TheWordNerd.info

The bad news is that I'm launching yet again. I suppose this makes the millionth or so incarnation of a blog in some form on this domain. The good news, however, is three-fold.

First, I've put a decent amount of effort into migrating the four or so posts over from the old site, so the content and URLs should still be mostly preserved. Aside from possible aggregator spam and a new look, most of the content I deemed important is here. That said, I did skip posts that were no longer relevant, so some didn't make the cut.

Also, I'm blogging old school now. Part of why I've stopped maintaining the older blogs is that I grew tired of the maintenance. First I had to keep the platform itself updated due to security vulnerabilities. Even with an up-to-date platform there were the plethora of plugins I invariably installed, and no system of which I am aware makes upgrading many of those anything less than painful. Now I'm using Ikiwiki I can edit via the web should I wish, but the whole blog is stored in a Git repository, all the files are text, and a simple commit and push is all that is necessary to update the site. It's so incredibly easy, and I'll be updating much more because of it.

How do I know these aren't just empty words? Because I have three uncommitted drafts ready to post as soon as I've either found the necessary links or have done the things I've claimed in them. Of course, that isn't counting the posts I have planned but haven't yet drafted.

So what's upcoming? I haven't yet written about my work on Spiel here, nor have I written my thoughts on and efforts toward Android accessibility. Stay tuned!

Of course, another blogging frustration is that I have no idea whether the site itself looks decent or hideous. It's mostly stock with a few tweaks to integrate Disqus, and while I'm not exactly trying to win any "best looking site evar!" awards, not looking horrific is also important. Feedback welcome, and while I can't promise to know how to fix it to make it look better, I'll at least try.

First, because text has no obvious tone, I'll set one. I write this not from a place of frothing rage, but rather from one of passionate anger concerning a behavior which is wrong. That it's one I encounter again and again indicates that it needs public airing, and I'm no longer willing to tiptoe around it while soothing fragile egos.

Second, while this is inspired by a recent happening, it is not a response to same. This is not a forum for drama, but rather a discussion of an issue endemic to many of my own relationships and those of others, as well as an attempt to make sense out of certain things I've witnessed over the years. I will delete and disregard any communication attempting to make this personal.

As background for any who don't know, I'm totally blind. I'll omit the discussion of specifics because they are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant. Yes, it's a major factor in my life. Yes, it shapes my wants and needs. Other than that, though, it matters less to me than most might think, and does so more because it shapes my interactions with others. If you still struggle with this concept, substitute race, gender or religion in place of disability. Is every woman, every black person, every Christian obligated to make these aspects central to their lives just because we decide that they must be? Must we really force our own assessments of importance onto others?

What I want to write about today, though, is discrimination, of which I now believe there to be two broad types. The first is incredibly obvious. I'm blind, therefore I can't do X or am automatically better at Y (where X is usually crossing streets or tying my shoelaces and Y is usually massage therapy or playing the guitar.) We're all familiar with this. Asians are smarter, black people are better basketball players, we can be here all day repeating tired stereotypes about any minority. I think we can all agree that these beliefs are condescending and inaccurate at best or humiliating and unempowering at worst. I think, though, that there is a second and more insidious type of discrimination, one that I feel is endemic in relationships of many kinds involving folks with disabilities. It may exist in more abstract forms affecting other groups, but disability is where I'm most familiar with it.

I as a blind person need more support, regardless of how independent I may be. This support can come in many forms, from good and reliable public transit to someone who unhealthily attends to my every need. I strive for the former more empowering support, but sometimes it's just not up to snuff and I turn to friends and family for help. This is not unnatural, as it is human (one may even argue primate) to seek supportive community, and new age woowoo self-help talk aside, we all need others regardless of ability.

Naturally, this has the potential for abuse, as it's easy to use a support network as a crutch. This is a fact of which I am quite conscious. As such, I make it incredibly clear to anyone in my life that they can say no if I ask for support. There's no guilt in saying no or in establishing boundaries. Rather, I whole-heartedly encourage that we all get better at it. If I don't get the support I need, I reserve the right to stress about it. I reserve the right to vent my frustrations. The need does not go away because someone says no, and I refuse to pretend that it doesn't exist. But meeting it or not doing so then becomes my issue. I do not reserve the right to make anyone feel guilty or anything else negative for setting a boundary.

