User:Wojci028/downward mobility

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Downward Mobility is a specific form of social mobility. It pertains only to those progressing down the economic slope instead of following the general "upward" trend. Downward mobility is a rather unspoken phenomenon in the United States. This is demonstrated by the lack of rituals to commemorate events that correspond with a slip down the social slope (for example, to celebrate upward mobility, Americans utilize rituals such as: Graduation Parties, housewarming parties and award ceremonies). Downward mobility is thought of by some to be a simplification of lifestyle. In these cases it is sought after to gain freedom from upward mobility.^[1]

The following subsection will concentrate on the psychological effects that being downwardly mobile has on the middle class managerial family.

[edit] Managers & Downwardly Mobile Families

Downward mobility was uncommon during the boom after WWII, but after 1973 it became a steadily growing problem.^[2] Consequences to the downwardly mobile family include, but are not limited to: reduced consumption, investment, and savings^[2]; as well as reduced social lives and mental health.^[3] The managerial work force was hit by layoffs after the economic boom of the 1990's and much of the downwardly mobile population in America today is comprised of former managers.^[3]

Image:Home foreclosure.jpg

Theories put forth by Katherine S. Newman in her ethnography, "Falling From Grace" detail downward mobility specifically. She describes the downwardly mobile family as distressed and undermined by downward mobility.^[3] Stress from downward mobility affects different roles within the nuclear family in different ways.

Children

One of her focus points is the effect of growing up in a downwardly mobile family on children. The children in her ethnography sometimes display adverse behavioral and perceptual abnormalities. For instance, the youngest sibling in the Miller family (one of the families studied by Newman) was showered with as much as the family could afford. He became quite spoiled, as his elder sister commented:

Whatever my youngest brother wanted when he was a kid, he got it, even though they didn't have the money. When he asked for something he just got it. If he lost something expensive, it was replaced. To me that was just amazing. As a result, he isn't happy with anything less than the most expensive items you can find. But since he was only seven when they started on food stamps, he really thinks of himself as a poor kid. He's a mass of contradictions.^[3]

Newman interprets this effect to display that downward mobility is a shared experience, and only exists when viewed through the multiple perspectives of each member of the family.

Newman states that in downwardly mobile families children often grow up too fast for their own liking. They're frequently stuck doing bills and taking care of younger siblings when they should be out learning to socialize with their peers.^[3]

One difference between male and female children is that while daughters tend to view their downwardly mobile fathers as victims, sons view their fathers as weak, a failure, or as someone who simply didn't try hard enough.^[3] Reactions vary from family to family, and there is some crossover. One daughter viewed her father as a "windbag" and a "loser" due to his various get-rich-quick schemes. Other children were sad that their family was downwardly mobile, but were still proud of their father for doing what had to be done to support their family.^[3]

Wives

Wives of the downwardly mobile managers behaved in a variety of ways according to Newman. In one family, the wife and mother of several children refused to work. She was quoted by her child as saying: "The deal they made when they got married was that she would have a lot of kids and she would have a lot of money and he would handle work."^[3] Another wife interviewed had similar sentiments. She argued with the father about whether or not she had to work, and when she finally did try to get a job she could not find employment. This may be due to her lack of effort.^[3] Another woman found a $20,000.00 per year position as a sales clerk after months of fruitless searching combined with lost jobs. She had no hesitation to work. The difference between the willing and non-willing is that the willing thought of their commitment to their families as one that required them to do anything that was necessary to help. Whereas the non-willing were more reluctant because they saw their contributions around the home as a substantial portion of the workload, to the point where they believed that their unemployment was justified.^[3]

Husbands

The managerial father is a character who is arguably the most affected by the downward mobility caused by the loss of their job. They frequently see the job loss as their own fault, even when something such as a merger caused a layoff. They have a tendency to replay the scene of their firing in their memories over and over.^[3] Oddly enough, the fired managers never seem to blame their superiors for their decisions. They blame themselves for not being good enough to compete in the dog eat dog world of American business. As corporations lay off workers to trim down the company and cut costs^[4], the downwardly mobile frequently state that were they in the same situation as their boss, they would have done the same thing.^[3] In addition to the guilt, the fired father's role in the home changes as well. Where the father was once thought of as a powerful (sometimes god-like) figure, he is now seen as all too human. A rather jarring example is that of the father of Penny Ellerby, who often came home from school with boyfriends only to find her father lying around in his underwear. Husbands who have lost their jobs do not always respond with such negativity, however. One father saw a silver lining to the dark cloud of his unemployment in that he got to spend so much more time with his kids.^[3]

