You must log in or register to comment.
In german this is even worse because people don’t ask what you do, but what you are. It reduces people’s identity to their job even more.
Fun fact, if you’re a visible minority people will ask you the same question in English speaking countries!
I would answer “I am Tom.”
Then I’d laugh, because my name isn’t Tom. I have just played an epic prank!!!
Sounds like they’ve figured out how not to be reduced to their jobs!
Naah, instead depending on the minority they’ll be further reduced to their skin colour, religion, genitals or sth. else. For the majority these things usually are just indicators for potential career chances and likelihood of being harassed.
Oh that’s horrible to hear.
It really does matter how and what we say, language is such an important part of shaping our human experience.
Tbh, I think they are exaggerating.
In German you do say “I am a farmer/doctor/programmer/manager/…” when talking about yourself, but the same is done in English too.
When asking someone about their job, you’d say “Was arbeitest du?” (“What do you do for work?”) or if you want to have a more specific answer “Wo arbeitest du?” (“Where do you work?”).
You wouldn’t ask “Was bist du?” (“What are you?”), since that question is way to open-ended and imprecise and German generally doesn’t do that level of imprecision.
The only circumstance where “Was bist du?” would work for asking for someone’s job is when you are already discussing everyone’s job roles. So e.g. you are new to the team and everyone’s telling you about their roles and you ask the next person about their role.
Yep, korrekt.
At the lowest point of my burnout, I saw what I had to do at work, what society said “defined” me, and I almost fell into despair. I was only able to recover when I focused on what I really wanted to do: write, cook, create, analyze, discuss. In short: live.
I’m glad to hear that things are going better for you now. I’m on the recovery from burnout path myself, so I know how hard it is.
I’d be interested to hear it you would share something specific that has given you peace or joy recently. I always find that hearing about little nice things bolsters my resolve.
Something that recently gave me joy was when I was spending Christmas with my found family, and we were having in-depth discussions about things we have read that had most shaped our political thought. I liked it because it was intense and tiring in a good way; I’ve come to realise that what is restful for me would probably look like work to most other people. That’s one of the things that made recovering from burnout so hard — at first, I tried to rest in a more conventional manner, and it took me a while to realise that what I needed was to carve out some time and energy where I can work at fulfilling things.
For me, analyzing the things I like and talking about them has helped me appreciate them and enjoy them even more. I really love writing, so I got into the habit of writing about it on my Mastodon account, for no one in particular other than myself.
However, what has changed my life for the better the most was overcoming my cringe and starting to write and publish my first fan fiction, which had been in my head for years. It has given me a sense of purpose and motivation that are uniquely mine and have helped me regain confidence in my abilities, because on the one hand, I really like what I write, and on the other, a lot of people seem to like it too!
When making small talk I usually explicitly differentiate between “what do you do for money?” and “what do you do for fun?”
Sometimes people are surprised by the latter, but it’s usually a more fun topic.
This comment reminds me of a quote.
“I’ve been involved with many cults. Both as a follower and as a leader. You make more money as the leader, but you have more fun as a follower. Hey, wanna start a cult together? I’m up for either role…”
Creed Bratton from The Office (US version). Truly one of the greatest minds. Read more at www.creedthoughts.gov.www/creedthoughts
How are people surprised ! That’s just sad
some people know only the ratrace
Hobbies are things you do? Working at a restaurant is also what she does.
One would think a writer would understand that.
Yes, yes, capitalism is evil and loss of meaning is real, but the “gotcha” in this comic is semantics.
You’ve almost found the point.
We are defined not by our employment status. 99.99% of the time you ask someone what they do, they will list their occupation. It’s a self-defeating mindset, and we need to be aware of this.
I like to ask people what they like to do/spend their time on. It’s subtle enough to blend into a normal conversation but meaningful in that I’m trying to connect with someone about what they like.
This is the trick. “What do you do when not laboring under the thumb of capitalism?”
It’s not self defeating, it’s an implicit understanding of unstated social context. In the comic, the direct leadup was talking about jobs when the question was asked. In the comic it was as direct context as possible without wording the question better.
99.99% of the time, people mean “What do you do for a living?”, and if they don’t and you wrongly assume they do, they can easily follow up with “Cool, and what do you do for fun/in your free time?”. Conversation stays flowing with no hitches.