And yet, people listen to this speech from me again and again and still feel guilty for not being supportive. People still refuse to listen to my honest words and believe them. People repaint history portraying me as some grand manipulator who wove them into a trap and, ultimately, they either strike out at me or arrive at unwarranted and inaccurate conclusions.

And, let's be absolutely honest and not mince words. It's easy to see me as the poor, pitiful blind person when someone can't give the support I request. It's also easy to imagine or see any number of racist or sexist stereotypes, often without looking for very long. There's a huge amount of societal conditioning steering us away from the latter, yet we ignorantly accept the former without a thought.

In short, this discrimination denies my ability to honestly relate. Instead, it relegates me to a sort of infantile status, selfishly taking with no regard to others. It is deeply and powerfully offensive.

I'm tired of this being acceptable. If someone genuinely feels guilty for telling me no, that's their issue and not mine. If someone persists in the inability to own up to that issue, and ultimately attacks me or perpetuates it, then I place them in the same category as someone perpetuating racial, LGBT or other stereotypes. Just because it's easy to imagine is no excuse. Similarly, because someone may have experienced it from others is likewise not an excuse, just as a member of a racial minority's upholding of a stereotype inherent to that group does not make it acceptable to generalize that behavior. It's time to publicly declare that the problem isn't me. The problem is a twisted survivor guilt combined with an inability to set boundaries and an astounding lack of honesty, both within and without. Strong words, yes, but this form of discrimination is as real as any other. It's worst aspect is that it hides well, masquerading as justification for purging a bad influence or as good cause for ending a bad relationship. The relationship may be bad, yes, but not because of the reasons given.

Honest communication and setting healthy boundaries are key to good relationships of any type. This discrimination is insidious in that it involves painting someone as a gross violator of such healthy behaviors when, in fact, the fault lies with the painter rather than the paintee. It's hard being a person with a disability trying to pursue healthy relationships when the ones responsible for such discrimination would rather not admit to themselves that they've found an instance where they are incapable of maintaining healthy relationship dynamics. It's also hard to admit to discriminating when one considers one's self open-minded. It's much easier to play the victim, use the very language of healthy relationships and tell tales of woe, if only to themselves, or easy to claim that this is all transferrence on my part. This latter fiction is something I've told myself for years, and I'm done with that as well.

So is it like this everywhere? Maybe. In my experience, disabled people tend to congregate to churches. I'm certain that, in most instances, this reflects the individual's true beliefs, and I commend anyone for following their path as long as it doesn't negatively interfere with that of others. Yet, when I think about this form of discrimination, I wonder if this environment lessens it somewhat. If those around you put aside earthly pursuits to promote a higher good, they'd seem more inclined to give support in lieu of establishing boundaries. It makes sense to me that someone adopting this mindset isn't likely to burn out and lash out because they gave too much of themselves, but would instead consider that a virtue.

I also see many people with disabilities gravitating toward each other. Whereas the church environment may address this form of discrimination by turning it to a virtue, those of us with disabilities might be familiar enough with it that it's just not as much of an issue. If I know the problem is there, whether consciously or more fundamentally, I'm not likely to get annoyed at someone else should their struggles seem like an inconvenience to me. I'd also not feel as guilty for saying no, as I'd truly empathize with both sides of the issue.

Am I criticizing anyone for choosing either of the above paths? Absolutely not. Live the life that makes you happy and satisfies your beliefs, not the one that others say you should, but live it honestly. Know others, and know yourself. Set and maintain healthy boundaries, holding honest dialogue about them. Most importantly, look within and question everything. Turn over every stone and ask yourself what lies beneath and why.

