Emotional labor is a useful idea, but far too narrowly and politically defined. Almost everybody has to do emotional labor to be effective.
-
-
Replying to @vgr
My understanding is that it's more about the amount of work, like how women are expected to help one another more than men are.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thirdtruck @vgr
Or the thoroughness of marginalized self-monitoring: Just outburst flips a woman's "unstable bit" or a black person's "angry bit."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thirdtruck @vgr
But this wouldn't be the first time I've underestimated how uselessly broad a redefinition of an otherwise useful word has been touted.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thirdtruck
Yes, there's an element of that, and activists would be heard more of if they made those careful qualifications
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr @thirdtruck
male exec who has to restrain himself from lashing out on twitter, or snapping at employees in a meeting is emotionally labor
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
Yes. Still a question of how much labor: Said exec can get away with such behavior more often than not. Frequency effect factors in.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @thirdtruck
There's also magnitude. Constant smiling versus getting slaughtered in press and trolled massively on twitter, not able to resp
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
(And apologies for crosstalk. This client's slow to mention replies.)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Overall, it's a weak argument. The strongest argument for labor is still lack of leverage and low pay for basic survival.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.