Chick-fil-a seems to have taken a page out of Mitt Romney's book. They want to appease everyone, make the most money possible, and not talk about the things about them that suck. Too bad Chick-Fil-A, you are a company, and so the people have a right to know how you roll.
Remember over the summer when Chick-Fil-A's president Dan Cathy told the world that he supported traditional marriage only? Then there was Chick-Fil-A appreciation day, and the kiss in. And then everyone on Facebook was like "omg I'm so sick of hearing about chick-fil-a!" even though they claim to support equality. And then it died down because people have the attention span of flies these days.
Well, they are back. According to a news story a few days ago, Chicago alderman (what is an alderman by the way? what a weird title) Joe Moreno claimed that Chick-Fil-A had stopped donating to anti- gay groups like focus on the family and that Mr. Moreno would stop blocking Chick-Fil-A from opening in Chicago. This could have been great news. Chick-Fil-A released a statement saying that they treat every person "with honor, dignity, and respect regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation, or gender." This should have been a giant step forward, showing that inequality in the work place is not tolerated in America.
BUT. Then, all the anti-gay people that went out and ate those sandwiches that day got super upset. Chick-Fil-A had caved to the pressure, their faith was weak. How could this company do this to all the people that went out in droves to show that equality is not an American value.
And then, Dan Cathy and friends must have had a secret meeting with the Mittster. Because they found the secret loophole solution. They found a way to secretly funnel money into their anti-equality organizations, appease the conservatives, be allowed to open in Chicago, AND get pro-equality people to advertise for them. I wish I was this talented.
There is an article on here at slate.com that explains the funneling of money pretty well. Basically it goes like this: Chick-Fil-A runs/owns Winshape ---> Winshape has a "ride for the family" which raises money to donate to an anti-gay group called Marriage and Family foundation ---> checks are to be made out to that foundation and mailed to 5200 Buffington Rd, Atlanta, GA. which is the same address as Chick-Fil-A inc in GA (presumably the HQ). Seriously, I couldn't make this up, Google map that address...you will see Chick-Fil-A inc.
When you Google that address, you do NOT see, however, a marriage and family foundation. This implies that they either share the same building or are the same company. It is also interesting that Chick-Fil-A never claimed to stop donating money to these groups, Moreno did. And when asked neither Chick-Fil-A or Focus on the Family will say if they are still financially connected.
This is NOT about freedom of speech or religion or whatever you think it is about. Dan Cathy can stand on a soap box and talk about how much he hates people all day, I don't really care. Its the fact that this company is trying to 1) not support equality 2) get credit for supposedly improving 3) appease everyone while actively excluding and clearly not supporting everyone.
Seriously. Waffle fries are not worth this.
21.9.12
17.9.12
Of course I act entitled, it's because I am.
I feel like the word entitlement is being thrown around a lot as this bad word. People keep thinking they are entitled to stuff, and this is bad somehow.
Entitlement (noun): the fact of having a right to something. <-that is the whole dictionary definition of this terrible terrible word. Having a right to something.
So when you are at the mall and you see that sixteen year old say to their mom, "no, I NEED the Hollister jeans mom!" and she says, "Don't act so entitled." That is normal, the teenager is acting as though he has a right to $75 jeans that he will wear once. This is not a right, he has no right to those jeans.
When you go to the factory that those jeans are being made in and the workers are sick with deadly diseases from the chemical they spray on them to make them look "worn in", and they say, "We really deserve better working conditions." (they don't actually say it like that, but you get the point) THAT is entitlement, AND it is GOOD. Those workers are ENTITLED to not die because of their job. They are ENTITLED to get paid enough to live and eat and support their families.
When Republicans complain about the left wing sense of entitlement, I feel no sense of shame or need to back down. I AM entitled. I am entitled to a roof. To a good meal (maybe a few). To healthcare that is actually affordable. To a job, and to not get fired from said job because of (insert dumb discriminatory reason here). And to get paid the same as my male counterparts (or more because, lets be honest, I'm the best). I do not think these things make me spoiled or bratty or lazy. I think they make me human.
But here's the thing, I also think that people who aren't me deserve the same stuff. (I know, this gets crazy so I hope you can follow). I think that other people (poor people, non-white people, queer people, homeless people, people with disabilities, etc) ALSO DESERVE BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS AND DIGNITY. There is no, "I'm sorry person, but you are (discriminated person) which means you are lazy and therefore do not deserve my help." Nope, that is not ok. ALL people have a right to (at the very very minimum) food, shelter, and medicine.
I think less people should be on food stamps. But the solution isn't to take everyone off them and then have a bunch of people in poverty instead. You know what, "those people", you know the ones that use food stamps, they ARE entitled, and they should be. They have a right to feed their families. The ones in the homeless shelter, the ones you won't give a buck to because he's probably going to buy beer with it, they are also entitled, they have a right to a roof, even if that roof is a homeless shelter. How is taking away those things that are helping to sustain them going to help? Maybe the welfare system needs a little bit of reform, maybe we need to put more effort in to job assistance. Maybe we should have showers in the homeless shelters, and suits to rent for job interviews. Maybe we should raise the minimum wage so that when somebody finally does find a job they can actually live on said job, and rent an apartment with that money. $7.40/hr even at full time WILL NOT be enough to live on. That person will remain homeless and probably lose their job.
And why is the idea of helping out your fellow man when he is at his lowest such an "Anti-American" idea?
Please keep telling me that my friends and I are entitled. I will keep saying, thanks for noticing. Please keep calling "those welfare people" entitled. The more entitled people we have in this world, the more change might actually happen.
