Monday, February 25, 2013
Gender and the Calvin Commercial
No Shame In (This) Game refers to the dichotomy of the "worthy and unworthy, the working stiff and the lazy sloth" (pg 87). This dichotomy further flushes out the dichotomy of street and decent people and provides insite into the difficulties of getting a job in the inner city, maintaining that job, and the stigma attached to the often "menial" jobs. I say "menial" because to those working, any job is seen as better than having no job. These two chapters made it extremely apparent that not only is minimum wage work tiring, but you have to put up with a bunch of nonsense from peers and customers many of whom do not even have jobs. The stigma attached to low wage jobs, especially burger joints, is apparent in the Calvin Commercial, aired in 1990 by McDonalds to show that working is a way to gain respect in the community. I found it interesting that the majority of interviewees in the chapters were female and yet the commercial was clearly aimed at young African American boys from the inner city. There is clearly some sort of genderized space associated with these menial jobs. I think this goes back to the way that males gain respect on the streets. It is not through having a minimum wage job at McDonalds, it is through showing violence and male hypersexuality that men gain respect in a street culture. Perhaps then, while their are still stigmas attached to having a job at McDonalds regardless of gender, women may find that having a job at a fast food joint is socially easier for them than for men because men have to deal with lack of respect brought on by leaving street culture for a job.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It did seem like the majority of Burger Barn employees interviewed were female. I wonder if this actually reflects a significant difference in the number of employees of each gender, or if the author just happened to use quotes from females more often. If the article does reflect an actual gender difference, perhaps the Calvin commercials were aimed at boys to encourage them to seek fast food jobs at the same rate that girls do. If, like Katie points out, boys are concerned with earning respect on the streets, maybe girls actually are more likely to try to get jobs in the above-ground economy, like at Burger Barn. From our readings it seems like boys are more likely to be wrapped up in the drug economy, so this might simply leave more girls available for fast food jobs.
ReplyDeleteAs for another gender difference, I also thought it was interesting that the author noted that girls more often were sent to work at the cash register than boys, because they are thought to be less likely to be targeted by angry customers. I would think that girls might be ridiculed more than boys, because they are considered more vulnerable! Perhaps the point is that they are thought to be less likely to fight back and escalate a confrontation.