Charity, Compassion and Conservatism: How "Caring" Lost its Meaning If being in Healthcare did anything for me, it was to laser focus the awareness and actualisation of what wellness-based "caring", therapeutically, entails. It isn't what the MSM has fed out. It isn't graft, or affirmative action, or endless "yes". It's so much more human. And difficult. You must *discern*. You must get your hands dirty. Not just throw money, Facebook skins or hashtags at it. You goddamn cretins. Boiling human suffering down to whether you're white or black, male or female, gay or straight. You goddamn selective sadists. NO demographic has cornered the market on suffering. It is a human condition. And so many -- too many -- use the oppression pyramid to justify selective kindness. And too many will use it to bleed those with kind hearts dry. So what do you do? You balance. You balance your heart with your brain. But prick your ears up where what's being asked of you is time and investment -- not money. Because money don't solve everything. But a moment of true compassion and human connection, outside of kyriarchial bullshit, can change everything for someone. https://youtu.be/6U4pxS6lyOs
164Upvotes
2Reminds

More from Bunny_Blackwell

[writing] First Principles: Write Relatably (or, Why Woke Mary Sue Characters Fail) So, some of you may not know, but I'm an award-winning published author. I'm real small beans when it comes to it, very niche, which is why I don't beller about it. However, I like to think I've at least a basic grasp of solid writing principles. Rule of thumb: The more fantastic the setting, the harder you have to work to ground the characters in relatable reality. Tolkien is likely the poster kid for this. Pages and pages of food and crockery descriptions. Barker, too; if "Candyman" fell flat for you, read "The Forbidden" and everything falls into place (spoiler: it's really about the desperation of the urban poor, echoed in other Barker works and Ellison "The Whimper of Whipped Dogs"). Point is, if you're going to introduce a patently supernatural (or "extant", as Stephen King wrote in "Danse Macabre") force, the characters must have an element of pragmatic banality. Their personal relationships, stripped bare, must mirror people YOU know. Heroes scratch their ass. Villains may be kind to kittens. This keeps the audience conflicted, and therefore interested. Bad fanfic is considered bad fanfic often because it does not understand this. Pan out, and you can see most of the criticisms of Black Panther and Captain Marvel boil down to the same thing: They're written like Bad fan fiction. Perfect people in an unrealistic setting. So the viewer's brain goes "uh, Nani?!?". To loop back to the Netflix Witcher series: I will watch. But the reason Sapkowski's vision worked is that everyone was flawed, all were relatable in some way, and by the trailer it looks like they're going hard tropes instead of the complicated (even quantum science complicated!) world the writer created. Netflix tried this with Bright. To dumb it down to 2D tropes. It didn't end well. Hopefully the Witcher won't go the same way. https://youtu.be/cSqi-8kAMmM
361 views ·
Corollary to last post: Why Raising Min Wage Won't Help (but Rewarding Good Employees Would) There are many heads of the "pay equity" narrative Hydra. Diversity quotas, outside of ability. The female earnings gap (which has more to do with choices). The underlying idea that all humans are the same. We are in a world now where the lowest common denominators who show up with a pulse -- but have some protected intersectional advantage -- are prized above competent workers with no intersectional cachet. This results in incentive for those who do not do their jobs, and disincentive for those who do. So you get... mediocrity. The antithesis of meritocracy. Raising the minimum wage, and maintaining mandatory mediocrity, does nothing but propel companies to further automate these jobs. So buhbye, cashiers and stock pickers. This really hit home for me yesterday. Customer was assembling an electrical supply for a robot (!). Yes, a five foot robot. I walked him through the adaptors and the 10/12 wiring, then asked "Seriously though. A robot? Can you tell me about it?" "Oh, my company makes stock robots for big box stores. They travel around and check SKUs to put together a packdown list of missing bay items." One hand, so cool. Other hand, sayonara to the humans who usually do this. He's already installed at 200 Walmarts. Second, I'm out in Garden. Corollary to this, personally: I'm gold star at customer service. I can take care of Ops too, but when I'm with a customer my goal is to make them feel like the only person in my world at that moment (if they want help). It's so at odds with the mediocrity where I work now it's causing confusion. Yesterday, contractor comes in (I can smell them now: slightly disheveled, fit, locked on target and usually a decent watch on a tanned wrist). I ask him if I can help. "Geraniums. Red. A lot of them." I nod. "Geraniums are here." I show him the absolute CF of geraniums the vendor dropped off. Various colours, tangled, no rhyme or reason. He frowns. "I need them all the same colour. Today. 30." He's irritated at the idea of sorting them. It will take at least 40 mins. I don't blame him. I sense I could lose this sale so I act fast. "You're a contractor, yes?" He nods. I continue. "You have better things to do than pick plants. So tell you what. I'll pick them. You come back in an hour (or send someone) and I'll have it ready. Deal?" He looks confused for a moment but says "Uh, if you'll do that, it's a Godsend. I need to have this done by 5. I'll send someone around. And make it 40 if you can?" I agree and start picking. But here's the upshot: When his employees showed up to collect them, the idea of someone actually taking the time to do this was so foreign, every person they asked "where are our geraniums?" said "We don't do that here.". Automatically. Not one person thought to ask the person actually working in the Garden. They almost LEFT because "we don't do that here". So I look up from pulling the last five Rocky Mountain Oranges to a small crowd of people -- no lie -- standing in front of my neat cart of handpicked healthy plants. I'm like "Uhhhh... hi?". The two guys, two employees, the ASM, and two DSes. All this because Mediocrity Is Now Expected. I didn't turn straw into gold ffs. I picked some plants. Is this not my job? Not one person considered the possibility I'd provided genuinely good customer service. But then, why would I... when I get paid the same as people with a heartbeat who just show up. This model will fail.
