In this section, we read Anne-Marie Slaughter's article "Why Women Still Can't Have It All" hear from Dannae Sewell in "How to Run a Daycare Center" as well as reading about "Therese Carter" from Studs Terkel's Working.
To start with the heftiest of the three, "Why Can't Women Still Have it all" I would first like to say that although I try my hardest not to, I almost always view my world in a very traditionalist manner. I like to be dainty, I like teaching, I like little kids, I hate dirty things, my room is all pastels and there is no satisfaction better than going to get my nails done. That being said, this article really made me ponder how that starts. As a child, my mom hated pink and refused to let me wear anything saying "Girls Rule" or "Brat" or whatever hideous bedazzled outfit choices are offered at Kohl's. However, I think the fact that she always made a distinction in making me against girly clothes, made me think about it more than I would have. She claims "Men are still socialized to believe that their primary family obligation is to be the breadwinner; women, to believe that their primary family obligation is to be the caregiver." And this is completely true, men still grow up with their dads complaining about work and their mom cooking dinner and they get monster trucks and girls get baby dolls to take care of. But then you have to think, this can't all be social can it? Maybe little girls really always will want to play with the doll and the boys would always rather smash things or do whatever they do. Right now, I don't think that it is possible to have it all. It can't be. You can't sleep 7 hours a night and work 60 hour weeks as a major CEO of a company while raising two children. I think that it's going to be a very long time before men start feeling comfortable sacrificing work and women feel comfortable sacrificing a little family time. The disconnect is all about balance, but I don't think society will be in a place to accept men cutting back a bit on work and women spending a bit more time in their job to be able to work in their successful jobs while have a balanced home life.
I think it's obvious when listening to Dannae Sewell's interview that she's extremely passionate about her job. Coming from someone that used to work in a horribly run daycare center, we need more Dannae's in the world. However, as much as I love her character, she almost freaks me out a little bit. I'm an education major and I still don't think that I will ever be this passionate or emotional about my students. I love working with kids and I love teaching and helping people but I think Dannae is a rare breed.
On the other hand, we read about "Therese Carter" who claims she's "just a housewife" my mom is "just a housewife" and I would be lying if I said it didn't bother me. I know she does a lot, I have two younger sisters that she also takes care of. But, I would be lying if I said it didn't annoy me that she's constantly complaining about money yet doesn't get a job. Especially when I've worked jobs I've hated so I can pay for things. The tone of Carter's article definitely changes throughout, you can tell at first she's a little timid about saying what she does all day, like she's embarrassed. Toward the end, she seems to feel more content about what she does. I don't think that being a housewife should be frowned upon if that's really what you want to do, and you find things to keep yourself busy. Carter states, "This is my offering. I think it's the greatest satisfaction in the world to know you've pleased somebody. Everybody has to feel needed." (303).
Just some thoughts...
Were you wondering how Dannae could possibly handle her own children on top of all the crap she does all day? I think if I worked in that center every day and came home to my own kids I might kill them, I can't imagine how exhausting that would be.
Thursday, April 9, 2015
Thursday, March 12, 2015
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree
I started helping my dad pack parachutes when I was 8 years old. (Don't worry I'm sure whatever I helped him with he went back and fixed to make sure it was still safe). I liked helping my dad because other than that we've never really had much of a relationship. I didn't really figure out until high school that it's very odd to have a skydiving dad who packs parachutes as a living. That's the thing. You grow up in this environment and that's your norm.
In this section from Studs Terkel's Working we read "Glenn Stribling, service station owner." And "Dave Stribling, his son and partner." As you read, I think you get a very different vibe about the job from these two men.
First, we read "Glenn Stribling, service station owner." Who seemingly loves his job. He states, "I don't do it for the money. People are in trouble and they call you and you feel obligated enough to go out there and straighten them out as much as you can." (546). Throughout this article, I personally think the tone is very content. He doesn't just seem happy to be working with these people, but he's very proud of the way he knows how to handle people. Stribling states, "You gotta be the same. Customers like people the same all the time." (547). Which, I think is true. If you go in to get your hair cut by the same person every time, you get used to their humor. You get used to what is okay to talk about, what they'll laugh at, what they might not want to talk about etc. This is extremely important when you have a personal business like this.
