Esoterica
Creative Commons License
This work by Mikki Kendall is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
 
 
 
blackamazon: lubiddu: blackamazon: abellandapomegranate: lubiddu: blackamazon: daintyblackpegasus: inflateablefilth: thepeoplesrecord: With a long history of being beaten down for thinking and acting upon thought, working class parents are more likely to emphasize the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority. The result: working-class pupils lose out because they are ‘too polite’. August 22, 2012 Pupils from wealthier households have more natural confidence at school after being taught by mothers and fathers to engage with authority figures, it was claimed. The study found that children with working-class parents were more polite and courteous in lessons but often shunned teachers and attempted to solve problems alone – hampering their long-term academic development. It was feared that the differences in classroom behaviour by the two groups may have knock-on effects in later life as poorer children slip further behind richer classmates. The disclosure – in research published in the United States – comes amid continuing concerns over link between social class and educational achievement. One British study earlier this year found that the highest-performing pupils from disadvantaged families lagged around two-and-a-half years behind bright children brought up in wealthy homes by the age of 15. Despite an extensive Labour drive to boost access to higher education, it also emerged that the richest schoolchildren were around six times more likely to go on to a top Russell Group universities than the poorest fifth. Jessica Calarco, assistant professor of sociology at Indiana University, assessed the classroom behaviour of primary-age pupils as part of the latest research. She said: “Even very shy middle-class children learned to feel comfortable approaching teachers with questions, and recognised the benefits of doing so. “Working-class children instead worried about making teachers mad or angry if they asked for help at the wrong time or in the wrong way, and also felt that others would judge them as incompetent or not smart if they asked for help. “These differences, in turn, seem to stem not from differences in how teachers responded to students – when working-class students did ask questions, teachers welcomed and readily addressed these requests – but from differences in the skills, strategies and orientations that children learn from their parents at home.” The study was based on observations of a class of state school children aged nine to 11 over a two year period. Children were assessed twice a week and then interviewed with their parents over the summer holidays. Research revealed that pushy parents from all kinds of social backgrounds attempted to teach their children how to behave at school and work hard. But a clear class divide in their methods emerged. Working class parents were more likely to emphasise the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority, it was revealed. They would also tackle assignments or projects but on their own without asking for help. In contrast, middle class children were encouraged to raise their hand, ask questions and not be afraid to ask for help when needed. These children are then more likely to be noticed by teachers who tend to reward such behavior, said the study. It meant that they became more outgoing as they get older, which could help as they get jobs or have to deal with authority in other ways, it emerged. Source This definitely applies to me. When I’m in jobs I tend to let myself get treated like crap because I’m worried what will happen if I stand up for myself. this shit is so real that it hurts. GPOY Let’s not forget that when middle-class students ask for help, they’re being “proactive” about their education. When working-class students ask for help it’s seen as proof that they aren’t capable of learning (or learning on that level) and don’t belong in that particular classroom. I think it’s fascinating that with an upper-middle-class parent and a working-class parent and a mixed-class life experience, I fit into the “working class” version of this model.  I actually expected otherwise. THE BOLDED. I was reading some article about how girls aren’t taught to progress or practice or something and my first thought was ” horse shit” because I was always taught top ractice and develop. BUT as a lower class girl I was also taught ESPECIALLY in scholarship situations , not to ask for development and help , because rather than indicate a desire to succeed , it indicated a lack of ability. as well ABAAP I would wonder what you were taught about HOW to make the jump. Cause that is HUGE as well. Like what are the narratives we are told about how to negotiate because I find in a lot of mixed class backgrounds  if the working class parent never gets comfortable IN the upper middle class , they try to make their kids as unobtrusive as possible as part of assimilation. Read “Limbo” by Alfred Lubrano. Many people never are able to psychologically make that jump, and often because they are physically marked as working class. Lubrano notes that as a big Italian-American guy, one of his journalist co-workers made a comment about him needing a “goon” to protect him from a stalking non-fan. Another co-worker stated, “Alfred doesn’t need a goon; Alfred is a goon.” But beyond that, the assumptions are different between those worlds, and strikingly so for women (femininity being marked by white middle classness). And fuck, these class borders are policed to hell, anyway. I’m right now loaded for bear. Tomorrow, I’ve got an IEP meeting for my daughter at her school. At the last IEP meeting at last year’s school’s end….despite her higher-than-average scores and As in language & literature, social studies, and science, they had her listed for bottom-weight classes for the next year. I insisted that she be placed in the heavyweight classes for those subjects based on her performance in class and her reading scores. I got it, but if I hadn’t been able to make that meeting? My daughter would have been shit outta luck—-they’d have placed her in classes that would have bored the shit out of her and made her lose interest in school. It’s been hard enough for me to keep her college dreams alive. She’s a bright kid who has struggled with learning disability due to her prematurity——her brain is still developing (I mean, every kid’s is; hers moreso than average because like all early preemies she’s still catching up). I will hide BODIES if I have to. I want SOOOO BADLY for you to meet my mom. SOOOO VERY BADLY. I hope this ain’t an insult but you’re writing reminds me of her stories of fighting for me so much. And that’s part of the issue. Kids who GET INTO different class backgrounds are often only there because of MOTHERS who raised all kinds of hell and have tow orrry about that as well as vindictiveness about their placement.  As a kid of that… I can say I have hid shit and not asked because of being ashamed of, scared of, and scared FOR the sheer destruction my Mom would have to cause for basic services. You can’t go in with anything less than willing to hid bodies cause if you don’t they will BODY your child and that’s if you KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON And I read Limbo and can I say I WEPT. I was a senior right before my dads deportation AND JUST WEPT. I felt in my chest how I had been shorted
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m96yfr00sc1r6m2leo1_1280.jpg

