Smartphone Wallet

As a follow-up to my post Campaign for No Purse, I am pleased to report that this is now a product on the market:

And what exactly is so great about the smartphone wallet?
They are efficient. Everything fits into it, and it fits right into your pocket. No need for the bulk of a wallet + a phone + a purse and all the awkwardness that comes with that bulky baggage.
They are non-gendered and therefore friendly (and inclusive) to both genders. They even come in colors that look appealingly feminine while maintaining the simplicity of design. Unlike other accessories marketed to women that tend to over-emphasize materialistic values, the design of these tends to emphasize the financial and spiritual independence that modern women now enjoy over materialistic values.
They are well crafted.
They save the consumer money, since the consumer is saved the need to buy both a wallet and a case for his or her phone. Physical efficiency meets financial efficiency, and does so with style.
This is truly a twenty-first century product.

When committing a crime is the most ethical option

Watch this man in Washington state, United States, politely rob the store clerk:

TYPED DIALOGUE FOR CONVENIENCE:

ROBBER: Could you do me a favor?
CLERK: Yes?
ROBBER: Could you empty that till for me please and put it right here?
CLERK: What do you mean?
ROBBER: Empty the till put the till right here because I'm robbing you, sir.
CLERK: You sure?
ROBBER: Yes I'm sure.
CLERK: Why do you want to do that?
ROBBER: Cause I need the money, I've got kids that need to be fed sir.
CLERK: I know...[noise interference covers speech]...
ROBBER: ...I know I am sir, I realize that. And I'm really, I really am sorry to have to do this. But I've got kids.
CLERK: How about today I give you forty dollars and this is it?
ROBBER: Well, [sigh] I can't do that. I've got rent to pay I've got bills...and the kids need to eat.
- Clerk starts removing money from till -
ROBBER: Thank you very much I appreciate it and I really am sorry and if I ever get back on my feet again sir, I'll bring it back.
CLERK: That's alright. God be with you man.
 ROBBER: Thank you very much and with you too.
CLERK: Thank you.
-Bell rings on door-


When a person is so desperate to do the right thing for his family that he commits a crime that he could go to jail for, you know there is something seriously wrong with the economy. Not with him.


Just a friendly reminder to readers to consider 360 degrees of any situation. Understanding, not shaming and punishing, will make us better.

The truth about college and jobs in America

At my private high school, the question was not "are you going to college?" but "which college are you going to?" When each graduate's name was called during graduation, the name of the university she would attend was also called, and also her intended major. No community colleges were mentioned. No "undecided" majors were announced either. Nobody was not taking a gap year to earn a college savings, think about their future, or join the peace corp. And if they were it was not mentioned either. Many universities were names such as Brown, Long Island, and Marquette. The one I was going to was not in those prestigious ranks, but was a university nonetheless. Every one of our fine young ladies is college-bound.

My parents terminated their 20-year marriage. My mother married a man 11 years older who worked in finance. Then my dad married a younger woman, a masseuse. I'm 18 years old and leaving for college, so none of it concerned me much.

I'm already hired to work in an on-campus fast food joint a week before classes start. I had some software and office management skills, but my mother advised me to start from the bottom when it came to jobs and to stay near my classes. I made 200 dollars every two weeks. I lived in a pre-paid dorm for the time being.

When my dorm lease was up I moved into the first place I could find and 200 dollars a paycheck didn't cut it. I continued school at a community college after a collision of arguments I was not involved in: Mr. Finance didn't think it was fair of my mother to spend his money (the money in a joint bank account he and my mother shared) on my education. My father didn't want to pay anything if Mom wouldn't pay half. Mrs. Masseuse wanted to send her son to private school. I was 19.

I got a second job and visited the school's financial aid office. I experienced long waits, long lines, countless re-directions to a different bureaucrat, and many, many rejections. I didn't qualify for status as an independent because my parents made a steady income and I had not had a 23rd birthday yet and was single and without children. By the end of that year I experienced eviction and knew how to make cheap foods stretch a couple weeks until my next pay day. Whatever classes I could pay for got put on the back burner while I scrambled for money and a new place to live.

