De Minimis
  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12

The Spectre of Classism is Haunting Melbourne Law School

11/4/2016

 
KATY HAMPSON
Volume 9, Issue 6
I would like to personally thank James Daff for his article in last week’s De Minimis, for his breakdown of the costings for the law ball this year. However, the price of admission to a ball is not just what is listed on the ticket. And what is at stake is not just one evening’s event.
I made a post on the JD 2014 Facebook page lamenting the expense of this year’s ball tickets. In truth, I thought the same thing the past two years, but simply did not attend. But as this is my third year I thought I should not miss out this time. However my frustration was misplaced. It is not the cost of the tickets that is the problem. It is that costs like these cannot be put onto HECS, so that future me can pay for them once I am the kind of person who has been to a fancy ball with a string quartet; once I am transformed. ​
​
Education is not just the “great equaliser”. It is transformative. Despite the incessant negativity coming from students and some lecturers about how there are no jobs and we’re already screwed if we haven’t done 15 unpaid internships before we started law school, the fact remains that people with degrees earn more than those who don’t. People with postgraduate degrees (particularly men) earn more in their lives than those with only a bachelor degree. But law gives us something more than money. When I told my Grandfather I got into law he wrote me a very moving letter. The gist of it was that as he was a fostered child and when he had to leave school at 14 to work he never would have dreamed that his grandchild would go onto study law. In his time that was absolutely unthinkable. But today, in Australia, if you are person like me, you can go to a mediocre public school, work hard, find your passion and go after one of the two biggest prestige professions: doctor or lawyer. You can go from being a cashed up bogan to being an upper middle class professional.


What I didn’t understand is that it doesn’t just take studying and doing well in class to really become a lawyer. You must adopt the maxim: “We are what we pretend to be.” If we want to have money, we must pretend to have it – buy nice clothes and suits and wear them to University, of all places, and undertake free work for experience at a time in our career when we can least afford to be working for free. In my rational mind I would never gather a group of my friends  and say hey let’s go for a three course meal in Docklands; it’s $130, but it’s good value! I’d ask them to go to Chinatown for indecent amounts of dumplings with BYO, because that’s who I am right now: I’m a student, on a budget. But because it’s law school it feels justified. It is showing us the right way to be a professional, a lawyer, a success and someone with money.

If you are lucky enough to already have money and don’t feel a ball of anxiety in your gut every time you are told what law textbooks will cost this semester; if it is just as simple as “taking an extra shift at work” because you are someone with the flexibility to do that; if you are someone I’ve probably been jealous of for having amazing photos of places you go on holiday every break; if you are already turning up to law school with a bunch of people you knew from your private school, then this might seem to be a minor issue. It might not seem like one of the main points of attending law school.

But you might not be seeking the same kind of social and economic mobility through a law degree that others are. The law ball and other events like it are part of Melbourne Law School’s status and prestige, part of the whole package of the JD. They are part of something that we have not earned through money, but through work. So to be told at this juncture, “if you can’t afford it, don’t come”, is to be told that you don’t belong here.

Some people in my position have managed, admirably, to “take an extra shift at work”. But this is a solution which individualises a structural, class issue. We can’t solve structural issues through individuals acting unilaterally - inevitably, this will mean leaving some individuals behind.
​

Let us put law ball on HECS and let the riffraff in. We’ve made it this far.  

​Katy Hampson is a third-year JD student
Picture

The rest of this week’s issue of De Minimis:
  • MLS’s Unhealthy Obsession with a Black Poodle: Equity Uncle responds
  • Another Year, Another Shafting: That’s Law, Folks!
  • **Paid Internship Opportunity, Internationally Renowned Firm**
  • The Kirby Effect
  • The Clerkship Diaries: Clerk v The People
  • From Car Salesmen to Nurses: MULSS’s Feedback Trial for JD Students

More De Minimis - other articles like this:
  • MULSS Law Ball: The Break Down
  • Law Ball Rip-Off
  • Another Year, Another Shafting: That’s Law, Folks!
The Man on the Clapham Omnibus
12/4/2016 11:03:46 am

I don’t understand. Why can’t you just pick up an extra shift at your dad’s law firm? Sure, it’s a hassle to get your chauffeur to take you to work on an extra day, but we all need to make sacrifices sometimes. Just last week I traded in my iPhone 6S Plus for a 6S in order to pay for my Snow Camp deposit!

Dee
12/4/2016 08:20:10 pm

👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

OP
12/4/2016 10:18:20 pm

I died

.....
13/4/2016 10:59:16 pm

wow, so original! the wit!

JL
12/4/2016 12:21:30 pm

The two HECS comments made in the article are bad jokes, right?

ODL
12/4/2016 10:38:24 pm

@JL I don't think adding "Law Ball" as a column on your HECS debt invoice would be the way MLS would do this. They could instead give whatever the extra cost it takes to run the Law Ball for every student to the LSS and hike up everyone's tuition fees to cover it...

JL
12/4/2016 11:20:42 pm

That is an absurd proposal.

We are privileged to receive the HELP support we do. The 2011 census reported that only 36% of 20 year olds attended a tertiary institution. We are incredibly fortunate to have taxpayer funded loans to pay for our education - a benefit many others do not receive. Taxpayers do not only pay upfront, but pay interest on our debt every single year until we have completely repaid it. This scheme exists because of the belief that our further education will benefit not just ourselves, but society.

What sense of self entitlement is required to seriously believe that taxpayers should pay for any student to attend a student society ball? It's true that in the scheme of things the amount is insignificant, and given our fees maybe MLS itself could cover us for a night of fun. However, to stretch and artificially inflate the HELP system so students can have a night of revelry on someone else's bank disgustingly self involved.

