“COMPLIANT, SILENT AND MOSTLY FEMALE” – FEMINIST BLOGGER NOTES SIMILARITIES
A blogger for a feminist website has suggested that interns are the new housewives, highlighting the parallels between “the precarious nature of their careers” and the “pressure on them to please their employer at any cost”.
In a piece for Jezebel called Are interns the new housewives?, Katie J.M. Baker also cites a recent Dissent magazine article in writer Madeleine Schwartz described how interns – “compliant, silent and mostly female” – have become “the happy housewives of the working world. (But are they really so “happy”?). ”
She also highlights Schwartz’s point that advice for unpaid interns “usually stresses their need to be adaptable, as well as enthusiastic, submissive, and obedient” and that adverts for unpaid internships often request that applicants are “flexible,” “energetic,” and “highly motivated with a positive attitude.” Yet all these demands are made despite the understanding that no wage will be paid for this person’s labour.
Schwartz also suggests that there is something sinister going on here – and that the power imbalance between employer and intern is inherently exploitative and unhealthy. She writes:
“By requiring that workers at the beginning of their careers learn these behaviors, employers don’t just introduce newcomers to an office environment, they teach them how to be grateful for whatever work opportunities they may have, no matter how unfruitful. No task should be too unpleasant and no job too much of an imposition for someone just happy to have the chance to work. It’s not enough to recognize one’s gratefulness for actually having a job. The key is in showing it. ‘Thank you for this opportunity,’ runs the mantra.”
And Baker – a former serial intern – seems to agree, saying:
“I have my dream job now, and I know part of the reason why is because, thanks to years of internships, I am “flexible, adaptable, enthusiastic, submissive, and obedient.” But that also means I feel uncomfortable about asserting myself while on the job.”
UK surveys regularly show that young women are more likely to intern unpaid than young men – but the reasons for this are clear. Is it because internships are more common in female-heavy industries like fashion and PR? Or because women are less likely to believe their work is worth paying for, so more likely to put up with poor treatment for longer? Or a bit of both? At the moment, we just don’t know.
What we do know is that there are plenty of male unpaid interns out there too (particularly in politics, TV, film and journalism) – which is why Graduate Fog has never really seen this as a gender issue.
But it’s an interesting idea, isn’t it? When you think about it, is any other group in society expected to be permanently cheerful, helpful and hard-working, despite not being paid a penny for their contribution?
*ARE INTERNS THE NEW HOUSEWIVES?
Do these bloggers have a point – are their parallels between housewives and interns? Or do you think the feminist press are hijacking a gender-neutral issue and turning it into a feminist cause? If you’re an intern, do you identify with being characterised as “silent” and “compliant” – and does it annoy you that you’re expected to be relentlessly cheerful and helpful, despite not being paid for your work?
Just another feminist making a non-gender issue a gender issue. Internships are societal issue, affecting all genders, ages, and categories of people (however, they mostly affect the young and highly-educated).
Yes, fashion, PR, comms, and marketing are more “female” industries typically, and they’re also rife with unpaid interns.
But as you say, politics, journalism, TV, film, banking, law, and NGO work, to name a few industries, are traditionally dominated with male interns.
This is not a gender issue. Let’s not draw even more dividing lines. Bringing gender into it is as bad as one social class blaming another for the problem.
Glad you found the article interesting, Tanya 🙂 I thought this was a really interesting perspective on unpaid internships, particularly because it sets our problem here in the UK into a more global perspective. Specifically, in the US like in the UK, the unpaid internship problem is largely confined to industries like PR, fashion, journalism or marketing, which tend to be more female-dominated; on the other hand, fields like engineering, finance or industrial manufacturing tend to be more male-dominated and significantly less likely to offer unpaid internships. While unpaid labour is, of course, a social problem rather than a gender one, it is nevertheless interesting to take note of this transnational pattern, and ask whether the ‘feminisation’ of certain industries/areas of work has any connection to the rise of unpaid internships and unstable employment in those particular industries. It is certainly one way to explain why some large corporations (eg. publishers, fashion houses…) are highly likely to request unpaid interns, while other corporations (eg. banks) are significantly less likely to.
It would be interesting to find out if there are more women in unpaid internships than men. I know that in entry level jobs, particularly retail, men often get rejected outright by employers usually because women are seen as being easier to manage (as in we won’t ask for pay rises or demand safe working conditions or anything daft like that!). I know it sounds over the top but I have seen men’s applications go straight into the bin at some of the places I’ve worked at. On the other hand, at a different place I worked at (not retail), there was a heavy bias towards the male candidates when we recruited anybody. Swings and roundabouts…
CD: Siteing Banking as having more male interns isn’t a fair comparison, because the banking industry overwhelming offers paid, not unpaid internships.
I’d also challenge the idea that Journalism and TV have more male interns: according to the Guardian UK 300’s 2012/13 statistics, 75.4% of applicants to this sector are female. Of course % of applicants doesn’t directly relate to the % of people working in the sector, but with that big a female bias in applicants it’d be surprising if the hires bias was in the other direction.
That said, whether or not this is a feminist issue is still debatable. If there are more female interns, it would be interesting to see if there are more women ultimately getting graduate positions as a result of interning. After all, the game may be exploitative, but those that are willing (or economically able) to play it are surely still going to end up the winners…
Laura: Well that’s not my experience as a man trying to land an internship in banking or financial services. Ever tried to get a paid internship in hedge fund management or investment banking that isn’t from one of the big firms? Rare as hen’s teeth.
