I know a guy who worked for a while at a Wal-Mart distribution center in Raymond, New Hampshire. His job was to pick boxes off the shelves and chuck them onto the right conveyor belts to be shipped hither and yon. His quota in a 12-hour shift was 5,000 boxes.
Now, let's talk about exploitation. 12 hours = 720 minutes. Subtract a 30-minute meal break and four 15-minute breaks -- one every two hours -- and you have 630 minutes to throw 5,000 boxes. To throw 5,000 boxes in 630 minutes, the thrower would have to chuck one box every seven and a half seconds. That's almost eight boxes per minute, or 476 boxes an hour. If the boxes weigh an average of 20 pounds each, the thrower must lift 9,523 pounds per hour. My friend was reviewed periodically -- I believe every quarter. He got a black mark for every review period in which he failed to meet his quota. Wal-Mart discharges a box chucker after 12 unsatisfactory reviews. This fellow is a burly guy, yet his best day was 3,000+ boxes. Why does Wal-Mart set such an impossibly high quota? I can't say. But here is a company that uses people up and throws them away. And many of us applaud that policy by shopping there. Gotta love those low prices! Ultimately my friend quit to stay home with his toddler daughter while mom worked as a psychiatric nurse. So here's an employer that treats its poeple like meat in a job that has no future. Yet, for this guy, it served a purpose -- for a while. Was this guy exploited? Not as a sex object, no, but perhaps as a laborer. Was he indignant about his situation? Not really. He took it in stride, and never aspired to be a Wal-Mart box chucker all his life. So what's the difference with sex workers and strippers? The key seems to be not in the word "exploitation," but in the phrase "sex objects." What I pick up in Judy's quiet indignation is, sex is something sacred, of the spirit, and to objectify someone in the pursuit of sex -- to make a woman a thing instead of a thinking, feeling partner in the pursuit of something divine -- is the defilement. Not the "exploitation," or sleazy treatment on the job. Which gets back to points made earlier: some women feel good dancing, or stripping, or collecting $50 for a few minutes of contact with a fully-clothed john. For those who don't like it, welcome to the reality of having a job you don't like and don't intend to keep. - Patrick Gillam --- In [email protected], akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can you define what you mean by exploitation? Maybe its a semantic > problem in my not being able to see the exploitive aspect of dancers. > Is choice the key factor for you? So if a dancer has other options, > then per your view, would there be no exploitation? > > --- In [email protected], Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Why don't we think of exploitation as a matter of > > degree? When there is no choice, such as a child being > > forced into slave labor, that is true exploitation. > > But when there is a degree of choice, such as > > stripping or taking an underpaying job, that is not > > complete exploitation. There is a degree of > > exploitation in it though. So, Judy, i do understand > > your point. > > Judy wrote > > > > > > > > > Strip clubs exploit women as sex objects. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
