On more than one occasion, comedian and sometime actor Chris Rock has spoken of his new role as daddy to his little girl:
When he walked on the stage, he immediately professed having become the father of a baby girl and now his only job was "to keep her off the pole." He contended that having a daughter who is a stripper is the ultimate failure for a father. He went on to dispel what he called "The Stripper Myth," which believes that girls are only doing it to pay for their education. "I haven’t heard of a college that takes dollar bills. I haven’t seen any clear heels in biology. I haven’t ever gotten a smart lap dance."
I can just hear his distinct voice saying that. Well Chris, scratch Palo Alto from your list of schools:
Students at a Palo Alto middle school learned more than school officials ever expected when a recent "career day" speaker extolled the merits of stripping and expounded on the financial benefits of a larger bust.
The hubbub began Tuesday at Jane Lathrop Stanford Middle School’s third annual career day when a student asked Foster City salesman William Fried to explain why he listed "exotic dancer" and "stripper" on a handout of potential careers. Fried, who spoke to about 45 eighth-grade students during two separate 55-minute sessions, spent about a minute explaining that the profession is viable and potentially lucrative for those blessed with the physique and talent for the job.
According to Fried and students who attended the talk, Fried told one group of about 16 students that strippers can earn as much as $250,000 a year and that a larger bust — whether natural or augmented — has a direct relationship to a dancer’s salary.
Now there’s a fine message from the Jane Lathrop Lapdance Stanford Middle School. For 11-to-14 year old girls, a father’s ultimate failure is a legitimate career option. At a school-sanctioned career seminar, young girls just blooming into womanhood got to hear that shaking their naked asses in a dark, sleazy, windowless tavern is a path to riches, that having a nice rack can help them pull down a cool quarter mil a year. Impressionable teenage girls–most of whom are already fully self-conscious about their looks–heard from an authority figure in a taxpayer subsidized school that if get themselves a larger set of bazoombas they can increase their income-earning potential. I know I’m sounding like the church lady here, but isn’t that just special.
While administrators said only two parents had formally complained about the presentation, other parents reached Thursday said the references to stripping did not belong at school.
What a knucklehead of a reporter. So if there were only two formal complaints, the writer is basically inferring "hey, what’s the big deal". Never mind the right or wrong of school children hearing that a couch dancing career awaits. Just imagine mom or dad asking "what’d you learn at school today", and then hearing their daughter say that taking off their clothes and dancing naked in a room full front of men is one of several lucrative career paths.
"I went into career day without knowing what I wanted to do, but (Fried) made it clear you can do anything you want," said 13-year-old Mariah Cannon.
Yep, that’s the message, Mariah, you can do anything you want, including shaking your boobies while hopping on the fast track to prositution.
"I believe you should be honest and open with everyone, and there is no such thing as inappropriateness," said Fried, 64, who owns a sales consulting firm.
And there’s the problem. You have dopes like Fried who are unable to make moral distinctions on basic matters, imparting their "wisdom" in institutions that we entrust our children to. If planting bombs in restaurants or buses paid well, why not bring that up too, Bill? After all, nothing’s inappropriate and it is a career option. Meanwhile, just down the highway, a school bureaucrat is censoring a teacher’s handouts on documents such as the Declaration of Independence. I know Arnold is busy fixing the gross gerrymanding in California, but maybe he can spare a few moments to do something about brain-dead school bureaucrats.
This is a story about a brain dead volunteer (Fried) for the school’s “career day” (which is a good idea) making a complete ass of himself. It says nothing about anything other than the fool who created the controversy.
I guess in the spirit of your post, we should also warn Rock not to send his daughter to Christian schools.
Right?
You’re right on most of the merits, but unsurprisingly placing the blame squarely on “educational bureaucrats” without making the case for it. They didn’t invite the guy to come there to speak about stripping; it was his own bone-headed remark during the Q&A session. I doubt he’ll be invited back, but it usually takes at least a few days for an accurate picture of officials’ responses to come into the press — if ever — because most schools just don’t know how to deal with them. You can’t always control your speakers; my orientation at a Jesuit University had an AIDS lecture, and the speaker went off on long tangents about how she kept trying to figure out how to have sex with different people. The administration wasn’t pleased, but her remarks didn’t make them pro-risky sex.
Exactly, dmbeaster. Christian administrators: Threat or Menace?
the writer is basically inferring “hey, what’s the big deal”.
