Tagged ‘personal’

What's the deal with Warby Parker?

Wednesday, March 21st, 2012

As many of the dozens of you who read my blog know, I wear glasses pretty much daily. On a rare occasion, I might break out the contact lenses, but like I said, it is rare. I find that contact lenses put a huge strain on my eyes during the course of a normal work day where I generally sit in front of a computer screen most of the time. And I'm still very scared of laser surgery where they slice open your eye (!) so, yeah, I wear glasses.

I've been wearing the same frames for years now. I originally found them for sale on ebay and purchased them something like 5 years ago. After years of wear, they started to get old so I decided to do a search for new frames again. I looked around and didn't see much I liked. I ended up buying the same frames again but in a different color. These are the frames that I'm wearing now. I really like them, but they are starting to age and it might be that time where I decide to get new glasses (especially with insurance…score!).

My first thought this time was to try a different sort of online purchasing experience. Warby Parker (warbyparker.com) has revolutionized the purchase of glasses by taking the whole experience, with the exception of the eye exam, online. You send them your prescription, pick glasses, and BEHOLD, you have new glasses shipped to your door. Also, they are a company committed to good. For every pair of glasses you buy, they send a pair of glasses to someone in need. I'm a sucker for a good cause.

I'm also a sucker for stalking apparently. After visiting the Warby Parker website once, I kept seeing Warby Parker ads on various websites I visited afterwards (this is not coincidental, by the way…). While I understood they were virtually stalking me (and targeting their ads at me), I did think their frames looked kinda cool. So I decided to consider the idea of buying my glasses online. I could easily get my prescription as my previous year's eye exam would suffice (last year I got prescription sunglasses — again, this is why it is awesome to have eye insurance).

But perhaps the biggest reason why I decided to try Warby Parker was the home try-on service. For no charge, Warby Parker will send you 5 pairs of glasses for you to try on. You keep the glasses for at most 5 days and then return them using the same box you received them in with a pre-paid shipping label also provided in your package. I thought that was the coolest thing since sliced bread. I hate the ordeal of going to the eye place and trying on glasses. I can't really see myself because I'm not wearing glasses. At least if I'm at home, I could put my contacts on and get a truer vision of what I would look like in a certain pair of frames.

I went to their website and picked five frames and I'm fairly certain that either the next day or the day after I received them. They say they put a hold on your credit card (in the event you decide not to return their glasses) but I didn't notice it. The box the frames came in was actually pretty nice as it was felted and neatly separated each plastic-wrapped pair of glasses. I could list the styles I tried on, but at he end of the day, I just wasn't digging them. They were either too small or too big or too narrow. I will keep checking their website to see if they add other styles, but for now, the styles they do offer just aren't a good fit.

That said, the return process was super pleasant. After dropping the package in the mail, I received an email from Warby Parker stating they were processing the return. They also suggested I contact them with any questions I have about their products or if I need help making a selection and getting to the next step. I'm happy to report that this is the only post-try-on solicitation I've received. No crazy sales pressure. No "hey, we are going to add you to our annoying email list." Just really straightforward and direct — which I dearly appreciate!

So, while Warby Parker didn't get my business today. I probably wouldn't hesitate in considering them at another time and definitely recommend them. With the option to try on from the comfort of your home, it's just silly not to try them!

Where did all the cowgirls go?

Thursday, December 1st, 2011

I recently read a blog post by Clay Shirky about the difference between how women talk about their own abilities versus men. He wishes that more women would stand up and exert their influence because women are just as talented, smart and capable as their more effusive male colleagues. I wish for this, too.

In fact, many other women wish for this as well. COO of Facebook Sheryl Sandberg has given many a talk aimed at women. She says that women should take a seat at the table and not count themselves out by default because they want to have a family. Sheryl is living proof that it is possible to maintain a family and still be successful; and she acknowledges the challenges that come with that.

However, she also touches upon the big elephant in the room that many who talk about the disparities between men and women fail to acknowledge. A man who goes for the gold is assertive. A woman who does the same is off-putting at best, and at worst simply labeled a "bitch." Often when I say this, people roll their eyes; Sheryl present a famous Harvard Business school study that proves this is not simply "women getting easily offended" or "being emotional" (which, by the way, is another topic for another day).

It's an issue that permeates regardless of industry. In politics, Hilary Clinton was often given that label. Her wardrobe of pants suits and "attack dog" stance during her campaign gave her a harsh exterior in the public eye to both women and men. Tina Fey of Saturday Night Live commented on the whole thing and turned it into a positive with the saying "Bitches get shit done."

I love that sketch because I sympathize. I am good at my job. I get things done. If that wasn't true, I wouldn't now be earning nearly triple what I was offered upon graduation in 2006 (in a "bad economy", to boot!). However, as a result of my focus on process, keeping on schedule, and GSD (getting shit done), I am sure that there are many colleagues, past and present, who think I'm a bitch. In fact, I can name them (and there are, unfortunately, women among them).

And the truth of the matter is, I'm not a difficult person to work with. Despite going to school for Computer Science, I'm self-taught at a lot of things, lousy at some others and definitely still have quite a bit to learn. This invigorates me to learn more but also terrifies me at the same time; being in technology, I sometimes feel the need to know everything and be on the cutting edge. This isn't necessarily true, but motivates me to keep on my toes and at the very least stay relevant in a few things (and, given current trends, looks like my decision not to dive head first into Flash development wasn't so bad after all).

But the point of writing this wasn't to brag about myself. The point is that yes, women need to step up to the plate more to brag and take credit — myself included. Often times, we shy away or defer to others when we know what the right answer is. This is a problem of self-doubt and wavering self-esteem that perhaps everyone has at times but tends to be more evident among women. However, the flip side of that is let's call a spade a spade. When a woman steps up, do we encourage it? Or do we add to this doubt — do we doubt her abilities because of predisposed notions?