Both of my bosses were getting fed up with my need to juggle time between the two jobs. I quit one job and asked for more hours at the one I kept. They granted me more at first and then gradually reduced them until finally they were 0 hours a week with no explanation and without terminating me either. I was forced to look for work farther away from school and increase my commute time.

Eventually I dropped out of college and worked at jobs that barely or didn't pay bills. There were scarce opportunities for advancement or full-time positions. I earned no commission for sales. I had severe pains in my lower abdomen but no health insurance. I had software skills to get me out of minimum wage jobs, but college graduates were preferred for those positions. My college savings stayed at 0 for months and when they existed were promptly spent on urgencies.

Many young Americans like myself have similar challenges. For those from lower-income families, many are not expected to go to college in the first place, and when they do they are often bogged down with external financial stress and lack of academic preparation. Some middle class baby-boomers see their adult children as slackers and wonder why they don't work hard and put themselves through college (like mom and pop did). There is little consideration for the inflated tuition rates or harsher economic climate of today's youth.

Some middle and upper class families who intend to finance their kids' education lose the ability to do so when circumstances spiral out of control. These circumstances can include loss of job, divorce issues, health problems and relating medical costs, and death of a family member. This in combination with rising tuition inflation continues to contribute to the growing rich-poor divide in America as more and more of the middle class (and even lower-upper class) become absorbed into the bottom section of America's wealth divide.

Meanwhile, other persons my age are graduating from college and joining the work force for the first time. They start a job with eagerness to prove themselves (quickly noted by the employer). They often work full-time and over time, even on-call. They cancel dinner appointments with their dates to meet the boss' deadline. They grow distant from loved ones. They delay commitments like marriage and starting a family. They take few breaks and earn a short vacations. They find a nice place to live alone. When and if they have families, their children have more paid-for sponsorship than actual quality time with parents. Time alone with spouses is limited.

And the graduates that can't find work in their field of study will find the same kind of work I do. On top of regular bills that are nearly impossible to pay, they may also have to pay back student loans. Many companies will not hire them because they are over-qualified.

A friend of mine works at a private hospital that recently had its annual layoffs. He observed that many hard working nurses got laid off, but all the text-a-holic nurses who were young, attractive, and female kept their jobs. A year earlier a doctor was found in a vacant room in an act of sex with a nurse.

So what does it take to do more than just get by in America? To have a fully-funded college education followed by an outstanding corporate salary, and a lifetime void of memorable experiences, love, and social needs?  To not be considered overqualified with education, skills, experience, and expertise? To be less qualified so as not to suck money out of an employer that you can legitimately deserve for being a good employee?  To be available for sexual favors? And what is the end game of success when you get it? To pay off student loans and a mortgage?

Even when we find employment, it does not cover all of our needs. Major retailers like Walmart push independent businesses aside and pride themselves on employing tens of thousands. But if you ask a Walmart employee what her budget is for food this month, she will tell you it's around fifteen dollars.

Here in America we live to pay bills, and the creditors suck every penny from us with severe consequences for nonpayment irrespective of income and with no sympathy for unfortunate circumstances. I know of very few people who consider this a fulfillment of the American Dream.

On analytical thinking

In the wake of a certain Creationist-Evolutionist debate I saw today, I urge readers to momentarily look beyond the curtain of conflicting ideas and to instead scrutinize the drift of how ideas are interpreted in our contemporary zeitgeist. I speak frankly regarding both sides of this outdated argument because I find something beneath its surface more unsettling than the debate itself.

The analytical nature of modern thinking pits people against each other on ideological grounds. There exists currently an overwhelming need to be "right" and to "prove" claims as "fact." After we have "proven" that something is "fact," we must defend that "fact" incessantly. There is also an ongoing obsession with proving the other person wrong before he can prove you wrong. This is ultimately harmful to actual human interests. The drive to uphold existing arguments is also counterproductive to true rational thought.