I don’t see what makes you think that. The reporter presents the fact and then suggests that the level of dissatisfaction is higher than the number might suggest. If you were the reporter and had been told that there had been only two formal complaints so far, how would you have written that paragraph to give it the “proper” implication?
I guess in the spirit of your post, we should also warn Rock not to send his daughter to Christian schools.
No, just the school in question. Did I suggest that Rock forsake all public schools? Or course not.
Hmmm. Seems to me that poll dancing is probably on par with being a paid propaganda whore for the current administration (seems the numbers are about on par). One’s an honorable profession and the other is just a “commentator”.
how would you have written that paragraph to give it the “proper” implication?
Taking out the word “only” for starters. How about this: “Administrators said that two parents filed formal complaints the presentation, and other parents reached Thursday said the references to stripping did not belong at school.
Taking out the word “only” for starters
Hmm… the implication I get from that word is simply that the reporter expected the school’s phones to be ringing off the hook, not that he decided that the issue was no big deal. But YMMV, of course.
This is interesting. The way I read
is that either that the administrators said “you know, only two parents complained” or a preemptive strike against a rebuttal along the lines of “well, only two parents complained”.
Meanwhile, just down the highway, a school bureaucrat is censoring a teacher’s handouts on documents such as the Declaration of Independence.
Given the background story (which I unfortunately don’t have time to link), I’m not at all bothered by that one.
Wow. Talk about an illustrative post for the concept for not writing on subjects about which you are wholly ignorant. I wonder if Charles has ever worked in the sex industry. Or for that matter even knows anyone who has.
I’ve both worked in it and have friends who do and have. This post is filled with the worst kind of ignorant, sensationalist, and sex-negative stereotypes of sex workers–exactly the kind of nonsense I’d expect from a social conservative, but nothing one should actually take seriously.
Like most stereotypes, they’re based on a certain amount of fact. There are dirty, sleazy strip joints, and there are brutal pimps and junkie prostitites. But comparing these to legitimate sex work is like comparing the crack dealer on the corner to a pharmacist.
Good post, but the bit about the teacher handing out his own “materials” on various historical documents doesn’t fit. Note, first, that we don’t have the documents or know what’s in them. Second, even without that crucial bit of information, the teacher’s motivations are highly suspect:
In having his students examine these documents, Williams explains the historical role of religion in our nation’s founding and the reason for the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. That provision forbids the government from preferring one religion over any other, thereby preventing the state from interfering with the practice of religion or adherence to no religion at all.
What’s wrong with discussion the historical understanding of the Establishment Clause? Well, nothing really, so long as the teacher does a thorough job of fully explaining the history of this very complex document — including how it’s interpreted and understood today — and the students are willing to think critically and analyze it. The trouble here is that the students in question are in Fifth Grade. There’s no way they can have the background to understand this issue. This teacher is either an idiot, or he’s lying about his purpose. In either event, yes, please do keep a careful eye on him.
But comparing these to legitimate sex work is like comparing the crack dealer on the corner to a pharmacist.
So does that mean you agree with that Fried dope?
Talk about an illustrative post for the concept for not writing on subjects about which you are wholly ignorant.
Huh? Bird Dog’s not writing about the sex industry (of which, for all I know, he may know nothing or lots about). He’s writing about appropriateness of stripping as a viable career in school. On needn’t be an expert on the sex industry in order to have an informed opinion on that topic.
“I wonder if Charles has ever worked in the sex industry.”
That conjures up some very unpleasant images, I’m not going to be able to eat for a while now. :p
Exactly. Comments that conjure up a mental image of Bird Dog as a sex worker are ruining this site.
Catsy has completely lost it. Any school that thinks work in the sex industry to be a career for their students to consider is a complete failure. Note that I’d say the same about a school expousing the benefits of janitorial work, which lacks any “sex-negative” baggage.
I didn’t even have to read to the bottom to know who the post came from. The egregious misrepresentation of someone’s POV was a dead giveaway.
“While administrators said only two parents had formally complained about the presentation, other parents reached Thursday said the references to stripping did not belong at school.”
What a knucklehead of a reporter. So if there were only two formal complaints, the writer is basically inferring “hey, what’s the big deal”.
ERROR. ERROR. DOES NOT COMPUTE.
