September 09, 2005

• /stops correcting people /retrieves panties
• /stops correcting people I'm glad. -s
• It did contain Marijuana.
• Couldn't they come to some sort of compromise, say, crotchless?
• Why would such a rule ever be made (if it does in fact exist). The only explination I can think of is that perhaps it's an outdated law in the same spirit as women not being able to cut thier hair without thier husbands permission. Outdated values that haven't been striken yet but are no longer enforced, except when authority figures want to be assholes.
• I believe there was no rule, per se. It was probably just some petty beaurocrat deciding that anything "out of the ordinary" would not be allowed, using their own parochial attitudes as the metric for normality. That's what petty beaurocrats do best.
• Isn't it obvious? No panties = anarchy.
• p.s. I'm not wearing any right now.
• As a sign of solidarity with Ms. Nall, I am also not wearing panties, nor will I ever again. And this time I mean it. Honest. My gf was starting to get suspicious anyway.
• Interesting read. Thanks. What is up with the NSFW tag? Is my adblock blocking something I'm unaware of?
• What is up with the NSFW tag? This weblog is hosted by the US Marijuana Party. Not safe for everybody's workplace.
• Does the rule specify how panties are supposed to be worn? I think for the convenience of the guards all future visitors should wear panties as hats. Men included. If they want to enforce stupid rules then let's make lunacy reign.
• This weblog is hosted by the US Marijuana Party. No, the blog is hosted by blogspot, not the USMP. And even if it were, there's still no call for the tag. It's pretty dang offensive that you think a political party's website needs a NSFW tag. Do you include that tag when you link to a mofi thread? Because every single mofi thread is just as NSFW as a page from the USMP.
• Mr. Knick, it was just a heads-up. There are definitely some employers who'd get all bent out of shape by someone visiting a USMP-related site at work, as idiotic as that bent-ness might be. I.e. don't shoot the messenger.
• There are definitely some employers who'd get all bent out of shape by someone visiting a USMP-related site at work Those same employers would get bent about someone visiting MoFi. I do have a peeve about throwing the NSFW at text, and that's part of what's motivating me. When you start putting NSFW tags on text, then NSFW loses meaning, and it becomes an appropriate tag for Discovery.com, CNN, or even Google. But this one bothers me more, because it's getting the NSFW tag because of political idealogy. It's like putting a NSFW tag on the ACLU's website, just because someone might be employed by an ACLU hater, or on whitehouse.gov, because someone might be employed by a Bush-hater. I'm trying not to be bothered by it, because I know mare had good intentions by it. But each time I see this happens, it's like another nail in the coffin. People complacently accept that employers have and should have this kind of control over people's thoughts. I'm going to try and drop it, because I don't want to poop all over the thread. But I don't see a lot of difference between a guard making up reasons to prevent entry and an employer making up reasons to fire.
• I'm also going to try to not be so repetitive when describing my actions.
• We're on the same team on this, Knick. Believe me.
• NSFW
• /note to self *definition of NSFW is very ambiguous concept.
• NSFW?
• Did she post a followup? I'd be interested in what happens after she calls up and sees if that rule really does exist. I suspect they were trying to give her a hard time because they knew who she was.
• I also suspect they were fooling with her. However, I have been searched in several federal prisons for men (I'm a photographer) and dress is always an issue. There may well be a rule about wearing panties so as not to 'excite' the male prisoners. As a panty wearer (pink) the panty thing has never been an issue. At Stark in Florida I had to change my shirt because it didn't tuck in-it occasionally showed my bare midriff. I was kind of annoyed ("these people and their rules!") but once I got inside the prison I was glad I'd changed. Some of the smaller state prisons just go though your stuff, others don't search you at all, they just surround you with guys carrying shotguns (death row, Angola, Louisianna-this was not for my safety). In any event, I always thought that the searches and requirements I've had to adhere to were about walking around in the general prison population (escorted). Visitor areas are very different from the yard. I think they decided to make her pay. And they totally know how to do that.
• Thanks for all the input above Blanky. It's always nice to get insight from someone who is more directly affected by these things.
• Call the CIA!
• Great. Now I have to worry about electronic spies in my underwear?
• Loretta Nall for Governor!
• Simple Measures At Prison Save Taxpayers Big Bucks A conservation ethic took hold. It's also brought low-flow showerheads, water saving toilets and an organic vegetable garden. And wonder of wonders, Cedar Creek's business manager Tom Matthews says a costly sewage treatment plant expansion has just been scrubbed. Tom Matthews: "From these very simple steps here we got this great whopping outcome down there. The sewage treatment, that was $1.3 million. That was the big surprise for us when we saw the engineers' report on that. We really avoided that cost as far as our expansion goes." So many 'prison' threads to choose from