If you want to change the general unstated social context (and I agree that we definitely should) don’t be abrasive/elitist/well ackshually with a person making small talk. Don’t introduce that hitch where you talk down to your conversation partner. That’s a great way to slam the brakes on any conversation.
If I was the asker in the comic, I’d be sorely tempted to start talking about the bodily functions that I do. If we’re gonna have a pedantry competition, I’m gonna win.
Anyway, you can introduce or specify the context of your answer with statements like “Well, to pay the bills I […], but I just do that so I can […]”. You can even reverse the order there so what fulfills you is the first answer. Keep things smooth.
That works for asking as well. I avoid the generic “What do you do?”. For me it’s always “So how do you spend your free time?” or “What do you enjoy doing?” for what brings them fulfillment. “What do you do for a living?” for what their job is. I specify.
Your job is still something you do, so just set the subcategory.
And like so many of these “and then everybody clapped” style of comics, that are pretty obviously a creator imagining a version of a real life event but where they were “cooler”…
If anyone was knocked silent by that response, it would only be from shock that you missed the context and then willfully doubled down on it.
That look wouldn’t be a moment of epiphany or something. It would be “Well great, I’m talking to someone lacking in social graces.”
Most people would respond by taking the conversation in the new direction of hobbies, or just correct the misunderstanding and ask what they did for a living to continue the original track.
You’re acting like she didn’t know the intended response was to talk about one’s self in terms of employment. This isn’t a lack of social understanding - its a difference in life priorities and self value.
When someone asks that, it’s usually short for “what do you do for work”?, because that’s a big part of someone’s life.
We are defined not by our employment status.
Wooow sooo deep man. I could have never guessed or referenced anything that would have even remotely suggested that to be the case, I’m just utterly shocked for this new information. However can I thank you enough for opening my eyes? Thank god you made me aware with this shitty comic that doesn’t remotely manage to actually make that point, only thinks it does because of it’s naive sophistry that entirely relies on a semantics point that it can’t actually cover.
Yeah, it’s annyoing when people ask you “what do you do” but it’s also annyoing when people use “literally” as emphasis rather than it’s literal meaning. But we can still tell the two apart, and I’m certainly not autistic enough to actually stop a conversation to deadpan someone and say “uh, I think you mean ‘figuratively’”. Sometimes jokingly with a close friend, sure, but like, in public discourse? Nah. Because it’d also be wrong, because linguists agree colloquial language is descriptive instead of prescriptive.
So yeah, attempt to semantically shift the word all you want, I’ll be happy if you succeed, but I really don’t believe anyone will manage it in my lifetime.
Edit also all the things she liste are pretty much things you could do as a job. Even the playing with a puppy bit, as a dog sitter. So even she is employing the word with the context of a job related to it. She doesn’t talk about enjoying time with her puppy, she specifically mentions an activity with it. She doesn’t talk about just relaxing or thinking about pleasant things or enjoying sewing. No no, she specifically mentions labouring to produce clothing and gardening to produce produce (or flowers but a product nonetheless).
In french they have a name for jobs you have only to eat, boulot alimentaire. I first thought they worked with food before I got it.
We have it in Finnish as well “leipätyö”, literally ~“bread work/job”.
Eh, it kind of reads as a question of self identity. The brunette identifies with her hobbies first while the blonde has really only thought of self identification via work.
That said, a lot of people don’t have deep hobbies. Having the economic means where someone can identify beyond their paid and unpaid jobs is a luxury.
Oh and the judgement if you’re not doing a socially acceptable job. People look down on you so much if you’re older and working in hospitality. Sorry but some of us work to live, not live to work.
Reminds me of a comic I’ve seen relating to situations at the (federal) job agency.
Agency guy: “What did you do so far?”
Woman: “I’ve raised 3 kids.”
Agency guy: “So you’re unskilled and did nothing.”
Surely there’s a less passive-aggressive way to ask someone about their hobbies and get across that you have interests beyond work…
Eh, the passive aggression didn’t really come in until her answer was described as hobbies, in what seems like an unflattering manner. There were probably better ways to handle it, but this was more entertaining!
but… those are hobbies…
Hey guys I’m just coming in here so spread the news so everyone knows that [email protected] is a misogynist who loves to defend misogynists and rape from the woke and is a rape apologist. :) thanks
…what?
A long time ago someone was arguing that you only do what you do if it brings in the money to support yourself. I told her that most artists regardless of their career can not support themselves solely on making art. She maintained her position.