blackamazon:

lubiddu:

blackamazon:

abellandapomegranate:

lubiddu:

blackamazon:

daintyblackpegasus:

inflateablefilth:

thepeoplesrecord:

With a long history of being beaten down for thinking and acting upon thought, working class parents are more likely to emphasize the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority. The result: working-class pupils lose out because they are ‘too polite’.

August 22, 2012

Pupils from wealthier households have more natural confidence at school after being taught by mothers and fathers to engage with authority figures, it was claimed.

The study found that children with working-class parents were more polite and courteous in lessons but often shunned teachers and attempted to solve problems alone – hampering their long-term academic development.

It was feared that the differences in classroom behaviour by the two groups may have knock-on effects in later life as poorer children slip further behind richer classmates.

The disclosure – in research published in the United States – comes amid continuing concerns over link between social class and educational achievement.

One British study earlier this year found that the highest-performing pupils from disadvantaged families lagged around two-and-a-half years behind bright children brought up in wealthy homes by the age of 15.

Despite an extensive Labour drive to boost access to higher education, it also emerged that the richest schoolchildren were around six times more likely to go on to a top Russell Group universities than the poorest fifth.

Jessica Calarco, assistant professor of sociology at Indiana University, assessed the classroom behaviour of primary-age pupils as part of the latest research.

She said: “Even very shy middle-class children learned to feel comfortable approaching teachers with questions, and recognised the benefits of doing so.

“Working-class children instead worried about making teachers mad or angry if they asked for help at the wrong time or in the wrong way, and also felt that others would judge them as incompetent or not smart if they asked for help.

“These differences, in turn, seem to stem not from differences in how teachers responded to students – when working-class students did ask questions, teachers welcomed and readily addressed these requests – but from differences in the skills, strategies and orientations that children learn from their parents at home.”

The study was based on observations of a class of state school children aged nine to 11 over a two year period. Children were assessed twice a week and then interviewed with their parents over the summer holidays.

Research revealed that pushy parents from all kinds of social backgrounds attempted to teach their children how to behave at school and work hard.

But a clear class divide in their methods emerged.

Working class parents were more likely to emphasise the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority, it was revealed. They would also tackle assignments or projects but on their own without asking for help.

In contrast, middle class children were encouraged to raise their hand, ask questions and not be afraid to ask for help when needed.

These children are then more likely to be noticed by teachers who tend to reward such behavior, said the study. It meant that they became more outgoing as they get older, which could help as they get jobs or have to deal with authority in other ways, it emerged.

Source

This definitely applies to me. When I’m in jobs I tend to let myself get treated like crap because I’m worried what will happen if I stand up for myself.

this shit is so real that it hurts.

GPOY

Let’s not forget that when middle-class students ask for help, they’re being “proactive” about their education. When working-class students ask for help it’s seen as proof that they aren’t capable of learning (or learning on that level) and don’t belong in that particular classroom.

I think it’s fascinating that with an upper-middle-class parent and a working-class parent and a mixed-class life experience, I fit into the “working class” version of this model.  I actually expected otherwise.

THE BOLDED. I was reading some article about how girls aren’t taught to progress or practice or something and my first thought was ” horse shit” because I was always taught top ractice and develop.

BUT as a lower class girl I was also taught ESPECIALLY in scholarship situations , not to ask for development and help , because rather than indicate a desire to succeed , it indicated a lack of ability.

as well ABAAP I would wonder what you were taught about HOW to make the jump. Cause that is HUGE as well. Like what are the narratives we are told about how to negotiate because I find in a lot of mixed class backgrounds  if the working class parent never gets comfortable IN the upper middle class , they try to make their kids as unobtrusive as possible as part of assimilation.

Read “Limbo” by Alfred Lubrano. Many people never are able to psychologically make that jump, and often because they are physically marked as working class. Lubrano notes that as a big Italian-American guy, one of his journalist co-workers made a comment about him needing a “goon” to protect him from a stalking non-fan. Another co-worker stated, “Alfred doesn’t need a goon; Alfred is a goon.” But beyond that, the assumptions are different between those worlds, and strikingly so for women (femininity being marked by white middle classness).

And fuck, these class borders are policed to hell, anyway. I’m right now loaded for bear. Tomorrow, I’ve got an IEP meeting for my daughter at her school. At the last IEP meeting at last year’s school’s end….despite her higher-than-average scores and As in language & literature, social studies, and science, they had her listed for bottom-weight classes for the next year. I insisted that she be placed in the heavyweight classes for those subjects based on her performance in class and her reading scores. I got it, but if I hadn’t been able to make that meeting? My daughter would have been shit outta luck—-they’d have placed her in classes that would have bored the shit out of her and made her lose interest in school. It’s been hard enough for me to keep her college dreams alive. She’s a bright kid who has struggled with learning disability due to her prematurity——her brain is still developing (I mean, every kid’s is; hers moreso than average because like all early preemies she’s still catching up).