What part of what you quoted at all implies what you claim the reporter’s inference is? (Hint: None of it.) How does the reporter noting the factual matter that there were only two formal complaints imply that the reporter thinks it wasn’t a big deal? (And is trying to convey that viewpoint to his audience.)
Sheesh. Just how exactly does the media have to report things to get you to stop complaining, if reporting an actual fact sends you reeling? Was he supposed to write, “Despite the fact that only two parents formally complained, this was TERRIBLE TERRIBLE TERRIBLE!!” or something? See, that would belong in an op-ed, not a news story. A news story is supposed to report facts. “Only two parents formally complained,” is, in fact, a fact.
Meanwhile, just down the highway, a school bureaucrat is censoring a teacher’s handouts on documents such as the Declaration of Independence.
Er . . . that’s not really what’s going on. (And shame on Nat Hentoff and his headline writer for positioning it that way.) You must have missed this bit from the 7th graf, though:
“And, apparently, only one parent has complained that [Williams] is proseltyzing.”
Using Bird’s Law, which states that reporting a factually low number of complaints indicates that a writer approves of or is indifferent to the activity being reported on, we can conclude that Hentoff believes that a teacher proselytizing students is not a big deal. What a knucklehead.
Comments that conjure up a mental image of Bird Dog as a sex worker are ruining this site.
that’s twice in a row you’ve made me laugh out loud mike…you sure you’re not Chris Rock?
Hmm — the work is
Legal
Well-paid
Short hours
and provides harmless fun for millions of Americans.
But we don’t like it. Therefore anyone who proposes it, and the institution that did not scream bloody murder that he had, must be eeeeevul.
I have met a few strippers. They are cheerful, well-adjusted people in very good physical shape. We should all have such horrible jobs.
Okay, there are definitely joints you don’t want to work in — but the same is true in retail or office work (you should see some of the goniffs I have temped for!)
Charles: So does that mean you agree with that Fried dope?
If what you’re asking is, do I agree that exotic dancing and other sex work can be a rewarding, well-paid, and legitimate career option, then absolutely. And given all the misconceptions about the work that exist, he was right to shed some light on it.
He wasn’t advocating that eighth-graders go out and get boob jobs any more than a college football recruiter who plays up the merits of being strong and beefy is advocating steroid use.
Jonas: Any school that thinks work in the sex industry to be a career for their students to consider is a complete failure.
On what grounds, other than the revulsion you and others apparently have for a profession about which you seem to know little?
Note that I’d say the same about a school expousing the benefits of janitorial work, which lacks any “sex-negative” baggage.
Sure you would–because it’s grimy, dirty work which doesn’t pay very well.
None of which apply to exotic dancing or most other sex work.
Next silly example please.
von: Huh? Bird Dog’s not writing about the sex industry (of which, for all I know, he may know nothing or lots about). He’s writing about appropriateness of stripping as a viable career in school.
Yes, he was: At a school-sanctioned career seminar, young girls just blooming into womanhood got to hear that shaking their naked asses in a dark, sleazy, windowless tavern is a path to riches
Which, taken along with the tone of the rest of the post, is practically dripping with ignorant contempt for sex work.
Note, first, that we don’t have the documents or know what’s in them.
Actually, we do: this has been extensively covered elsewhere. Your subsequent skepticism about his purpose is well-founded.
“For 11-to-14 year old girls, a father’s ultimate failure is a legitimate career option.”
Yeah, because we all know that females are merely just expressions of a male’s success. Well I guess daughters should really get permission slips from their father before going into any line of work that might make the father look bad, even if it is lucrative.
Oh and apparantly being a serial killer ranks higher than being a stripper, well that’s just dandy.
Hmmm…since when is “stripper” equal to “sex worker”?
Slarti – didn’t you get the memo?
Seriously, I’ve seen the term used for at least a couple of years in the press to refer to employees in the adult entertainment biz.
Catsy,
I see education, ideally, as partially a preparation for careers. Given that there is no major knowledge component to preparation for stripping, this can sabotage the process and reduce their ambitions. There would be no reason for a middle-school girl, who in light of this encouragement decided to become a stripper, to further and excel at her education given that it plays little or no role.
There will always be strippers and I have no problem with that. But I’d rather it remain a sort of “last resort” profession as opposed to a School-endorsed aspiration.
And I can’t believe I’m having this argument.