Next, we read "Dave Stribling, his son and partner" who seems to have a very different attitude about his work. He repeatedly mentions that his dad seems to take his work home with him, whereas Dave likes to forget about his work when he gets home. Dave states, "When I used to live at home, you could tell by thirty seconds after he got in the door that he either didn't feel good or somebody gave him a bad time." (550). Dave seems a little critical of his father, I think that's just how a man his age acts, though. He's in his young 20's and I really don't think you appreciate your parents until your own children grow up and stop needing your help. He states his dad might be a little too traditional, which I can definitely see after reading Glenn's section.
Overall, I think both of these men seem to be decent and personable men. Some of the most normal men we've read about in this semester I would say. However, I think that having your children too involved in your work at a young age almost always sets you up for failure. For example, if Dr. Wanczyk started taking his daughter to class every day when she was 10 years old, she helped him grade quizzes or put grades in etc. she might grow tired of teaching. Or maybe she would decide she wants to teach differently than her dad does. Inevitably, children will grow to be critical of their parents. I think parents working alongside children can be risky business.
In this section from Studs Terkel's Working we read "Glenn Stribling, service station owner." And "Dave Stribling, his son and partner." As you read, I think you get a very different vibe about the job from these two men.
First, we read "Glenn Stribling, service station owner." Who seemingly loves his job. He states, "I don't do it for the money. People are in trouble and they call you and you feel obligated enough to go out there and straighten them out as much as you can." (546). Throughout this article, I personally think the tone is very content. He doesn't just seem happy to be working with these people, but he's very proud of the way he knows how to handle people. Stribling states, "You gotta be the same. Customers like people the same all the time." (547). Which, I think is true. If you go in to get your hair cut by the same person every time, you get used to their humor. You get used to what is okay to talk about, what they'll laugh at, what they might not want to talk about etc. This is extremely important when you have a personal business like this.
Next, we read "Dave Stribling, his son and partner" who seems to have a very different attitude about his work. He repeatedly mentions that his dad seems to take his work home with him, whereas Dave likes to forget about his work when he gets home. Dave states, "When I used to live at home, you could tell by thirty seconds after he got in the door that he either didn't feel good or somebody gave him a bad time." (550). Dave seems a little critical of his father, I think that's just how a man his age acts, though. He's in his young 20's and I really don't think you appreciate your parents until your own children grow up and stop needing your help. He states his dad might be a little too traditional, which I can definitely see after reading Glenn's section.
Overall, I think both of these men seem to be decent and personable men. Some of the most normal men we've read about in this semester I would say. However, I think that having your children too involved in your work at a young age almost always sets you up for failure. For example, if Dr. Wanczyk started taking his daughter to class every day when she was 10 years old, she helped him grade quizzes or put grades in etc. she might grow tired of teaching. Or maybe she would decide she wants to teach differently than her dad does. Inevitably, children will grow to be critical of their parents. I think parents working alongside children can be risky business.
Wednesday, February 11, 2015
Entertainment
Entertainment is a huge part of our lives. We are constantly consumed by people spoon feeding us with things to fill up our open time. In this blog, we listened to Stephen Colbert in "How does Stephen Colbert Work?" Presented by David Plotz. We also read "Hots Michaels" from Studs Terkel's Working. In addition, I chose "Jill Torrance" and "Bud Freeman" also from Studs Terkel's Working.
Stephen Colbert is a well-known comedian and that definitely shows through in his interview. Because I have listened to a myriad of Slate podcasts, I find it interesting to compare different interviewees and how well they articulate their work. Colbert is excellent at explaining what he does and making it amusing to listen to. One amusing thing Colbert says is comparing the script to a girlfriend and saying that sometimes a script won't "love him" and sometimes no matter how hard you work with a script, it won't give you what you need and you have to "break up" with it. One thing I found interesting is when Colbert was talking about interviewing people and he said "if you're interested, I'm interested" which is really scary. What if you get someone who's horrible to talk to? Colbert is a great example of someone who although has a bit of an unstable job, has obviously made it. He's the success story of the jobs that most of us are too scared to reach for and I think that's a great inspiration.