I will hide BODIES if I have to.

I want SOOOO BADLY for you to meet my mom. SOOOO VERY BADLY. I hope this ain’t an insult but you’re writing reminds me of her stories of fighting for me so much.

And that’s part of the issue.

Kids who GET INTO different class backgrounds are often only there because of MOTHERS who raised all kinds of hell and have tow orrry about that as well as vindictiveness about their placement. 

As a kid of that… I can say I have hid shit and not asked because of being ashamed of, scared of, and scared FOR the sheer destruction my Mom would have to cause for basic services.

You can’t go in with anything less than willing to hid bodies cause if you don’t they will BODY your child and that’s if you KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON

And I read Limbo

and can I say I WEPT. I was a senior right before my dads deportation AND JUST WEPT.

I felt in my chest how I had been shorted

 
 
inflateablefilth: thepeoplesrecord: With a long history of being beaten down for thinking and acting upon thought, working class parents are more likely to emphasize the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority. The result: working-class pupils lose out because they are ‘too polite’. August 22, 2012 Pupils from wealthier households have more natural confidence at school after being taught by mothers and fathers to engage with authority figures, it was claimed. The study found that children with working-class parents were more polite and courteous in lessons but often shunned teachers and attempted to solve problems alone – hampering their long-term academic development. It was feared that the differences in classroom behaviour by the two groups may have knock-on effects in later life as poorer children slip further behind richer classmates. The disclosure – in research published in the United States – comes amid continuing concerns over link between social class and educational achievement. One British study earlier this year found that the highest-performing pupils from disadvantaged families lagged around two-and-a-half years behind bright children brought up in wealthy homes by the age of 15. Despite an extensive Labour drive to boost access to higher education, it also emerged that the richest schoolchildren were around six times more likely to go on to a top Russell Group universities than the poorest fifth. Jessica Calarco, assistant professor of sociology at Indiana University, assessed the classroom behaviour of primary-age pupils as part of the latest research. She said: “Even very shy middle-class children learned to feel comfortable approaching teachers with questions, and recognised the benefits of doing so. “Working-class children instead worried about making teachers mad or angry if they asked for help at the wrong time or in the wrong way, and also felt that others would judge them as incompetent or not smart if they asked for help. “These differences, in turn, seem to stem not from differences in how teachers responded to students – when working-class students did ask questions, teachers welcomed and readily addressed these requests – but from differences in the skills, strategies and orientations that children learn from their parents at home.” The study was based on observations of a class of state school children aged nine to 11 over a two year period. Children were assessed twice a week and then interviewed with their parents over the summer holidays. Research revealed that pushy parents from all kinds of social backgrounds attempted to teach their children how to behave at school and work hard. But a clear class divide in their methods emerged. Working class parents were more likely to emphasise the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority, it was revealed. They would also tackle assignments or projects but on their own without asking for help. In contrast, middle class children were encouraged to raise their hand, ask questions and not be afraid to ask for help when needed. These children are then more likely to be noticed by teachers who tend to reward such behavior, said the study. It meant that they became more outgoing as they get older, which could help as they get jobs or have to deal with authority in other ways, it emerged. Source This definitely applies to me. When I’m in jobs I tend to let myself get treated like crap because I’m worried what will happen if I stand up for myself.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m96yfr00sc1r6m2leo1_1280.jpg

inflateablefilth:

thepeoplesrecord:

With a long history of being beaten down for thinking and acting upon thought, working class parents are more likely to emphasize the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority. The result: working-class pupils lose out because they are ‘too polite’.

August 22, 2012

Pupils from wealthier households have more natural confidence at school after being taught by mothers and fathers to engage with authority figures, it was claimed.

The study found that children with working-class parents were more polite and courteous in lessons but often shunned teachers and attempted to solve problems alone – hampering their long-term academic development.

It was feared that the differences in classroom behaviour by the two groups may have knock-on effects in later life as poorer children slip further behind richer classmates.

The disclosure – in research published in the United States – comes amid continuing concerns over link between social class and educational achievement.

One British study earlier this year found that the highest-performing pupils from disadvantaged families lagged around two-and-a-half years behind bright children brought up in wealthy homes by the age of 15.

Despite an extensive Labour drive to boost access to higher education, it also emerged that the richest schoolchildren were around six times more likely to go on to a top Russell Group universities than the poorest fifth.

Jessica Calarco, assistant professor of sociology at Indiana University, assessed the classroom behaviour of primary-age pupils as part of the latest research.

She said: “Even very shy middle-class children learned to feel comfortable approaching teachers with questions, and recognised the benefits of doing so.

“Working-class children instead worried about making teachers mad or angry if they asked for help at the wrong time or in the wrong way, and also felt that others would judge them as incompetent or not smart if they asked for help.