There may be forums where passing out information about a career as a stripper would be appropriate. A public school class populated by eighth-grade girls is not one of them, and the administrators of the school in question–who either did not screen the career material distributed by Fried or did review it and found it suitable for the young teenage girls in the class–are ultimately responsible for the glaring error in judgment, and should face discipline from the school district.
Given that there is no major knowledge component to preparation for stripping, this can sabotage the process and reduce their ambitions.
That is truly one of the funniest sentences I’ve read in a while, all the more so because I agree 100%.
Thanks! Although I have to admit that Chris Rock made roughly the same point far more amusingly… unless your sense of humor is as dry as mine has been lately 🙂
…unless your sense of humor is as dry as mine has been lately.
I’ve spent the last two days working on quantum information processing while sparring with the university bureaucracy over whether I can get my designation changed (and thus receive a whopping 20% pay raise). Calling my present sense of humor “dry” is wasting a perfectly good opportunity to use “arid” or “sere”.
Now that’s actually quite interesting… is there anywhere online those of us who work with good old-fashioned non-quantum information processing can get up to speed with this? I feel like a dinosaur.
Look on the bright side… I dare say, if in a few years you guys get this working you’ll have an order of magnitude increase in pay working anywhere you want 😉
Note to self: World contains idiots. Thus, if I ever have a child, which is looking increasingly unlikely, I must remember to equip her to listen to idiots without accepting everything they say at face value. Even if they are speakers in her middle school.
Note to self 2: if I don’t manage to do that, I should take that as raising serious issues about me as a parent, whether or not this idiot ever gets within 100 miles of any child of mine.
is there anywhere online those of us who work with good old-fashioned non-quantum information processing can get up to speed with this?
Allow me to commend unto the world the merits of scholar.google.com. You can pretty much pick any topic in classical complexity (or communication) theory, tack “quantum” in front of it, and see what comes out. Other standard things to look for are “Grover’s algorithm”, “Shor’s algorithm”, “quantum Fourier transform” and the “hidden subgroup problem”, as well as anything to do with “entanglement” and “superposition”.
Additionally, if you’re more interested in some more in-depth stuff, this is the homepage of the course I took on QIP some years ago. The handout on the final paper, incidentally, has an excellent list of resources and ideas for what was at the time cutting-edge research and are still hot topics.
[The following two links, CO 681 and CO 781 seem to be quite good and even more current. In particular, the 781 notes spend a good of time explaining Razborov’s QCC lower bound result, which is what I’m currently working on myself.]
I dare say, if in a few years you guys get this working you’ll have an order of magnitude increase in pay working anywhere you want 😉
Ha! Only problem is, I’m a mathematician slumming around in CS trying to get a minor, and even then we only looked at the theoretical aspects of QC, not the practical ones. I don’t know ion traps from photonic excitement from a nice piece of Limburgher cheese.
Anarch,
Thanks for those links, I’ll be parusing them, despite how badly it makes my brain hurt…
I was only half joking about how valuable I’d figure this could be for you. The mere fact you have any theoretical knowledge of QC at all will put you ahead of nearly all workers currently in IT – should the tech show up anytime soon, of course. And I hope it does, given how lousy the increases in performance are getting with the traditional processes…
I see education, ideally, as partially a preparation for careers. Given that there is no major knowledge component to preparation for stripping, this can sabotage the process and reduce their ambitions. There would be no reason for a middle-school girl, who in light of this encouragement decided to become a stripper, to further and excel at her education given that it plays little or no role.
Wait a minute, isn’t that just an underhanded attempt to disrupt a free market valuation?
If what you’re asking is, do I agree that exotic dancing and other sex work can be a rewarding, well-paid, and legitimate career option, then absolutely.
I like that neutral phrase “sex work”. Actually, not. The reality is that dopey Fried was talking to young teenagers about contemplating a career in pornography. Since he believes “nothing is inappropriate”, he might just as well have talked to them about the interesting trade of girls lying on their backs for a living and becoming full-blown prostitutes.
Do I have contempt for the porn industry? No. It’s a legal enterprise. I have contempt for those who see nothing wrong with telling children about this line of work and so-called benefits.
What I’d really like to hear is the NOW gang’s stand on the issue. Sure it provides certain endowed women with a good income, something they would support, but I thought they were opposed to activities that exploited women and treated them as sex objects.
