Servants - yes or no?

[Kerr]

ok , let's change tack a minute.

does anyone agree with me that this type of arrangement encourages segregation in society - ie: servers and served?

It is not that black and white. If you go to a resturant and buy food you are being served, and there is nothing wrong with that. Just as there is nothing inheritly wrong with having someone help around the house. If I ever got a big house I would probably need that kind of help, mainly because I am terribly disorganized (for the record, I dont want a big house because it would just be a lot of work with no apparent benefit). I can see some situations where its wrong to have servants, but that is mostly when "servant" also comes with inequality and such things. Thats a different issue, though.

 

[Kathryn]

Everybody knows who was really in charge in this movie anyway:

I'm saying that tongue in cheek, just for the record.

 

[nnmartin]

Nearly everyone serves someone. If you have a job, you serve someone. If you have kids, you serve someone. If you have a spouse you serve someone. If you have parents you serve someone.

Even Bill Gates serves someone - his customers - and the IRS.

This is clearly not the same thing at all - similar in a vaguely related way , but not the same.

Servants fullfill a slave/master role - an unequal power dynamic in which one person is clearly dominant , usually for subconscious ego-gratification.

 

[nnmartin]

I think the whole idea of servants is morally repugnant. It's not too far away from slavery, just that you're dangling dollar bills in front of them and then making them work for it. Segregation isn't a bad word to describe it, either. I know some families back home in England that have maids. They don't get treated very well at all, and are expected to disappear when their bosses don't want to be seen.

That is a good post, and I agree that servants are just modern day paid slaves.

 

[nnmartin]

of course the biggest joke here is all those that are in favour of servants (aka: slaves) would likely never dream of doing such a thing themselves as that is considered to be for the 'lower orders'.

They tell us that in the past they had a low paid job for a time so now they are immune from any charges of snobbery or self aggrandisement. Now are you joking here or what, because ,hello, many many people have to do low paid jobs permanently!

and who is coming to their house to clean their toilets or wipe up after them,

the idle rich?, I think not!

 

[Kathryn]

of course the biggest joke here is all those that are in favour of servants (aka: slaves) would likely never dream of doing such a thing themselves as that is considered to be for the 'lower orders'.

They tell us that in the past they had a low paid job for a time so now they are immune from any charges of snobbery or self aggrandisement. Now are you joking here or what, because ,hello, many many people have to do low paid jobs permanently!

and who is coming to their house to clean their toilets or wipe up after them,

the idle rich?, I think not!

This is the second time you've made this crazy accusation. So I will repeat myself as well, and remind you that I've cleaned houses for a living in the past, and would do so again if necessary.

As a manager, I've cleaned toilets, nasty microwaves, and refrigerators at work. Oh, and washed other people's dishes in the break room as well.

Why are you so worried about cleaning your own toilet by the way? Most people clean their own toilets. Even those who have maids usually don't have a maid come in every day - it's usually once a week AT THE MOST, and more often, once every couple of weeks. I can assure you that toilets need more regular cleaning than that.

But maybe you don't know that. Which would explain why you're so horrified by the idea of cleaning one.

 

[nnmartin]

As a manager, I've cleaned toilets, nasty microwaves, and refrigerators at work. Oh, and washed other people's dishes in the break room as well.

'as a manager' you say - so not as a maid or cleaner, and not in someone's home.

This is entirely different as a manager is a manager not a servant.

 

[Levite]

What do you think of the idea of having servants?

If you could afford it , would you have them?

I am thinking of servants such as butlers, cleaners, chefs, door openers etc..

Would you really want to have these people in your home attending to your every need, and what do you think of those people that have such staff?

another question, should they be allowed at all in the first place?

We have a cleaning lady. She comes every other week, and saves us a buttload of time on stuff we don't like doing, or aren't good at doing, around the house. We pay her generously, which helps her work her way through nursing school.

I really don't see a problem.

 

[Kathryn]

'as a manager' you say - so not as a maid or cleaner, and not in someone's home.

This is entirely different as a manager is a manager not a servant.

Oh give me a break. Sorry to be so blunt, but someone else's crap and pee are crap and pee no matter whether they are in a private home or not.