Hots Michaels, a hotel pianist, may not be a big time entertainer like Stephen Colbert, however, he seems very content with what he's doing. Michaels says, "If I were suddenly to inherit four million dollars, I guarantee you I'd be playin' piano, either here or at some other place" (251). I think this quote really embodies what it is to be a performer. Even if you're not working in the best conditions or making the most money, there's really no feeling like getting to do what you love and show it to people.
Next, I read about "Jill Torrance, model" Torrance talks about her job and all of the different ways she has to comply to what other people want, which when it comes down to it, is what entertaining is all about. She quotes her photographer that says, "we want you to be sexy, coy, pert, but not too effervescent" (51). In this way, I can see all different types of performers getting this critique. Stephen Colbert might hear, "be witty, but not too quick, make sure the viewers can keep up," etc. No matter what type of art you're doing, you're constantly tending to what other people want you to portray.
Finally, I read about "Bud Freeman, Jazz musician." Almost as soon as the chapter starts, Freeman states, "I do what I do because I want to do it. What's wrong with making a living doing something interesting?" I immediately began to love this character. I think he embodies exactly what you think of when you think of a musician. Free spirited and independent. He also exemplifies another example of if you can do what you want for a living, absolutely pursue that. It won't always be easy or conventional, but it's worth it.
Overall, I would say that being a performer is a rewarding job. As an ex cheerleader and musician, I can really relate to performing; the good and the bad side. Nothing can make you feel more insecure than performing for an audience that doesn't care about what you're doing (which for cheerleaders is literally every audience in the history of ever- unless boys are staring at your butt or your mom came to relive her glory days). I also know that there's nothing more rewarding than the feeling I got when I would nail a piece on my violin and get to move up a chair in the section or when my whole orchestra would get ranked superior in our contest every February. Performing is a job that I think is very easy to fall into a love, hate relationship with. But at the end of the day, I think it's impossible for the hate to outweigh the love when you get to literally do what you are passionate about for your career.
Stephen Colbert is a well-known comedian and that definitely shows through in his interview. Because I have listened to a myriad of Slate podcasts, I find it interesting to compare different interviewees and how well they articulate their work. Colbert is excellent at explaining what he does and making it amusing to listen to. One amusing thing Colbert says is comparing the script to a girlfriend and saying that sometimes a script won't "love him" and sometimes no matter how hard you work with a script, it won't give you what you need and you have to "break up" with it. One thing I found interesting is when Colbert was talking about interviewing people and he said "if you're interested, I'm interested" which is really scary. What if you get someone who's horrible to talk to? Colbert is a great example of someone who although has a bit of an unstable job, has obviously made it. He's the success story of the jobs that most of us are too scared to reach for and I think that's a great inspiration.
Hots Michaels, a hotel pianist, may not be a big time entertainer like Stephen Colbert, however, he seems very content with what he's doing. Michaels says, "If I were suddenly to inherit four million dollars, I guarantee you I'd be playin' piano, either here or at some other place" (251). I think this quote really embodies what it is to be a performer. Even if you're not working in the best conditions or making the most money, there's really no feeling like getting to do what you love and show it to people.
Next, I read about "Jill Torrance, model" Torrance talks about her job and all of the different ways she has to comply to what other people want, which when it comes down to it, is what entertaining is all about. She quotes her photographer that says, "we want you to be sexy, coy, pert, but not too effervescent" (51). In this way, I can see all different types of performers getting this critique. Stephen Colbert might hear, "be witty, but not too quick, make sure the viewers can keep up," etc. No matter what type of art you're doing, you're constantly tending to what other people want you to portray.
Finally, I read about "Bud Freeman, Jazz musician." Almost as soon as the chapter starts, Freeman states, "I do what I do because I want to do it. What's wrong with making a living doing something interesting?" I immediately began to love this character. I think he embodies exactly what you think of when you think of a musician. Free spirited and independent. He also exemplifies another example of if you can do what you want for a living, absolutely pursue that. It won't always be easy or conventional, but it's worth it.
