Raise the Hammer

Thank you for posting that, Michelle. This is a social justice issue that is near and dear to my heart. I cut hair at the Living Rock once a month (community outreach centre for street involved youth on Wilson & Hughson Streets) when they host a "Wellness Night" (sometimes we call it "Spa Night") where the kids can get their hair done using "Rock Bucks" that they have earned doing jobs around the centre. It is precisely this issue that we are trying to address. I do my very best to give them a real spa experience, attention, consultation, and a very nice haircut that will help raise their self esteem and confidence even a little bit. And I think a spinoff benefit is that these kids feel more keen to apply for a job or ask for better treatment from society, by carrying their heads just a little bit higher. I am always on the lookout for donations of nice shampoos, conditioners, razors, etc. RTH readers, feel free to conatct me at cajunblues@gmail.com if you have any products you would like to share!!! I provide free labour, but I do need product.

Great article on a touchy subject, Michelle, and the Chesterton quote is fantastic.

We can also thank our keen and impeccably moral advertisers for hammering our self-esteem for the past half century in order to construct the impression that buying new and expensive (while not always functional) "health and beauty" supplies is a requirement of participating in civic life.

You have a good a point here generally about how health issues affect the poor more than the rich.

But you don't need to remove the nits. Just shampoo twice 9-10 days apart to break the cycle.

Comment edited by gullchasedship on 2012-01-03 13:55:15

Huh... this is something I've never thought about... great eye-opener, Michelle.

My daughter had lice once, and the GF just combed it out with a lice comb & used lice shampoo for a few days, and all was well. I have no idea how much it cost.

She would nit-pick for about 1-2hrs every night for a week... pain in the ass, but it worked.

I, too, love that Chesterton quote. Worth noting, though, that this was standard practice with native kids in Canada at the time.

As for the links between "personal grooming" and poverty, it needs to be separated into issues of hygeine/sanitation and aesthetics. Class-based aesthetic preferences play a really big role here, and there's only so much which can (or should) be done to help people to conform to them. Power-suits and overpriced cosmetics are about social status. If everyone got them for free, people would simply shift to some other indicator of status and privilege, just like kids in high schools that implement uniform policies. The sanitation, issues, on the other hand, have to be available to everyone, or else nobody's really safe. Whether it's lice, bedbugs, mice/rats, infectious diseases or fire hazards, they're just too contagious, and elitist social prejudices don't do a whole lot to limit their spread.

Whether it's lice, bedbugs, mice/rats, infectious diseases or fire hazards, they're just too contagious, and elitist social prejudices don't do a whole lot to limit their spread.

I beg to differ: shame is a great motivator and we do harm be marking shame a modern form of evil. What I might not do (or do quickly) for its intrinsic value to me I very often do lest I bring shame upon myself or my family or my community.

Comment edited by moylek on 2012-01-05 19:52:51

Thanks for the comment, Undustrial, you always have an interesting take on things. I do agree with your point about class-based aesthetics (and hey- on that note, did you all read about the plastic surgery coverage for one hospital CEO?).

I think there are some aspects of personal grooming, though, that move out of aesthetics and while not coming under hygiene or sanitation definitely come under the category of personal comfort/discomfort to the point where they can interfere with daily life and functioning. I think that a lot of skin complaints which can affect outward appearance also fall under this category, and concern about them is not a superficial thing or an artificial construct. I think that anyone who has suffered from very dry, cracked skin (preventable with store-bought lotions designed to combat it), for example, would attest to this.

Comment edited by Michelle Martin on 2012-01-04 19:51:38

I can deeply sympathize. If my acne had been much worse as a teenager, I might have needed a perscription. Believe me, it's physically painful. There's social consequences, too, since people tend to make the best assumptions about 'good looking' people, and much less kind assumptions about everyone else. This is a serious matter of privilege, and it can affect any area of your life.

What worries me about things like CEO plastic surgery coverage is the standard they set. Not only does it normalize a "perfect" appearance within elite circles, but also strengthens the associations between any kind of "abnormality" and social exclusion.

Think about what dental benefits have done to the smiles of different economic classes. Not only are "bad teeth" often a consequence of being poor (often quite a serious one), but they've also taken on additional risks because of what they show about your 'background'.

"If my acne had been much worse as a teenager, I might have needed a perscription. Believe me, it's physically painful."

