This is a placeholder for the rage I plan to let loose on Ancestry.com. Those fucking commercials are really starting to piss me off.
Random thoughts, musings, rants, and an occasional picture from a thirty-something in our nation's capital. I write, you read, everybody wins.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Saturday, June 4, 2011
The New Gender Inequality in the Workplace
Great strides have been made to reach equality in the workplace. In 1963, women earned 59% of the wages earned by men – this has improved to 77% of men’s wages. And even more significant improvements have been made in the younger workforce with women under 25 making 93.2% of men’s wages (2005 figures). Although we’re not completely equal yet, we’re getting there.
Although pay may be getting closer, there is one area where we are taking significant steps backwards – and it’s not where you might think. Women have moved past men in summer workplace comfort. That’s right, men are being discriminated against in the summer wardrobe department.
The societal expectation that men wear suits every day regardless of weather is outdated and must be revisited. Women have managed to rebel against traditional expectations of wardrobe and can get away with wearing sleeveless blouses, skirts and sandals. You know what that boils down to? Formal tank tops, shorts and flip flops. It’s like a business suit for the beach. And they love it. Men? We don’t get that pass.
Wearing a suit with tie in 90+ degree weather is simply cruel. It doesn’t matter how breathable your fabrics are, when you arrive at the workplace you will be drenched, and after cooling off, you’ll be a little more ripe than you were when you got out of the shower. If you are lucky enough to stay in your office building the entirety of the day, it’s not so bad and you can remove the jacket, maybe undo the top button and settle in to whatever comfort you can find. However, if you are required to leave the building and enter the outdoor furnace, the sweat starts all over again. And it is none too pleasant. This can be compounded by metro cars with no air conditioning that are slightly over crowded so the real temperature on board is somewhere in the 135 degree range and there’s no room to take off your jacket so you stand there with your arms over your head holding on to the clammy metal bar for balance, shoving your ever increasingly moist armpit into some unsuspecting transit neighbor. Not. A. Fan.
By the time you arrive at your meeting place, you are soaked from head to toe, the handouts/papers/notes that you brought with you have smeared because of your clammy hands. You are hesitant to shake the hands of those in the meeting because you haven’t been able to stop sweating as your body temperature is still hovering somewhere around 110 degrees. This is not conducive to a successful meeting.
Women, on the other hand, have their minimalist outfits that allow them to perspire and cool down as nature intended. I don’t hold that against them. I mean, I’m all for acceptable business attire for women that, shall we say, let’s their skin breathe. I just want business attire equity.
I do hereby submit for consideration a revolution against societal norms for summer business attire. On days with no formal meetings, men should be not only allowed but encouraged to wear polos and khakis. On business meeting days in the summer, ties are optional but jackets are prohibited if the temperature is above 90.
Men will never be able to wear skirts in the workplace or sleeveless shirts, and that’s fine. Women get the upper hand there. I’m not asking for full gender equality of summer wardrobes, I just want to make strides towards equality. How many more dress shirts must we ruin with sweat stains before someone will take notice?
Saturday, May 14, 2011
News you can use…or lose, whichever
Since its raining outside and I don’t want to go run right now, I share with you a sampling of world events critical for intelligent conversations at your cocktail parties this evening.
Page 6 of New York Post does it again…
Not sure which is worse – Osama bin Wankin’ or “Whora Bora” or the photoshopped porn on his tiny TV.
Pippa Middelton got drunk a few years ago…
More pictures are coming out of Pippa downing the devil’s juice and running around without all of her clothes on. A couple weeks ago, the “world” was abuzz with these photos of Pippa in her bra dancing with some dude. According to the British gentleman on MSNBC this morning, more pics are coming and the Royals are just flummoxed. But it’s not like she’s pulling a Britney or a Lindsay, she was 23 got a little drunk and danced without her top on (but with a bra). Who hasn’t done that? And how the hell was she supposed to know 4 years ago that her sister was going to marry a prince? If the Brits can get behind Benny Hill, I think they can handle some scantily clad Pippa…I know the rest of the world can (and might even be looking forward to it)…
In a new twist on “an eye for an eye”
An Iranian woman who was scheduled to pour acid in her attacker’s eyes has to wait a little longer.
Amenah Bahrami was attacked by Majid Movahedi after she refused to marry him. He was so insulted that the threw a jar of acid in her face when she returned home from work in 2004 leaving her looking like this:
Photo above courtesy of the Guardian
She asked for and won the right to seek revenge by truly achieving an eye for an eye justice. Movahedi was to be put under and Bahrami was then to use presumably an eye dropper to drop 4 drops of acid in each eye. Iranian officials have endorsed the ruling as they seek to stem the tide of increasing acid attacks in the country.
There’s a whole lot of shit that’s wrong with this picture. First, Movahedi is a chickenshit asshole and deserves to rot in prison but I’m not sure I can support burning his eyeballs with acid – even IF you make it slightly more humane by putting him under for the “procedure”. Second, how the fuck does an “acid attack” become the growing trend in assaults? How readily available is acid that burns your fucking face off? Admittedly, I've not looked into it here in the US but I can’t believe they’re doing a whole lot of different shit where they are packing thermoses of acid do their day jobs in Iran.
The premeditation for such an attack would seem to be fairly extensive. I mean, no matter how pissed you are at the person who’s face you’re going to melt off, you’re going to want to take serious precautions to make sure you don’t melt any of your hand or arm off when you toss that toxic shit into their face. Plus, you have to put it in the bottle or jar or spritzer or whatever it is that you are using as your carrying device. That’s a lot of planning.
I suppose it isn’t that much different from getting pissed at somebody, going to the pawn shop, buying a hand gun, waiting 14 days, then going over and shooting them. But there’s finality in that act. Not right by any means but you’re intent is to kill someone. Throwing a jar of acid in someone’s face – your are inflicting incredible pain, causing extreme disfigurement, in many cases I would assume blinding them, but you aren’t killing them. You are fucking them over so completely but then allowing them to live out the rest of their life with the constant reminder of your sick and twisted revenge.
That is really, really, fucked up. If I piss anyone off to the point they want to do severe harm, just shoot me, please.
You can read more about this here, and here.
And today’s “Sign of the Apocalypse”
Disney has trademarked "Seal Team 6". That’s right, the mouse owns the rights to all toys, clothes, movies, books, and any other money making product they can think of. And they filed the papers 2 days after Osama’s death.
Regardless how you feel about the American reaction to Osama’s assassination, I think we can all agree that trademarking the assassination team for use in product development is a little much. I will not argue their heroism, patriotism or their importance to helping keep America safe from future terrorist attacks. But something simply does not sit right with this.