Overall, I would say that being a performer is a rewarding job. As an ex cheerleader and musician, I can really relate to performing; the good and the bad side. Nothing can make you feel more insecure than performing for an audience that doesn't care about what you're doing (which for cheerleaders is literally every audience in the history of ever- unless boys are staring at your butt or your mom came to relive her glory days). I also know that there's nothing more rewarding than the feeling I got when I would nail a piece on my violin and get to move up a chair in the section or when my whole orchestra would get ranked superior in our contest every February. Performing is a job that I think is very easy to fall into a love, hate relationship with. But at the end of the day, I think it's impossible for the hate to outweigh the love when you get to literally do what you are passionate about for your career.
Wednesday, February 4, 2015
Manual Labor
Thinking about manual labor typically immediately makes me want to cry. I'm not athletic or coordinated and I never have been. I think I've always just been destined to be a caregiver. Every job I've ever had has revolved around helping people and now my major is education. Can you imagine me doing heavy lifting and manual labor? Probably not. If so, you are really overestimating my capabilities.
For this blog, In Studs Terkel's Working we read about Mike Lefevre, as well as "Lincoln James, a Factory Mechanic." We also hear from John Lefever in "How Does an Appliance Repairman Work" presented by David Plotz.
Mike Lefever is a hard headed, hard worker who talks to about his experience working in manual labor. I find it interesting how much Lefever values his work, yet also refers to himself as a "dummy." Lefever also values the idea of being able to see the finished product of your work, "Picasso can point to a painting. What can I point to? A writer can point to a book. Everybody should have something to point to," (xxxii). I completely understand what Lefever is saying. It's very satisfying to have a tangible object to look to. However, I don't necessarily find that for a job to be meaningful, or for you to feel successful you need to have a tangible object. In addition, Lefever also seems to be a hard headed independent. He repeatedly states how much he hates to be "bugged" throughout his work day, "Stay out of my way, that's all. Work is bad enough, don't bug me," (xxxii). Although Lefever definitely seems like a hard worker, I'm not necessarily sure I would want to work with him for 8 hours every day.
In contrast to Mike Lefever seemingly only wanting to be alone, John Lefever from "How does an Appliance Repairman Work?" really seems to enjoy the interaction he gets from his job. To me, it seems that John really enjoys the puzzle piecing aspect of his job. He not only gets to check the appliances, he also gets to puzzle piece the people together. He gets to observe all these different people with all these different cultures and families and guess why their appliance has the problem that it has. Is it an appliance problem? Did the kids cause it? Etc. I would say both of these men are excellent workers, but when it comes to charisma, I would certainly choose John.
Finally, we have "Lincoln James, a Factory Mechanic." From Studs Terkel's Working. James very much values his work. He claims that he doesn't know what to do without it, "I look forward to going to work. I'd be lost if I wasn't working," (110). Personally, I feel that James is an excellent example of you don't have to love your job to find it meaningful. James seems to take pride in the fact that he's been working in the same place for so long and he doesn't seem to mind any of the conditions in his working enviornment.
Food for thought...
I think that Mike Lefever is a hilarious character. However, he obviously has some deep rooted (or maybe a little on the surface) violence issues. Do you find him likable or unlikeable? Do you think he would be enjoyable to work with?
For this blog, In Studs Terkel's Working we read about Mike Lefevre, as well as "Lincoln James, a Factory Mechanic." We also hear from John Lefever in "How Does an Appliance Repairman Work" presented by David Plotz.
Mike Lefever is a hard headed, hard worker who talks to about his experience working in manual labor. I find it interesting how much Lefever values his work, yet also refers to himself as a "dummy." Lefever also values the idea of being able to see the finished product of your work, "Picasso can point to a painting. What can I point to? A writer can point to a book. Everybody should have something to point to," (xxxii). I completely understand what Lefever is saying. It's very satisfying to have a tangible object to look to. However, I don't necessarily find that for a job to be meaningful, or for you to feel successful you need to have a tangible object. In addition, Lefever also seems to be a hard headed independent. He repeatedly states how much he hates to be "bugged" throughout his work day, "Stay out of my way, that's all. Work is bad enough, don't bug me," (xxxii). Although Lefever definitely seems like a hard worker, I'm not necessarily sure I would want to work with him for 8 hours every day.