Entitlement (noun): the fact of having a right to something. <-that is the whole dictionary definition of this terrible terrible word. Having a right to something.
So when you are at the mall and you see that sixteen year old say to their mom, "no, I NEED the Hollister jeans mom!" and she says, "Don't act so entitled." That is normal, the teenager is acting as though he has a right to $75 jeans that he will wear once. This is not a right, he has no right to those jeans.
When you go to the factory that those jeans are being made in and the workers are sick with deadly diseases from the chemical they spray on them to make them look "worn in", and they say, "We really deserve better working conditions." (they don't actually say it like that, but you get the point) THAT is entitlement, AND it is GOOD. Those workers are ENTITLED to not die because of their job. They are ENTITLED to get paid enough to live and eat and support their families.
When Republicans complain about the left wing sense of entitlement, I feel no sense of shame or need to back down. I AM entitled. I am entitled to a roof. To a good meal (maybe a few). To healthcare that is actually affordable. To a job, and to not get fired from said job because of (insert dumb discriminatory reason here). And to get paid the same as my male counterparts (or more because, lets be honest, I'm the best). I do not think these things make me spoiled or bratty or lazy. I think they make me human.
But here's the thing, I also think that people who aren't me deserve the same stuff. (I know, this gets crazy so I hope you can follow). I think that other people (poor people, non-white people, queer people, homeless people, people with disabilities, etc) ALSO DESERVE BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS AND DIGNITY. There is no, "I'm sorry person, but you are (discriminated person) which means you are lazy and therefore do not deserve my help." Nope, that is not ok. ALL people have a right to (at the very very minimum) food, shelter, and medicine.
I think less people should be on food stamps. But the solution isn't to take everyone off them and then have a bunch of people in poverty instead. You know what, "those people", you know the ones that use food stamps, they ARE entitled, and they should be. They have a right to feed their families. The ones in the homeless shelter, the ones you won't give a buck to because he's probably going to buy beer with it, they are also entitled, they have a right to a roof, even if that roof is a homeless shelter. How is taking away those things that are helping to sustain them going to help? Maybe the welfare system needs a little bit of reform, maybe we need to put more effort in to job assistance. Maybe we should have showers in the homeless shelters, and suits to rent for job interviews. Maybe we should raise the minimum wage so that when somebody finally does find a job they can actually live on said job, and rent an apartment with that money. $7.40/hr even at full time WILL NOT be enough to live on. That person will remain homeless and probably lose their job.
And why is the idea of helping out your fellow man when he is at his lowest such an "Anti-American" idea?
Please keep telling me that my friends and I are entitled. I will keep saying, thanks for noticing. Please keep calling "those welfare people" entitled. The more entitled people we have in this world, the more change might actually happen.
10.9.12
World Suicide Prevention Day
This week is suicide prevention awareness week and today is world suicide prevention day. This is something that has always been important to me, and something I've always talked about. If you are hurting and you feel alone, it is so important to know that you are not alone. There are so many places to turn to for help, so much hope for the future.
There are so so many organizations, causes, walks, numbers that are there to help those who are hurting. Sometime at the beginning of my time at Eastern I learned about To Write Love on Her Arms, an organization that pretty much everybody is aware of now. This is an organization that works to raise money to help people find the help they need if they are struggling with suicide or addiction. It is incredible.
Recently the It Gets Better Project was born out of need to let kids and young adults know that life will not always be as terrible as it is now. This project is geared towards bullied queer kids, but these messages are good for everyone to hear. The point is, no matter what the struggle is, there is somewhere to turn.
Throughout college I watched my friends lose their friends to suicide. I was aquiantances with some, and with others had only heard their names in funny stories and tales of great friendship. But these people, during my time at eastern, had never been my close friends or the people I spent time with. This doesn't take away from those lives lost, or the lives impacted. It was horrible to have to watch the people I cared about go through that. Knowing all along what we knew about all the places they could have turned to.
Of all the times I have had facebook statuses (which don't really mean anything), or talked to my friends, or even held an event once, about how there is always hope...suicide continues to be the 3rd leading cause of death among young people today. That number is only behind gun violence and car accidents. My generation, which if I may say so, is the best generation, is dying because we are either 1) killing each other 2) crashing our cars or 3) taking our own lives. Accidents happen, but 1 and 3 can be prevented. (well so can number 2, but its different)
One year ago I got that horrible call, that I imagine most of the readers of this blog have received at one point or another. The voice on the other end told me that George Jansson had taken his life. George was someone that I had known since (and then I don't really know) either late middle or early high school. Either way, for as long as I can remember George had been around. George and I worked together at this pizza place/liquor store for a short time, we worked together on class projects in high school, he was there with a smile if I needed one. I don't think it comes as a shock to anyone that knew George that he was one of the best people I ever knew. And that news was...well I guess there aren't really good words to describe what that news is like. But if you've received it you know, and if you haven't I hope you never do.
Someone told me that that the best thing to do when you lose someone important is to honor their memory, its better than just being gloomy. So I'm writing this blog in honor of George and all the lives lost to suicide which are too many to mention. And I want to make sure that anybody that needs help, anybody that feels alone, knows there is hope. There are places to turn. And if you call that number and they tell you it is a prank call and hang up on you (yeah I heard that happened to someone) then call me, or call somewhere else, or call 911 if you have to.
