Filed under: Nonsense
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118799086084008302.html?mod=todays_us_pursuits
Okay, I’ll weigh in on this one.
Speaking as someone who suffers from allergies and asthma…yeah, I can see the logic in a ban on perfumes. First, consider that we are not talking about one scent…or two…but several dozen, if not several hundred. If you have three hundred high-school girls circulating through these hallways, assume that just one-third of them are wearing some sort of scent. (That’s probably low, but we’ll err on the side of conservatism.) That is one hundred different perfumes, body sprays, and/or lotions – and many of these girls will wear all three. (I HAVE a teenage daughter, so I know something about this.) To an allergy sufferer, that is a huge issue.
Now factor in the one-third of the high-school BOYS who are wearing body sprays or cologne – that’s TWO hundred different scents. (Some of them will be the same scent, but it’s still a multiplier.) Again, for an allergy sufferer, that’s a fairly big deal.
One girl, or one boy, wearing body spray is not an air-quality issue. Two hundred or more could be. I can see the logic here.
Now add in the fact that few of these kids have been taught the doctrine of “less is more”. These kids don’t lightly spritz on some cologne or spray the air in front of them and walk through it…they practically bathe in this stuff.
Okay, I hear some of you saying, “Well, if you have allergies, you should be on medication.” I agree wholeheartedly. However – about a week ago, I actually experienced an severe allergy attack at work brought on by a customer’s injudiciously applied cologne. That is the first time this has happened – though I have frequently experienced them from coworkers’ scented candles or room sprays. This, despite the fact that I take two different oral allergy medications and use a nasal spray and an asthma inhaler. This is not an issue of inadequately protecting ourselves, it is an issue of being assaulted by vastly overapplied cosmetics. And if we are going to ban peanut butter from schools due to food allergies, it only makes sense to ban fragrances due to respiratory allergies.
I do think the reasoning cited in this article – “kids don’t shower the way they used to” – is rather spurious. That’s a separate issue, in my opinion. If that is the concern, maybe the appropriate tactic isn’t a ban, but educating these kids on proper hygiene?
But if your concern is that the average school hallway smells like a low-end French brothel…well, I’m behind you on that one.
Filed under: Nonsense, PMS, Random thoughts, Rants, tongue-in-cheek
Okay, someone really needs to explain to me the evolutionary purpose of PMS.
Assuming that humanity in fact has become what it currently is as a result of a process that retained characteristics that AID in survival, and abandoned characteristics that HINDERED survival…every characteristic that is prevalent in most of mankind (womankind, in this case) should probably be a survival trait, yes?
So tell me, please, how it is that blind, unthinking rage; intermittent bouts of severe depression; homicidal tendencies; and a complete inability to tolerate the slightest aggravation can possibly aid in the survival of the species? Because frankly, I don’t get it. But I have it.
Here’s what I think. I think that PMS, and in fact the entire menstrual experience, are actually Nature’s punishment for failing, for yet another month, to do our part to contribute to the survival of the species – i.e., get pregnant. I think this is a giant cosmic Smack Down for letting down the team. It’s the only explanation that makes sense. Cramps, body aches, muscle and joint weakness, extreme fatigue, and sheer insanity cannot possibly be considered survival traits! (Oh yeah, and don’t forget that extra 10 pounds of fluid that leaves you about as able to avoid predators as the Pillsbury Doughboy!)
The problem is, pregnancy gets you all that crap too, plus 18 years of the severe depression, unthinking rage and extreme fatigue…so where’s the incentive?
Somebody dropped the ball here.
Filed under: General silliness, Jobs and Work, Nonsense, Random thoughts, Rants
In recent years, there has been much controversy and to-do over the titles we give clerical staff.
First, we were “secretaries”. Fine, great word. It’s evolved considerably over the centuries, but for some reason in the 80’s it became synonymous with “empty-headed bimbo who excels at filing nails and fetching coffee while wearing short skirts and low-cut blouses and giggling a lot – and probably chewing gum”. Which is fairly stupid and inaccurate, not to mention demeaning…so THAT term lost favor.
Then we were “administrative assistants”. But for whatever reason – possibly the fact that we don’t do that much assisting, handling most tasks all by our cute little selves – that term wasn’t good enough either.
So then we were “administrative professionals”. Oh, good. Just in case anyone was concerned that these tasks were being handled by AMATEURS, or perhaps that we were doing it all for free, out of the sheer joy of filing! Glad we cleared that one up!
I don’t know what we’re called now, and frankly I don’t care. Becuase I have it all figured out – one perfect, generic term that covers all the bases.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Paper Mover. Highly skilled, thoroughly trained and passionate about what I do – which is, all day, every day, to move papers from one stack to another, and eventually into a folder within a box. Then, when the case is done, I will take them out of the folder and put them in another box, to be shredded.
My life is about moving paper. How freakin’ pathetic is that? I just can’t wait for the phone to ring, so I can have a break and be the Message Taker for a few minutes!