In contrast to Mike Lefever seemingly only wanting to be alone, John Lefever from "How does an Appliance Repairman Work?" really seems to enjoy the interaction he gets from his job. To me, it seems that John really enjoys the puzzle piecing aspect of his job. He not only gets to check the appliances, he also gets to puzzle piece the people together. He gets to observe all these different people with all these different cultures and families and guess why their appliance has the problem that it has. Is it an appliance problem? Did the kids cause it? Etc. I would say both of these men are excellent workers, but when it comes to charisma, I would certainly choose John.
Finally, we have "Lincoln James, a Factory Mechanic." From Studs Terkel's Working. James very much values his work. He claims that he doesn't know what to do without it, "I look forward to going to work. I'd be lost if I wasn't working," (110). Personally, I feel that James is an excellent example of you don't have to love your job to find it meaningful. James seems to take pride in the fact that he's been working in the same place for so long and he doesn't seem to mind any of the conditions in his working enviornment.
Food for thought...
I think that Mike Lefever is a hilarious character. However, he obviously has some deep rooted (or maybe a little on the surface) violence issues. Do you find him likable or unlikeable? Do you think he would be enjoyable to work with?
Thursday, January 29, 2015
“How Does a Helicopter Paramedic Work?”
While listening to "How Does a Helicopter Paramedic Work?" presented by David Plotz, Jeff Ennis tells some personal anecdotes about his experience as a paramedic and what his job is all about. The first thing I thought while listening to this podcast was how great it is that Grey's Anatomy now has all 10 seasons on Netflix. The next thought I had was that Ennis says he works 24 hour shifts. And I complain about trying to stay awake in my 55 minute classes?
Personally, I've spent a pretty decent amount of time in ambulances. Blood transfusions, pneumonia, anaphylactic shock, all the good stuff. Paramedics have this magical aura about them. Every paramedic I've ever had in an ambulance has been a man and it's always been a very personable guy. I can get that kind of vibe from Jeff Ennis. He seems personable and he seems like somebody that would have been able to calm a 12 year old me down as I get stabbed with IV's.
Ennis' main anecdote is about a bit of a puzzle piece of a patient. A paramedic only has so much time to figure out how to treat a patient and what a proper diagnosis is. Ennis states that he thinks that the damage that went to this young man's brain was too much and that he probably couldn't have been saved. However, Ennis seems to be at peace with this. He says the man had healthy organs that could save 7 other lives. He states that this kind of thinking allows him to sleep at night.
As a lifeguard, I can't imagine this kind of pressure. The worst EPA I've ever had I was completely alone. A 70 year old man was in the steam room and he suddenly hunched over and couldn't talk. I ran into the room and as a 15 year old I was pretty much clueless on what to do. I thought it was a stroke but I didn't really know. I thought about how I was supposed to ask him to smile or to raise his arm, right? Did I get that right on the test? Was that even for a stroke? I ran back to the guard room, grabbed a bucket (in case he vomited) pulled the emergency button grabbed more First Aid supplies. What the hell was I supposed to do? Why the hell did I think to grab a bucket and not get him some water? I called 911 and grabbed all the paperwork I didn't really know how to fill out and tried to calmly explain the situation.
Finally, my manager came out. She asked all the questions I didn't know how to ask and did all the medical things I didn't know how to do. I can't imagine having this kind of panic every day and it amazes me that Ennis still has such a positive spirit.
Food for thought...
Do you think Ennis is able to keep a positive spirit because he only gets the first sight of patients? Kind of like he gets to assess and do what he can and then pass the patient on to the trauma center? Maybe he feels a different kind of stress than the doctors do.
Thursday, January 22, 2015
How does a teacher work?
It's obvious that there are all different kinds of educators. There are teachers that put on a movie and hope no one asks them a question. There are teachers who delve hours into making intricate lesson plans for their students each night. There are teachers who regurgitate information from the textbook and assume that if their students score high on standardized tests they're doing a great job. After reading excerpts from Studs Terkel's Working and listening to the podcast "How Does a Principal Work?" presented by David Plotz, we've seen all different types of educators.