Call
1-800-suicide
1-800-273-talk
Visit the trevor project online or call
1-866-4-u-trevor
Visit reachout.com
Learn about the reality of depression and other mental health issues. Help to stand up and fight the stigma of these issues. If you are not struggling with depression, stand up and fight for your friends who are struggling silently because they are afraid to talk about it. MEN: tell your friends it is ok to feel depressed and it is OK to ask for help, even dudes need help sometimes. Women: men are less likely to ask for help, but women struggle with it to, so let your friends know they can ask for help.
If only to honor the memory of those lives lost, ask for help. Reach out to someone. This way our generation doesn't lose anymore.
Recently the It Gets Better Project was born out of need to let kids and young adults know that life will not always be as terrible as it is now. This project is geared towards bullied queer kids, but these messages are good for everyone to hear. The point is, no matter what the struggle is, there is somewhere to turn.
Throughout college I watched my friends lose their friends to suicide. I was aquiantances with some, and with others had only heard their names in funny stories and tales of great friendship. But these people, during my time at eastern, had never been my close friends or the people I spent time with. This doesn't take away from those lives lost, or the lives impacted. It was horrible to have to watch the people I cared about go through that. Knowing all along what we knew about all the places they could have turned to.
Of all the times I have had facebook statuses (which don't really mean anything), or talked to my friends, or even held an event once, about how there is always hope...suicide continues to be the 3rd leading cause of death among young people today. That number is only behind gun violence and car accidents. My generation, which if I may say so, is the best generation, is dying because we are either 1) killing each other 2) crashing our cars or 3) taking our own lives. Accidents happen, but 1 and 3 can be prevented. (well so can number 2, but its different)
One year ago I got that horrible call, that I imagine most of the readers of this blog have received at one point or another. The voice on the other end told me that George Jansson had taken his life. George was someone that I had known since (and then I don't really know) either late middle or early high school. Either way, for as long as I can remember George had been around. George and I worked together at this pizza place/liquor store for a short time, we worked together on class projects in high school, he was there with a smile if I needed one. I don't think it comes as a shock to anyone that knew George that he was one of the best people I ever knew. And that news was...well I guess there aren't really good words to describe what that news is like. But if you've received it you know, and if you haven't I hope you never do.
Someone told me that that the best thing to do when you lose someone important is to honor their memory, its better than just being gloomy. So I'm writing this blog in honor of George and all the lives lost to suicide which are too many to mention. And I want to make sure that anybody that needs help, anybody that feels alone, knows there is hope. There are places to turn. And if you call that number and they tell you it is a prank call and hang up on you (yeah I heard that happened to someone) then call me, or call somewhere else, or call 911 if you have to.
Call
1-800-suicide
1-800-273-talk
Visit the trevor project online or call
1-866-4-u-trevor
Visit reachout.com
Learn about the reality of depression and other mental health issues. Help to stand up and fight the stigma of these issues. If you are not struggling with depression, stand up and fight for your friends who are struggling silently because they are afraid to talk about it. MEN: tell your friends it is ok to feel depressed and it is OK to ask for help, even dudes need help sometimes. Women: men are less likely to ask for help, but women struggle with it to, so let your friends know they can ask for help.
If only to honor the memory of those lives lost, ask for help. Reach out to someone. This way our generation doesn't lose anymore.
6.9.12
Somebody please explain this to me
Things I don't understand about the conservative arguments:
1) What is the plan after you cut funding for education so much that teachers are getting paid basically nothing and our public school system collapses? The answer can not be private schools. If that is the answer, you have no idea how good you have it. Where will the kids go whose families can't afford private school? Why would you want to eliminate the thing that will make America the most competitive? And the real thing that sucks is that the best teachers aren't in it for the money. All of the teachers I know love their students and are passionate about wanting them to succeed. The money is second. Of course they wish they were making more so their lives were easier, but the kids are the most important part of the job. Maybe a business man can't understand that. But their is more to a job than the money you get every two weeks. So what exactly are we as a country going to do when the public school system collapses?
2) Why do you insist on calling yourself pro-life? That bothers me so much. I know a few conservative people who are really pro-life, but the Republican platform and base are not. Pro-life means that you are anti-death. So, fine you are anti-abortion that's pro-life. But what about the death penalty? What about war? What about poverty? What about health care? What about hate crimes? So basically your plan is to save all the babies, and then have them live in a world where they might die before they see age two because their mom is too poor to feed them or take them to the doctor. (fact: Flint has one of the highest infant mortality rates in in the country) You want this baby you saved to grow up uneducated and more likely to turn to crime, putting him on death row and killing him that way. You want people who are different to be able to be killed for who they are. You want to send 18 year old kids overseas to die for oil. These thing are not pro-life. At least you saved a baby, but that baby will have a horrible life and die early.
3) What is the problem with taxes? Do you understand how taxes work? Everybody pays money into a pot and now we can buy something for everyone to use. Firefighters, police officers, schools, roads, public parks, all things that you use and need are paid for with taxes. I don't understand the "we can't have universal health care because it will raise our taxes" argument. Of course it will, but guess what, now everybody gets to use it. Even drug dealers and murderers deserve a little bit of healthcare, we need to have it available so people don't die. Nobody deserves to die, especially just because they didn't have access to a doctor. Not even criminals or lazy people. We need these public services, we all use them. It doesn't make any sense to have to pay to have someone come put a fire out. You're not understanding what it is like to be poor if you think that is ok.
