this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024

41 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10181 readers

545 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

circularfish@beehaw.org

knokelmaat@beehaw.org

remington@beehaw.org

Lateness is not a moral failing, and punishment for it is systematic oppression (beehaw.org)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by rosethornRangerTTV@beehaw.org to c/politics@beehaw.org

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Timing the start of something is not a simple process. Punishing people for being late disproportionately impacts poor and disabled people. Not all of us can drive a car or even have a car to drive. We might have to wait on other people, or use public transportation, and the more steps we add to the process the more likely something is to go wrong. Punishing people for being late is systematic oppression towards these groups. This punishment can include starting without people, especially if that itself is framed as a punishment.

“Let the late ones be late and miss out (they can read the minutes), and reward the prompt ones by not wasting their time” From the rusty's rules of order, something the IWW uses to organize. They are ableist.

On the other hand, waiting too long to start can impact people with limited time or energy. Not everyone can stay awake an extra hour just to wait for something to start.

This means that there is not one singular solution for how to start things (although obviously don’t do punishment). In small groups the best solution is to talk things over with everyone and get an idea for what everyone wants to happen, what can go wrong, and plans to mitigate any potential issues. If public transportation is running late, maybe someone with a car can go pick you up.

For large groups, most things do not need a strict starting time. If it is a large group and it requires strict attendance then you brought hierarchy into it long ago and ableism and such was always the conclusion you were going to get anyways.

edit:

organizing in a way where disabled people are inherently accommodated instead of shoved into some “extra” system makes a big difference

to reply to those below, it is "entitled" to think that it isn’t ableist to force people into systems instead of building systems around the people there.

to put it simply, if a group is organized in a way where you must actively decide to favor one social group over another systematically and it is always the same group, you failed and are just doing hierarchy, in this case on the basis of ability. It doesn't matter if you can't imagine organizing without ableism, that is still ableism.

I got a discord linked in my bio for people who are a fan of that form of organizing, as you can see here it isn't common even in these spaces

all 23 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] protist@mander.xyz 48 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Reading your headline, I was thinking I was going to agree with you here. People who have lower incomes or who lack transportation absolutely have more barriers to overcome to be on time, and I genuinely believe grace should be given e.g. when arriving to work.

But starting a large meeting on time is being ableist? I don't know how else to put this...that sentiment is profoundly entitled. You want the entire group to wait for you because you had transportation difficulties? You want the entire group to extend the time they were planning on being on this meeting? What about people who have pre-scheduled rides who are going to have to leave on time? People who rely on family for transport?

I fully support giving grace to people who have transportation issues, and supporting them in getting caught up on anything they may have missed. I will never abide a person who's not on time who expects the world to stop and wait for them and calls them "ableist" for just holding a meeting as planned.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 24 points 3 months ago

You said exactly what I was thinking.

I came into this ready to agree with OP. In fact I wanted to add an additional point about how neurodiverse conditions can make it difficult for some people to keep track of things and arrive on time.

But the idea that other people should put their schedules on hold? Nah, sorry. You lost me there, OP.

[–] rosethornRangerTTV@beehaw.org 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

organizing in a way where disabled people are inherently accommodated instead of shoved into some "extra" system makes a big difference

it is entitled to think that it isn't ableist to force people into systems instead of building systems around the people

[–] Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Do you think a concert starting on time when not everyone who bought a ticket has arrived yet is ableist?

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

No, but it might be to charge a "missed appointment fee" if you don't get there on time. That's the fucking difference between punishment and consequences.

[–] mbtrhcs@feddit.org 3 points 2 months ago

Which is what the original commenter already indicated they think as well.

[–] Sop@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago

That makes sense, I’m just trying to understand OP’s view on large meetings. I understand the issue with calling it a punishment that those who are late have to miss the first part, but always waiting for everyone be present just seems impossible (similarly to delaying a concert).

[–] protist@mander.xyz 13 points 3 months ago

I've managed people for a long time. I've helped develop and implement accomodations for people with physical disabilities, learning disabilities, trauma history, mental health issues, and more. What you're doing here is painting everyone with a disability with one brush, where the reality is people with disabilities have a wide variety of needs and wants.

I feel like you are coming into this conversation with a specific grievance about a specific meeting or group that's starting without you. I'd challenge you to think inventively about how you can get your needs met while not externalizing your experience ("my dissatisfaction is everyone else's fault") and falling into resentment.

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 28 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Look, I'm an anarchist so I am completely on board with abolishing systems of hierarchy, but a flat group can collectively decide to do something at a certain time, and that's not intrinsically creating hierarchy.