Social lives

The managerial force often lives in upper class society where dinner parties, trips to the theater and the orchestra are commonplace social events. When downward mobility sets in, Newman states that families do their best to hide the unemployment from their friends. Often they continue to spend lavishly to maintain social bonds even when budgets have no way of supporting such activities.^[3] Generally when savings accounts are depleted the friends of the unemployed chip in so that they may continue their bonds of friendship. Newman saw that this usually only took place for a limited time for a few months, as the recipients of the charity felt obligated to give back to their friends. With no way to return the constant favors, the friendships gradually terminated.^[3]

The social lives of the children are also affected by their family's downward mobility. It was common for the children of a manager to be members of higher class cliques accustomed to wearing expensive brand name clothes.^[3] The ability to blend into the crowd is what generates one's social success at the high school level, and thusly, when the children of the downwardly mobile cannot replenish their expensive clothing stocks, they are forced to relocate themselves on the social ladder.^[3]

Husbands and The Forty Plus Club

Many of the managerial downwardly mobile choose to join what is called "The Forty Plus Club", a support group of sorts that meets daily to help its members cope with finding another job.^[5] The sentiments of the downwardly mobile members are varied to say the least. The general population of the club was seen as "over the hill" by the business world as many members are over 50.^[3] The younger people who join are often disgusted by the older members. Newman reports that they look upon them as the losers who couldn't try hard enough to make it. To make things worse, the older members begin to believe this themselves when they see the young members obtain new jobs much more quickly, sometimes within months.^[3] The members of the Forty Plus Club help each other with resumes, contacts and practice interviews, but many never see employment by the business world again. The length of their unemployment, their age, and their suits, unreplaced for years, prove to be hurdles to large to jump. The general stigma toward the unemployed (ie: if nobody else wants them, there must be something wrong with them) keeps those that have begun to slide down the economic ladder on their way to failure, Newman argues.^[3]

[edit] Downward Mobility and the Other

To some, downward mobility is a blessing to be sought after and achieved as shown by Bob Corbett's essay, "Downward Mobility and the Other".^[1] The essay is philosophically based, and functions nearly like a self-help essay, rather than stating facts about America's economic status or discussing the psychological implications for those affected.

Corbett believes that the fast pace of American culture and its citizens' tendencies to look for meaning in life have a connection. He goes on to state how to remedy feelings of discomfort.^[1]

Theory

Upward mobility, in contrast with common thought, is seen by Corbett as a negative. "[His] position is to show that we need liberation from upward mobility as a LIFEFORM (emphasis his)." ^[1] He stresses that while we still need to provide for our families, one ought to tone down emphasis on luxury items. He does not advocate living in poverty, however.

Corbett implies that all items that do not fit in the following list are luxurious in nature and should be reduced^[1]:

   * basic nutritional food
   * adequate shelter and warmth
   * adequate health and dental care
   * educational opportunities
   * living in an atmosphere of safety and personal security
   * living in an atmosphere where one can grow as an individual

Corbett goes on to state that we should not shun technology. While he believes that the abundant use of today is not sustainable, he reasons that were humans to use technology sparingly it would have a place in a world in equilibrium. The philosophy of "everything in moderation" represents his stance quite accurately. He is not for socialist or communist ways of life either, rather he believes that moderated competition is fine as long as everyone has their basic needs (as outlined above) met.^[1]

Corbett proposes two ways to get what you want in life later in the essay. He proposes that you can work harder and want more (representing upward mobility), or you can simply lower your standards and want less. He proposes that the latter is the healthier of the two as the first creates tension and is unsustainable in the long run. He specifically targets upward mobility as shortsighted, saying "the logic of upward mobility ignores the limits of the planet".^[1] Corbett's attitude toward the environment is a liberal one. He assumes that much of what he writes is common knowledge and fails to cite sources to back up his statements about the state of our environment.

Proposed Practice

The ways to practice downward mobility put forth by Corbett are guidelines, and he tells one to be creative and think up ways for oneself. He writes a little of his own exploits, and encourages his reader to follow suit.^[1]

[edit] References

---