4) Why do you need to say you are for religious freedom? It is impossible to be for religious freedom, but then also not want those darn Muslims to have a mosque near you. You are not for religious freedom, you are for Christian control. And, since you also might call yourself a constitutionalist, lets talk about the constitution. It says pretty clearly that congress shall make no law respecting one religion. So that means that Muslims, Jews, Christians, and all the other religions get to be free to worship and practice their religions. It does not mean that Christians get to rule the country and make everyone live the morals of Christianity.
5) Why are you REALLY against marriage equality? Do not say anything about slippery slopes. There are already thousands of same-sex couples living essentially married (sharing a house, finances, children, love, etc) and in states like Mass, Iowa, NY, etc same-sex couples are getting married. And nowhere have I seen an outbreak of people wanting to marry dogs, toasters, monkeys, couches or whatever else is supposed to happen once people can get married. There is no slippery slope, that argument is invalid, try again. Because the Bible says so? OK but we just covered the whole religious freedom thing, so you can't really stop someone from doing something just because it is against your religion. So why is it? Because same-sex couples don't count? Because it grosses you out? Because it makes you feel uncomfortable? I really want to know, because so far it just seems like conservative people are against it because it's weird to them.
6) So, you hate marriage equality. That's fine, but why are you against hate crimes laws? Do you want gay kids to get killed? Or black people? Or Latinos? I really really don't understand that. What about hate crimes laws could possibly be bad?
7) Why do you hate women? Oh, I know, you don't hate women, you love them. As long as they are controlling themselves. If you don't hate women why did you block the Lily Ledbetter act? Why should women not get paid the same amount as men? Why should women have to justify the crimes committed against them? Why are women at the hands of men for the decisions they make? Do you want women to get paid less in order to encourage them to stay home? That is obviously not working, and it's not really fair to women who you claim to love. (who you are should not be a factor of how qualified you are).
Those are the top 7 things I don't get about the conservative thought process. There are millions more. But I just really don't get it. I try to understand where everyone is coming from, but seriously, conservative people, you are making it really hard.
1) What is the plan after you cut funding for education so much that teachers are getting paid basically nothing and our public school system collapses? The answer can not be private schools. If that is the answer, you have no idea how good you have it. Where will the kids go whose families can't afford private school? Why would you want to eliminate the thing that will make America the most competitive? And the real thing that sucks is that the best teachers aren't in it for the money. All of the teachers I know love their students and are passionate about wanting them to succeed. The money is second. Of course they wish they were making more so their lives were easier, but the kids are the most important part of the job. Maybe a business man can't understand that. But their is more to a job than the money you get every two weeks. So what exactly are we as a country going to do when the public school system collapses?
2) Why do you insist on calling yourself pro-life? That bothers me so much. I know a few conservative people who are really pro-life, but the Republican platform and base are not. Pro-life means that you are anti-death. So, fine you are anti-abortion that's pro-life. But what about the death penalty? What about war? What about poverty? What about health care? What about hate crimes? So basically your plan is to save all the babies, and then have them live in a world where they might die before they see age two because their mom is too poor to feed them or take them to the doctor. (fact: Flint has one of the highest infant mortality rates in in the country) You want this baby you saved to grow up uneducated and more likely to turn to crime, putting him on death row and killing him that way. You want people who are different to be able to be killed for who they are. You want to send 18 year old kids overseas to die for oil. These thing are not pro-life. At least you saved a baby, but that baby will have a horrible life and die early.
3) What is the problem with taxes? Do you understand how taxes work? Everybody pays money into a pot and now we can buy something for everyone to use. Firefighters, police officers, schools, roads, public parks, all things that you use and need are paid for with taxes. I don't understand the "we can't have universal health care because it will raise our taxes" argument. Of course it will, but guess what, now everybody gets to use it. Even drug dealers and murderers deserve a little bit of healthcare, we need to have it available so people don't die. Nobody deserves to die, especially just because they didn't have access to a doctor. Not even criminals or lazy people. We need these public services, we all use them. It doesn't make any sense to have to pay to have someone come put a fire out. You're not understanding what it is like to be poor if you think that is ok.
4) Why do you need to say you are for religious freedom? It is impossible to be for religious freedom, but then also not want those darn Muslims to have a mosque near you. You are not for religious freedom, you are for Christian control. And, since you also might call yourself a constitutionalist, lets talk about the constitution. It says pretty clearly that congress shall make no law respecting one religion. So that means that Muslims, Jews, Christians, and all the other religions get to be free to worship and practice their religions. It does not mean that Christians get to rule the country and make everyone live the morals of Christianity.
5) Why are you REALLY against marriage equality? Do not say anything about slippery slopes. There are already thousands of same-sex couples living essentially married (sharing a house, finances, children, love, etc) and in states like Mass, Iowa, NY, etc same-sex couples are getting married. And nowhere have I seen an outbreak of people wanting to marry dogs, toasters, monkeys, couches or whatever else is supposed to happen once people can get married. There is no slippery slope, that argument is invalid, try again. Because the Bible says so? OK but we just covered the whole religious freedom thing, so you can't really stop someone from doing something just because it is against your religion. So why is it? Because same-sex couples don't count? Because it grosses you out? Because it makes you feel uncomfortable? I really want to know, because so far it just seems like conservative people are against it because it's weird to them.
6) So, you hate marriage equality. That's fine, but why are you against hate crimes laws? Do you want gay kids to get killed? Or black people? Or Latinos? I really really don't understand that. What about hate crimes laws could possibly be bad?
