3 ms·
> Interesting that the language of sight is so prevalent that it appears in this very title twice. Well, it appears once in "invisible", and once in "blind"...
by thaumasiotes 4mo ago
> Interesting that the language of sight is so prevalent that it appears in this very title twice.
Well, it appears once in "invisible", and once in "blind"... but I don't see why "blind" is a surprise when talking about someone blind.
There is no reference to sight in "reveal".
- Planktonne 4mo agoNot an immediately explicit one, but to reveal is to unveil [1] is to remove a covering that blocks sight specifically. [1] https://www.etymonline.com/word/reveal https://www.etymonline.com/word/reveal
- zersiax 4mo agoI always find it interesting to see that while we watch people struggle to get through a UI , unable to see the forest through the trees while they just want to get done with the task they, when they eyeball it, should only take five minutes but takes five hours instead, we get blinded by talking about the use of the word blindspot or the order in which we should say visual, impairment and person. meanwhile the UI never gets fixed and the cycle repeats when the next person shows up. As a blind person myself, I truly don't see the problem with using visual terminology given we don't live in a value, and while I understand some people go looking for a fight after the 30th inaccessible mandatory form they have to fill out that day, I've always preferred a more measured approach.
- handoflixue 4mo agoThe language isn't even being criticized here, just remarked upon. I think that's fair.
- TimByte 4mo agoYeah, blind seems unavoidable there, since it's literally about a blind client