no one knew that and her subsequent blow up in trying to get the photo removed led to everyone knowing that her home was in the picture, and if she hadn't made a fuss, it would have continued being a secret.

[–] dontsayaword@piefed.social 7 points 4 hours ago

I have a pretty bad memory and I still knew what caused the name. But I was aware of it when it happened, not learning about it much later. That probably helps.

[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

🙋 Language evolves in weird tangential ways. Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra isn't too far off from reality tbh.

[–] SGforce@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 hours ago

It was really the south park episode that did it.

[–] radix@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago

I do. I've been reading Techdirt for over 25 years, so I'm sure I read the original post where the term was coined at the time it was first published.

[–] FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website 1 points 32 minutes ago

Somebody took shots from the air of her home. She tried to get them removed from the public sphere. That caused headlines and as a result more people saw them attached to these news stories than ever would have if she hadn't made an issue out of it.

Didn't google, didn't read the other comments.