7) Why do you hate women? Oh, I know, you don't hate women, you love them. As long as they are controlling themselves. If you don't hate women why did you block the Lily Ledbetter act? Why should women not get paid the same amount as men? Why should women have to justify the crimes committed against them? Why are women at the hands of men for the decisions they make? Do you want women to get paid less in order to encourage them to stay home? That is obviously not working, and it's not really fair to women who you claim to love. (who you are should not be a factor of how qualified you are).
Those are the top 7 things I don't get about the conservative thought process. There are millions more. But I just really don't get it. I try to understand where everyone is coming from, but seriously, conservative people, you are making it really hard.
29.8.12
Why are quality shoe companies so hard to find?
I need new shoes. No really, the shoes I'm wearing actually have a hole in them (because I guess my dad rubbed off on me and I waited till they were sooo messed up before I gave in to spending money). And so began my search for shoes.
Obviously, my first requirement was that they be green or have green accents. Because what is the point of spending money on shoes if they are going to be ugly and not my style? I work in the mall like 6 stores down from the Nike store. Everyday I walk past the window of the Nike store and see the green shoes with a grey swoosh and think, I want those. Or maybe I want the converse's from the store downstairs. Or maybe I want a different style altogether. (I do really like shoes...I don't know why.)
But then, 5 minutes into my uber consumeristic mental shopping spree, my conscience joins the party. Oh hey conscience, go away I want to buy shoes, I tell it. But it doesn't. So I decided I WILL find shoes that are coming from a company that I can trust is ethical by my standards.
So I added fair trade to my list of requirements for shoes. Sweat shop free, fair wages the whole deal. And I added they must have an anti-discrimination policy I feel like I can support. Race, national origin, sexual orientation/identity/expression, sex, creed, etc. If I had had a mirror at the time I decided this, I probably would have looked at myself like I was crazy, they way you are thinking it right now. But, it had to be possible.
When I typed in "ethical shoe companies" into to google, I got a range of responses. I found a brand called Remyxx, which makes 100% recyclable shoes! It is a small company which just got started on Kickstarter, and their shoes won't even be out until October. But seriously, how cool is that? And the designs are pretty cool to, not just plain. Go him! But they won't be out until October. (I might still buy these shoes, if his company really gets started, or maybe Santa will bring them to me).
Evidently, most people who are looking for ethical shoes are looking for vegan shoes. Being a lover of all things steak, I had literally never thought of buying vegan anything. I mean, I guess I have been accidentally semi-vegan cloth person. Fur freaks me out, I don't like wool because it's too itchy, I can't really pull off leather, and all of my T-shirts are 100% cotton because it's comfy. Vegan-ish. Either way, I had no choice but to settle into my hipster side and accept that my fair trade shoes were probably going to be cruelty-free. Don't worry, I will eat a steak the first time I wear them. :-) .
And then I found literally the best website ever. www.ethicalwares.com is a website of well...ethical products. Including hemp shoes, which would be fun because I could just tell everyone I'm wearing hemp shoes. While drinking a PBR. And listening to obscure bands. And telling everyone they just don't "get" me.
Ok, but seriously. When I found out converse was owned by Nike my heart was kind of broken. Sort of in the way your heart breaks when you remember that Urban Outfitters is worse than Chick-fil-a when it comes to equality. Just a sad moment. But then...the heavens parted.
Ethletic. These shoes are fairly traded, the workers make double the minimum wage of the country they are manufactured in, which is Sweden. They are vegan, which wasn't really a requirement but cool, I saved a few animals. They are the same style kind of as converse, so definitely wearable. They come in green, which makes them awesome. And I couldn't find out of they are welcoming and equal. But they are based in Sweden which is like the most queer friendly country in the world. These shoes are the closest thing to perfect that I have found.
Of course, New Balance came up. They are made in the USA but usually only 25% made in the USA. The rest is outsourced to china and other countries. When I need a running shoe it will probably be NB, because ethical shoes don't seem to come in running.
By the way, ethicalwares.com has vegan Birkenstocks. This might the single most Ann Arbor-y thing I have ever seen.
So, if you need fair trade shoes....try out that website. If you know of other good shoe companies...please tell me about them so I can have the best shoes always. :-).
Obviously, my first requirement was that they be green or have green accents. Because what is the point of spending money on shoes if they are going to be ugly and not my style? I work in the mall like 6 stores down from the Nike store. Everyday I walk past the window of the Nike store and see the green shoes with a grey swoosh and think, I want those. Or maybe I want the converse's from the store downstairs. Or maybe I want a different style altogether. (I do really like shoes...I don't know why.)
But then, 5 minutes into my uber consumeristic mental shopping spree, my conscience joins the party. Oh hey conscience, go away I want to buy shoes, I tell it. But it doesn't. So I decided I WILL find shoes that are coming from a company that I can trust is ethical by my standards.
So I added fair trade to my list of requirements for shoes. Sweat shop free, fair wages the whole deal. And I added they must have an anti-discrimination policy I feel like I can support. Race, national origin, sexual orientation/identity/expression, sex, creed, etc. If I had had a mirror at the time I decided this, I probably would have looked at myself like I was crazy, they way you are thinking it right now. But, it had to be possible.
When I typed in "ethical shoe companies" into to google, I got a range of responses. I found a brand called Remyxx, which makes 100% recyclable shoes! It is a small company which just got started on Kickstarter, and their shoes won't even be out until October. But seriously, how cool is that? And the designs are pretty cool to, not just plain. Go him! But they won't be out until October. (I might still buy these shoes, if his company really gets started, or maybe Santa will bring them to me).
