3 ms·
Right. You being pedantic about your work-related concerns is valid. Me doing the same is "off topic." Got it. Learned that a really long time ago, actually.
by DoreenMichele 3y ago
Right. You being pedantic about your work-related concerns is valid. Me doing the same is "off topic."
Got it. Learned that a really long time ago, actually.
- coldtea 3y ago>Right. You being pedantic about your work-related concerns is valid. Me doing the same is "off topic." Here's the whole history of the thread: djur: title is wrong, it's about return-to-office, not return-to-work u: no problem with it, "work" is a place, not an activity. me: work as synonumous with office, is an anachronism from when work was mostly done in an office. TFA title also anti-WFH weaseling. u: As a former homemaker, I generally find it offensive that "work" means paid work and "women's work" is routinely implicitly devalued as not really work. In your first comment you found it OK for work to mean "office" in TFA title, as if WFH is not work. But suddenly you find it offensive that work doesn't also include not just WFH but also home chores. U-turn much? And based on "But you do you" am I wrong to take this as an ad-hominem because I dared to reply to you, based on something unrelated to the discussion, which nor I not anybody in this subthread touched upon anyway? >Got it. Learned that a really long time ago, actually. Yes, it's all about you.
- DoreenMichele 3y agoNo, it's not about me at all. And never will be. Former homemakers have issues it's nigh impossible to discuss at all anywhere. But I think that's a mistake that harms ongoing efforts to reform what work means to humans and when, where and how it can be validly performed.