This teacher is either an idiot, or he’s lying about his purpose.
That could be true, von. I’m sure there’s much more to the story than has been reported. I included the reference because Palo Alto and Cupertino are just a few minutes drive from each other and it deals with how education is being administered.
No, I would never dream of such a thing!
Unless of course you’re figuring that the price of strippers will fall if the Palo Alto school system overproduces them…
And I hope it does, given how lousy the increases in performance are getting with the traditional processes…
Sadly, most of the results I’ve been reading of late put far harsher lower bounds on QC than we’d hoped.
*full geek mode engaged*
For example, there’s a paper called Quantum Polynomial Lower Bounds which show that exact quantum blackbox algorithms can provide, at best, a polynomial increase in speed over their classical blackbox counterparts… and for the most common ones, e.g. OR_n and MAJORITY_n, it’s basically a linear boost. Quantum search, we now know, is asymptotically no better than classical search [Omega(n log n)]. The Razborov paper I mentioned, which is sort of the mother of all communication lower bounds (at least for symmetric predicates), shows that the optimal quantum speed-up for communication protocols is quadratic even if you allow inexactness. A variant of Holevo shows that superdense coding only allows you to code two bits per qubit. There’s a paper — can’t remember which offhand — which shows that the best-case scenario quantum speed-up is strictly exponential (i.e. O(n) -> O(log n) for most problems); and it’s known that BQP, the collection of problems solvable on a quantum computer with error bounded away from 1/2, is a subcollection PSPACE (I think it is), which means it’s not enough to put much of a dent on the time/space hierarchy, let alone on computability theory as a whole.
And that’s all assuming you can create a damn quantum computer (with all the yummy bells-and-whistles like arbitrary gates and entangled states) in the first place.
That’s the bad news. The good news is that for certain, very limited, very carefully prescribed problems, QC is hella powerful. Bernstein-Vazirani, f’rex, order-finding (and the whole slew of eigenvalue estimation problems), hidden subgroup… these are much more tractable on QC than elsewhere. My erstwhile prof remarked, and this seems to be the consensus, that QC is powerful precisely on problems which have a huge amount of hidden symmetries and order. This means they’ll be powerful on NPI problems like factorization — thanks to Shor’s algorithm — but not a lot better than classical computers on NP-complete problems. Assuming P != NP, of course.
IOW, there’s potential for speed-up — maybe even useful, non-negligible speed-up — but it’s nothing like the panacea we were hoping for.
*disengage geek mode*
*threadjack: complete*
“I see education, ideally, as partially a preparation for careers. Given that there is no major knowledge component to preparation for stripping, this can sabotage the process and reduce their ambitions. There would be no reason for a middle-school girl, who in light of this encouragement decided to become a stripper, to further and excel at her education given that it plays little or no role.”
Would you say the same thing about any teacher who encourages an athletic boy to become a professional athlete?
Because, I mean, if the basis of your objection here is that explaining the realities, both pros and cons, of working on a field which relies on physicality over intellect, will encourage students to abandon ambition and intellect… it applies equally well to athletics and sports as it does stripping.
There would be no reason for a middle age boy, in light of the immeasurable encouragement he gets from society and from school staff to become an athlete, to further and excel at his education given that it plays little or no role.
Right?
“(and the whole slew of eigenvalue estimation problems)”
And therefore sparse-matrix style collaborative filtering. Yay for Quantum Amazon!
Word to your quantum mother, sidereal!
Well, decades of education have failed to equip me to understand Anarch’s post, so maybe I should have been a stripper after all.
Doh! Quantum sort is no better than classical sort, at theta(n log n). Exact quantum search is also no better than exact classical search, at theta(n), but approximate search (i.e. search with bounded error) is theta(sqrt(n)) using Grover. No wonder you were confused, hilzoy!
[Although your destiny of stripperhood will be finalized once your employers realize that you were so cavalier in your reference to The Johns Hopkins University…]
I wonder if Charles has ever worked in the sex industry. Or for that matter even knows anyone who has.
Talk about trying to derail a conversation and so early in the thread.
Anarch: tenure is a wonderful thing. I don’t think that dropping the ‘The’, or even the ‘University’, counts as moral turpitude.
Yet.
Gender discrimination I would say. Why only talk to boys about athletic careers, and not about their prospects as a stripper?