Evidently, most people who are looking for ethical shoes are looking for vegan shoes. Being a lover of all things steak, I had literally never thought of buying vegan anything. I mean, I guess I have been accidentally semi-vegan cloth person. Fur freaks me out, I don't like wool because it's too itchy, I can't really pull off leather, and all of my T-shirts are 100% cotton because it's comfy. Vegan-ish. Either way, I had no choice but to settle into my hipster side and accept that my fair trade shoes were probably going to be cruelty-free. Don't worry, I will eat a steak the first time I wear them. :-) .
And then I found literally the best website ever. www.ethicalwares.com is a website of well...ethical products. Including hemp shoes, which would be fun because I could just tell everyone I'm wearing hemp shoes. While drinking a PBR. And listening to obscure bands. And telling everyone they just don't "get" me.
Ok, but seriously. When I found out converse was owned by Nike my heart was kind of broken. Sort of in the way your heart breaks when you remember that Urban Outfitters is worse than Chick-fil-a when it comes to equality. Just a sad moment. But then...the heavens parted.
Ethletic. These shoes are fairly traded, the workers make double the minimum wage of the country they are manufactured in, which is Sweden. They are vegan, which wasn't really a requirement but cool, I saved a few animals. They are the same style kind of as converse, so definitely wearable. They come in green, which makes them awesome. And I couldn't find out of they are welcoming and equal. But they are based in Sweden which is like the most queer friendly country in the world. These shoes are the closest thing to perfect that I have found.
Of course, New Balance came up. They are made in the USA but usually only 25% made in the USA. The rest is outsourced to china and other countries. When I need a running shoe it will probably be NB, because ethical shoes don't seem to come in running.
By the way, ethicalwares.com has vegan Birkenstocks. This might the single most Ann Arbor-y thing I have ever seen.
So, if you need fair trade shoes....try out that website. If you know of other good shoe companies...please tell me about them so I can have the best shoes always. :-).
22.8.12
This is not about Todd Akin.
Some women keep babies that are conceived through rape. And those babies turn out to be wonderful additions to their lives. It is a baby after all, so cute!
This whole Todd Akin thing has proved, once again, how unable to see the real issues we are as a society. This is not a pro-life vs pro-choice argument. This is a time for that horrible division between the two sides to be bridged.
A person who is pro-life will tell you they are more pro-woman than a person who is pro-choice. The idea being they are protecting the woman from abortion. Their intentions are good. And a pro-choice person will also say they are pro-woman, protecting a woman from having her body controlled by another. Their intention also are good. Neither side wakes up in the morning and thinks, "I just hate women so much, I'm going to support/prevent abortion just to hurt them".
The so-called war on women is not being waged by the pro-lifers and it is not being waged by the pro-choicers. This war is being waged by the political establishment so intently set on winning elections and raising money that they will wave whatever words or thoughts in your face to get you to vote for them. That is the real problem here.
The problem is, after a woman gives birth to her rapists child, that rapist has the same parental rights to the child as any other upstanding man. The problem is that women are afraid to report rape because they will have to defend themselves, and prove it was a real rape. The problem is we teach boys that "no means no" rather than "unless you are 100% sure you are both agreeing to participate leave her alone".
Why do we give men the power to approach any woman and hit on her, that he gets to be with her unless she says no. That doesn't even make sense, do robbers get to rob my house unless I put a sign up that says "don't rob me"? No, of course not, a person is not welcome in your house or on your property unless invited. Otherwise it is trespassing and illegal. But a rapist is allowed access to a woman's body until she says, "no, go away".
The truth is, you are not welcome to another person's body unless invited. Seems logical and silly for me to have to say. But think about this, women: when is the last time some guy made a really inappropriate comment about your body or how he would like to be with you? Men: when is the last time you oogled over some woman as if she was a model there for you to just check out?
Of course people aren't blind and women check out men as well. But you know as well as I do the difference between "hey that person walking there is cute." And the inappropriate version. If you don't, ask someone.
We should be raising kids to think "yes means lets talk about it and make a decision if this is right for us" and anything else means no. We should be teaching our kids that even if that person said yes, it's OK to still not do it. We should be teaching our kids that it is better to drive someone crazy saying "are you sure, because I just don't want to hurt you" than it is to do anything they don't want to do, ever. And if you are not smart enough to figure out if someone is SURE, then you probably shouldn't be having sex anyways.
Todd Akin is nothing more than the spokesperson for the ignorance of the country. Daniel Tosh is nothing more than the face of millions of college aged men. These people are bullies.
It is estimated that about 17.7million American women have been victims of rape. That doesn't count the women who don't report it. It doesn't count sexual harassment. Maybe they had abortions, and maybe they didn't. But they got taken advantage of in the worst way possible. If you're really interested in protecting women, start by fighting the rape culture instead of supporting the political smokescreen.
Here are 3 important articles to read:
Rapist visitation rights?
A personal account.
The problem with men explaining things
This whole Todd Akin thing has proved, once again, how unable to see the real issues we are as a society. This is not a pro-life vs pro-choice argument. This is a time for that horrible division between the two sides to be bridged.
A person who is pro-life will tell you they are more pro-woman than a person who is pro-choice. The idea being they are protecting the woman from abortion. Their intentions are good. And a pro-choice person will also say they are pro-woman, protecting a woman from having her body controlled by another. Their intention also are good. Neither side wakes up in the morning and thinks, "I just hate women so much, I'm going to support/prevent abortion just to hurt them".