A lot of people don't like to hear the "as a woman, it's hard out there…" speech, but it is. I can only speak from personal experience here so I will tell a short story that I think illustrates the point. I remember looking for internships while I was in college. I didn't have a ton of relevant experience but I had done freelance web design/development for some local bands while in high school and could show some of that work if necessary. In addition, my part-time work study job was helping out at a public school in Brooklyn where I become the defacto computer expert as I refurbished and networked together old Macs and Windows PCs that were previously merely taking up space in the back of the fourth grade classroom. So, while I didn't have a lot of experience on paper, I felt pretty confident I could land a crappy internship at a record label for $8 per hour (and most likely consist of lame administrative work).

I went to the interview in midtown Manhattan. The office building was not glamorous (this was a small, indie label that worked on re-releases of older records) and the office itself was pretty rundown. I was introduced to several men in the office. They were all men. I made a note of the fact that I did not see a single woman in their office. I spoke with the man who interviewed me and explained my skills and background. He nodded and didn't seem impressed; I was unable to really tell if he was unimpressed or if it was just a really good poker face. After I finished my talk, he asked me if I would be willing to take a typing test.

"A typing test?" I responded.

He said, "Yeah, we hired a girl before that couldn't type so we just want to make sure whoever we hire can type."

I made a mental note of the fact that he said they hired a "girl" before. I put two and two together but typed out a stupid sentence from the cover of an LP anyway. When I left the interview, I knew, without a doubt, that I would not be offered the position because I was a woman.

Since then, I've seen the "boys clubs" at certain offices. I've seen the quizzical looks or passive aggressive emails when I've (correctly, I might add) critiqued a colleague's work. Today, in fact, I received an email that did just that. I don't think the email would have been as questioning if I were a male colleague. Perhaps I'm thinking into this too much, but perhaps I'm not.

Before I am crucified, I have to say that the majority of the men I have worked with have not been like this. The majority have been great and accepting of a lady on their team. To my credit, I like sports which greatly improves my ability to relate. My personal theory (because I took Psychology 101 does not mean this is truth so please take it with a grain of salt) is that the gender roles we grow up with have a great bearing on how we interact with folks of the opposite sex. As soon as you take a car out of a girl's hand and put it in a boy's hand, you've implicitly created an impact on the capabilities of each.

While that may be hard to break, it certainly is not impossible to educate better on the implicit sexism that comes across more often than we care to admit in our interactions at work. However, this means that leveling the playing field is not so simple. Per Clay Shirky's post, this is also a rant with no immediate answer. My hope is I've illuminated some issues that can start discussions in favor of a positive, more inclusive future.

Observation on Museums

Tuesday, November 22nd, 2011

I'll preface this by saying that maybe this opinion is largely the way it is because I'm a (relatively) young person.

I'm a member of both the Metropolitan Museum of Art ("The Met" for short here in New York City) and the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA). I started with MoMA membership a year ago and decided to renew this year. The MoMA is a cool place to hang out, has lots of exhibitions of interest to me, and is pretty accessible to my house by train. This year, I decided to get a membership to The Met. I was mostly attracted by the Alexander McQueen exhibit (I won't lie to you, the opportunity to skip to the members line and avoid a 2+ hour wait was appealing) but I've been to The Met many times before and there are some pieces of their permanent collection that really speak to me. Additionally, I discovered that they have a killer roof deck that overlooks Central Park.

That said, I don't make use of these memberships nearly enough. I wish I could find more time to go, particularly during members-only hours when I could really make the best use of my membership in avoiding the herds of tourists. However, I've noticed some differences in how these museums speak to me as a member and thought it might make interesting fodder for my blog (which, I know, I haven't updated in quite a few months).

I find that MoMA is a lot better at asking for money than The Met is; and I should mention that this doesn't mean that MoMA contacts me more frequently about it. Actually, the reverse is true! I get a lot of mail from The Met asking me for money and I just became a member in August of this year. I would understand if I was reaching the end of my membership period and they were looking to retain me, but it's only been a few months. To be honest, the excessive asking is making me consider NOT renewing my membership next year.

On the contrary, I find MoMA's ask to be less, well, annoying because not only does it happen less frequently, but I get much more useful content from MoMA on a regular basis. Every month, I get a booklet from MoMA that tells me what is going on at the museum. It's a tall narrow book (it looks sort of like a Zagat guide in size) so it is easily portable in case you wanted to take it with you to the museum. In addition, as a member of their "Film Plus" program, I get one or two emails a month about specials screenings that I am able to attend gratis with that membership. These emails even go so far as to make it easy for you to RSVP. If you click on "YES" in the email, you get routed to where you can complete your RSVP. If you click on "NO," they know you are not attending and will stop contacting you about that event.

Now, fast forward to today, I check my mail and find two items from The Met. One is a monthly members calendar and the other is a fall bulletin. I find this confusing. Why mail me two things? Just send me one thing, and kill less trees. The fall bulletin is a large magazine-sized book but on the outside of it is yet another ask for money. I'm not so much bothered by the ask as much as the fact that this jacket on the outside of the fall bulletin was covering a wrap-around cover that featured the restored painting of Washington crossing the Delaware, which looks pretty freakin' cool. Why would you cover that? And apparently the fall bulletin is a lot of in depth information about the restoration of that painting. Very interesting stuff. How about putting the ask for money in the middle of the book? So while I'm perusing it and realizing how hard you guys work, I can think about donating before the year's end.

Instead, I'm annoyed because you keep asking me for money in all the wrong ways and compelled to blog about it!