this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
561 points (95.0% liked)

memes

16492 readers
3275 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Please don't tell me to get off of it, I have old Livejournal friends to keep in touch with and that's why I'm there.

(page 2) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] scytale@piefed.zip 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly, following gossip about people you're actually connected with is still better than random accounts, pages, and posts you don't follow being forced on your feed.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (3 children)

It unexpectedly happened to me recently, and I didn't mean to follow the gossip so much as I was surprised, and I discovered the husband had put up a video of the wife cheating on him that he had hired a private investigator to follow. That is very much not nice, but also cheating is crappy. Last person I expected it from would be her.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 23 points 1 week ago

Never cared for this type of stuff while I was on Facebook. It's been ages though. I don't miss it one bit.

[–] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Saying you have to stay on Facebook to keep up with people says you aren't able or willing to put in the energy required to keep up with people yourself.

There are hundreds of communication platforms, and a most of them aren't run by assholes trying to ruin society for their own personal gain.

[–] callouscomic@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's a 2 way street. I will say from experience that not using social media like Facebook dramatically dwindled who will reciprocate by text or email.

Fine by me for my life, but I saw the difference as they all used it more and more and I did not.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

People used to write letters to stay in touch. Literally basic email could fill that niche.

[–] Uruanna@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Just write an email

Just call them

Yeah no thanks

I'll just scan for their name in the papers.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] peregrin5@piefed.social 15 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Are you serious? It's a propaganda tool basically owned by the Russian government now.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Velypso@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

After that I'll change my top 8 on MySpace!

[–] peregrin5@piefed.social 4 points 1 week ago

imagine if everyone just went back to the social media of the 2000s. i would go back to vox.com when it was a blogging platform and not a news site.

[–] ximtor@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Since when do random low quality social media posts qualify as "meme"?-_-

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] modifier@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 week ago

There is no reason good enough to still be on the Meta hamster wheel in 2025. Facebook, insta, whatever. Get out as fast as you can.

[–] tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 5 points 1 week ago

You know it’s a dumpster fire yet you remain. There was no way I was going to try and convince you.

Technically I still have an account. It’s from the before times when you could have a fake name and not need to verify anything. I’ve used it twice in 9 years, both times for selling things. Pissed it’s still the best place for that.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Facebook has had my middle name as a last name since day 1. I was never into giving them personal information.

[–] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I thought I was being original when I did this. Though I used my middle name so no one from my hometown could find me and I only use fb for marketplace. Fb needs a separate app for marketplace. When I bring this up my brother always goes "then I couldn't check their page to see if they are a wierdo". My guy, you were goonin over a girls account that bought your couch, you're the creep. Like that's exactly why it would be better. "Ebay 2.0 local buy sell trade" i don't need to know Annie has 4 kids and golden retriever. All I need to know is the price, but I digress

[–] TonyOstrich@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Soooooo Craigslist? It's wild to me how everyone flocked to FB.

[–] Dorkyd68@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I'm ok with a craigslist reboot. As long as we can bring back all the murders, drug dealers and hookers aka everything that made craigslist fun

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's Angela, isn't it?

[–] MudMan@fedia.io -2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Man, the idea of people changing names based on who they bang is so wild to me.

I can't believe how much of the world just... goes with it and thinks it's normal. It's definitely not normal. Just some serious psychosexual patriarchy mindfuck going on for so many people.

Anglosaxon cultures out there arguing about pronouns and it turns out they just casually rewrite their identity based on who's the owner of their daughters going into the second quarter of the 21st century. Nuts.

[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's normal because it's what most do. That's what normality is

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It does make it easier to work out who's paired up with who, and which kid belongs to which parent.

The history of the practice is pretty gross, but there are some benefits.

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago

No, hold on, those two things aren't remotely the same.

It makes sense to work out which kid belongs to which parent, for sure. For one thing, a whole bunch of the legal system is based on who inherits what when people die. You want some way to keep track of that. There's some weirdness about keeping track of the father rather than the mother, and some cultures keep track of both or of the mother first, which makes more sense, but that's a different conversation.

But "who's paired up with who"? Absolutely not. Why would it be more convenient to be unable to separate sexual partners from descendants? That is not a practical thing. And the stuff that's preserving, which is that women are historically treated like children without full legal autonomy and part of the stuff being managed by a paterfamilias, is fortunately no longer true.

And of course once that gets recognized enough that even a bunch of Christianity admits that not all relationships are forever and reintroduces divorce (after centuries of treating women like perpetual property of their husbands) it makes absolutely no sense to have half the population ping-pong between names over their lifetime an arbitrary number of times. It's not only logically absurd, it is actively inconvenient to both the first goal of pairing descendants but also administrative bookkeeping in general. I can only imagine the amount of public records errors induced by women changing their name a bunch of times over their lifetimes.

[–] BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

It is. And young women are kind of forced into it as part of the conventional ideas of marriage and weddings. I didn't change my last name, because I married an asshole who wanted me to feel bad for wanting "normal" things like that, which is another story, and in the end I'm very glad I didn't, but my narcissistic mother was OBSESSED with me changing my name.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›