Subsurface description and bedrock topography map of The Ohio State University central campus area

No embarg

The economic value of domestic science

Citation: Finley, Lena M. The economic value of domestic science. Senior thesis, Kansas State Agricultural College, 1905.Morse Department of Special CollectionsIntroduction: The purpose of this thesis is to show the relation of economics to domestic science and to emphasize the importance of the latter science as a factor which enters into the efficiency of the individual laborer. Domestic economy is quite commonly conceded to be one of the most important sciences of today; but popular opinion limits its application to the home when in reality its scope is wider than that of any other science. Its relation to certain phenomena of economics is especially close; and to none closer than to the labor-power of any community. It is this intimate connection of individual and communal efficiency of labor with domestic science that will form the basis of the following discussions. The history of the past ages of man proves that the civilization of the early ages was of very low degree. The domestic science part of their lives, we find, "was indeed very poor and crude. They lived upon roots, grasses, and various kinds of wild nuts, for the vegetable part of their diet, and the animal diet consisted of the wild animals that they could capture. As a rule all their food was eaten in the raw state. According to their ideas fresh meat was not at all necessary for they would often eat meat partially or even wholly spoiled and think that they had a treat. Not very long ago the Australians considered themselves haply if they could but secure whale's flesh that was beginning to putrefy. Other animals eaten by the early races were: beavers, rats, toads, bears, foxes and rhinoceri. In fact as near as can be determined, these ancestors of ours would eat anything which they could capture by any means and would eat it in anyform

Guarding the Gate to the Courthouse: How Trial Judges Are Using Their Evidentiary Screening Role to Remake Tort Causation Rules

The article looks at what trial judges are actually doing in toxic tort cases in the post-Daubert world; it reviews and critiques cases in which judges have in effect adopted a new rule of causation law that requires plaintiffs to rely on epidemiology, and in particular epidemiology that demonostrates an increase in relative risk of 2.0 or greater; the article considers the substantive as well as the normative implications of this legal treatment of epidemiology

A study comparing table-based and list-based smartphone interface usability

Never before has society seen a technology or medium advance as quickly as the smartphone. With advancements of smartphone technology, many daily tasks can be accomplished easier and faster with smartphone devices, which require more and more people from numerous backgrounds to use a variety of interface layouts. This study hopes to contribute in building a framework for conducting usability studies to assist in creating a foundation for smartphone interface development by evaluating the effectiveness of two commonly used mobile website interfaces. Since smartphone usability studies are relatively new, there is no smartphone software to record or track this kind of information. Three usability methods reviewed in this study were demographics, usability study through video recordings, and evaluation through exit survey. In regards to usability, the table interface is more effective than the list interface. User testing of the two navigation prototypes, as well as user comparison of one prototype to the other, gave feedback that will contribute to improve the mobile website navigation experiences for users

Breaking Women\u27s Silence in Law: The Dilemma of the Gendered Nature of Legal Reasoning

Language matters. Law matters. Legal language matters. I make these three statements not to offer a clever syllogism, but to bluntly put the central thesis of this. Article: it is an imperative task for feminist jurisprudence and for feminist lawyers–for anyone concerned about what the impact of law has been, and will be, on the realization and meanings of justice, equality, security, and autonomy for women–to turn critical attention to the nature of legal reasoning and the language by which it is expressed. As I exhorted in a recent article, feminist legal theorists must start to grapple with the nature of law itself, to understand the extent to which it is male defined, and the extent to which its language and its process of reasoning are built on male conceptions of problems and of harms–and on male, or epistemologically \u27objective\u27 and \u27neutral,\u27 methods of analysis. If the law has been defined largely by men, and if its definitions, which are presumed to be objective and neutral, shape societal judgments as to whether a problem exists or whether a harm has occurred, then can the law comprehend and adequately redress women\u27s experiences of harm? This Article is my effort to take up my own call, and to push beyond my beginning reflections in the previous article

\u3cem\u3eGeduldig v. Aiello\u3c/em\u3e, 417 U.S. 484 (1974) (Judgment)

Published as part of Chapter 10 in Feminist Judgments, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Linda L. Berger & Bridget J. Crawford, eds. In Geduldig, the Court was asked to decide whether California invidiously discriminated against women in violation of equal protection doctrine by excluding disabilities related to “normal” pregnancy and childbirth from its otherwise comprehensive employment disability insurance program. At the time, the U.S. Supreme Court had not yet clearly articulated that heightened scrutiny must apply for sex-based classifications, although it had strongly suggested as much in two recent cases, Reed v. Reed and Frontiero v. Richardson. The Court had also recently emphasized the importance of reproductive liberty in Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, which struck down employers’ forced maternity leave policies. Furthermore, the lower court opinion in Geduldig had held that California\u27s pregnancy exclusion denied equal protection to women. The three-judge district court opinion had emphasized in particular that under the standard articulated in Reed, states cannot impose statutory classifications based upon gender stereotypes. Yet six justices, led by Justice Stewart, rejected the plaintiffs’ claims. Most striking to many critics, the Court refused to recognize pregnancy discrimination as sex discrimination. The Court rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the heightened level of “rational basis” scrutiny applied in Reed and Frontiero should apply to the California statute, because the statute was “a far cry from cases like [Reed and Frontiero] involving discrimination based upon gender as such.” Instead, the Court declared: “There is no risk from which men are protected and women are not.https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/book_sections/1245/thumbnail.jp

Southern opposition to civil rights in the United States Senate: a tactical and ideological analysis, 1938-1965

Contrary to many historical accounts that depict white resistance to civil rights legislation in the United States Senate as relying exclusively on filibusters and overt racism, southern senators adopted a more moderate approach in the late 1930s when they realized that civil rights activism would continue until Jim Crow collapsed. Following strategic delay, a tactical model that enabled them to thwart civil rights advances for decades, they granted minor concessions on bills only tangentially related to civil rights and emasculated more substantive measures, rather than always utilizing the filibuster. The level of northern support for a given civil rights proposal dictated which approach southerners employed. As southern senators altered their legislative strategy to counter greater public support for civil rights, they also transformed their arguments, crafting their claims to appeal to northerners, who they believed cared little about the plight of black southerners. Southern senators linked their defense of segregation with the nation\u27s founding principles and depicted themselves as the guarantors of the federal system as defined by the Revolutionary generation. At the same time, they limited the use of overt racism that had formerly served as their primary defense of segregation. Despite the advantages accrued by following a conciliatory approach at the federal level, southern senators proved unwilling to intervene on the state level. This decision undermined their long-term objective of preserving segregation. Unlike southern senators, local politicians did not moderate their actions because they answered only to their white constituents, not a national audience. By not challenging racial demagogues in the South, southern senators allowed the extremism that resulted from massive resistance, especially white assaults on non-violent civil rights protestors, to flourish. As a result, many northerners by the 1960s began to question the long-standing southern claim that Jim Crow produced racial harmony. Southern senators then abandoned strategic delay and lost their fight to preserve segregation. Had the legislative battle to desegregate public accommodations occurred in the context of black violence in the late 1960s, rather than white violence of the early 1960s, southern senators might have succeeded in defeating the proposal