Cross-Discipline: How r/K Selection Translates to Business (Or, Why Customer Service Is A Dead Pursuit) Full bias disclosure: I am something of a biological determinist. It makes sense to me, it's largely quantifiable in repeated practice, and while humans are complex animals, we are still animals. I do not ascribe morality, merely result. This is why I will not pillory (((Them))) for being successful, given (((Their))) careful selective genetic and fitness practices that have, unsurprisingly, resulted in a cline of largely excelling doctors, lawyers, Nobel winners and executives. JQ out of the way ;) Applying biology to economics isn't a new thing. Sowell did it years ago, and better than I can hope for. What I *can* comment on, as someone who has always worked to pay rent in high customer service jobs, the shift toward quantity over quality -- and I offer this has a direct correlation to culture. Business: You have X labour budget. You can therefore pay 5 people at 100%, or 10 people at 50%. If you choose the former (K selection), you are counting on them much more seriously. They also receive more reward -- but if they fuck off of work, you are crippled. If you choose the latter, you have more warm bodies doing... things... for less incentive. They're not going to be loyal or invested, but it's playing the odds that at least some will show up. This is the mirror of biology. Invest in a few, or scatter many. In terms of business, when I did hiring for an extremely successful branch of a global company, I chose 3/4 K and 1/4 r. The Ks got raises based on performance. The rs largely performed poorly, but were the warm body backup, and were paid fairly by time on the clock. When you call your mobile service provider, ever wonder why it's so frustrating? When you walk into a big box hardware store, ever wonder why the employees avoid you or if you corner them are mostly incredibly useless? It's because these companies are either frank outsourcing to non-NA areas, or demographically hiring populations that are not invested in the ethos. Note I did not mention race. All one has to do to confirm Huwhite r selection is turn on Jeremy Kyle. But this is the new business model. Warm bodies>efficiency and competence. So the next time you go to a store, see 8 employees doing nothing and not a single one offers to help you... that's why. The last really good customer service I got was at a goddamn Hot Topic. They K select. And if that ain't shade to current business practice I don't know what is. https://youtu.be/s5f8hjzxmkA
344 views ·

More from Bunny_Blackwell

[writing] First Principles: Write Relatably (or, Why Woke Mary Sue Characters Fail) So, some of you may not know, but I'm an award-winning published author. I'm real small beans when it comes to it, very niche, which is why I don't beller about it. However, I like to think I've at least a basic grasp of solid writing principles. Rule of thumb: The more fantastic the setting, the harder you have to work to ground the characters in relatable reality. Tolkien is likely the poster kid for this. Pages and pages of food and crockery descriptions. Barker, too; if "Candyman" fell flat for you, read "The Forbidden" and everything falls into place (spoiler: it's really about the desperation of the urban poor, echoed in other Barker works and Ellison "The Whimper of Whipped Dogs"). Point is, if you're going to introduce a patently supernatural (or "extant", as Stephen King wrote in "Danse Macabre") force, the characters must have an element of pragmatic banality. Their personal relationships, stripped bare, must mirror people YOU know. Heroes scratch their ass. Villains may be kind to kittens. This keeps the audience conflicted, and therefore interested. Bad fanfic is considered bad fanfic often because it does not understand this. Pan out, and you can see most of the criticisms of Black Panther and Captain Marvel boil down to the same thing: They're written like Bad fan fiction. Perfect people in an unrealistic setting. So the viewer's brain goes "uh, Nani?!?". To loop back to the Netflix Witcher series: I will watch. But the reason Sapkowski's vision worked is that everyone was flawed, all were relatable in some way, and by the trailer it looks like they're going hard tropes instead of the complicated (even quantum science complicated!) world the writer created. Netflix tried this with Bright. To dumb it down to 2D tropes. It didn't end well. Hopefully the Witcher won't go the same way. https://youtu.be/cSqi-8kAMmM
361 views ·