I am more on board with the part about required attendance creating hierarchy, if "required" means "people are required to be there at a certain time, period", rather than "people are required to be there at a certain time, if they want to take part in the event", where the "required" part is not meaning that they are beholden to participate, but just a pre-requisite if they choose to participate.

Under your post's system, you are stuck with a contradiction. You say both that:

Punishing people for being late is systematic oppression towards these groups.

but also

On the other hand, waiting too long to start can impact people with limited time or energy. Not everyone can stay awake an extra hour just to wait for something to start.

And if the event itself is the benefit (and thus missing it, the punishment), then under your system you are being ableist no matter what you do.

Start on time? Ableist towards people with movement disabilities who can't get there on time.
Start late? Ableist towards people with low-energy disorders who can't just wait around.

If you find that your system has created a no-win outcome, it needs revision.

[–] coffeetest@beehaw.org 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The universal design ideal, is that, an ideal. Hopefully we strike an appropriate balance between different people's needs. I think recognizing that some things are more challenging for some people than others is good. There should be reasonable responsibility to anticipate other's needs and advocacy for one's own needs.

I'll give you my own example as a person with a disability. Have I been late to meetings/appointment "because of my disability"? Sure. I do plan to have enough time to make it work but that doesn't always happens because of unforeseen issues that come up for me that would not for most others. Do I consider that the fault of the others involved? Of course not, let be practical.

On the other hand when possible, which has been 100% of the time since March 2020, I essentially demand virtual meetings now because my computer is the most accessible environment for me in the world and put me on far more even ground as others.

[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 3 points 2 months ago

I agree with this 99%. I think the 1% where I disagree, is that the OP's ideal (as-stated) is missing the way to actually accommodate everyone even in an ideal situation.

IMO the answer to this is not punishing people who show up late, or who have to leave on-time or even early, with external consequences (e.g. to their job). Not moving the meeting/event itself cannot be held to make someone ableist, especially when, as they noted, it could also be ableist to move the event.

On the other hand when possible, which has been 100% of the time since March 2020, I essentially demand virtual meetings now because my computer is the most accessible environment for me in the world and put me on far more even ground as others.

Absolutely agree. I like to make all of my meetings virtual, even in the rare case that everyone is in the same office, just so no one feels pressured to pile into a room together. Anyone who is pretending that plans cannot be made and communicated outside of a strict time, place, and medium, is being a huge asshole, and, if they don't care about how this affects people with different abilities, ableist. Email, slack, virtual meetings, group calls, message boards, documentation, etc, are all valid mediums for decision-making and information dispersal, and the more ways you involve, the more ways there are for people with different needs and communication preferences and capabilities, to be equitably involved.

[+] downpunxx@fedia.io 25 points 3 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] Onihikage@beehaw.org 19 points 3 months ago

OP is absolutely mistaken that it's somehow ableist to stick to a meeting deadline or similar "punishment" for lateness, and t3rmit3 has said why much more eloquently than I could. However, you've said something that I can't let pass without a rebuttal.

perpetual lateness means someone values their time more than they do the commitment and the time of others. period.
[...]
perpetual lateness, though, is a statement, that individual could not give a shit what others needs and responsibilities are

This is making a moral judgment on what you believe is in someone's mind, and your judgment is based on a false premise. There exists an extremely common mental disorder (so common that some might consider it a form of neurodivergence) that when left untreated makes it much harder to do the things you want and are obligated to do. It's harder to start doing things, it's harder to stop, it's harder to focus yet too easy to focus, it's harder to remember important things, and it's harder to motivate yourself to do anything you aren't doing at any given moment, and anything you have to put effort into motivating yourself to do leaves you with less mental energy to do anything else in that category.

The one thing that can usually overcome all of these mental blocks is panic - when you're actually out of time and Consequences are approaching if you don't do something RIGHT NOW then you can finally do what you need to do and get something done - later than you wanted, worse than you wanted, more mentally drained, and with plenty of reasons to beat yourself up over it, not that it helps if you do. This is the reason behind why most people show up perpetually late. They might not let the emotional turmoil show, but if they're consistently a few minutes late for everything, I can just about promise it's not because they don't care.

People who have this disorder and receive prescription medication for it often describe the first dose as like receiving superpowers. The idea that they can decide they want to do something, and then just go do it? Without thinking about it? No buildup? No psyching yourself into it? No roundabout coping strategies? No reorganizing the entire structure of your life to make it happen? No bargaining with the goddamn monkey in your brain that almost never lets you do the rational thing? Wait, normal people don't have the monkey? They live like this every day, without any expensive pills? Impossible. It couldn't be that simple. Do they have any idea how lucky they are?