“These differences, in turn, seem to stem not from differences in how teachers responded to students – when working-class students did ask questions, teachers welcomed and readily addressed these requests – but from differences in the skills, strategies and orientations that children learn from their parents at home.”

The study was based on observations of a class of state school children aged nine to 11 over a two year period. Children were assessed twice a week and then interviewed with their parents over the summer holidays.

Research revealed that pushy parents from all kinds of social backgrounds attempted to teach their children how to behave at school and work hard.

But a clear class divide in their methods emerged.

Working class parents were more likely to emphasise the role of politeness and courtesy and being deferential to authority, it was revealed. They would also tackle assignments or projects but on their own without asking for help.

In contrast, middle class children were encouraged to raise their hand, ask questions and not be afraid to ask for help when needed.

These children are then more likely to be noticed by teachers who tend to reward such behavior, said the study. It meant that they became more outgoing as they get older, which could help as they get jobs or have to deal with authority in other ways, it emerged.

Source

This definitely applies to me. When I’m in jobs I tend to let myself get treated like crap because I’m worried what will happen if I stand up for myself.

 
 

After a recent Romney rally, a woman in the crowd said this to a radio news reporter: “I will not help those people.” She was referring to “welfare” recipients, who, according to Mr. Romney, would no longer be required to work or to look for work to qualify for these public benefits. She uttered the words “those people” with the absolute certainty that she or anyone she cares about would never be one of them. As a social scientist who studies issues directly related to race, I know that in the context of implicit racial bias, she is most likely referring to African Americans, the “racialized other” in her mind, and this is precisely what Mr. Romney and his tea party cohorts want her to do.

Every reputable fact checker, including the New York Times, has said that Romney’s campaign ad about the President’s welfare reform is either grossly distorted or an out-and-out lie. And yet, just yesterday, this ad was aired four times within sixty minutes on one of my local television stations. Romney and his people are keenly aware of the racialized mythology about who gets welfare and why (most welfare recipients are not Black). Heightened reaction to this myth channels cognition away from more fundamental issues like who will pay for tax breaks for the wealthy or who rode shotgun over the bankers who are responsible for the subprime lending crisis or who is sending American jobs overseas to increase profit, shareholder dividends and executive bonuses.

Did Romney play the race card? Yes he did, and he is likely to do it again and again as the election approaches.

Todd Rudd, “Did Romney Play The Race Card?,” Race-Talk 8/24/12 (via racialicious)
 
 

This is why I can’t watch TV news

madamethursday:

The news is on the TV and for some reason I didn’t turn to another channel, and CBS aired this completely enraging segment on the poor pitiful white middle class and rising tuition costs. 

And I just saw this middle class white woman saying (in reference to the middle class being the “forgotten class), “There are great programs for the poor…” - because she and her husband are paying a lot for their kid’s college tuition and fees. 

[Image: A rage face comic face looking unamused with the caption “are you fucking kidding me”]

Seriously? More and more people are falling towards or beneath the poverty line, hunger is a serious issue here in the U.S., I’m reading articles about people who are living in their cars or on the street and can’t get money so they can eat or have clothes and this privileged fuckfaced woman is telling us that there “are great programs for the poor”. Millions are getting sicker and sicker or DYING because they can’t afford to get to the doctor or their meds or what little health care coverage they get isn’t enough. 

But you think there are “great programs for the poor”. 

Having a welfare and entitlement system doesn’t mean it’s great. And the fact that you don’t know how shitty it is in your own country tells me how privileged you are and that you’ve never had to try to seek help. 

I swear to god I thought she was going to talk about everyone but white people getting college scholarships next. 

 
 
madamethursday: [Image: A picture of a hand holding down a torn out section of a newspaper, the text of which is transcribed below.] 23andchildfree: stfuconservatives: whimsicallyyours submitted: “This opinion appeared in The Augusta Chronicle in a section where basically stupid people submit whatever stupid thoughts strike their fancy, and the most racist and conservative ones get published. It’s not very unusual for the Augusta Chronicle; the sad(der) part is that a guy I graduated high school with (who is about 22 years old) posted this on Facebook and SEVENTEEN people, several of whom were my age also, liked it. Isn’t our generations supposed to be the teensiest bit more progressive than this?” —- Oh, and I love the last line: “We paid for your body to be disposed of in a Christian manner!” That’s right; this lengthy racist poor-hating screed was written by a Christian. Surprise, surprise. I like how it’s addressed to schoolchildren who can’t afford supplies. Damn those impoverished fourth graders and their sense of entitlement from the hardworking taxpayer! Transcript of the editorial for those with iffy vision: They reported this morning on 26 news: One-fourth of all Richmond County school kids cannot afford basic supplies! We pay for your prenatal care, we paid for your birth, formula and meds, we pay for your housing, day care, your school is free, we pay for your after-school programs, in-school breakfast, lunch and dinner. We pay for the food your mother sometimes provides. We paid when your mother had 10 other children she could not afford. My money paid for your stint in the Youth Detention Center. We paid your hospital bills when you were shot “doin nuttin.” We paid for the month you spent in jail when you turned 17. You just robbed me because you are to0 [sic] old to suck the system and your baby mama threw you out and you decided you were entitled to things that were not yours. We paid for you all of your life. PS: You were fatally shot the last time you tried to rob someone. We paid for your body to be disposed of in a Christian manner!
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m68y9xbUzz1qa4ff3o1_1280.jpg

madamethursday:

[Image: A picture of a hand holding down a torn out section of a newspaper, the text of which is transcribed below.]