Corollary to last post: Why Raising Min Wage Won't Help (but Rewarding Good Employees Would) There are many heads of the "pay equity" narrative Hydra. Diversity quotas, outside of ability. The female earnings gap (which has more to do with choices). The underlying idea that all humans are the same. We are in a world now where the lowest common denominators who show up with a pulse -- but have some protected intersectional advantage -- are prized above competent workers with no intersectional cachet. This results in incentive for those who do not do their jobs, and disincentive for those who do. So you get... mediocrity. The antithesis of meritocracy. Raising the minimum wage, and maintaining mandatory mediocrity, does nothing but propel companies to further automate these jobs. So buhbye, cashiers and stock pickers. This really hit home for me yesterday. Customer was assembling an electrical supply for a robot (!). Yes, a five foot robot. I walked him through the adaptors and the 10/12 wiring, then asked "Seriously though. A robot? Can you tell me about it?" "Oh, my company makes stock robots for big box stores. They travel around and check SKUs to put together a packdown list of missing bay items." One hand, so cool. Other hand, sayonara to the humans who usually do this. He's already installed at 200 Walmarts. Second, I'm out in Garden. Corollary to this, personally: I'm gold star at customer service. I can take care of Ops too, but when I'm with a customer my goal is to make them feel like the only person in my world at that moment (if they want help). It's so at odds with the mediocrity where I work now it's causing confusion. Yesterday, contractor comes in (I can smell them now: slightly disheveled, fit, locked on target and usually a decent watch on a tanned wrist). I ask him if I can help. "Geraniums. Red. A lot of them." I nod. "Geraniums are here." I show him the absolute CF of geraniums the vendor dropped off. Various colours, tangled, no rhyme or reason. He frowns. "I need them all the same colour. Today. 30." He's irritated at the idea of sorting them. It will take at least 40 mins. I don't blame him. I sense I could lose this sale so I act fast. "You're a contractor, yes?" He nods. I continue. "You have better things to do than pick plants. So tell you what. I'll pick them. You come back in an hour (or send someone) and I'll have it ready. Deal?" He looks confused for a moment but says "Uh, if you'll do that, it's a Godsend. I need to have this done by 5. I'll send someone around. And make it 40 if you can?" I agree and start picking. But here's the upshot: When his employees showed up to collect them, the idea of someone actually taking the time to do this was so foreign, every person they asked "where are our geraniums?" said "We don't do that here.". Automatically. Not one person thought to ask the person actually working in the Garden. They almost LEFT because "we don't do that here". So I look up from pulling the last five Rocky Mountain Oranges to a small crowd of people -- no lie -- standing in front of my neat cart of handpicked healthy plants. I'm like "Uhhhh... hi?". The two guys, two employees, the ASM, and two DSes. All this because Mediocrity Is Now Expected. I didn't turn straw into gold ffs. I picked some plants. Is this not my job? Not one person considered the possibility I'd provided genuinely good customer service. But then, why would I... when I get paid the same as people with a heartbeat who just show up. This model will fail.
Cross-Discipline: How r/K Selection Translates to Business (Or, Why Customer Service Is A Dead Pursuit) Full bias disclosure: I am something of a biological determinist. It makes sense to me, it's largely quantifiable in repeated practice, and while humans are complex animals, we are still animals. I do not ascribe morality, merely result. This is why I will not pillory (((Them))) for being successful, given (((Their))) careful selective genetic and fitness practices that have, unsurprisingly, resulted in a cline of largely excelling doctors, lawyers, Nobel winners and executives. JQ out of the way ;) Applying biology to economics isn't a new thing. Sowell did it years ago, and better than I can hope for. What I *can* comment on, as someone who has always worked to pay rent in high customer service jobs, the shift toward quantity over quality -- and I offer this has a direct correlation to culture. Business: You have X labour budget. You can therefore pay 5 people at 100%, or 10 people at 50%. If you choose the former (K selection), you are counting on them much more seriously. They also receive more reward -- but if they fuck off of work, you are crippled. If you choose the latter, you have more warm bodies doing... things... for less incentive. They're not going to be loyal or invested, but it's playing the odds that at least some will show up. This is the mirror of biology. Invest in a few, or scatter many. In terms of business, when I did hiring for an extremely successful branch of a global company, I chose 3/4 K and 1/4 r. The Ks got raises based on performance. The rs largely performed poorly, but were the warm body backup, and were paid fairly by time on the clock. When you call your mobile service provider, ever wonder why it's so frustrating? When you walk into a big box hardware store, ever wonder why the employees avoid you or if you corner them are mostly incredibly useless? It's because these companies are either frank outsourcing to non-NA areas, or demographically hiring populations that are not invested in the ethos. Note I did not mention race. All one has to do to confirm Huwhite r selection is turn on Jeremy Kyle. But this is the new business model. Warm bodies>efficiency and competence. So the next time you go to a store, see 8 employees doing nothing and not a single one offers to help you... that's why. The last really good customer service I got was at a goddamn Hot Topic. They K select. And if that ain't shade to current business practice I don't know what is. https://youtu.be/s5f8hjzxmkA
344 views ·