That said: I must admit that I would not really like school to promote exotic dancer as a career option that is as viable as the rest – for boys *or* for girls. There is not much of a future in it, as is the case with most occupations that rely on your physical appearance. And though pay may be nice (for the lucky few), it is not big enough to finance the live afterwards.
But for instance as an option to make money for college; why not.
Ahh, Chris Rock, noted professor of… er, noted member of right wing think tank… er. Noted, um, stand up comic.
In other news, Eddie Izzard is in favour of giving birds free flights on planes and Billy Connelly thinks yoga makes you fart.
Now, for the meat of the matter. I know a stripper, know her very well, in fact (and through her know several other strippers to talk to) who also works as a call girl. Those who know her reckon it’s probably the perfect job for her. There have been times when it’s really gotten her down, but amusingly these have mainly been in the first year or so, dealing with management rather than anything else. Crappy entry-level job has crappy management — hold the presses! Now that she’s been doing it a while, though, she’s working more and more for herself, setting her own hours, and incidentally making more money than me. A lot more money than me.
I doubt that even she would recommend it as a career. It’s something she’s doing for now, she’ll change when she gets bored or finds something else she wants to do. But as a job, it beats working in a call centre or working checkout in a grocery store.
Additionally, most of the “problems” she has with working in the sex industry are tracable to the peculiar attitude we have towards it. Society says what she does is bad and wrong and immoral, but pays her £1000 a night to do it. There’s a trace of gender bias in latent attitudes towards sex workers — we don’t want to get rid of them, we want to abuse them, even if we only get to denounce them from on-high.
I tend to take a free market approach to the idea. There’s demand for strippers and prostitutes. There’s a market there. Rather than make it out as a last ditch job of last resort, why not examine the pros and cons critically and place it in the correct context? If you don’t mind waving your boobs in someone’s face — and there are girls who do and girls who don’t — then it’s got a lot going for it. It’s also got a lot against it, and no, it’s not for everyone. But the demand exists, and while demand exists people will find the supply and give it to them. And, if we treated sex workers in the sex industry as that, workers in an industry, rather than some strange subhuman creatures existing below polite society, much of the crap in the industry would also vanish. But then, who would we have to abuse?
Would I recommend my friend’s choice of career to everyone? No. No, I would not. But I would recommend it to some, which is a step up from my old job working as a civil servant in the UK DWP. It’s not the best job in the world, but then that’s probably “syndicated newspaper columnist” or “bestselling travel writer” or “touring rock and roll band” and I wouldn’t put any of those in a lecture on potential future careers either. Not because they’re bad, but because they’re inappropriate for the medium. You can’t get a job as a novelist.
So, on the point that giving “stripper” as a career option was inappropriate, conceded. On the point that stripping is morally equivalent to terrorism and that the lack of moral condemnation of stripping is TEARING APART THE MORAL FABRIC OF OUR COUNTRY AND OH THE HUMANITY, that’s total crap. Especially the equivalence with terrorism.
I tend to take a free market approach to the idea. There’s demand for strippers and prostitutes. There’s a market there. Rather than make it out as a last ditch job of last resort, why not examine the pros and cons critically and place it in the correct context?
Or, to quote the immortal George Carlin:
“Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn’t selling fucking legal?”
This is where we separate the true libertarians from those conservatives in libertarian clothing. Let the sorting begin!
“Selling is legal. Fucking is legal. Why isn’t selling fucking legal?”
It is over here, but I’d still not like to see it presented in a careerday at school 😉
Italic tag escaped. Cought it now I hope.
Loose Links
Manhattan Utilities: If you live on my island, print this and mail it to all your out-of-town friends, (or at any rate the ones who don’t make business trips here) along with a gentle reminder that your dwelling has about…
Loose Links
Manhattan Utilities: If you live on my island, print this and mail it to all your out-of-town friends, (or at any rate the ones who don’t make business trips here) along with a gentle reminder that your dwelling has about…
“Students at a Palo Alto middle school”
Umm, Bird, buying a *small* house in Palo Alto wouldn’t leave you enough change from $1m to buy a latte. We’re not talking kids with low resources, expectations or self-esteem here.
I told both of my daughters when growung up, I would disown either one when they consider being in law,I told them be a stripper or escort, would b a more prestisgious professional, with truth, dignaty and honour than a paristie whore attorney. Fortunately for me the steered wide of a career as a sysh.ter