The Poor Boy Fallacy
"Oh, poor boy. That must be difficult."
Someone once said to me while I was working my evening shift at the Republic Hotel Pub in Sydney. Was I cleaning tables or toilets at that moment? I don't remember. It was 16 years ago. I was 22, happy to study abroad and make some money 15,157 kilometers away from home, in a country about 14 times larger than my native land.
I was not poor, but rather enriched by the adventure, satisfied with simple discoveries like the tropical climate and cockroaches the size of my palm. Life was sweet. Working as a runner or barback was not difficult. In fact, it's relatively easy. Life was easy.
Yet, somehow, society has managed to produce the fallacy on a large scale. I believe so (ironically, am I not doing here an anecdotal fallacy?). Many (or some?) host and propagate the poor boy fallacy meme. Of course, low-skill jobs have their downsides: alienating and repetitive tasks, low salaries, etc. Yet, is it possible that what makes them difficult is not necessarily inherent to their nature, but rather a reflection of how some people perceive them? A myth that has its roots deep in the rat race. Could it be as old as capitalism? Or even older? Sometimes, the challenge doesn't seem to be the job itself, but the perception of it.
Is it possible that the poor boy myth is eroding? Not because the fallacy appears obvious, all of a sudden, but because technological progress makes the myth believers doubtful. If my societal inputs can be replaced by an invisible intelligence (a very bright one!), thus jeopardising my pride and status within the social order, I may then lose my unintentional condescending posture, and perhaps, start envying those yet to be touched by the invisible intelligence's hand — among them, the poor boy.