23andchildfree:

stfuconservatives:

whimsicallyyours submitted: “This opinion appeared in The Augusta Chronicle in a section where basically stupid people submit whatever stupid thoughts strike their fancy, and the most racist and conservative ones get published. It’s not very unusual for the Augusta Chronicle; the sad(der) part is that a guy I graduated high school with (who is about 22 years old) posted this on Facebook and SEVENTEEN people, several of whom were my age also, liked it. Isn’t our generations supposed to be the teensiest bit more progressive than this?”

—-

Oh, and I love the last line: “We paid for your body to be disposed of in a Christian manner!” That’s right; this lengthy racist poor-hating screed was written by a Christian. Surprise, surprise. I like how it’s addressed to schoolchildren who can’t afford supplies. Damn those impoverished fourth graders and their sense of entitlement from the hardworking taxpayer!

Transcript of the editorial for those with iffy vision:

They reported this morning on 26 news: One-fourth of all Richmond County school kids cannot afford basic supplies! We pay for your prenatal care, we paid for your birth, formula and meds, we pay for your housing, day care, your school is free, we pay for your after-school programs, in-school breakfast, lunch and dinner. We pay for the food your mother sometimes provides. We paid when your mother had 10 other children she could not afford. My money paid for your stint in the Youth Detention Center. We paid your hospital bills when you were shot “doin nuttin.” We paid for the month you spent in jail when you turned 17. You just robbed me because you are to0 [sic] old to suck the system and your baby mama threw you out and you decided you were entitled to things that were not yours. We paid for you all of your life. PS: You were fatally shot the last time you tried to rob someone. We paid for your body to be disposed of in a Christian manner!

(Source: stfuconservatives)

 
 
jadelyn: cabell: jadelyn: indigofer: dashingbilly: nillabearajh: nudiemuse: jadelyn: indigofer: Just saw this on twitter.  BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY ALL PEOPLE WHO WORK RETAIL CAN AFFORD TO JUST TAKE A DAY OFF and probably lose their job to ~strike a blow~.  For fuck’s sake. What the fuck.  Not coming in on Black Friday when you work retail is pretty much an insta-fired offense.  Where the hell do they get these people?  You can tell most of them have never actually worked retail in their lives.  More anti worker bullshit. Also how is it ever helpful to recommend to people who are probably already poor, that they go ahead and lose that job? Are you serious dood? RLY DOOD? …. RLY? And that’s how the system is designed, to make you feel dependent on it. This is up there with being mad at protesters for blocking you from making it to work. Who should you be mad at, the protester working against a corrupt system, or the corporation cutting hours, laying people off, cutting benefits, all while collecting more and more money? Besides the fact that I’m sure you could easily take a sick day. The only reason to make excuses not to do it is if you’re afraid. Because if you weren’t, if you didn’t care, you wouldn’t take issue with the idea in the first place, and could just brush it off. “Besides the fact that I’m sure you could easily take a sick day” “the only reason to make excuses not to do it is if you’re afraid” AHAHAHAHAHAHAH.  You just have no fucking idea how working in jobs like retail works, do you? Take your epic class privilege and shove it up your arse. dashingbilly, please go work shit-end retail for a few months, complete with pressure and stress and shitty customers and long hours - if they give you enough hours - or barely any hours so you’re struggling to make ends meet, and also work through the Xmas season at any retail business and then you look me in the eye and you fucking tell me “I’m sure you could easily take a sick day” on fucking BLACK FRIDAY and that choosing not to FUCKING LOSE YOUR JOB “FOR THE CAUSE” is just “making excuses” because “you’re afraid”.  Spoken like someone who has never been dependent on a shitty retail job in their life. To clarify: Most retail jobs do not HAVE “sick days.”  ”Sick days” are an artifact of middle- and upper-class jobs, and even then, they are often quite minimal; my spouse has avoided taking any this year because he’s going to need pretty much every single one that he’ll have banked by February in order to take a week off when our daughter is born (not having worked at the company for a year, he is ineligible for family medical leave, the only federally mandated leave that can be used for paternity leave).  Similarly, a manager in retail work, even if in a salaried full-time position, cannot afford to squander a sick day, much less in a way that is guaranteed to piss off their superiors and make retribution likely. But forget that, anyway, because the vast majority of retail workers are not in middle-class jobs.  The vast majority of people working retail jobs are not actually full-time employees; they are kept at 39.5 hours (or fewer) in perpetuity, to avoid having to follow labor laws that only apply to full-time employees (such as having to pay benefits or provide any kind of leave at all).  Working at Taco Bell as a teenager, I witnessed an adult co-worker get screamed at by our manager for going over 80 hours in two weeks and thus costing the company for overtime, and risking the possibility of being reclassified.  I don’t know if her hours were subsequently drastically cut, but they might well have been. Similarly, a retail worker who calls in sick for a scheduled shift, even one that isn’t considered high volume and crucial, is taking a risk—often a very high one—that they will see all their hours disappear from the next schedule, because the manager can find someone else who will work through a 103-degree fever if instructed to do so. Because, see, retail workers hardly ever get “fired.”  They just lose all their hours, or are given the worst, least desirable hours, until they effectively no longer work there.  This allows management to circumvent even the tiny possibility that a wrongful termination suit could be brought (as if the majority of retail workers have the resources to do that). THIS A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.  I forgot to mention that.  “Sick days” are not something the vast majority of associate-level retail workers even get, in the sense of “paid day off”.  Only at the manager or above level do you accrue paid time off, and so for most retail workers, if you can’t/don’t want to come in on a given day, you call in and you just don’t get paid for the hours you would have worked that day.  So you’re (as in the person who tweeted this, also dashingbilly and anyone who agrees with them) not only asking retail workers to risk losing their jobs, you’re asking them to sacrifice a day’s pay as well.  And let me tell you, when you’re working that level of retail, odds are you really can’t afford to lose even the $50-60 takehome pay you’d have gotten for that day.  That’s a week or two of groceries, or two tanks of gas to get you to and from work, or a good chunk of your electrical or water bill for the month, or your phone or internet bill.  Also, like cabell said, if you call in, you can expect subtle punishment for it.  Even if you don’t get yelled at - and you probably will, because that’s just how it is - you will see your hours diminished, or your manager will punitively assign you the worst shifts, make you work every weekend for the next month, or spread out what paltry hours you get over every day so you can’t get a full damn day off for weeks (actually happened to one of my co-managers when our district manager tried to push her out of the store while she was pregnant; she was given half-shifts *every day* for almost a full month).  And all of these tactics are totally legal, too; complaining about them will just get you written up for backtalk (that’s not how they phrase it, but that’s essentially the offense) and put your job even further in jeopardy.  Retail managers know they have their bottom-level employees over a barrel in terms of dependence, even more so in this economy and job market, and they actively take advantage of it, because corporate pushes them to do it.  These are the same retail jobs I see requiring employees to work on Thanksgiving day until 9, leave & be back at midnight or 6 am. I don’t know why anyone would look at those kinds of store hours & think the people working there had many options. Well I do know why, but it doesn’t involve the use of critical thinking skills or any knowledge about what it means to be the working poor.
http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lv1pnyMw0Y1qcqnt5o1_1280.png

