Isn’t it an absurdity of absurdities when pharmaceutical commercials say, “Do not take [this drug] if you are allergic to it or to any of its ingredients.” Isn’t that a no-brainer? If it were a commercial for steak, would it say, “do not eat this meat if you are a vegetarian”?
What To Call Skirts Marketed For Men?
Part of the women’s liberation movement was inventing new vocabulary which enabled women to differentiate their agenda as the pursuit of equality and not emulation. Women sought to be treated equally as men (particularly in employment) but it was also clear that they were not to be regarded as men. Employment law shifted accordingly such that if trousers were acceptable attire for men, they must also be acceptable attire for women. And since men were not required to wear stockings or heels, neither could women. As I have pointed out in other posts, these cultural strides were not reciprocated for men. While it remained acceptable for women to wear sandals to the office, I have yet to read a single employee dress code that specifically extends such option to men. (Granted, no one wants to see most men’s feet, and most men lack fashion sensibility to select dignified sandals, but the same can be said for a number of women as well.)Continue Reading
Alternate DNS Servers
If you want to cut down on the data that your ISP collects and sells regarding your web browsing, use an alternate free (and probably faster) DNS service.
Advocacy Apparel – Because Clothing Is Genderless
I am developing a site and business plan to sell skirt-advocacy apparel. Not just screen printed t-shirts, either. There will be some classy polo shirts and caps (and perhaps bumper stickers!) with catchy phrases and educational URLs. Stay tuned for more details. In the meantime, please suggest items and slogans in the comments below.
Tell your friends too!
Feedback = Market = Advocacy
Live the change that you want to see.
A Pentecostal First Amendment Objection
I am not saying that face coverings should be worn nor am I saying that face coverings should not be worn; I am saying that governments must not compel it. You see, while I am a stalwart libertarian, I am also a pentecostal Christian. I contend that such mandates go against my sincere religious beliefs.Continue Reading
Use the Foreign to Serve the Domestic
Chairman Mao Zedong once said, 古为今用 洋为中用, “use the past to serve the present, the foreign to serve China.” I wonder if the same is true for my relationship with Google.Continue Reading
Online Census? Think Twice!
Completing the decennial census online probably seems like an easy task, but convenience comes at a price—a price that I am unwilling to pay.Continue Reading
Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946)
Marsh v. Alabama is a remarkable decision in which a Jehova’s witness attempted to distribute literature in a township operated by a private company. She was arrested and charged with trespass. The Supreme Court reasoned that even though the township existed within the property rights of a private company, “[o]wnership does not always mean absolute dominion. The more an owner, for his advantage, opens up his property for use by the public in general, the more do his rights become circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who use it.” The U.S. Supreme Court reversed Alabama on First Amendment grounds and vacated Marsh’s state conviction. Supreme Court opinions from the era are notably concise and this one is definitely worth the read. Marsh v. Alabama
Behind the Scene At a Car Dealership
In 2013 This American Life spent a month at a Long Island, NY Jeep dealership as the sales teams tries to make its October sales goal of 129 cars. If they make it, the dealership gets a huge bonus from Chrysler between $65,000 and $85,000 (depending on the models sold). So they pull out all the stops and in the process reveal a great deal about how to reverse the process to get a good deal on buying a car.