The so-called war on women is not being waged by the pro-lifers and it is not being waged by the pro-choicers. This war is being waged by the political establishment so intently set on winning elections and raising money that they will wave whatever words or thoughts in your face to get you to vote for them. That is the real problem here.
The problem is, after a woman gives birth to her rapists child, that rapist has the same parental rights to the child as any other upstanding man. The problem is that women are afraid to report rape because they will have to defend themselves, and prove it was a real rape. The problem is we teach boys that "no means no" rather than "unless you are 100% sure you are both agreeing to participate leave her alone".
Why do we give men the power to approach any woman and hit on her, that he gets to be with her unless she says no. That doesn't even make sense, do robbers get to rob my house unless I put a sign up that says "don't rob me"? No, of course not, a person is not welcome in your house or on your property unless invited. Otherwise it is trespassing and illegal. But a rapist is allowed access to a woman's body until she says, "no, go away".
The truth is, you are not welcome to another person's body unless invited. Seems logical and silly for me to have to say. But think about this, women: when is the last time some guy made a really inappropriate comment about your body or how he would like to be with you? Men: when is the last time you oogled over some woman as if she was a model there for you to just check out?
Of course people aren't blind and women check out men as well. But you know as well as I do the difference between "hey that person walking there is cute." And the inappropriate version. If you don't, ask someone.
We should be raising kids to think "yes means lets talk about it and make a decision if this is right for us" and anything else means no. We should be teaching our kids that even if that person said yes, it's OK to still not do it. We should be teaching our kids that it is better to drive someone crazy saying "are you sure, because I just don't want to hurt you" than it is to do anything they don't want to do, ever. And if you are not smart enough to figure out if someone is SURE, then you probably shouldn't be having sex anyways.
Todd Akin is nothing more than the spokesperson for the ignorance of the country. Daniel Tosh is nothing more than the face of millions of college aged men. These people are bullies.
It is estimated that about 17.7million American women have been victims of rape. That doesn't count the women who don't report it. It doesn't count sexual harassment. Maybe they had abortions, and maybe they didn't. But they got taken advantage of in the worst way possible. If you're really interested in protecting women, start by fighting the rape culture instead of supporting the political smokescreen.
Here are 3 important articles to read:
Rapist visitation rights?
A personal account.
The problem with men explaining things
19.8.12
The real reason Mitt won't release his tax returns. (hint it has nothing to to with tax brackets)
So, in case you haven't been paying attention, and I don't blame you if you haven't, Mitt Romney is not following in his daddy's footsteps. That's ok, gotta blaze your own trail. Except the thing he is not doing is releasing his tax returns to the public so that everyone knows exactly who it is that they are electing to run their country. George Romney (Papa Romney) released 12 years when he was running for office, which more or less set the standard for politicians. Mitt has released 2-ish.
"DAAAAD, you're embarassing me" -Mitt Romney
Recently, Obama's campaign manager wrote a (passive aggressive) letter to the Romney campaign promising that if he releases just 5 years (only 3 more) they will stop bothering him for not releasing enough information. Romney's campaign sent an equally awesome and passive aggressive letter back that basically said: "no thank you, now that we have covered this I hope you guys can focus on the real issues at hand" <--paraphrased.
So much speculation has been made around Romney's taxes and why he is hiding them. Maybe he didn't pay any taxes, maybe he didn't pay enough taxes, maybe he is secretly in the mob. But the thing is, no matter what Romney paid in taxes after all this speculation Romney's base will get behind his reasoning and the left will hate him for it. And the undecided voters won't decide based on Mitt Romney's tax bracket. If it was truly all about taxes, even if Mitt paid zero taxes it would be easier for him to just release them to show that he is a bigger, better man and isn't afraid. Look, the far left isn't voting for Mitt Romney. (not until the far right votes for Obama at least, and also pigs fly)
Those are obviously all jokes, but seriously, everyone is getting in on the speculation action.
So, why oh why IS Mitt hiding his tax returns? Because he doesn't want to alienate his base. You know, the tea party voters, the evangelical christians, the catholics, the rich white men in suits. It's no secret that Mitt Romney is the biggest flip-flopper on the block today. First he was against privatizing social security, now he is for it; first he wanted to defend a woman's right to choose, now he thinks Roe V Wade has gone to far; first he thought don't ask don't tell was silly, now he thinks it worked well; first he supported the assault rifle ban, now he is against all gun control laws. This is common knowledge to the democrat voters. Those are voters who won't be voting for him anyways. This is not really a heavily discussed topic within his base, and I'm sure he would like to keep it that way.
I read this really good article about reasons why Mitt won't release his tax returns. Abby Huntsman says the following:
If Mitt releases his tax returns, we will see he paid somewhere between 0 and 13% taxes. But we will also see the charities he is donating to. Has he given money to planned parenthood back when he supported that? Does he really want to make public how much money he gives to the Mormon church? Where else did Romney's charity money go that would cause him to lose votes on the right? Did his dollars go to stem cell research? Who knows. Right now, we don't know. And it is better that way. Romney will lose more votes within his base (where it matters) if he makes it clear how not conservative he really is, than he will lose from the left wing voters who aren't voting for him anyways, by not releasing them at all. If Romney alienates his socially conservative base, he will lose a HUGE chunk of voters.
But in 2002 he pledged to support planned parenthood.
Mitt Romney needs to be the pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-religious freedom candidate. But he is only kinda pro-life, he doesn't seem to actually care that much about traditional marriage (MA issues marriage licences to same-sex couples, and Romney didn't really do anything about it and nobody has asked him why), and he is Mormon. Which nobody wants to remember, it's not a bad thing, but they seem to want it to be on the back burner. Probably because of all the connotations of polygamy around Mormonism, and then he would have to face speculation about that (though I'm sure Romney is not polygamous).
