Even without attribution or ever reading this quote before, I just knew it had to be Sir Terry Pratchett and I was right.

That man was unmatchable in his wit and wisdom and how he packaged life lessons on simply being good people into entertaining stories. The world is lesser without him.

Silicosis is typically caused by years of breathing in silica dust at work, and can worsen even after work exposures stop. In recent years, after decades of inaction, the federal government finally took several important steps to reduce the incidence of this ancient and debilitating disease. Under the Trump administration, all that progress is going away, in but one example of the widespread destruction now taking place across the federal government.

Silicosis first caught the attention of the federal government in the early 1930s, when hundreds of workers hired by the chemical company Union Carbide and its subsidiary to drill a tunnel through a mountain of almost pure silica died of silicosis. Most of the workers were Black, and many were buried in unmarked graves. President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s secretary of labor, Frances Perkins, issued a report on the widespread problem across factories and mines, informing businesses that control measures, “if conscientiously adopted and applied,” could prevent silicosis.

Yeah… her being in a higher position does add complexity. But you also have the coworker whose photo you were specifically talking about to back you up, right?

If one of the guys who reports to me told me this, I’d probably give them the same advice as I gave you, but add an offer talk to her for him. (But tbf I’ve received enough feedback to know I’m not exactly an average manager.)

You’re compassionate enough to know that you’re in the 1% on this and don’t seem resentful about that, so I’m sure people in your workplace see that in you. I don’t think talking about this is inherently “complaining,” as you put it, and how you present it could help a lot.

I keep a framework about giving feedback in my back pocket to use and share all the time, and I can’t help but share it here. It recommends formatting the feedback in 4 steps (with an example of what you might say for each part):

• Context (I was looking at photos with X, discussing examples of the poor photography practices resulting in subpar photos when Y came in and heard part of our conversation)
• Observation (I believe Y misconstrued our conversation to be about the people in the photos, not the photography issues, because she gave me feedback to not speak about coworker’s looks and didn’t give me a chance to explain that’s not what we were doing)
• Results (I am feeling afraid that Y may be misjudging my actions and that is causing me to withdraw from interacting with her)
• Next Steps (I want to resolve this so I don’t feel awkward around Y and to ensure my reputation isn’t negatively impacted; I’ve considered [these approaches] and would like your input on how to move forward)

It’s from a training called Radical Candor and they call it CORE, but c’mon, it’s CORNS! 🌽 I hope it might help you!

This sucks. Your coworker misjudged a situation and seems to be unfairly misjudging you because of it. I can understand why that would create tension and discomfort.

Can you try to talk to her about it? Approach her and ask if you can have a few minutes of her time. Then try to explain that you didn’t mean any offense because you were talking about the low quality of the photography, not about the people in it and it didn’t occur that someone might take it to be about the people. After her reaction it clicked that it could look/sound that way, but that was genuinely not the intent or your thought process at all.

Heck, you could also take a good selfie and a bad selfie (or internet examples of this) and show her those as an example to highlight that the same subject in different settings can look starkly different, and that was what you were commenting on, not the subjects themselves. Hopefully that would clear it up.

This approach would take some humility to concede some to her perception of you doing something wrong because doing so might soften her up enough to actually listen to you, but I want to clarify that I don’t think you did anything wrong (and FWIW, I’m a woman).

Do you need to do this? No. But it’s clearly eating at you, and this is a way that might put it to bed. And if she doubles down and gets worse, then you know you really should put distance in how you interact with this person.

Like the other commenter said, it might be worth mentioning to your manager first though, especially if you have a good relationship there. Doing so covers several bases:

1. If she was spiteful enough to report you for what she perceived to be happening, you have the real version out there.
2. Your manager may have a recommendation on how to approach her better than what I said since they actually know each other.
3. Your manager may recommend not reaching out, for whatever reason. One possibility, maybe this coworker is known to stir the pot and this could be another example. Sometimes there are performance things spoken about only at the manager level.

I wish you luck and peace in moving on from this. It’s stressful to be accused of something you haven’t done because of a misunderstanding (I’ve been there).

Or how God supposedly created all people in his image, but wait, no, not those people 🙄

I used to use em dashes all the time and now I find myself rethinking my writing styles because of people like you and it’s obnoxious.

They can appear green because of the plant growth, but don’t produce the green color themselves.

I got an, “I’d never seen that before,” from a surgeon. Who is a specialist in her field focusing explicitly on the procedure she performed on me. 🙃

I think your second point is fine, but your first point comes across as condescending and needlessly pedantic. The meaning was clear enough.

Ah, ok. Looks like West Virginia also had 100% of counties go for Trump, so “only” is still not right, but at least that makes more sense.

OK had 66.2% vote for Trump. Idaho, North Dakota, West Virginia, and Wyoming were all higher than that.

So what do you mean by “only state” and “100%”? I’m confused by your comment.

Alternatively, they do think of their loved ones but through the lens of, “their lives would be better without me.”

I can’t help but wonder if her bullies may have made this poor girl think she might be responsible if her parents faced repercussions from immigration policies. Regardless, it’s a tragedy that a life was lost so young and it’s inconceivable that the school took no action that may have prevented it.

Or heaven forbid something in the software allows it to print the right vote but record the wrong vote. I’m with you: no paper trail = not a paper ballot.

“simplejack” = “Jesus”? I’m not seeing it.

Not great for long-term use in cases of chronic pain though.

I know it’s possible for conditions to be tied to federal funding (like how interstate funds were withheld from Louisiana until they raised their drinking age to 21), so is it just that the Executive branch can’t impose that? (Genuinely asking since I’m not sure.)

I’m wondering if that may be the Mennonites? Like the Amish, they don’t have social security numbers so the tax code is definitely different for them. I can say with confidence that Quakers don’t have that exclusion.

You and I may know some of the same people! Does the name Max Carter mean anything to you?

Small correction though: the taxes thing isn’t actually true… there were (probably still are, but I’ve not been actively involved in enough years to feel justified making the claim) Quakers who chose to hold a percent of their income tax in escrow rather than give it to the government under the argument that their conscientious objector status should keep their money from going to the military.

It is not a legally recognized stance, and these people risk fees, interest, and legal action for their withholdings. And yet they choose to risk that as a form of peaceful protest.

Your comment dredged up all the memories of a workshop/talk I attended by one of these folks when I was in probably high school? It was not something done lightly or without effort.

It’s making me really happy seeing how many people in the comments here have nice things to say about Quakers!

I don’t remember the incident you’re recalling. Sounds like something my people would do though, lol. What I do think of in terms of Quaker activity at the time is a lot of protests and also Tom Fox, a Quaker taken hostage and killed in Iraq. He was there representing the org Christian Peacemaker Team, which goes to places plagued with violence to do service and good. Unlike missionaries and despite their name, they do not try to convert anyone.

I did not know Tom, but I know many people who did. And despite the very personal loss, the response was doubling down on the efforts to bring peace and stop the war. I think it was a pretty widespread assumption that most Friends organizations were on watch lists.

Leftist Quakers are pretty radical, and pretty awesome.

I mean, they wanted to cash in on the positive reputations Quakers had in business. While not being Quaker. And not implementing any of their business practices AFAIK. Plus their logo is of a traditional Puritan and has nothing to do with Quakers.

I think “deceptive” is a fair word.