My point is that you keep saying that those who have servants must surely feel too superior to clean toilets. I'm pointing out to you that generally speaking, that's simply not true.

When was the last time YOU cleaned up someone else's crap and pee?

 

[Kathryn]

'as a manager' you say - so not as a maid or cleaner, and not in someone's home.

This is entirely different as a manager is a manager not a servant.

And by the way - a good manager knows that she is a servant. She's a servant to her customers, to her staff, and to her chain of command. A good manager never loses sight of the fact that it can be an honor to serve others and that if we expect others to realize that, we have to model it ourselves.

 

[Penumbra]

The way I see it, this thread has basically been a case study on inaccurate initial assumptions.

Inaccurate assumptions and unsupported positions, combined with the tendency of people to want to disallow for others what they do not like themselves, has been a problem throughout history.

 

[Kathryn]

"Gotta Serve Somebody"

You may be an ambassador to England or France
You may like to gamble, you might like to dance
You may be the heavyweight champion of the world
You may be a socialite with a long string of pearls.

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
It may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

Might be a rock'n' roll adict prancing on the stage
Might have money and drugs at your commands, women in a cage
You may be a business man or some high degree thief
They may call you Doctor or they may call you Chief.

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

You may be a state trooper, you might be an young turk
You may be the head of some big TV network
You may be rich or poor, you may be blind or lame
You may be living in another country under another name.

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

You may be a construction worker working on a home
You may be living in a mansion or you might live in a dome
You might own guns and you might even own tanks
You might be somebody's landlord you might even own banks.

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

You may be a preacher with your spiritual pride
You may be a city councilman taking bribes on the side
You may be working in a barbershop, you may know how to cut hair
You may be somebody's mistress, may be somebody's heir.

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

Might like to wear cotton, might like to wear silk
Might like to drink whiskey, might like to drink milk
You might like to eat caviar, you might like to eat bread
You may be sleeping on the floor, sleeping in a king-sized bed.

But you're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
It may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

You may call me Terry, you may call me Jimmy
You may call me Bobby, you may call me Zimmy
You may call me R.J., you may call me Ray
You may call me anything but no matter what you say.

You're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
You're gonna have to serve somebody,
Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

 

[nnmartin]

as, I've said already, being in a high position and 'serving' somebody metaphorically is not the same as serving for real.

 

[Kathryn]

as, I've said already, being in a high position and 'serving' somebody metaphorically is not the same as serving for real.

Apparently you've never been a manager working 70 hours a week.

 

[Revoltingest]

as, I've said already, being in a high position and 'serving' somebody metaphorically is not the same as serving for real.

Today I did the groundskeeping at a building I own.
Who has the higher position in your eyes?
1) Me - the landlord who serves the tenant
2) The tenants (businesses) who pay me for my service.

 

[nnmartin]

Apparently you've never been a manager working 70 hours a week.

you do understand what a metaphor is I take it?

 

[nnmartin]

Today I did the groundskeeping at a building I own.
Who has the higher position in your eyes?
1) Me - the landlord who serves the tenant
2) The tenants (businesses) who pay me for my service.

that is an absurd way of looking at things.

You own the property and the tenants are only paying rent - therefore whatever work you do on the building is working for yourself , not them.

and of course, being the landlord, makes you the one in the higher position.

 

[Kathryn]

you do understand what a metaphor is I take it?

Absolutely. What I don't think you've got a clear grasp of is the definition of "service."

 

[Revoltingest]

that is an absurd way of looking at things.
You own the property and the tenants are only paying rent - therefore whatever work you do on the building is working for yourself , not them.
and of course, being the landlord, makes you the one in the higher position.

Hmmmm.....I provide the service which they pay for, yet I'm top dog?
Woo hoo!

Btw, you think that a landlord works for himself? Hah!
I am at the beck & call of my tenants, at all hours.
If they need, I provide. It's a service industry, bub.

 

[Kathryn]

Hmmmm.....I provide the service which they pay for, yet I'm top dog?
Woo hoo!

Btw, you think that a landlord works for himself? Hah!
I am at the beck & call of my tenants, at all hours.
If they need, I provide. It's a service industry, bub.

We're wasting our time here. He does not understand the meaning of the word "service."