I know she’s had a very successful career and she loves what she is doing. I wish everybody could support themselves on what they love doing. Or find something to support themselves that they love doing.
Tbh, I don’t believe anyone who says they do what they love for work.
The difference between work and something you do because you love it is the money.
If you do something for money, you have to do it because otherwise you will run out of money. So even if you aren’t in the mood for it, even if you have done it for 8h per day for the last few years you still need to do it because you got dealines to meet and you have to deliver value.
You might like the thing you are doing in general, but as soon as you add the forced extrinsic motivation of depending on the money you make by doing something for work it directly devalues and diminishes the intrinsic motivation you get from doing something for fun.
You might enjoy drawing a painting. Believe me, you will not enjoy drawing paintings if you have to deliver 15 of them by friday afternoon.
People who are saying they do what they love for a living are either so rich that they don’t actually need the money at all and thus are actually doing hobby work and get paid for it, or they are lieing to themselves to make themselves feel better about investing their whole life time into work instead of something that would actually be fulfilling.
Happened to me in real life and it really changed my perspective for some reason. I was at a bar with a group of people I recently met, and one of them asked me what I do. I sighed internally and started answering the premade answer I give everyone, explaining my job and the company I work for. He cut me off and told me “Yeah yeah that’s great, but what do you DO?”. I was taken aback for a second, and then I started telling him what I do for fun, what my hobbies were, etc. It really turned a boring icebreaker into a genuine conversation
That woman would be infuriating to talk to.
I know right? who cares if you’re sucking up to your boss for a promotion that will never happen I want to hear about the puppies!
As if everyone else isnt
deleted by creator
This reads like a schoolkid who just discovered semantics
So does this
This is an expression of privilege.
Beatrice comes from a background where she has access to affordable housing that doesn’t require her to work a high-income high-effort career or multiple jobs just to pay rent. She has a stable enough life that provides time to spend on personal hobbies rather than constantly working to cover expenses. Beatrice’s lifestyle is being subsidized by someone else. Beatrice does not have to work for a living.
Margaret is providing for herself, at the cost of luxury time. Her housing situation is less stable, and she’s aware of it, and feels trapped by the cost of it, which is her personal life and free time. Margaret has to work for a living.
Beatrice is privileged, and is judging Margaret’s life from her own place of privilege. Margaret is realizing that no matter how hard she works, she will never gain access to Beatrice’s level of privileged lifestyle, and that is crushing her soul.
Their outfits too. Bratrice is wearing a floral patterned more casual thing. Margaret is wearing something black and white that communicates “office job” a lot more directly. Could be taken that Margaret is just on break from work, or that she doesn’t have outfits that don’t double as work clothes.
At the very least, Beatrice has casual clothes.
Yeah, nah.
Nice attempt at trying to flip the message around tho.
A well-reasoned and thoughtful response, with a clear demonstration of an experienced writer’s capacity for nuance.
*Edit: sarcasm aside, my point is that the comic should be interpreted as an indictment of a socioeconomic system which forces people into situations where they must burn themselves up in order to survive. It should not be interpreted as an indictment of Margaret’s life choices. Margaret is doing her best in a world that has not provided her the opportunity to really flourish as an individual. To judge Margaret for this is at best narrow minded.
You’re trying to subvert the comic’s message to demonise it. Im sorry, was that meant to be met with an in-depth response?
Demonise is a bit strong. They’re just offering an alternate interpretation that’s more negative than yours.
I think it has some merit. A lot of people are forced out of a work/life balance. I’ve tried to stay out of careers that demand my whole life, and I still get sucked into doing nothing but working from time to time. That’s life.
I can appreciate the fact that Beatrice has clearly stopped caring about the corporate machine, and that the author is trying to convey that we could all be the same, while still recognizing that the implication of the comic is a little half-baked due to the fact that the real-life financial capabilities of the working class are usually decided by how much they brown-nose and eat shit at work.
This sets two people up as enemies when one could be teaching and the other could be learning. Instead, they’re locked in a battle of semantics. The comic has a little bit to analyze, I think. This discussion could even go further.
2005 was a very different time than 2026.
If Beatrice was 20-30yoa, a restaurant paid her to afford a house. Margaret is clearly a decade younger Beatrice’s seniority. So there is a generation of difference in priorities and affordabilities.
destroyed