jadelyn:

cabell:

jadelyn:

indigofer:

dashingbilly:

nillabearajh:

nudiemuse:

jadelyn:

indigofer:

Just saw this on twitter.  BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY ALL PEOPLE WHO WORK RETAIL CAN AFFORD TO JUST TAKE A DAY OFF and probably lose their job to ~strike a blow~.  For fuck’s sake.

What the fuck.  Not coming in on Black Friday when you work retail is pretty much an insta-fired offense.  Where the hell do they get these people?  You can tell most of them have never actually worked retail in their lives.

 More anti worker bullshit.

Also how is it ever helpful to recommend to people who are probably already poor, that they go ahead and lose that job?

Are you serious dood?

RLY DOOD?

….

RLY?

And that’s how the system is designed, to make you feel dependent on it.

This is up there with being mad at protesters for blocking you from making it to work.

Who should you be mad at, the protester working against a corrupt system, or the corporation cutting hours, laying people off, cutting benefits, all while collecting more and more money?

Besides the fact that I’m sure you could easily take a sick day. The only reason to make excuses not to do it is if you’re afraid. Because if you weren’t, if you didn’t care, you wouldn’t take issue with the idea in the first place, and could just brush it off.

“Besides the fact that I’m sure you could easily take a sick day”

“the only reason to make excuses not to do it is if you’re afraid”

AHAHAHAHAHAHAH.  You just have no fucking idea how working in jobs like retail works, do you?

Take your epic class privilege and shove it up your arse.

dashingbilly, please go work shit-end retail for a few months, complete with pressure and stress and shitty customers and long hours - if they give you enough hours - or barely any hours so you’re struggling to make ends meet, and also work through the Xmas season at any retail business and then you look me in the eye and you fucking tell me “I’m sure you could easily take a sick day” on fucking BLACK FRIDAY and that choosing not to FUCKING LOSE YOUR JOB “FOR THE CAUSE” is just “making excuses” because “you’re afraid”. 

Spoken like someone who has never been dependent on a shitty retail job in their life.

To clarify: Most retail jobs do not HAVE “sick days.”  ”Sick days” are an artifact of middle- and upper-class jobs, and even then, they are often quite minimal; my spouse has avoided taking any this year because he’s going to need pretty much every single one that he’ll have banked by February in order to take a week off when our daughter is born (not having worked at the company for a year, he is ineligible for family medical leave, the only federally mandated leave that can be used for paternity leave).  Similarly, a manager in retail work, even if in a salaried full-time position, cannot afford to squander a sick day, much less in a way that is guaranteed to piss off their superiors and make retribution likely.