Your misplaced sense of moral superiority is unfortunately quite common, but it's not going to help these people, it's going to hurt them. If it's affecting their life, and it often is, they need treatment and training in how their brain works, not to be told they're a piece of shit who doesn't care about others and are choosing to inconvenience everyone else in their life including themselves. That's only going to put them in a worse place.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

This is identical to "drug addicts choose to be drug addicts and so do not deserve medical care" except it's closer to "blind people choose to be blind"

[–] borf@lemmynsfw.com 23 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Wow, hmmm. I'm someone who makes personal sacrifices in the name of punctuality because I've experienced the negative effects of lateness and strive not to externalize those costs to others whenever I can.

I'm going to be thinking about this post for a while because I really want to appreciate and relate to this perspective, because my personal inclinations go: food gets cold and won't be as good reheated as it was when it was hot the first time. Other people might have woken early or skipped a meal or made other personal sacrifices to be somewhere on time. I see punctuality as a responsibility to my fellow humans. If I say I'll be somewhere at a certain time, I do my best to do keep my word. So it's going to take me a while to really process the alternative perspective here.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That's just it. The sacrifices that a poor or disabled person has to make to be on time for their doctor's appointment are much greater than the ones their typical patient has to make. We all have to make sacrifices for punctuality, but we're not all asked to make the same degree of sacrifice.

[–] borf@lemmynsfw.com 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's just that the logical conclusion here is that everybody skips work/class/get-togethers/volunteering on days any individual is sick or has problems, and therefore effectively nobody can ever do any work or receive any benefits from any work or community activity of any kind. At some point some things have to start on time, right? From surgeons to airline pilots to garbage collectors to graduate classes to stamp collecting clubs to backyard BBQs, delaying everything until everyone can do everything at the same time just doesnt seem like it would work

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

The argument isn't that everyone should be allowed to come whenever they want, but rather we should assume good faith and not intentionally punish people for being late. The natural and social consequences are more than sufficient for whatever misguided purpose the punishment is meant to serve.

[–] borf@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 3 months ago

Ah I thought the argument was that there shouldn't be any natural or social consequences either per the assertion the IWW's language was ableist

[–] petrescatraian@libranet.de 8 points 3 months ago

@rosethornRangerTTV I understand that some buses and other form of transport do not come on time, but on the other hand, one myst acknowledge that everything has a schedule and a time. You can't force a train not to leave the station just because you didn't show up on time (I mean, in my country many trains are leaving late anyways, but that's not the point). You'll just be delaying other people too.

I tend to be a late person as well, but whenever I have the possibility I either:
a. Put stuff in my calendar, with a notification prior to the event, so that I know when to get ready.
b. Run and/or rush. Literally. I know it isn't a possibility for many, and it might be dangerous for me (I do my best not to hit into other people when I do and I can dodge really well), but if you hurry up you'll never be late more than a few minutes, maximum 20. Happens to me every time. If you can't run, try going at a faster pace.
c. If I see there is a high chance I am not getting there in time, I announce my lateness to the person I meet with so that they won't be too upset.

I know getting on time can be hard sometimes, but it is a thing up to every single individual to sort out. You sometimes do not have the luxury of getting late somewhere and calling them ableist (even if they might be) might not help you out.

[–] cerement@slrpnk.net 8 points 3 months ago

pile on layers of cultural norms – some cultures place a priority on punctuality, and some cultures it’s downright rude to arrive at the time stated – and then there’s the US where workers are required to be on time but bosses don’t even need to show up

[–] Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 months ago

The systematic change you describe would make sure that people are "on time" though, just redefining on what that meaning.

Being "on time" I understand as one of two things:

Being in a place you agreed to be at a time you agreed to.
Something happens for a lot of people and it was announced beforehand that this will do.

The first one is your responsibility, the latter is impossible to make in a way that works for everyone.

I don't understand how this "change" should look like, what you'd expect people to do for meeting each other and events.

Of course I'm fine with "I take public transport I'll be there between four and six" as a statement for punctuality. Beyond that though?

[–] emmie@beehaw.org 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I think it is something more of an ego thing. I never was in this position but many people explained to me that they feel offended if I am late.
I only feel annoyed in such situation that I have to wait and can’t do anything before the person arrives. Being so often late myself I don’t think I could be truly angry though.

Sorry I didn’t read it but I have adhd and it would be ableist to expect me to /s?

God you guys really can make a super long comments have you thought of me? How do I feel seeing such a long wall of text and being excluded from discussion? /s

All in all I won’t feel guilty for being late but I won’t feel entitled either. It’s my fault but it’s pointless to feel guilty if it happened. Not good for your mental health. Generally guilt is counterproductive and entitlement is weird.
I try to not be late but if it happens it happens.