Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (180980)	5/6/2005 5:17:31 AM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 186894

OT RE: "why do you suppose that is?" There probably isn't one answer. People have different reasons. My Mom never wore perfume to work, only when my parents would go out. She believes perfume is not appropriate for work. Some women don't want to send the wrong message - there's nothing worse than having a guy at work think you are sending him a message, when you're not. ( Putting perfume on sometimes can be a sign a woman is trying to impress a guy. ) I think women try hard to be taken seriously so don't wish to dilute their goals or message with the smell of perfume. ( But I think women should feel free to do whatever they believe fits their personal individuality, and not worry about what's the norm. ) On a different level, perfume is impractical to carry on trips. A bottle of perfume in luggage, risks leaking all over work clothes needed for meetings on business trips. Not a risk worth taking on trips. In the fast-paced world of hightech, perfume is just one more thing to do that's a drag on speed and efficiency. To keep this post somewhat on topic to the semiconductor industry, here's what an AMD exec reportedly packs, down to whether he wears briefs or boxers, I kid you all not: business2.com "After logging more than 150,000 miles a year as a vice president at Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), Kevin Knox has packing down to a science..." Back to OT, some women may not wish to waste money on a non-essential item like perfume - hightech women are quite good with math and many times money. Some women don't wear it because there is a very widespread cynical attitude towards consumer marketing, where Madison Avenue says women are suppose to be dumb and spend their money too. Many women believe their IQ levels are above the manipulations of consumer marketing, which in this country is quite negative for women. Many hightech women believe consumer marketing on women equates to dumbness. So, consumer marketing for women (e.g. for perfume, etc.) is to be ignored, not trusted. Other women don't wear it because they don't want to be confused with being a trophy wife. ( A friend of mine that's a s/c exec said everyone from Japan thought her husband was the exec rather than her at this one function. ) Still others don't wear it because they are sick and tired of being confused with a hired tradeshow bunny when they are "manning" a booth. (The smarter women tend to avoid working for corporations that lack a policy on not hiring bunnies.) Some women don't wear it because they don't want to be confused with women in lower paid occupations. (Not a polite reason.) I don't wear perfume in my personal life because there are way too many other ways to be feminine that are more natural - it's simply not my definition of femininity - I'd prefer to be heard and seen, rather than be smelly. Regards, Amy J PS There was a lady that got fired in San Francisco for being "smelly". The firing went to court, and she lost. The judge ruled the company had the right to decide on what was offensive and what wasn't. (Or something like that.) I thought the ruling was actually an abuse of the company's power, even though I'm somewhat happy corporations still hold the power to decide if someone's stink gets too bothersome.

To: Elmer Phud who wrote (180980)	7/19/2005 3:24:36 AM
From: Amy J	Respond to of 186894

OT Elmer and Thread, if you do any traveling, you may know that Hyatt injects perfume into their Air ventilation systems. (It's a hotel I avoid for this reason.) My favorite hotel, Marriott, decided to trial placing perfume into their air ventilation system too. (Sigh) Perfume is a liquid, so to get perfume into a gaseous form, Marriott sticks an electrical rod into the liquid perfume and heats the perfume up until it turns into a gas. Then the gaseous perfume gets pumped into the air ventilation system of the hotel. And presto - you get to breath it in. The hotel industry considers this a 'benefit.' It's worse than smoke - a person had an asthma attack that was triggered by the perfume gas in their room while at the Marriott testing this out. Marriott worker-bees say their management doesn't inform them when they pump these gases into their Air system. One Marriott worker complained to me she was having a medical reaction to it. Wonder how those people would be able to travel when all the hotels start doing this? It was annoying even to me (it was better to wait in 100+ degree weather than stay indoors.) It's more annoying than smoke. Am glad I don't have asthma. Even so, if I had the option to stay in a perfumed gaseous hotel with wifi connection - or - a hotel with no gaseous perfume/no wifi, I'll pick the later any day. Wonder if Sheraton and Westin plan on pumping perfume into their Air systems too? Hopefully there will be at least one global hotel chain that doesn't. Air is better. It's amazing how we have "no smoking sections", while it's okay to pump gaseous perfume into the air ventillation system of hotels in the USA where there's no getting away from it. Isn't that a bit ironic? Regards, Amy J