Suchergebnisse

"We live in a tumbleweed society, where job insecurity is rampant and widely seen as inevitable. Companies are transforming the way they organize work. While new working conditions offer gains for some workers, others lose out. Home life offers little respite: while diverse types of families are more accepted than ever before, stability is increasingly lacking in our intimate lives. In The Tumbleweed Society, sociologist Allison Pugh examines the ways we navigate questions of commitment and flexibility at work and at home in a society where insecurity has become the norm. Drawing on 80 in-depth interviews with three groups of parents who vary in their experiences of job insecurity and family structure, Pugh explores how people are adapting to the new culture of insecurity and how these adaptations themselves affect what we can expect from each other. Faced with perpetual insecurity both at work and at home, people construct stronger walls between the two, expecting little or nothing from their jobs and placing nearly all of their expectations for fulfilling connections on their intimate relationships. This trend, Pugh argues, often has the effect of making intimate lives even more fraught, reproducing the very tumbleweed dynamics they seek to check. Pugh shows that our experiences of insecurity shape the way we talk about obligations, how we interpret them as commitments we will or will not shoulder, how we conceive of what we owe each other--indeed, how we are able to weave the fabric of our connected lives"--

Even as they see their wages go down and their buying power decrease, many parents are still putting their kids" material desires first. These parents struggle with how to handle children"s consumer wants, which continue unabated despite the economic downturn. And, indeed, parents and other adults continue to spend billions of dollars on children every year. Why do children seem to desire so much, so often, so soon, and why do parents capitulate so readily? To determine what forces lie behind the onslaught of Nintendo Wiis and Bratz dolls, Allison J. Pugh spent three years observing and interviewing children and their families. In Longing and Belonging: Parents, Children, and Consumer Culture, Pugh teases out the complex factors that contribute to how we buy, from lunchroom conversations about Game Boys to the stark inequalities facing American children. Pugh finds that children"s desires stem less from striving for status or falling victim to advertising than from their yearning to join the conversation at school or in the neighborhood. Most parents respond to children"s need to belong by buying the particular goods and experiences that act as passports in children"s social worlds, because they sympathize with their children"s fear of being different from their peers. Even under financial constraints, families prioritize children "feeling normal". Pugh masterfully illuminates the surprising similarities in the fears and hopes of parents and children from vastly different social contexts, showing that while corporate marketing and materialism play a part in the commodification of childhood, at the heart of the matter is the desire to belong

The rationalization of human life in work, feeling, and relationships is amplified by artificial intelligence (AI), apps and automation, challenging interpersonal workers not only in how and whether they do their work, but also how they understand themselves as human. Given these trends, how do interpersonal workers interpret the humanness of their work? To answer this question, I focus on the interactive service work I call "connective labor," relying on 80+ in-depth interviews and 300+ hours of ethnographic observations with teachers, therapists and primary care physicians in the San Francisco Bay Area and mid-Atlantic United States, as well as with less advantaged practitioners such as sex workers, hairdressers, and home health care aides. I found that these interpersonal workers differentiated themselves from AI, automated agents, and robots in three ways: (1) by describing and defending their work as not rote, (2) taking pains to prove that they were not robots, and (3) justifying their judgments as safe, unique, and worthwhile. Much of their case rested on the unpredictability of humans, in terms of feelings, secrets, and mistakes. These findings have implications for race, class, and gender inequality, as advantage shaped how people were able to demand, perform, or experience their humanness in the ways that the proliferation of algorithmic technologies made salient.