Hmm I wonder if I may have shot past the more straightforward way to parse it.

I’m coming from a stance where “don’t do it as soon as you know it’s ableist” is voiceless rule, so that significantly colors how I’m interpreting it.

That response was more me being like “oh wow this is essentially saying ignorance is an excuse for using ableist language” (caveats run amok here like “only when there are no known other words” as well as “strictly only when one isn’t employing a shitty stereotype when referring to whoever they’re referring to”)

Admittedly, I can see how that is still a less than desirable takeaway, but all I’m trying to say is I 100% agree with what you’ve written.

Tldr; thank you for the clarification! Full agree and this is mostly just me trying to figure out where some disconnect is

Work is going crazy because 1 project got behind schedule and then another project got behind schedule as a consequence of the first project going off. Waterfall workflows, man.

But it’s looking ok. As long as I keep lifting afterwork and vibing out when I’m too tired, I think I’ll be ok lol

Thank goodness for flex hours and wfh though. I don’t know how I’d survive without being able to take a massive break away from it when it gets to be too much

My biggest take away was:

Ableism is not a list of bad words. Language is one tool of an oppressive system. Being aware of language – for those of us who have the privilege of being able to change our language – can help us understand how pervasive ableism is. Ableism is systematic, institutional devaluing of bodies and minds deemed deviant, abnormal, defective, subhuman, less than. Ableism is violence.

So the language itself isn’t ableist, technically, according to this, but abilism is when the person using the language thinks of the negative stereotypes associated and uses that to justify some shitty position or action.

So in other words, while lame is acknowledged as a problematic word, it’s not inherently abilist to use it, which is not a takeaway I was expecting to get.

Let me know if I misread it, but thank you for posting! It was an informative read!

Weak-sauce is the exact essence of what I’m trying to get at, but it’s too… Millennial… Like, internally there’s no issue with using it, but saying/typing it out to someone older than me feels distinctly cringe (in the lightest sense, though lol just like something you’re not supposed to do, you know?)

That’s a good idea too. I think the word I was looking for was “inconsiderate” but these are fantastic solutions for other situations as well!

This post made me realize that the word I’m looking for is likely “inconsiderate”. Thank you! Sad is definitely close too.

And I agree, I try not to be too hard on myself when I slip on language I prefer to use. I don’t think being too hard on myself is productive in any way anymore.

Cringe is just too visceral for what I’m describing though.

Lame would be a 3/10 while cringe would be like a 5/10, using cringe in its least meaningful form. A full on cringe is like a 8/10 (and depending on who I’m talking to, it seems to sometimes hit like a 10/10)

I gotta agree with you.

It feels like dumb has more baggage than meaning to the point that the baggage has become the meaning. I feel like lame is on the precipice of having the same problem, which is kind of a big motivator for me making this post to begin with.

Ahh those are all fantastic, thank you!

I wouldn’t describe “only texting someone when you need something” as mid though, if that helps at all

That’s a good one, I like that. Thanks for the suggestion!

Bosses self reporting as dumbasses, as usual

I was under the impression it was primarily " if it isn’t broken, then don’t fix it" levels of tradition.

I could be wrong though, so if someone with more creds than a random internet dweller comes along, feel free to ignore me.

Heck, if you think I’m an idiot, feel free to ignore me :)

I get you, it’s just that I feel like this conversation might end up swirling into a “what is normal? Who gets to define what normal is and what are their motivations for defining those parameters as normal?” sort of deal.

With the current world the way it is at hand though, yeah, kids do need to be forced to focus for long periods of time so they can operate when they get into the world on their own.

In an ideal world, whatever shape that takes, I’m not so sure that would be necessary, but we don’t get to work with ideals, so your stance seems the most realistic.

Ahhh this is a case of I misread one of your posts it seems.

Yeah your stance seems reasonable enough to me with that clarification.

I don’t really know about the long focus sessions being necessary for proper brain development (social conditioning seems to be more the point of that) but I’m not an expert here, so I am not going to trust my gut on this one. (In the effort of reigning in my pedantism, I’m not going to ask the definition of proper development either lol)

In any case, ty for the conversation!

We had some demanding clients lol

I remember having to use pie.htc to hack rounded corners for buttons into ie6. I remember liking ie7 a little bit better, but ie8 felt like a god send compared to 6 lmao

I recall having to support multiple versions of ie as well at the same time as well. I can’t remember what year we dropped support for ie6 but it wasn’t too long after I started.

I danced every time we got to drop another ie support version all the way up to 11

Ah ok, that’s true, that is their responsibility to educate the students. I’d also say it’s their responsibility to provide reasonable accommodations to in demand constituent methods of communication.

So how is allowing a kid checking a phone between classes and having it put away in a locker (so not on their person) during class the school abdicating it’s educational responsibility?

(This specific case is my own “reasonable accommodation” theory, so I’m really curious about genuine counterpoints to this that aren’t just devil’s advocate, and you really seem to believe this, so thank you for your input so far, it is appreciated)

Does not sure. Cannot though… How does that work? What’s so imperative that it warrants cutting off communication for this person’s daughter? Like I get telling a kid to wait till in between classes to check, but “cannot have” the right? Why?

Even I think this is a bit pedantic, but it feels like you’re using the word cannot for an odd authority grab, and I don’t understand it, so I figured I’d question it at the very least

I do web dev and I can say I was super guilty of this back in the 2010s. I bit the hype hard, and now we’re getting right back to the circumstances that made ie such a POS to work with. (In my defense, I got my dev job in 2013 and had to develop for ie6. It’s not a good defense, but I think that really lead to my overhype for google. I had no knowledge of chrome’s bloated whale carcass days, so it always felt like the browser that “just worked ™”)

Market monopoly inspires evil in the good intentioned. Market monopoly also inspires nefariousness in the evil.

I’d say this is the sort of thing that inspired Google to remove the “don’t be evil” from their guidelines.

…I mean that could explain his very alt-right bent…

Endorse a fascist into office then ban the rest (this is no more likely than any general conspiracy theory though. We’ll have to wait and see if that’s what his actions actually align with in this coming election season to give this theory any actual weight)