This diary started out as a comment to Nonlinear on this diary: This tech company posted a job ad seeking 'preferably Caucasian' applicants is all over the internet.
Nonlinear said: "...I didn’t look right. They needed somebody who could fund raise and represent the University with big donors. They worried my being Metis would upset old white money."
Nonlinear said:
"...I didn’t look right. They needed somebody who could fund raise and represent the University with big donors. They worried my being Metis would upset old white money."
That's a problem in itself. Why would it be necessary to BE old, white and from money in order to appeal to people who happen to be old, white, and from money? Why is it apparently too much work to push past that momentary feeling of discomfort when you see your representative is not one of your crowd, in order to listen to what comes out of their mouth, heart and brain? Why is it too much of a bother to defy that first few seconds of a first impression? That always struck me as the easy, lazy way out of human interaction.
And yet, that’s the decision our business leaders have been making for a long time. Better to leave those primal patterns in place, those ones that love familiarity and sameness. Over and over again, they’ve caved and continue to cave into this reductive view of human nature, and call it smart business. Or even sound instincts about people. When it’s really just fear— fear of offending a fickle, capricious, rich clientele; and sadly their fears are not unfounded.
Too many jobs, period, require currying favor with spoiled, fragile white people, cajoling and flattering them so that they open their wallets.
* ~ * ~ * ~ *
And no, being respectful as a fellow human being isn't enough, apparently. In order to perform that magical wallet-opening trick, you have to either look like them (similarity required for rapport FTW!) or be sexually attractive to them (see, the plight of too many waitresses and others in customer-facing positions).
When I was younger, I was told by too many customer service managers that "I didn't have the social skills" for customer facing jobs. As an insecure young adult who wasn’t sure how the hell I was to prove to anyone I had these skills, I sadly came to believe them. After all, the main pieces of evidence we take to mean a person has good social skills are: do other people want to be around this person? Do they date, marry, hire, include, or just feel good around this person? Do they choose to be with THIS person out of their limited time and attention, each day and on this earth?
In other words— things that are out of our control.
Why are we using something we have no control over, as our main yardstick for gauging one of our most important sets of human qualities? (so we are constantly told)
We also know that sexual harassment is, as we've spelled out thanks to #MeToo, a way of life for women and femmes in public facing jobs.
After middle school, I hardly ever got sexually harassed. I was glad, but I have wondered ever since then if I've developed too much of an unapproachable vibe.
Would the day I knew I had "enough social skills" for my old managers, was the day I got sexually harassed? Did "socially skilled", in fact, mean "sexually harassable"?
Then it hit me: Customer service authorities weren't interested in curbing sexual harassment, especially if it came from a customer; because that customer likely had money and needed to be "flattered", or they would take their money elsewhere. And the very fact the poor girl was getting propositioned was something SHE should be flattered by, because that meant she was attractive and could interact well with people. She might even, gasp, think of the harassment as a compliment. Cue me going "ewwwwwww".
And then you have people like Rachel Leah, who loved dancing for years and got body-shamed and policed for years, and finally gave it up because she couldn't stand the emotional abuse anymore... not to mention the compliments and greater acceptance she got after she lost weight, which she lost because she was UNHEALTHY.
Notice, as you read the article, how the dance company forced her to wear these skimpy. revealing outfits. An even slightly less skimpy outfit would have flattered Rachel's body better. But nooooo, you've got to make it rain by sexually titillating the creepy rich men in the audience.
The same thing is in play with cheerleaders, all the way down to the high school level. This article from CNBC from 2008 makes the case that skimpy cheerleading uniforms are good business— but doesn’t go into much detail as to WHY they’re good business, other than “some fans like them”. The author, Darren Rovell, seems to have this “isn’t it obvious?” attitude as to why showing more skin would open more wallets. An article of faith. A norm, that shouldn’t be explained or questioned too much— only followed.
Fatter wallets and happier customers. Shut up and do whatever works, everybody! We’ve got profits to make!
The problem is, of course, that making yourself the most pleasing service employee possible all comes out of your own pocket. That black Twin Peaks waitress looks like she had breast implants— which naturally, the Twin Peaks restaurant chain did NOT pay for. “Professional” clothes, more makeup, hairstyles, tooth whitening (because the rich have whiter teeth, and building rapport with them means looking like them too)— except for a lucky few companies who provide clothing allowances, all of that comes out of YOUR own pocket, service industry employee.
And naturally, that goes double for emotional labor. All of that happiness and friendliness you must project as part of your job is on you. In fact, I have wondered if the greater unhappiness of American society can be perfectly tracked with how long happiness has been enforced in our workplaces. I’ve even wondered if one of the biggest reasons for the jump in antidepressant use, has been strictly to project the necessary cheerful affect at work!
And all this would be one thing if it was good for our own psyches. But no: it’s strictly to make us more attractive and relatable to our well-heeled customers. Because they have the privilege of being fickle and capricious, and take their business elsewhere if their whims dictate.
Meanwhile, if they do so, we in the service industry get chastised, have aspersions cast on our character, have our very ability to be successful human beings questioned.
And yes— fundraising, Nonlinear’s line of work, has become a service industry job. Teaching has become a service industry job. Just about any job offered to women and femmes has become a service industry job.
But it’s not entirely accurate to say America is a service economy.
Because America is not merely a service economy. It's an economy of desperately trying to curry favor with rich white men who want to be flattered, either by us being on their team, or by us giving them a tingle in their nether bits.
And I, for one, am sick and tired of it. Sick of all the lost human potential, and tired of the lack of imagination as to what "socially skilled", "good dancer", or even "sexually attractive" looks like.
Sick of all the stereotypes that are willfully left in place.
Tired of all the emotional abuse prettied up as “good judgment of character” and “good gut instincts”.
Sad that America, once one of the most innovative countries in the world, continues to kill its own innovation through its own “best practices”.