Darwinian theory allegedly purported that human evolution produced racial groups and that some were inferior to others. And in Genesis, God curses the descendants of Noah's son Ham. Both Darwin and the writers or curators of Genesis were most probably exposed to cultural/political biases from their respective times. And those written biases translated into the early twentieth century when both Darwin and Genesis were used to uphold the myth of white superiority.

There also exists a need to prove or discredit the entirety of a work rather than giving an impartial assessment of its many respective parts. A person, ideology, literary work, scientific journal, or religious text must only be 100% right or 100% wrong.

In the course of the debate, Darwin was discredited on the basis of contradicting literal Biblical teaching and even promoting racist ideas. A question was put forth for to the Creationist in regards to the practicality of believing all of the Bible literally, even specific laws of Deuteronomy that have no place in contemporary western society.

Does that mean that Biblical commandments to love one another are inherently illegitimate? Does that mean Darwin wasted years of his life making observations about nature and recording them?

Nothing is ever perfect. Take things for how they are. Draw observation-based understandings, but change gears when something new can be ascertained or taken into account. And be filled with wonder in things whether or not your analytical-intellectual inclination is to agree with them upon further assessment.

Your Daughter is a Victim of Your "Beauty" Standards

A recent trip to the local botanical gardens yielded the observation that many women do not choose appropriate clothing or footwear for daily outings that require lots of walking. The majority of these young (and not-so-young) women chose to wear heeled footwear that was chunky, platform-style, stilettos (you name it), and often accompanied by dresses that were so snugged and shrugged that they left little to the imagination. Their purses were chained and branded. Faces covered in makeup that matched their outfits but not their, well, faces. On one arm was a purse, and on the other was a man. It was hard to tell who owned who in that relationship, and to what end game.

Supposing that the women I saw are mothers or will be mothers, it is no wonder that the following statistics are true for young girls:

(Video Uploaded Feb. 2013)

 

The reporter makes a point about women being role models to young girls by being confident in their own skin. Even though there are more reasonable options, many women make fashion mistakes based on"beauty" standards that are impossible to attain or just plain ridiculous. Mistakes that say that our purpose as women is to be attractive to the opposite sex, and that we accomplish attraction with appearance alone. What greater meaning to female life do we teach our daughters, then, if we live by these standards?

 

Instead of constantly having to "fix" things that are "wrong" with us, why not get rid of the need to be ashamed of natural imperfections that actually make us beautiful? While teaching your daughter confidence that only comes from being herself, you will also teach her that you do not have to spend tons of money to be beautiful. That there are thousands of activities more enlightening than dolling up. That her self worth compared to other women is not based on attractiveness. It is a cycle of shame (and expenditure) that you will free her from if you decide to be her first example.

 

 

Campaign for No Purse

A year ago I decided to give up purses. I realized that they are unnecessary, cumbersome, and physically binding. The truth is, you don't actually need one for every day use. And when you do have specific activities requiring trooping around with certain materials or equipment, a purse is not actually going to serve your purpose. So I am advocating for women to switch to No Purse, with the discretionary use of quality bags that are stylish and effective for specific purposes when necessary.

Sure, some purses can be very efficient, well crafted, and look nice. I am not protesting nice craft or criticizing personal choices. Instead I am trying speaking out against the concept behind "The Purse" and the way it negatively impacts a woman's self image. I urge women to invest instead in quality products that will last, be appropriate for many different activities, and benefit a woman's pursuit of a balanced lifestyle while representing her interests. These are my thoughts based on my personal experience switching over.

Here are the things I find wrong with The Purse:

1. It is a symbol of materialistic female values and stereotypes. The kind that are exclusively and unfairly associated with our gender, and which unfortunately many women still choose to represent in addition to other lifestyle choices that are just as bad.