The more dividing lines we draw, the more we start to blame each other. The rich betraying the poor, for instance, is another example of dividing lines being drawn. The people to blame are the Government for allowing the practice to continue without intervention, the employers who offer them, and (to a lesser extent) the people who accept such working conditions. Those people betray us, not males, or females, or rich, or poor.
Alone we are one, together we are many. The less lines that divide us, the better.
CD: Yes, but saying that we’re all in this together smacks of Cameron’s statements about the Big Society and ignores the very real problems which poorer graduates face. I do get angry with people who accept unpaid internships, not because I think they’re living the dream, but because they are playing their part in keeping poorer graduates from moving up. Only in a small way but they’re still doing it and they should stop.
Sarah: firstly, I do not support unpaid internships. Secondly, I believe as graduates being ripped off by society, we DO need to stick together and not draw dividing lines between each other on petty things such as rich/poor or gender. Finally, I have no idea where your Cameron comparison came from, but if its the “alone we are one, together we are many” line… Those are Tanya’s words. Check the mailing list sign up tagline. Does Tanya smack of Cameron?
If you must know, I am in a “priveledged position”. But I denied my parents offer to completely support me while I undertook unpaid work to advance my career. Why? Because I would rather be principled than rich, and I would rather not prop up an industry that has unpaid work entrenched in its culture. You are right… I could NOT be in this fight with you. I could betray my fellow graduates who dont have my potential advantage. But I choose to be. Stop drawing dividing lines. It’s counterproductive to getting this corrosive culture stopped.
CD: You’ve just made a load of counterpoints to things I never said… I never said you did support unpaid internships, I never asked or cared whether you were in a “priveledged position” (but I’m glad you’ve chosen not to take advantage of a situation which leaves poorer graduates out of certain opportunities). I am well aware of Tanya’s feelings on the issue and I’ve commented about this before. What do you mean “do you think Tanya smacks of Cameron”? Nowhere did I say that! I said that this “we’re all in this together” attitude does seem to echo Cameron’s words regarding the Big Society.
I’m completely baffled as to why you think it’s “petty” to see the difference between the experiences of graduates of different genders or financial backgrounds. You said yourself you’d rather be “principled than rich” which implies that you DO see the difference between yourself and someone who doesn’t have as much money as you do and you’re not willing to take advantage of that situation (which I applaud you for).
Taking note of the fact that different graduates will have different experiences isn’t “drawing dividing lines”. It’s common sense. If someone takes an unpaid internship with full knowledge that they are perpetuating a system where the less fortunate will suffer, that really is contributing to a “corrosive culture”.
Sarah: When I originally read your statement, it seemed like you were having a dig at me. However, upon re-reading I misconstrued what you had said. As I’ve misunderstood your response, my response won’t make sense unless it is read in the context of how I misunderstood your response, if that makes sense? As such, ignore it.
In any case, I believe there are lesser evils. I don’t support people who take unpaid internships, but I don’t fully blame them. They’re not evil, they’re human. Most of whom will be ignorant to the issues faced by graduates in lesser economically or socially advantaged positions. And their parents? What parents wouldn’t want their son or daughter to take up opportunities that puts them on the career ladder? They’ve made so much sacrafice so far, what is a little more sacrafice worth to see their son or daughter suceed and better then? I understand. I empathise.
Who I do find evil are people who give talks to start-up businesses telling them unpaid interns can be a cost-effective (ZERO) labour solution to get their business off the ground risk-free. The businesses who rely on unpaid interns (journalism, fashion, law, media, arts, PR, etc). To a Government that supports unpaid work as a viable and “sensible” alternative to “scrounging” on benefits. That’s not human, that’s evil.
I believe that whether you’re undertaking an unpaid internship, or staunchly against them, I believe we’re in it together, with all our diversity and different life experiences. Better causes than ours have fallen by the wayside for lack of unity, I’m sure. In that sense, I will agree that the wording of of that may be “Cameron-esque”, but I don’t agree that it’s in the same spirit. We have a common problem that affects us all – Unpaid internships. We’re all here for that reason. David Cameron has a common problem that affects all (economy, unemployment, etC), except he’s not in the same position as 99% of us. So, it’s disingenuous.
I see now you weren’t having a dig, so excuse me defensive response.
CD: I will always have more anger for the companies which continue to employ unpaid internships than I will have for the people who take them. That’s a given. Businesses and politicians have far more power to stop this from happening than graduates do.
If someone can take an unpaid internship in full awareness that they are taking part in something which disadvantages many, then there’s not a lot I can do to stop them. But I’m not going to excuse them on the grounds that they are “ignorant to the issues faced by graduates in lesser economically or socially advantaged positions”. In this case, ignorance really is a luxury – the people who are less advantaged don’t choose this position, they’re stuck with it. They deserve to be seen and understood.
Regarding the parents: the issue isn’t with sacrifice. It’s with advantage. Some parents will really struggle to support their son or daughter through unpaid internships. Others will be able to do it with ease. In both cases, the scenario where the parents simply cannot afford to do this is ignored.
Finally, I don’t think we can ignore the issue of privilege when it comes to unpaid internships but perhaps the problem is more with attitudes. I’ve seen well-off graduates who think unpaid internships are disgusting and poorer graduates who think they’re absolutely fine (even though they can’t afford to do them themselves!). Either way, we can’t ignore all the differing opinions on the issue – this is truly where the lines of division lie.