This happened to me:
- Due to a minor medical condition which doesn’t warrant going into, I had to put band-aids, or as is said in some parts of the world, “sticking plasters,” on my fingertips.
- Because they don’t stick all that well, the band-aids came a little loose.
- As a result of typing on my laptop with the loose band-aids, glue was transferred onto the keys from my fingertips.
- Next, glue was transferred from the keyboard to my laptop screen.
- The usual cleansers, such as iKlear, the generic stuff I got at Best Buy, and soap and water, only served to spread the glue around on the screen.
I knew to google this before panicking. On a years-old HP message board, I found an answer. Get a petroleum based cleaner, made for removing things like paint, caulk, wax, asphalt, and glue. Goo Gone is a good brand. When I used to work on bikes, I used this to clean grease and oil stains out of my clothes. Avoid alcohol-based solvents, such as Windex and similar window cleaners. (Note: I think Windex comes in non-alchohol formulations, but since there are other cleaners readily available, it’s not worth hunting around for.) Avoid acetone. Use a lint-free cloth, like the ones that come with screen cleaners. Don’t use paper towels, which will scratch the screen. Don’t worry, even though the stuff seems industrial-strength, it’s perfectly fine to use on your screen. Wipe the screen until the glue is gone. Then, take a different lint-free cloth, get it a little wet, put a dab of soap on it, and wipe off the residue of the goo-gone. I used dish soap. If there’s any glue left on the screen, repeat the step with the goo gone. When the glue is gone, use your screen cleaner to wipe off the soap and water residue. You can use the same technique if there’s glue on your laptop’s case. Make sure there’s enough ventilation so you don’t inhale too many solvent fumes.
Now that you have goo gone around, you can remove the glue from all those things around the house that have residue from price tags and labels on them!
Readers of the New Yorker face a problem. There are powerful reasons for him or her not to read the New Yorker, but these reasons are a consequence of some of the essential qualities of New Yorker readers.
The following three statements are either common knowledge or self-evident.
- If someone is a New Yorker reader, that person has a policy of reading the New Yorker.
- If someone is a New Yorker reader, that person believes that he or she is a better judge of aesthetic, cultural, and social value of a person or thing than everyone else, i.e.., is a snob.
- If someone is a snob, he or she regards those persons and things beneath him or her with disdain, avoiding them and taking action to prevent others from discovering that he she has had contact with them.
Riley regards those things and persons she deems beneath her with disdain, by 1 and 2. This includes the New Yorker, by 2, whose scope is universal. The paradox of practical reason is instantiated when she is confronted with a copy of The New Yorker. As a New Yorker reader, by 1, she is committed to a policy of reading the New Yorker. At the same time, she regards the New Yorker with disdain, as a consequence of being a New Yorker reader, by 2. From these two premises together with 3, it follows that, when in the presence of a copy of the New Yorker, she forms the intention to pick up that copy, but at the same time, she forms the intention not to pick it up.
In an article entitled “Trowelblazers: In search of the female Indiana Jones,” Victoria Herridge writes about Dorothy Garrod’s 1930′s archeological work. The purpose of the article is to highlight Garrod’s gender as a way to discuss the broader issue of women’s participation in archeology. One of the commenters, countertrans, responds in the following way.
I am unsure if i get the point of this article. women have broken every single glass ceiling over the last few decades. we are neck to neck with men when it comes to numerous jobs. I am not one bit surprised that women are doing the same in archeology. in fact a woman was queen to half the world when all these fascinating archaeology was going on. So, this article looks like a shameless self promotion to me. Today when women are breadwinner or co-breadwinner in four out of five families our battle is one of pay equity, paid family/maternity leave and fighting for taking care of our families without the fear of loosing our jobs.
The comment says that women have broken “every single glass ceiling,” which is definitely not true. Nature devotes an entire issue to analysis of gender inequalities in science; the Harvard Crimson describes gender biases among the undergraduates there. Many tech fields have a similar problem. Consider the repeated instances of in-the-open misogyny at tech conferences recently, the latest being the rape joke told by someone from Microsoft, on stage. There is good reason to believe that the differences are not due to intrinsic differences between the genders in analytical reasoning. There is also a question of women’s’ experience. I wish I had scientific literature about this. I think many in academia do not think that women can make a significant contribution, judge them on their attractiveness, and see them as objects of sexual desire. This is a structural feature of the environment; there may be just as many women who treat other women badly as there are men.
Pointing out that a woman is or was a queen is a little funny, because if someone is queen, it follows immediately that the person is a woman, because queens can’t be men. (Sorry, couldn’t help myself.) More seriously, the gender of a country’s ruler is probably irrelevant to whether there is gender equity in science.
Articles like this one are needed because, as in the case of Indiana Jones, there aren’t any female icons for archeology or in general the study of antiquity. Having such icons (and their real-life counterparts) is important in order to help bring girls and young women into male-dominated fields.
NASA’s astronaut corps is for the first time gender-equal (http://msmagazine.com/blog/2013/06/18/nasas-new-astronauts-reach-gender-parity/). Much of the news media coverage on this reports, in a substantive way, on Sally Ride, the first American woman in space. She’s that iconic role-model.
Now for some real shameless self-promotion: everyone should look up Betsy Bryan and Kara Cooney, archeologists from my graduate alma mater.
I am not entirely guilty of shamelessly promoting myself by responding to a blog comment on my own blog, rather than in the comment thread. I couldn’t log in to the original blog, which is required for posting. I figured that, since I went to the trouble of writing this, it may as well be posted somewhere.