But forget that, anyway, because the vast majority of retail workers are not in middle-class jobs.  The vast majority of people working retail jobs are not actually full-time employees; they are kept at 39.5 hours (or fewer) in perpetuity, to avoid having to follow labor laws that only apply to full-time employees (such as having to pay benefits or provide any kind of leave at all).  Working at Taco Bell as a teenager, I witnessed an adult co-worker get screamed at by our manager for going over 80 hours in two weeks and thus costing the company for overtime, and risking the possibility of being reclassified.  I don’t know if her hours were subsequently drastically cut, but they might well have been.

Similarly, a retail worker who calls in sick for a scheduled shift, even one that isn’t considered high volume and crucial, is taking a risk—often a very high one—that they will see all their hours disappear from the next schedule, because the manager can find someone else who will work through a 103-degree fever if instructed to do so.

Because, see, retail workers hardly ever get “fired.”  They just lose all their hours, or are given the worst, least desirable hours, until they effectively no longer work there.  This allows management to circumvent even the tiny possibility that a wrongful termination suit could be brought (as if the majority of retail workers have the resources to do that).

THIS A THOUSAND TIMES THIS.  I forgot to mention that.  “Sick days” are not something the vast majority of associate-level retail workers even get, in the sense of “paid day off”.  Only at the manager or above level do you accrue paid time off, and so for most retail workers, if you can’t/don’t want to come in on a given day, you call in and you just don’t get paid for the hours you would have worked that day.  So you’re (as in the person who tweeted this, also dashingbilly and anyone who agrees with them) not only asking retail workers to risk losing their jobs, you’re asking them to sacrifice a day’s pay as well.  And let me tell you, when you’re working that level of retail, odds are you really can’t afford to lose even the $50-60 takehome pay you’d have gotten for that day.  That’s a week or two of groceries, or two tanks of gas to get you to and from work, or a good chunk of your electrical or water bill for the month, or your phone or internet bill. 

Also, like cabell said, if you call in, you can expect subtle punishment for it.  Even if you don’t get yelled at - and you probably will, because that’s just how it is - you will see your hours diminished, or your manager will punitively assign you the worst shifts, make you work every weekend for the next month, or spread out what paltry hours you get over every day so you can’t get a full damn day off for weeks (actually happened to one of my co-managers when our district manager tried to push her out of the store while she was pregnant; she was given half-shifts *every day* for almost a full month).  And all of these tactics are totally legal, too; complaining about them will just get you written up for backtalk (that’s not how they phrase it, but that’s essentially the offense) and put your job even further in jeopardy.  Retail managers know they have their bottom-level employees over a barrel in terms of dependence, even more so in this economy and job market, and they actively take advantage of it, because corporate pushes them to do it. 

These are the same retail jobs I see requiring employees to work on Thanksgiving day until 9, leave & be back at midnight or 6 am. I don’t know why anyone would look at those kinds of store hours & think the people working there had many options. Well I do know why, but it doesn’t involve the use of critical thinking skills or any knowledge about what it means to be the working poor.

(Source: indigoferarchived)

 
 
Parental conduct or home conditions that appear innocent when the parents are affluent are often considered to be neglectful when the parents are poor. A whole host of common circumstances can trigger an investigation of poor parents. As a former caseworker in New York City’s Administration for Children’s Services (ACS) described her clients, ‘If you are poor and if you have ever had problems with the law, if you have ever been involved in a domestic violence dispute, if you took your child to the emergency room after an accident, if you have ever used drugs, if your children have problems in school, if you have ever been homeless, ACS has been a part of your life.’ Several studies have found that poor children are more likely to be labeled ‘abused’ than children from more affluent homes with similar injuries. For example, an investigation of suspected cases of child abuse referred by Boston hospitals discovered that ‘the best predictor of removal of the child from the family was not severity of abuse, but Medicaid eligibility.’

Dorothy Roberts, Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare (via thecurvature)

Having grown up in affluent white conservative evangelical churches - a lot of rich white people are abusing their kids who will never, EVER have their children taken away from them - because they are rich and white.

(via jhameia)

I remain convinced that white privilege is why my ex’s mother was able to keep her kids despite them being found repeatedly wandering the streets of their town in the middle of the night. She was educated, attractive, & incredibly abusive to the point that the kids often tried to avoid all contact with her despite the oldest only being 11.

 
 

pt II: why I’m not a feminist

jaded16india:

youarenotyou:

just to address some of the responses I’ve been getting…

calling feminism oppressive =/= calling all feminists oppressive.

but I shouldn’t even have to make that distinction any more than I should follow up every mention of male privilege with “But I know not all men are like that.” 

