Perhaps it was two years working at a family owned coffee shop and the constant accusations of being “a fake Starbucks”.

Maybe it was me having to explain to an average of 19 customers per day that ‘frappuccino’ is not a universal term.

It could have been the constant clarification of what size a person was attempting to order, no matter how much they insisted they wanted a ‘grande’, and me gently explaining the specific terminology used in our shop was ‘small’, ‘medium’, and ‘large’.

Possibly I just have turned down a few too many Starbucks gift cards at the register.

It could be the looks of disapproval on the customers’ faces stained in my memory of when mid-order they would realize we weren’t Starbucks, and would immediately evacuate the premises.

Whatever it was, somewhere along the way in those two years all of my anxious, caffeinated energy converted to anger and annoyance.

Now I don’t mean to hurt any coffeelings here.

And don’t get me wrong, I don’t necessarily have anything against the establishment itself.

I don’t think their coffee necessarily tastes bad.

There is an ignorant mindset I saw repeatedly associated with the name, and it supports the psychological phenomena of groupthink, conformity, and the bandwagon effect.

I can understand that in more situations than not, Starbucks is the “most convenient” place to get your fix, but being someone who fully supports local businesses I just cannot bring myself to contribute to a large corporation when I can support a smaller one with minimal effort.

I hear the words ‘Starbucks’ and ‘coffee’ used as interchangeable terms too regularly for it not to have caught my attention.

The company has dominated the industry and has become barbarically successful around the globe, but has plowed over hundreds of start-ups in the process.

And yet, day after day, millions of people support the system that towers over vulnerable businesses that are practically begging for help in order to stay afloat.

Advocating for smaller businesses is a very intentional act, and I think making the decision to do is a deliberate contribution. Because of the income differential between large and small corporations, just a handful of sales at a mom-and-pop-shop will make a more significant impact than it would at a chain.

The incorrect usage of terminology kindles a whole other series of issues. For instance, when a man was trying to order our coffee shop’s version of an ice blended drink, he simply would not accept that it was not called a ‘frappuccino’. I pointed at the menu that had a picture of the drink on it to clarify.

“The ice blended mocha?”

“No.” He looked horribly offended. “The ‘frappuccino’.”

When handing out the finished drink, we were always instructed to call out the order. I completed his drink, topped it off with whipped cream, and walked it over to the pick-up counter. “I have an ice blended mocha with whipped cream!”

He literally stood there and stared at me for a very uncomfortable 10 seconds.

“Sir, here is your drink!” I pushed it closer to him.

“Is that the ‘frappuccino’?”

He continued to stare at me as if every second he did would increase his chances of me calling it a ‘frappuccino.’

“It’s the ice blended mocha,” I told him.

“Then that’s not my drink.” He continued to stare at me in disbelief.

I actually can’t recall whether he even took the drink or not.

True story.

I continually felt like the customers were asking for an apology from us for not being Starbucks.

How can this not be viewed as problematic?

Is that what large corporations are doing to us? Creating an apologetic society? Any ideology that demands an apology from something that exists, but not to a certain standard, is disgusting.

So what I’m saying is, I don’t have an issue with the company itself.

I have an issue with people ignorantly consuming what’s most available and known, with no intent of exploring other options. It just comes off as passive, and there are more issues that stem from this ideology than we might have realized.

And thus, the Starbucks Complex is born.