2. It is reminiscent of old ladies. The kind who will brutally assault you with one if you ever try to help her across the street and she thinks you are trying to rob her. The kind with bad perfume, atrocious hairstyles, and clothing that only suits a woman her age. Seriously, The Purse is outdated and we need 21st century options for 21st century women. Why do we carry on a trend that is popular with a generation that, in their day, thought it was just not proper to leave the house without pantyhose on? Who considered it the husband's duty to provide while they made a home for him, and occasional took their purse out on a shopping spree with his allowances? Hasn't feminism changed the way we think enough for women to not feel restricted to these ways of thinking and accessorizing?

3. Major brand names have lost their subtle, minimalistic style. These days a Michael Kors bag screams MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! MK! all over it . Or some horrible faux animal print with fake gold chains and rhinestones. Okay, we get it, but is that really necessary? It used to be the style and craft of the bag itself that was worth the cost and appreciated based on look, quality, and distinctive class. Now it's all about showing off, and the resulting effect looks....cheap.

4. You can't fit books in them. They aren't designed for readers apparently. Or for women with equipment for a day outing or outdoor hobby (i.e. a professional camera, rock-climbing gear), a job requiring work in the field (tape measure, drafting tools), school (notebooks, tablet), or other activities. The design of The Purse is almost as if to say that women don't have such activities.

5. What do you really need to put in them anyways? Since they are too small or poorly designed to fit practical items?

6. They get in the way when you are trying to do stuff. Like lifting and carrying things with both arms. Like going for a run. Basically, the design of The Purse sucks because it is not designed with any kind of physical activity in mind. Strictly sitting and walking only.

7. They go hand-in-hand with a lifestyle in which a woman's self-esteem depends on material things in order to feel "feminine." The most obvious example is The Purse itself, used as an object to show off and represent its owner. Many women also feel the need to carry make up in their purses instead of being confident with their natural beauty. If you want to wear make up, you can put it on at home. If it wears off, so what? If you use make up to cover skin problems like acne (as I do), learn ways to take care of your skin including healthy diet and lifestyle choices. Most of all, be confident about YOURSELF. Don't hide behind your make up or purses, because at the end of the day you are not these things nor should you be limited to them.


And the benefits of switching to the "no purse" lifestyle?

• You don't need to constantly upgrade to the newest style of purse.
• You don't need to buy a different purse to match with every outfit.
• Matching your outfits becomes easier because you no longer have the awkward purse problem. (Ladies, why is a purse even considered part of an "outfit" anyways?)
• You will not be targeted by purse-snatchers. Belongings kept closer to the body are usually kept safer. Logistically speaking, a snatch-and-go thief can cut a single strap faster and easier with a knife/scissors than he can wrestle with you for your close-kept belongings or a backpack. Be advised, however, that there is no 100% guarantee against street robbery whether or not you are carrying a purse and that caution is to be exercised no matter the circumstance.
• You will be liberated economically, physically, and emotionally. You will experience increased confidence due to non-dependence.
• You will come to understand that your femininity or attractiveness does not depend on your choice of accessories. If anything, your exaggerated accessories do the opposite by being a distraction from your natural charms. By going purse-less you will experience higher levels of confidence and self-esteem.

Many women are attached to their purse by habit. They instinctively grab their purse whenever leaving the home or a certain locality. So some questions about the practicality of not having a purse might come up. I will try to address those issues below:

Q1. What do I put my wallet/keys/cell phone in? And other things?

A1. Pockets work great. So does a lanyard for keys. You will spend a lot less on clothes with pockets and lanyards than you will constantly upgrading to the new Louis.

As for other stuff, what other stuff? What is so important to keep with you that you need it to drag you down? Unless it's something that contributes to meaningful activities, it can stay home. Otherwise, on a daily basis, there is really no need to bring needless crap with you as extra weight. Men don't have this problem, so why should you?

Q2. What if I have my period and need to keep sanitary products with me?

