To change the future, you have to understand the past.

Also, Waldman makes the same point I’ve been railing about for the last couple of years.

The “stay in your lane” mentality that seems to undergird so much progressive discourse—only polyamorous green people really “get” the “polyamorous green experience,” and therefore only polyamorous greens should read and write about polyamorous greens, say—ignores our common humanity.

That authors should only write about those exactly like them seems like such a colossally bad idea that I’m absolutely flummoxed that anyone could have ever been convinced of its virtue, nor can I comprehend how it has become so widespread in what passes for modern discourse.

This also has never made sense to me.

Proudly declaring that they “Don’t do computers” as if somehow the tool that’s ubiquitous in every workplace to enable their efficiency, is beneath them.

As a later comment points out if you treated any other standard office tool necessary for your job like that, you’d be fired.

I never understood it. If they had to use any other standard office tool 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for the last 10 years and still couldn’t perform basic tasks, they would be fired! Why are computers an exception?

I’m not saying that everyone should be able to do the things I do with computers. I’m saying that if you can’t find your start menu, don’t know what icons to click on, don’t even know the names of the applications you use — well, the robots are coming for your job first. And damn soon, too.

It’s like getting in a car (to return to the tried and true car analogies) and forgetting how to use the steering wheel and needing it to be explained every single time. It just makes no sense.