I hear ya-- i think people forget that, that it actually hurts

Comment edited by Michelle Martin on 2012-01-05 21:59:12

Not only are "bad teeth" often a consequence of being poor (often quite a serious one), but they've also taken on additional risks because of what they show about your 'background'.

Not just that: 'bad teeth' are a routeway to cardiac problems; gum and tooth infections can allow bacteria into the bloodstream and therefore allow poisons into the heart. My mom had to have a bad tooth out to prevent this from exacerbating her situation, but chances are that her need for a valve replacement was precipitated by an earlier tooth problem.

So if we're looking at increased morbidity and mortality rates amongst the poor, it behooves us to consider dental care a lot more pro-actively.

So if we're looking at increased morbidity and mortality rates amongst the poor, it behooves us to consider dental care a lot more pro-actively.

Uhm ... I'm pretty sure that the provincial government has covered dental care for those without private insurance for ages now.

Healthy Smiles Ontario is a program for children 17 and under who do not have access to any form of dental coverage. If eligible, your children will get regular dental services at no cost to you.

http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/public/pr...

Uhm ... I'm pretty sure that the provincial government has covered dental care for those without private insurance for ages now.

They undoubtedly have. However, that doesn't mean what I've referred to has been acknowledged as the risk factor that it is.

And frankly, I somehow doubt that someone who is in a place of poverty has dental care front-and-centre in their day-to-day. I know for a fact that most people over the age of 55 have no idea that not taking care of your teeth can have such a calamitous impact on your general health. Neither of my parents did, and they're neither impoverished nor dumb-bunnies.

But then, we do live in a society of smokers and over-eaters and sedentary life-stylers...

Doesn't look like most orthodontic work is covered, and that is definitely a divider between those who have good private insurance coverage (the expense is still considerable even with the typical 50% coverage-- I speak from experience) and those who do not.

Does anyone here know about a source of funding/assistance for those who need coverage to access orthodontic care?

Comment edited by Michelle Martin on 2012-01-05 20:49:19

Have you heard of the Lousebuster? It is being used in schools in california, and it dehydrates the lice and eggs in a half hour. schools are purchasing the machine to use in school, so no children, rich or poor, go without treatment. It's even FDA cleared. Every school nurse should have access. lousebuster dot come

this was a great article about a social injustice. I actually liked at the beginning the mans use of "mother" though. It might not be politically correct, but the comparison/relationship between daughter and mother was needed for a deeper emotional effect and understanding of what he was trying to say.

OT, but thanks for the link to the National Post article in your bio. Some of the best commentary I've seen on the issue.

Michelle,

You quote Chesterton saying "because there should not be an usurious landlord, there should be a redistribution of property; because there should be a redistribution of property, there shall be a revolution."

You mentioned that you disagreed with his odious assumption that mother's would be tending their daughter's grooming. What about the necessary revolution and the redistribution of property? Or are we taking that as more-or-less already having happened?

Well, I don't think his assumption is odious- just a product of the times in which he lived, and I find myself in agreement with an earlier commenter that it does help him, quite poetically, get to the heart of the point he is trying to make. That being said, in my house I and my husband share the responsibility - though, to be honest, I am the one that concerns myself with the state of everyone's hair, which may be a function of roles we have been socialized to assume, or may be a function of our personalities...not something I care about-- we all get along fine and everyone pitches in generally.

We have most definitely achieved a great deal with our social safety net, but more needs to be done-- a living wage would be a good start. The implementation of that would be a revolution in itself.

Comment edited by Michelle Martin on 2012-01-05 21:15:41

I should probably note that I used "odious" as a bit of ironic exaggeration, to emphasize that you had a problem with Chesterton's implicit sexism but not his explicit revolutionary socialism (not a problem to everyone, of course, but quite a threat to many). It surprised me.

Comment edited by moylek on 2012-01-05 21:33:17

Thanks for the comments--

Chesterton used a lot of hyperbole (just google Chesterton hyperbole), and what he actually espoused was distributism, not socialism. He famously debated with his friend G.B. Shaw, but they maintained a great respect and liking for each other.

What has always interested me most about this quote, as a parent, is his insistence that it is not a frivolous thing to want to help your children look their best, and that it is reasonable to account for it when considering the means a family requires to manage a household.

Comment edited by Michelle Martin on 2012-01-05 21:52:34

Distributism? Somehow I've never heard of it - but am intrigued: "Too much capitalism does not mean too many capitalists, but too few capitalists."

And thanks for the link to the Shaw-Chesterton debate.