The worst aspect of this is that there's no real way to succeed in some instances. Either I deny my path and my beliefs, pursuing a contrived life just to lessen it, or I'm faced with the choice between long-lasting friendships or finding the support I need. And, unlike many issues, honesty and openness isn't the solution, as this discrimination's very basis is an inability to believe in my sincerity and, ultimately, others' declaration that I'm false. The only "solution," as it were, is to simply never ask for help. We should be stable and support ourselves, sure, but anyone who considers this a valid response should honestly ask themselves where they'd be without a healthy support network. The resulting picture would likely be a desolate one.

I want to show compassion for those who perpetuate this form of discrimination. It can be difficult to realize and acknowledge that it is being done, especially for those who consider themselves open-minded. There's no shame in making amends for a wrong done, only in continuing to do it. I want to show compassion, yet I also want to establish a boundary of my own.

I refuse to accept that I manipulate others by being honest. I refuse to accept any negative feelings for the guilt or other emotions that result from said honesty. I also refuse to show any sympathy to those who continue to insist that they are being manipulated or otherwise mistreated while being dishonest with others and themselves. Whatever negative emotions these words may have inspired, my acceptance of any blame as a result has been much worse by far. Today I let go of that, and hope that anyone perpetuating these beliefs will likewise let go of their own burdens. It's time to vocally acknowledge that this exists, and to end the notion that it is either OK or subtly my fault.

Just a brief update:

When I wrote yesterday's post on Utterance, one feature I hadn't gotten working yet was direct messaging. They could be sent, but not received, and it wasn't immediately obvious why this was. Last night I figured this out, and a few minutes later had two-way direct messaging working quite nicely.

So what does this mean? Twitter and Identi.ca have in essence become completely IM-like. Granted, it's a slow IM with a few minutes between messages and the 140 character limit, and I'd not recommend using it over any other form of IM if you have the chance, but with this feature I've finally succeeded in creating an IM-like interface to microblogging that works regardless of which XMPP client you're using.

I think I'll take a break from Utterance for the moment, both because I'm getting tired of hacking on it and because I need to work on other projects. Next, however, I plan to add a chatroom-style interface. Following/unfollowing users will be a matter of inviting or kicking them from the chatroom. You'll also be able to group users into custom rooms, separating some updates out from the larger stream. Finally, Utterance will detect based on several factors whether or not to use the classic or chatroom interface, thus keeping you connected on clients from the desktop to the phone.

But for now I shift gears and chase another shiny.

No, this isn't the major post I promised--that's still being worked on--but I did want to announce a project I've been hacking on for the past few months now that is finally becoming usable.

Microblogging is a fun way to communicate en mass, though in actuality it is little more than web-based IM, deriving its origins from IM status messages. Twitter even had a simplistic IM interface earlier on, though this was axed soon after I began using it (I'm sure the two are unrelated. Other microblogging services like Identi.ca still do provide these interfaces, though they're quite simplistic and offer an incredibly limited featureset.

A few months ago, I set out to write an XMPP-based interface of my own. The result is Utterance, and I rarely need to visit either the Twitter or Identi.ca websites these days. Here is what currently works:

• Messages are relayed via IM to and from multiple accounts on either Identi.ca or Twitter. It is also possible to post to only one account. All other IM interfaces of which I am aware are limited to a single account on just one service.
• Quick @ replies. Each message has a small identifier that can be used to not only prepend the @username, but also to direct the reply at the correct notice. Most existing IM interfaces assume that replies are intended for the last message received from any given user, which is often inaccurate.
• Viewing of previous messages in the client. If you've received a message recently enough that it is still archived, then sending the message identifier resends the message. Currently Utterance archives nearly 4000 messages per user, so you're likely to find just about any received message without hitting the web.
• Conversation fetching. A three-character command displays an entire conversation, so you need not leave your client to view context for a notice.
• Follower management via the buddy list. An optional feature lets you follow or unfollow users by adding or removing them as regular IM contacts. Also, new followers appear as if an IM contact has just subscribed.

There's more that's not mentioned, and even more planned. Feel free to try it out if such things interest you. Mind the alpha warning, and the occasional bug. The bit about wiping the database is no joke. I deleted and restarted it just last weekend due to needing to test a number of fixes in production, but in general I find it stable and reliable enough that I've used it almost exclusively for months.