Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by moistforchoice
This Is What Inequality Looks Like by Teo You Yenn
5.0
This is a very, very important book, not just on inequality and poverty, but as a great tool to allow yourself to learn how to be more critical and observant of structural processes and how they interact to influence an individual's life and choices in ways we don't usually think about.
This is a good book for readers at most levels of understanding of social issues such as inequality. A good few points to take away from this book, which Prof Teo has very clearly broken down into digestible pieces:
I will discuss point 2 first.
A key emphasis that comes up in every discussion piece of every issue is the need to define the correct questions or the correct direction for discussion, which I feel often goes ignored. Indeed, I have a friend working in psychology research, and she scoffed when I told her I've taken an interest in the philosophy of psychology, saying that, "Philosophy is useless." Which is ironic because her work is much closer to philosophy than my other peers who are working in direct services. Her base assumptions behind her research lends the direction of which it would take, and yet she has not thought to examine them.
Look at the idea of meritocracy, for example. Prof Teo highlights that meritocracy works on misdirection, by defining the system as something that rewards a person for their hard work and directing the discourse from there.
Now on to point 1.
I find that it is extremely important for every discourse on social issues to emphasize and steer the focus back to the structural set-up of the society.
The difference in amount of work life balance between groups of different class, for instance, is often not brought up or even given a second thought about. Work life balance sometimes is a class privilege - this is the logical deduction through the gender lens and when talking about inequality. And it should not be this way. Prof Teo highlights that life - childcare amongst other aspects - should not be compromised for what she terms 'wage work', which is a term I find effective in bringing attention to the fact that there are other forms of unpaid duties that should be recognised as work as well. In another of her essays, she said that the economy - essentially wage work - is inherently dependent on unpaid work. A worker may rely on someone to upkeep the house, cook meals, take care of children, and other things that need time. Without the latter person, the paid worker had to make adjustments to their time - possibly taking less time to do less paid work - to do unpaid work.
When work life balance is a class privilege, it means that persons who are of a lower socioeconomic status has lesser choice and options when it comes to balancing work and other responsibilities. Pairing that against the gender disparity - as in women are more likely to do lesser-paying jobs, have more unpaid care duties, and are likelier to experience other discriminations and inequalities because of their gender - this means that it is more likely that women are more affected by this class privilege.
Prof Teo also talks about less-obvious forms of class privilege:
As someone working in social services and would never become a social worker in Singapore for the reasons she highlighted and critiqued in her book, I applaud her efforts to bring up the deep-rooted issues with the social service system in Singapore:
Her last essay on 'race' and the study of 'racism' was much needed. It was a very readable academic perspective on the phenomenon, and it's a great starting point for someone who wants to know more about the subject.
This is a good book for readers at most levels of understanding of social issues such as inequality. A good few points to take away from this book, which Prof Teo has very clearly broken down into digestible pieces:
1. it's inaccurate to only focus on issues at the individual level, because ultimately an individual's choices and options are within the social structure they are in, and
2. framing the questions with an understanding of social structure will direct the conversation as such.
I will discuss point 2 first.
A key emphasis that comes up in every discussion piece of every issue is the need to define the correct questions or the correct direction for discussion, which I feel often goes ignored. Indeed, I have a friend working in psychology research, and she scoffed when I told her I've taken an interest in the philosophy of psychology, saying that, "Philosophy is useless." Which is ironic because her work is much closer to philosophy than my other peers who are working in direct services. Her base assumptions behind her research lends the direction of which it would take, and yet she has not thought to examine them.
Look at the idea of meritocracy, for example. Prof Teo highlights that meritocracy works on misdirection, by defining the system as something that rewards a person for their hard work and directing the discourse from there.
"Meritocracy... we think it rewards each individual's hard work when in reality it rewards economic and cultural capital."
"By focusing primarily on what individual women can do to improve their own situations, this mode of thinking about women's advancement fails to critique, and ultimately serves to legitimise, the undemocratic and exploitative nature of neoliberal capitalism."
Now on to point 1.
I find that it is extremely important for every discourse on social issues to emphasize and steer the focus back to the structural set-up of the society.
The difference in amount of work life balance between groups of different class, for instance, is often not brought up or even given a second thought about. Work life balance sometimes is a class privilege - this is the logical deduction through the gender lens and when talking about inequality. And it should not be this way. Prof Teo highlights that life - childcare amongst other aspects - should not be compromised for what she terms 'wage work', which is a term I find effective in bringing attention to the fact that there are other forms of unpaid duties that should be recognised as work as well. In another of her essays, she said that the economy - essentially wage work - is inherently dependent on unpaid work. A worker may rely on someone to upkeep the house, cook meals, take care of children, and other things that need time. Without the latter person, the paid worker had to make adjustments to their time - possibly taking less time to do less paid work - to do unpaid work.
When work life balance is a class privilege, it means that persons who are of a lower socioeconomic status has lesser choice and options when it comes to balancing work and other responsibilities. Pairing that against the gender disparity - as in women are more likely to do lesser-paying jobs, have more unpaid care duties, and are likelier to experience other discriminations and inequalities because of their gender - this means that it is more likely that women are more affected by this class privilege.
"The inclination by class-privileged women and men to reject the domestic realm because we see and know that it is the sphere of less power - it is an inclination that gives up too much and we must claw it back."
Prof Teo also talks about less-obvious forms of class privilege:
"Cultural capital", a term coined by sociologist Pierre Bourdieu to describe advantages that higher class parents pass on to their children - ways of speaking, relating to authority, understand art and music - that are eventually translated into formal credentials and status. "They are qualities that schools reward and don't teach."
As someone working in social services and would never become a social worker in Singapore for the reasons she highlighted and critiqued in her book, I applaud her efforts to bring up the deep-rooted issues with the social service system in Singapore:
"Subsidies for services are dependent on rigid familial forms. Being and staying married are preconditions to accessing public goods, most notably housing. A gendered division of labor - where husbands are breadwinners and wives are responsible for care functions - is supposed and reproduced by polices concerning parental support (eg. maternity/paternity leave; childcare center subsides, foreign domestic worker regulations, tax reliefs for married working mothers).
These key principles - employment income as the primary mode for meeting needs, and a specific marital form as criteria for accessing public support - are justified in the language of 'self-reliance' and 'protecting traditional Asian family values'."
"Working in an environment of scarcity - where aid is limited, finite, and highly contingent on narrow criteria - social service providing Organisations and workers operate fundamentally within a world where resources are understood and experienced as limited." In this context, it makes sense that they look out for signs of deservedness as manifested in performances of 'mindsets' so as to decide how to distribute scarce resources."
Her last essay on 'race' and the study of 'racism' was much needed. It was a very readable academic perspective on the phenomenon, and it's a great starting point for someone who wants to know more about the subject.
"'Racism' is a tool too crude to get at the fact that 'race' becomes meaningful and consequential through specific means: "categorisation (including classification, prejudice, and stigma), discrimination (differential treatment based on imputed group membership), segregation (group separation in physical and social space), ghettoization (the forced development of parallel social and organisational structures), and racial violence (ranging from interpersonal intimidation and aggression, to lynching, riots and pogroms, and climaxing with racial war and extermination)."... the word 'racist' is a barrier to analysis."