I know about bell hooks, for fuck’s sake. 

call it generalizing if you want but the truth remains that mainstream western feminism is rife with the problems I named. if you don’t see it, look closer. 

this is about an entire movement. when oppression happens in the name of feminism it’s not about individuals fucking up (but that happens A LOT, too). it goes beyond that, to deeper, systemic issues within feminism.

this is not the same as misogynist anti-feminism or someone just “not getting” how patriarchy works. this is not the same as cultural stereotyping of feminists. this is not coming from an outsider. i identified as a feminist for the past 15 years of my life. i have PLENTY of experience to fall back on as well as facts we call “history”.

if you deny the well-documented oppressive history *and present* of feminism, you’re part of the problem.

if you deny the validity of my (and others’) lived experiences, you’re part of the problem.

and academia should not be your go-to resource on what’s going on in modern day feminism. academia is massively distanced from the rest of the world. hence, “ivory tower”. it’s also kind of hilarious to be told by someone that “well I have a master’s degree in women’s studies and I don’t see any of this”. “Women’s studies” itself is a fucked up term to use and I’ve heard countless stories of the obscenely racist, cissexist and ableist bullshit being taught in various schools under the title “women’s studies” so there’s a good chance you’re not seeing it because you’re just not looking.

but I digress. here are some of the things I’m referring to when I say mainstream western feminism (a lot of these are US-centric but still applicable to broader western feminism):

PRESENT DAY:

-attachment to “women’s studies”

-the national organization for women

-liberalism

-the way feminists (including higher-ups in NOW) publicly and loudly attacked Black women for supporting Obama over Clinton

-the idea that all women are united in ANY way

-the idea of a shared ‘female experience’

-“Muslim women are oppressed”

-“rap music is misogynist”

-the vagina monologues

-the pro-choice movement’s stubborn and consistent use of cissexist language

-Ms. and Bust magazines (Bitch much less so because it’s pretty ‘underground’ and third wave, but it still has major problems)

-Feministe

-the loudest feminist voices in the media like Jessica Valenti and Amanda Marcotte and the fact that they get the credit for repeating shit women of color said before them

-the fact that the date that is widely accepted and celebrated as the day when “women won the right to vote” is actually only applicable to white women 

-the fact that the most frequently cited feminist statistics are about white & cis women

-slut walk, its origins, and the discourse surrounding it

THE PAST (except not really because a lot of this still happens)

-the exclusion of women of color (intentionally so; many feminists hated Black women and were QUITE vocal about it and this trend continues today in more subtle ways)

-the exclusion and oppression of trans women by second wavers and radfems (which still continues today IE: Michigan Women’s fest) such as Gloria Steinem, Andrea Dworkin, and Mary Daly

-eugenics. For example: Margaret Sanger (the founder of Planned Parenthood) openly expressed a desire to prevent people with disabilities from procreating

there is a LOT more information out there if you’re actually interested in understanding what I’m talking about.

some of you need to take a good, long, hard look at the arguments you’re making cuz they reek of privilege denial. 

*Nods empathetically* 

Definitely agree with all of the critiques here. I’m doing a degree in gender studies right now, but it’s nothing like the US academy courses — one day I’ll actually write what I’m doing here, meanwhile gathering spoons to just survive the best I can. You don’t have to solely be in the US to understand how mainstream white feminism has become the face of feminism globally — in a manner of speaking — this exasperation with feminism is an old friend of mine. 

The only point of divergence I have with OP is the way we’ve both responded to the many —isms within feminism — I’m not going to give up just yet. Yes, I do have my moments of exhaustion where I want to just give up the label altogether. However (so far) I’ve been able to manage with taking breaks or disengaging wherever necessary, not sure if this is healthy at all either. 

But the main reason I stay in the movement (besides that I can and haven’t reached my breaking point yet) is that voices like mine are so frequently erased or just silenced, right up. So I am a reminder that me and mine are not silent or wordless. I am the reminder that your movement isn’t as progressive as you think it to be. I won’t quit feminism because these —isms exist, rather work toward making feminists fuck up less. 

Of course, tomorrow I may feel differently — and completely understand how OP got to where they did, just wanted to clarify that for me that isn’t an option as of now. 

 
 

As many as 15 percent of freshmen at America’s top schools are white students who failed to meet their university’s minimum standards for admission, according to Peter Schmidt, deputy editor of the Chronicle of Higher Education. These kids are “people with a long-standing relationship with the university,” or in other words, the children of faculty, wealthy alumni and politicians.

According to Schmidt, these unqualified but privileged kids are nearly twice as common on top campuses as Black and Latino students who had benefited from affirmative action.

Ten myths about affirmative action (via linzyxxxxx)

well well well look at that.

(via piddlebucket)

OH HEY

OH HEY COLLEGE REPUBLICANS/YAF

OH HEY WOULD YA LOOK AT THIS

(via viviopsis)

George W. Bush was the poster child for this.

(via reagan-was-a-horrible-president)

Well OBVIOUSLY, there are some colored folks comin into top colleges, y’all. Negroez comin in yo colleges, snatchin up yo admission spots, so hide ya ACT scores, hide ya GPA, cuz affirmative action is takin away from the white folks….

(via sourcedumal)

(Source: sociolab)

 
 

Republican On Fox News Says Minimum Wage Should Be $3/hr

masteradept:

mswyrr:

PETER SCHIFF: — maybe $3 or $4 an hour, if that’s what they’re worth

(source)

Welp, why am I not surprised that in the wake of inflation & cutting of social benefits the plan is to let the workers starve if they can’t produce. Didn’t we see this story already? We did. In Russia, France, & a dozen other revolutions.

 
 
 
 
 
 
'smb-dark hibiscus' theme is designed by Smallbit dot Net. For other themes, feel free to browse from here. If you have any question regarding the theme functionalities, please refer to theme manual page. Thank you.