What can you do with Sociology/Psychology/Cultural Studies/Social Anthropology post-grad qualification

[onebatmother]

Apart from pat self on back?

I am thinking of retraining but no idea about jobs. Those are the things I'm considering studying - what REAL ACTUAL JOBS might I get with a postgrad MA/PHD in them?

I mean ones that pay money. Any money. But must be money.

Thanks dearies.

I'm very fussy about cake/biscuits. Do none of you remember cake-gate? OBM and I nearly came to blows - pavlovas at dawn, and all that.

A Very Angry Auaaaorrrgghhh. I've had a few of those. Book Tokens Why did you have to do it?

Wow, Threadie, that's just wrong and rude, however you look at it. I used to be a commissioning editor, and even then - not a copy editor - I'd NEVER change a word, just make strong suggestions.

Some copy editors really do have their hands on their hips and their noses in the air though - I think they don't understand the work that's gone into getting it to the stage it is when it lands on their desks.

Actually, that's true 100, about it all feeding in. Although this is all v vague and silly, it is paradoxically keeping me focused on the subject in RL iyswim.

Oh no! I've forgotten my own gate!

Veery very large multi-vol reference work. Senior editor too busy rewriting contributions, so editorial underlings had to mop up blood, tend egos etc.

(I don't type coddishly when working, btw)

Work in a very diff environment now. I make minimal changes -- most authors I deal with write v well. The ones that write well are the ones most appreciative of my minor rewrites. The ones that write badly are less able to understand the point of minor textual fiddlings, so I let infelicities through.

I have to rewrite absolutely acres of stuff - but then my books are usually very technical and dry, and by people for whom English is not a first language. I can't imagine that any proper editor would rewrite a novel.

(I always raise a query for author before imposing changes for clarity, etc)

Copy-editing fiction must be v different from copy-editing academic work. I imagine one wouldn't change anything without discussion.

Yes, I used to work with good writers too, it does make a difference. Also think it is hugely helpful, even if it feels like a body blow, so you'd be a fool not to be grateful and take the criticisms.

Must go. I look forward to hearing what happens in the end OBM. It's exciting! New starts! I love them.

Speaking of work, I must go and do some.

Look at that - three editors: I say copy editing, thready says copy-editing and 100x says copyediting.

I'm turning the wireless connection off now.

I'm not even dressed and I haven't walked the dog. Am hopeless, hopeless, lazy person and am going away.

I'm going to Hampton Court with whole family even dp.

Laters, homegirlz.

Well officially I'm now a writer, so we KNOW my way is wrong.

So are we all friends now?

100x, I am now in Defensiveness Corner re the very intrusive editing I spoke of earlier. This was on a very sui generis publication where we all had a kind of author/editor joint role. The interventionist general ed was a vvv esteemed academic, and the angry author was a vvv bolshy type.

I did find the editorial culture rather gung ho, but there were justifications. In a few cases I just decommissioned contributors and rewrote their articles in my own name, rather than lacerating their work.

(They still got paid their 3p honorarium.)

I LOVE Hampton Court. Much nicer maze to walk around in than the career maze here.

Policywonk - I didn't mean it insultingly. I meant that you all seem politically confused about capitalism. You seem to both condemn and embrace choice depending on whether you are interested in the product on offer which is inconsistent. You shun 10 different types of toothpaste because we don't 'need' them. But you embrace 100,000 different pairs of shoes because you like shoes. But you surely recognise that we don't 'need' choice in so many shoes any more than we 'need' choice in so many toothpastes. Of course 30 types of toothpaste make our lives more complicated but so does shoe-shopping. Capitalism has at its heart freedom. Freedom to choose. You shouldn't try and call the market for other people as one woman't toothpaste is another woman's pair of shoes.

LOL at this now being a thread for insulting people.

Well, you're making a lot of false assumptions about me then, and I'm beginning to think you must think I'm thick. I don't think that 30,000 different kinds of shoes as a 'choice' is any more necessary than 30 kinds of toothpaste. I would absolutely embrace a reduction in market alternatives if it meant that resources were distributed more equitably.

As someone (Lenin?) said below, the fact that us socialist types participate in some of the egregious characteristics of advanced capitalism doesn't mean that we don't see them for what we are. I could restrict myself to one change of clothes and only replace them when they simply couldn't be patched any more - but to most people this would mark me out as a weirdo. I would have neither friends nor employment.

i think what annoys me about advertising is the illusion of choice rather than choice itself. Yes, a minority of toothpastes are more equal better than others, probably, but most toothpastes do exactly the same job but are marketed to appear special in some way they are not. Is consumerism an amoral exercise? Toy advertising is immoral I feel, manipulating parents at the most painful source, but perhaps the most manipulative advertising is just a logical extension of our basic consumerist outlook. Dodgy territory.

yes quite Lenin. My Dh grew up in communist Yugoslavia, and they had a dishwasher and everything. Things got worse after Tito died, when corruption got rather endemic, but before that, or at least a lot of people look back at that time as a golden age, no homeless, everyone had enough thought not a lot and there were choices in the shops, mostly Yugoslav produced, but there were choices. It worked. It didn't fulfil the kind of consumerist standards we are not used to, but it worked.

we are used to.