Kind: Replies

In reply to @andrearennick.

@andrearennick You got this.

In reply to @bruce_toews.

@bruce_toews Something like that yes.

In reply to @bruce_toews.

@bruce_toews Yes that's the idea. I'd say also that you have a responsibility to do so, but also that this isn't something you're going to do all at once. It takes actual work, and sometimes that work involves internalizing things you don't want to hear. Just basing on my own personal experience.

In reply to @bruce_toews.

@bruce_toews No. The best you can do is to be aware of what prejudices exist, and prevent those from effecting your actions, especially in cases where what you do and what you say can harm other people.

In reply to @redcrew.

@redcrew Sounds like that's a tab worth closing and never re-opening again. If you can of course.

In reply to @redcrew.

@redcrew @chris Of course they did.

In reply to @bubbline.

@bubbline If I find myself in a situation where I need to use the word cisgender, and someone says they find it offensive, I'm just going to tell them that I'm just ensuring they have the least woke experience as possible since making linguistic changes in order to avoid harming people has been considered woke by the anti-woke for something like 40 years or so. See also: politically correct.

In reply to @AmyDentata.

@AmyDentata @StillIRise1963 Personally I've been going with "Moms for Mussalini" because they're fascist fuckwits, but that's just me, and also this works too.

In reply to @StillIRise1963.

@StillIRise1963 Oh God damn it.

In reply to @StillIRise1963.

@StillIRise1963 Wait who's claiming to have accidentally quoted Hitler now?

In reply to @amy0223.

@amy0223 You're not broken. People are just hard to deal with in crowds.

In reply to @PollyWaugh.

@PollyWaugh @pivoinebleue Yep this.

In reply to @pivoinebleue.

@pivoinebleue Because it's too easy for people to think of the accommodations *they* need while completely leaving out everyone else. I can't count the number of t imes I've had to remind fellow blind people that accessibility isn't just about screen reader users, and that "it works with my screen reader using this hack I came up with" doesn't mean it's accessible.

In reply to @pivoinebleue.

@pivoinebleue Nobody fucks over people with disabilities quite like other people with disabilities.

In reply to @aardrian.

@aardrian How many are we up to now? Because when they nominate Trump again, I'm going to love pointing out that they had x number of other choices and once again picked the worst one.

In reply to @ablackcatstail.

@ablackcatstail Oh excellent!

In reply to @ablackcatstail.

@ablackcatstail Your website isn't necessarily accessible just because it looks like something from the 1990's. I mean if you're using plain old semantic HTML, paying attention to color contrast, and only using things like ARIA when you have to and as they're intended to be used, then yes it's accessible. If it's got layout tables and those spacer gifs, not so much.

In reply to @ablackcatstail.

@ablackcatstail well if you need accessibility use whatever you need even if it's non-free software.

In reply to @ablackcatstail.

@ablackcatstail Also, re: Stallman: I love free software, and have contributed to several projects for a very long time, but be careful you don't go too far down the rabbithole. For example, if you require accessibility, it'll be necessary for you to essentially have a foot in both worlds. And Stallman doesn't really have an answer for that, (I.E., accessibility is not a part of any version of the GPL license, and tends to get short shrift by projects, and his answer is +

In reply to @ablackcatstail.

@ablackcatstail What's your blog running on how?