Foto: © Anke Illing
Mittwoch, 25. Mai 2011
yms: Classist
urmila, 02:13h
The venue of our conference is very posh. It is the Mariott Zamalek in Cairo. And the reason for choosing this place is also acceptable: there are both conference rooms and internet access for all. But it also represents the privileges we all have. We sit here in this posh place, all costs covered, our travel expenses covered as well and all (but one, whose passport was not valid for six months more) got visas. We sit in this room and almost all of us have a notebook/ netbook / Macbook in front of us. Many have smart phones. The habitus of most indicates being situated in the upper middle class or upper class.
I engage with one in a discussion about migrant (domestic) workers (because I am interested in migrants from South Asia to this region) and talk about our privileges and their marginalisations. She gets into a very defensive mode, arguing that the domestic workers are treated well (since they are trusted the kids) and they give wrong accusations about being mistreated by their employers. She adds that she is working hard for her income as well and is not rich. That she can afford a driver, her sister has a domestic servant for her kids, who comes along to London, were they have a flat, etc. just seems normal to them.
Also another claims not to be rich, just comfortable. She drives a good car, has a blackberry, a very upper class habitus and the impression that the poor are less educated and thus more religious/ conservative.
These people are active in supporting the Arab revolutions, women's rights, etc., they are nice people and do good things. But I have a feeling that they do not question their class privileges much (I do that also much too little), that they reproduce classist exclusions and I ask myself, what consequences it has when it is these people who not only raise their voices but are also heard. And what it means that we privileged meet and network. What exclusions are we reproducing together?
I engage with one in a discussion about migrant (domestic) workers (because I am interested in migrants from South Asia to this region) and talk about our privileges and their marginalisations. She gets into a very defensive mode, arguing that the domestic workers are treated well (since they are trusted the kids) and they give wrong accusations about being mistreated by their employers. She adds that she is working hard for her income as well and is not rich. That she can afford a driver, her sister has a domestic servant for her kids, who comes along to London, were they have a flat, etc. just seems normal to them.
Also another claims not to be rich, just comfortable. She drives a good car, has a blackberry, a very upper class habitus and the impression that the poor are less educated and thus more religious/ conservative.
These people are active in supporting the Arab revolutions, women's rights, etc., they are nice people and do good things. But I have a feeling that they do not question their class privileges much (I do that also much too little), that they reproduce classist exclusions and I ask myself, what consequences it has when it is these people who not only raise their voices but are also heard. And what it means that we privileged meet and network. What exclusions are we reproducing together?
... comment
andreas24,
Mittwoch, 25. Mai 2011, 12:04
well, Urmila, it was more or less the same argumentation I applied to your audience at HU Berlin, where it seemed strictly less sensible to you to apply, the question remains why: are the techniques of distinction for the upper/middle upper class in Berlin possibly less 'materialistic' in the sense that one tends to spend more money on 'edu travelling' or 'life-style' than on cars or blackberries (btw. what is that?). Or is it just the subjective estimate that non-germans are already 'posh' if they drive a car and have a notebook?
... link
... comment