A2. My suggestion to the fashion industry to address this issue is to design more shirts, sweaters, and jackets for women with discreet interior pockets. Feminine products could be kept in them and taken to the bathroom more discreetly than having to bring your purse. Plus, it would just be nice to have a hidden pocket! Perhaps your wallet can be kept safely in it, or other personal items can be kept out-of-sight. Nobody can snoop in an interior pocket the way they can in your unattended purse.

However, until this happens, my suggestion is this: You can discreetly tuck them away in large pockets (ones with buttons or zippers work best). Keep can also keep a small toiletries bag full of them in the glove compartment of your car. Carrying a small clutch or bag for the duration of your period is also a nice option for the minimalist, though there is no functional way to secure it to your body. If you are already carrying a day-pack or similar bag, put your feminine products in there in a hidden or discreet compartment.



Q3. What are some good alternatives to purses if you actually need to bring stuff with you?

A3. It depends on the kind of stuff you need to bring. I generally find satchels and backpacks very practical. They leave your hands free while you're out and about, come in many stylish options, and can be made of durable yet fashionable materials such as leather and with quality craftsmanship.

Q4: But my wallet doesn't fit in my pocket.

A4: A "woman's" wallet is just an extension of The Purse. It has all the same materialistic implications, if not more. Think about it. A man's wallet has a place to put cash, business cards, and a few credit/gift card slots. The implications are straightforward and to business. A "woman's" wallet is often characterized by being oversized, blinged or flashy in design, and has at least twice as many slots for credit cards and gift cards, but a smaller compartment for business cards. The wallet itself seems to speak for it's holder: I'm  a shopper. I will max credit cards and shop my way into debt on materialistic crap I don't need. Is this the image we want women to promote for ourselves? Does this image really represent you?

Buy a (quote-on-quote) "man's" wallet instead. They are thin and will slide easily into your jeans' back pocket. The simplicity of the design looks serious enough for business and is easily seen as a unisex accessory. And ladies, coins can be kept in your pockets (men do it all the time, so why not?). I hope one day all wallets will be designed for simplicity and efficiency, with perhaps some slight gender varieties in craft, color, or print.


Here is an explanation of what the fashion industry needs to change about women's fashion:

1. Pockets. At the moment women's clothing does not always have roomy pockets, or may have no pockets at all. Women just aren't used to having pockets on finely crafted wardrobe pieces, and I hope this attitude changes. But the main reason is that clothing designed for women is, by expectation, made for purse-carriers. And by clinging to our purses so much we unknowingly reinforce the demand for low-functionality design in women's clothing. Which keeps us needing to spend money on our purses after we've already spent so much money on that designer dress, blouse, or pants that didn't have pockets in the first place. This is a cycle that has many parallels to much broader dysfunctional habit to earn, spend, and then catch up on newest styles/technologies/debts.

2. More simple designs. Less complicated pieces of clothing and blinged accessories. As Coco Chanel once said, simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. This is coming from a woman who, during her fashion reign, told women they were more beautiful in gowns that accentuated true beauty instead of covered it in obscene decoration or exposed it vulgarly. She designed equestrian riding pants for women so they wouldn't have to ride sidesaddle, and eliminated the corset to literally allow women to breathe. Consistent with the concept of simplicity in her designs, Chanel thought it was silly for women to try hard to impress men who ultimately trapped them in restrictive roles. In today's world, the blinged Purse and wallet, exaggerated jewelry, and tacky nail fashions represent all these genderized trappings on female identity.

3. Take "male" fashions and make them feminine. Women should not have to choose between overly-tacky female items and overly-masculine pieces. I have owned wallets that meet my simplicity and functionality standards, but I still had to choose a man's wallet over tacky-looking women's wallets. The fashion industry needs to market more of these wallets to women (and remove the label of it being for men), and part of doing so would be having more variety of color and print. This concept can far outreach just the wallet or purse example. Dressing smart makes you feel confident.

We need to extend our conceptualization of women's fashion as a whole. We do not need to dress like men to have a practical wardrobe. We just need to make women's clothing more practical. We do not need to compromise fashion to accomplish this.