chaoticats

it would be so awesome

I explained very clearly to the manager my issue with the meat section not having the price tags listed, and they claimed it was only going to be for the meat, since meat is by weight, and the price of each item is printed on the packs of each item.

Sure. That’s how they get their foot in the door. Fast forward not even two weeks, and here we are:

Bar codes. No prices, no item descriptions. No price stickers on the individual items. Heck, not even the name of the item that is SUPPOSED to be there.

No. The only way to see the price is to scan it on your phone app, which is also recording what you looked at recently, as a way of gauging what you might be looking for in the future.

So here’s what we’re gonna do gang:

Every time you go into a store that has implemented these price-less tags:

Take 1-3 items up to the cash register. Ask the cashier for the price, or hit the price check item on the self checkout, which will likely call over the attendant.

Express that you didn’t actually want it, you just couldn’t see on the shelf how much it was.

POLITELY, AND WITH A THANK YOU FOR THE PRICE CONFIRMATION, Give the items to the cashier or attendant to put back.

When they inevitably try to push the app, politely decline. If pressed for why not, say you don’t want to have to carry your phone in-hand the whole time you are shopping in order to see how much things cost. (Not having cell service or data to use the app is NOT a valid excuse, as stores already often have complimentary WiFi AND more stores will provide WiFi rather than give up on this push for surveillance pricing)

If it’s a shelf-stable item, the cashier will have to set it aside, taking up room in their limited operating space, and eventually pass it off to someone to put in a holding area to put back later. If it’s a fridge/freezer item, it might have to get tossed due to food product sale regulations.

In either case, you are making it a pain in the ass for them to have these digital bar codes. Tie up the checkouts. Give the employees more busywork that the company has to pay them to do. Hurt their bottom line having to toss the pint of ice cream you carried around in your cart for 20 minutes before giving it back to the cashier.

You’ve got people who need stories where men get to have completely platonic deep friendships with other men, need stories where men can be affectionate and support each other emotionally without it having to be romance. You’ve also got people who need stories about men being romantic with men. Both of these are valid. Whether either is canon doesn’t really matter because transformative works are allowed to be transformative and transformative works are works in their own right. It’s right there in the name.

But because there can only be One True Fanon, instead of acknowledging that different people have different needs and taking a live-and-let-live approach, you usually end up with both groups fighting to throw the other one under the bus first for trying to “steal” their representation.

(so nobody leaves this post without knowing what competing access needs are: the thing where movie subtitles are important for people with hearing loss or auditory processing issues, useless to people with vision loss, and can easily distract other people from the action. the thing where movie descriptive audio is important for people with vision loss, useless to people with hearing loss or auditory processing issues, and can easily distract other people from the action. et cetera and so forth.)

the other thing that worries me about both groups you describe is, zero of these people seem able to enjoy stories that aren’t entirely for them, which is sad, and zero of these people seem to know where to find the back button should they happen upon a fic that turns out to be really not for them, which is aggravating to everyone else and can’t be much fun for them either

Why shouldn’t we expect that in media? The answer to “we need representation” shouldn’t be “only perfect representation [which is very subjective, with everyone having a different definition of what that would even be] is allowed. Everything else is offensive.” It should instead be “more representation means more aspects of our experiences are shown.”

The “oh no I definitely can’t be gay, it’s time for some self-loathing” story is real for a lot of people, and can be very important to see represented. But I don’t want it to be all the stories I see. The “I’ve always known I was gay and I’ve never had a problem with it” story is real for a lot of people, and can be very important to see represented. But I don’t want it to be all the stories I see.