I agree with you that Chesterton is raising a non-trivial point. But like Undustrial, I think that if we eliminate one social marker (lice; holey shoes) we will simply find another - or rather, find that another is already there (messy hair; Korn t-shirts).

The only way to come close to getting rid of these damaging social markers is to have the state take over the raising of the children. And to be fair, it needs to be everyone's children, not just those of "the poor." And of course, we are already part of the way there with compulsory K-12 education. All-day kindergarten, JK and universal day care get us a little further along. And maybe state-supervised communal living where necessary, a la Bertrand Russell. And then we achieve paradise: not a workers paradise, but the well-intentioned, middle-class, liberal-minded, wage-earners bourgeois paradise. Which leaves me awash in a mixture of wistfulness and horror.

The only way to come close to getting rid of these damaging social markers is to have the state take over the raising of the children.

Yikes. The "state" solution is never the only solution. And it rarely really works. Consider the military - one part of society which has done quite a good job at eliminating (obvious) class distinctions among its ranks. It would be a huge leap from there to say that people on a military base are "free" or "equal".

There are lots of other ways to address these damaging social markets. We can call them out, expose them, or even mock them (ala the Hummer) until they no longer bestow social capital ("aren't cool anymore"). We can do what we want, rather than what people of our class are 'supposed' to do. And we can place a social stigma on class-based prejudices ("snobbery"). All things considered, we're a far more culturally egalitarian society than we used to be, and more than many like us (Britain, America etc).

"Canada's economy began creating jobs again in December after two consecutive months of declines, but it was not enough to keep the unemployment rate from edging up a notch to 7.5 per cent.

Statistics Canada said the unemployment rate rose one-tenth of a point despite the jobs increase because more Canadians entered the labour force.

The pick-up of 17,500 jobs was welcome news after November and October's significant setbacks of 73,000, yet overall, there was little to cheer about in the first major economic report card of 2012.

The agency noted that all the gains were in the weaker categories of part-time and self-employment, whereas full-time work fell by 25,500 and the number of employees in the country declined by 13,600 in December.

The losses were offset by gains of 43,100 in part-time work and 31,100 in self-employment."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/jobs/jobless-rate-edges-up-to-75/article2293532/

First off, I would like to say that for those without dental coverage, the state does very little to help people with problems. They just pull teeth, you cannot get things like root canals etc, even getting your teeth cleaned is a hugh problem.

It is frustrating when I read comments that people write about these issues, yet they have no general experiecne with the true reality.

One also has to consider what is going on the the workplace, since many workers have difficulty in geeting their wages paid, or as I would like to call it STOLEN WAGES.

The legislation at the Min of Lab is not strong enough to force emplyers to pay wages owed and these is elaving many workers struggling jsut to collect the money they have earned, even if they have a ruling from the Min of Lab that they are owed.

It is absolutely idsgusting that all levels of government have allowed this to happen.

It is very imperative that as a society we should be putting more resources into teaching workers their rights, since many business owners do not know the law and with the legislation that was passed by the Harris government back in the day, which ahs been continued by the pathetic liberal party, we are seeing workers left with no other option to fight back using tactics like protesting for their right wages that they earned.

I think I missed the memo that said, 'life is fair'.

From 1982-98, the number of Canadians on welfare averaged 8%. During this time period, GDP increased by 5.64%/yr. As for inflation, the average house increased by 4.43%, while oil prices fell from $39.30 CDN to $18.61 CDN.

Since that time, the number of people on welfare has declined substantially and is now at 3.46% (Ontario). With less people on welfare, our economy should be stronger, right?

Well, from 1998-current quarter, GDP in Canada has increased 4.50%/yr. However, the cost of a house has increased faster, by 7.10%/year (1998-2011) and oil has increased by 12.55%/yr.

Oh, but what about the deficit and the debt?

Private sector surplus = Public deficit + current account surplus...

http://pragcap.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/sb1.gif

Furthermore, because we issue debt in our own currency (unlike Greece, Portugal, Ireland, etc), there can never be an issue of solvency. All the feds have to do, to make interest payments, is issue more debt.

The good news is, we can increase welfare benefits, decrease household debt, and have a productive economy, but we have to stop worrying about the public debt.

The public debt is a myth/lie. If you don't agree, please tell me why you think it is a real concern.

When I was a kid I had my orthodontic work done by the students at the U of T's school of dentistry. It's considerably cheaper.