From Studs Terkel's Working we read a little about "Rose Hoffman, a teacher" To me, I would say that this woman seems about 110% done with her job. She's been in the education system for over thirty years and I don't think she's coping with the changes very well. It's obvious that Hoffman has trouble adapting to the different ethnicities going on in her classroom and she has no trouble picking favorites. She states, "I loved the Polish people. They were hard-working." (485). Hoffman also seems to have a closed door policy. She claims, "Even a child deserves a certain type of privacy in their personal life. I don't see where that has anything to do with what a child studies." (484). This statement is a significant contrast to Andrew Rubin in "How does a Principal Work?"
Rubin seems incredibly concerned with his students and what's going on outside of school. He takes the time to make playlists every day for his students to walk into school and be excited to be there. He seems to have a very personal relationship with his teachers and just in this 19 minute podcast a listener can really tell that he has genuine compassion for his students. At one point Plotz asks in what ways the music and all of the goofy things Rubin does helps the students and Rubin laughs and says that really, he hopes that the kids will just laugh with him. In one simple conclusion, anyone who runs a 5K in a chicken suit obviously has a lot of dedication to their job.
Finally, we have "Pat Zimmerman, a teacher" also from Studs Terkel's Working. Zimmerman seems to have a very "hands off" policy. The students are given work and it's their duty to decide what they want to do with it. Zimmerman states, "We lay out powerful materials in front of them, and tell 'em they're perfectly capable of doing it - and not make any excuses about it." (490). If they don't want to go to college, that's okay. If they don't want to push themselves, that's okay. He states, "I discourage competition in the classroom. The only one I accept is the student's competition with himself." (490). Although I do enjoy that Zimmerman is letting students make their own choices, it's obvious that these students don't necessarily have the ability to make their own choices wisely. These students are coming from low income areas, most likely without very many role models to look up to. So, I wonder why they would try? If competition isn't motivating them, then what is?
Food for thought...
The best teacher I have ever had was my orchestra teacher. I had him for seven years (he teaches middle school and high school orchestra) and he was incredibly similar to Rubin. He blared music as we filed into the classroom (sometimes death metal sometimes classical) and he let us choose what pieces we wanted to perform. He was there to guide us to perform to our best abilities but with music that we loved. He was a bit of a push-over, but we loved him so much nobody even abused the fact that we could have gotten away with whatever we wanted.
So, what type of teacher is the most effective? Would this type of teacher work at all schools? If not, what type of school do you think he would be successful at?
Thursday, January 15, 2015
"Working" Entry 1
The parallels between Rankin's story and Walker's story are honestly uncanny. It's obvious they are both very passionate (or at least used to be) about this job. Rankin states "...anything that grows is really remarkable when you think about it" and in that one line I realized why Rankin has been working these physically exhausting potentially fourteen hour workdays for the past forty years of his life- he loves it. Walker had a similar statement when he discussed the satisfaction a farmer gets when he/she gets a good crop. He explains that it's tedious work, but it's rewarding work. Another thing both of these men can definitely agree upon is the struggle of unpredictability. Bugs, weather, what crops people will want, etc. are all major stressors for farmers. Finally, one thing is definitely for sure; they are exhausted. Another similarity that Aunt Katherine Haynes shares with both of these men, she is exhausted. However, Aunt Katherine Hayes brought up an interesting point about education. She repeatedly states that she's "just a hillbilly" but seems proud of all the hard work she's accomplished in her life. I would say that she's more unhappy with her lack of education rather than her work. I think she's proud of her farm and proud of her children but wishes that she could have a little bit more basic knowledge. All three of these people have a very different perspective on working than I do. First of all, as a future educator, I don't feel I really have any physical labor to be concerned about in my future. Unpredictability, however, I feel is a concern no matter what your career path is.
Just a thought....
I'm not sure how the interviewer meant it, but when he said that Rankin's job was a lot about bugs I almost felt he was a little condescending... While Rankin did say a lot about insects and how to deal with them I felt that the way the interviewer presented the question was a little rude... Does anyone else feel this way?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)