Remember, John McCain saw Romney's taxes and decided to go with Palin as his VP. How bad must those taxes have been for McCain to think Palin was his best option? Not paying enough taxes is easy to get through, so what, he did it legally, the end. That's how it would go. Donating to the wrong charities? That could literally stop somebody from voting for you. It's why people stopped eating at Chick-Fil-A.
If it were just about the fact that he is rich, has offshore money, and doesn't pay his fair share of taxes he would release them just so people would stop speculating. There is something really really really bad in those. Something that would cause him to lose the white house. Something that he and his campaign figured they will take the risk of losing a few votes, over the actual reality of releasing those taxes. For that, if I was going to vote republican and really couldn't ever vote for Obama, I would want to see those taxes even more so I knew who it was I was voting to run my country.
"DAAAAD, you're embarassing me" -Mitt Romney
Recently, Obama's campaign manager wrote a (passive aggressive) letter to the Romney campaign promising that if he releases just 5 years (only 3 more) they will stop bothering him for not releasing enough information. Romney's campaign sent an equally awesome and passive aggressive letter back that basically said: "no thank you, now that we have covered this I hope you guys can focus on the real issues at hand" <--paraphrased.
So much speculation has been made around Romney's taxes and why he is hiding them. Maybe he didn't pay any taxes, maybe he didn't pay enough taxes, maybe he is secretly in the mob. But the thing is, no matter what Romney paid in taxes after all this speculation Romney's base will get behind his reasoning and the left will hate him for it. And the undecided voters won't decide based on Mitt Romney's tax bracket. If it was truly all about taxes, even if Mitt paid zero taxes it would be easier for him to just release them to show that he is a bigger, better man and isn't afraid. Look, the far left isn't voting for Mitt Romney. (not until the far right votes for Obama at least, and also pigs fly)
Those are obviously all jokes, but seriously, everyone is getting in on the speculation action.
So, why oh why IS Mitt hiding his tax returns? Because he doesn't want to alienate his base. You know, the tea party voters, the evangelical christians, the catholics, the rich white men in suits. It's no secret that Mitt Romney is the biggest flip-flopper on the block today. First he was against privatizing social security, now he is for it; first he wanted to defend a woman's right to choose, now he thinks Roe V Wade has gone to far; first he thought don't ask don't tell was silly, now he thinks it worked well; first he supported the assault rifle ban, now he is against all gun control laws. This is common knowledge to the democrat voters. Those are voters who won't be voting for him anyways. This is not really a heavily discussed topic within his base, and I'm sure he would like to keep it that way.
I read this really good article about reasons why Mitt won't release his tax returns. Abby Huntsman says the following:
"Could he actually be worth more than is being estimated under federal disclosure filings (currently ~$190-250 million)? Has putting money in offshore accounts in some way lowered the amount of taxes he's had to pay (according to his campaign, the answer is no)? Or, is there significant income from Bain that was earned after his departure in 1999 (when Romney claims to have not been involved in Bain's investment decisions)? And lastly, was a deal stuck with fellow Bain partners that Romney could never disclose certain information about the firm and its income (since Bain remains a private company)?" (click the link above and read the rest of her article)All of those are possible. But who would care if he was worth $250 million or $500 million? That's more money than any of his voters can even fathom. Whatever his tax bracket the right will defend it. And more importantly if it was something as simple as a privacy agreement with Bain, don't you think he would have come out and said it? He hasn't, he won't.
If Mitt releases his tax returns, we will see he paid somewhere between 0 and 13% taxes. But we will also see the charities he is donating to. Has he given money to planned parenthood back when he supported that? Does he really want to make public how much money he gives to the Mormon church? Where else did Romney's charity money go that would cause him to lose votes on the right? Did his dollars go to stem cell research? Who knows. Right now, we don't know. And it is better that way. Romney will lose more votes within his base (where it matters) if he makes it clear how not conservative he really is, than he will lose from the left wing voters who aren't voting for him anyways, by not releasing them at all. If Romney alienates his socially conservative base, he will lose a HUGE chunk of voters.
But in 2002 he pledged to support planned parenthood.
Mitt Romney needs to be the pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-religious freedom candidate. But he is only kinda pro-life, he doesn't seem to actually care that much about traditional marriage (MA issues marriage licences to same-sex couples, and Romney didn't really do anything about it and nobody has asked him why), and he is Mormon. Which nobody wants to remember, it's not a bad thing, but they seem to want it to be on the back burner. Probably because of all the connotations of polygamy around Mormonism, and then he would have to face speculation about that (though I'm sure Romney is not polygamous).
Remember, John McCain saw Romney's taxes and decided to go with Palin as his VP. How bad must those taxes have been for McCain to think Palin was his best option? Not paying enough taxes is easy to get through, so what, he did it legally, the end. That's how it would go. Donating to the wrong charities? That could literally stop somebody from voting for you. It's why people stopped eating at Chick-Fil-A.
If it were just about the fact that he is rich, has offshore money, and doesn't pay his fair share of taxes he would release them just so people would stop speculating. There is something really really really bad in those. Something that would cause him to lose the white house. Something that he and his campaign figured they will take the risk of losing a few votes, over the actual reality of releasing those taxes. For that, if I was going to vote republican and really couldn't ever vote for Obama, I would want to see those taxes even more so I knew who it was I was voting to run my country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)