ODL
13/4/2016 10:24:55 pm

Not looking to get into a stoush or anything. I didn't even advocate for the Law Ball being on HECS, i merely presented how it could be done realistically.

That said, while I disagree with it, I don't think it is entirely absurd. We already can HECS Student Services and Amenities Fees every year, and part of that goes to funding the student unions on campus i believe. I'm sure you'd also be happy to indulge in a few snacks whenever there's a seminar at the law school, or at the Garden Party. I think a few social events and other non-tuition services provided for the benefit of students is reasonable. University isn't just supposed to be a degree factory: it's also meant to be a social hub, perhaps within which 'great minds collide' (lol).

It's all a question of degree, so to label the proposition of student loans extending to society events as 'disgustingly' self-indulgent is probably a bit over the top.

Whatever happened to 'respectfully disagreeing'!

JL
13/4/2016 10:58:48 pm

Sorry ODL, no offence intended towards you. I agree, you merely suggested the mechanism (not incorrectly at all). My comments are directed to the author.

I think Student Services and Amenities can be differentiated given the many good public interest services the union manages. Not so with extending HELP for a night in Docklands.

We're all incredibly fortunate to receive the substantial support we do (a fact most people seem to take completely for granted), and we should not forget that. If we are trying to justify to ourselves that the taxpayer really should be funding our ball I think we have lost all perspective. I can't imagine what the below average income family would think if they saw our cohort at the ball on taxpayer funds.

The absurdity is evident when you extend the principle to every student, in every degree, at every university.

Not Lucky Enough
13/4/2016 11:27:29 am

As someone that could be thought to be "privileged" by some, it's really not that simple. Having worked over the entire summer break, I saved what I needed to to be able to move out this year. Because of the status of my parents' finances, I am ineligible for Centrelink. So this means that I have, and continue to work to be in the position that I am, living out of home and staying afloat with the general expenses that come with such a lifestyle. I budget, I cut things out and be penny wise when I can (buying second hand textbooks, for example). This allows for the occasional indulgence (the Law Ball being one), but my being able to attend this event was not brought about by just "picking up an extra shift at work" or me just having money to spare. Yes, some people from the private school I went to also attend the law school, but that doesn't make it any easier either, it just means I have friends that I knew before attending the law school. I am sick to death of being labelled as "privileged" and thought to have everything in my life handed to me, when in reality it just isn't like that at all. I may be eating plain rice for the next 3 weeks, but will happily be attending the Law Ball this year.

PP
14/4/2016 08:32:26 am

The use of privelage does tend to get a rise out of people, however that doesn't nullify it existance. Privelage is expressed in many forms and no it doesn't mean you were handed everything, but it does recognise certain safeties in how one grew up. No one is denying that it isn't hard to move out of home, however privelage is that you were able to prepare for that, and that you have an assumed familial safety net should living away from home not work out. That safety of plan B is significant. The psychological stress of uncertainty that accompanies financial stress is significant, and for some, starts from a very young age, and this changes life quality.
No one is undermining the hard work you're doing to stay afloat. Its asking you to understand that you (likely) have certain basic aspects of life assured, such as access to food (whether it be plain rice or a meal at your folks), a roof over your head (self purchased or familial), and warmth (clothes or unfettered access to warm places).at the end of the day, it sounds like you're able to sacrifice 3 weeks of diversity of food to be able to attend the Law Ball. Those who aren't privelaged do so to survive.

not lucky enough
14/4/2016 05:03:33 pm

Thanks for your reply PP.
My comment was in no way seeking to show that privilege does not exist, but merely to explain that throwing around the word as an all-encompassing label is not always accurate or helpful.
With due respect, you are not aware of my familial circumstances or my motives for leaving home, so let's just leave that there.
The fact that I work in retail (not a paralegal or an associate, nothing fancy) is not a result of privilege - it is a result of me making the effort to find work and maintain it.
As for having access to food, a roof over my head etc, I don't feel like this makes me stand out from the rest of the cohort, seeing as we live in a first world country and attend the country's most acclaimed law school - we are all privileged in this sense, not just me.

Duncan
15/4/2016 03:51:18 pm

Not Lucky Enough: You say, "As for having access to food, a roof over my head etc, I don't feel like this makes me stand out from the rest of the cohort."

The cohort is generally quite privileged, but it's likely some among us are having real problems keeping a roof over their head (see, e.g. http://m.smh.com.au/national/education/homeless-crisis-at-top-university-20080701-300d.html).

Homelessness is a real issue for many people in Australia!! You may have seen that highlighted recebtly by the Homeless Persons Union: http://m.theage.com.au/victoria/homeless-women-told-they-had-10-minutes-to-leave-east-west-link-home-20160331-gnvcdl.html

L2SPEL
27/4/2016 02:32:57 pm

*Privileged. Seriously.

Dee
14/4/2016 08:53:55 am

Ahahahahaha omg my heart bleeds for you

PP
14/4/2016 09:31:13 am

By no means was I claiming this experience as my own, nor was I trying to garner sympathy. I was providing an insight into the definition of privelage.

Lets keep it civil, yeah?

Dee
14/4/2016 10:14:40 am

My comment was in response to 'not lucky enough'.

PP
14/4/2016 03:58:34 pm

Apologies for the misinterpretation, in that case.

NOT LUCKY ENOUGH
14/4/2016 04:56:57 pm

Though I was not seeking sympathy in my reply to this article, but merely trying to eradicate what seem to be quite pervasive misconceptions of the "privileged" among us JD students, I do thank you, Dee, for taking the effort out of your morning to respond to my comment. Your apathy is helping no one, but at least you got some of that bottled-up angst out, and am I glad to have provided you with that opportunity. Have a great day.

Dee
15/4/2016 11:44:50 am

So sorry that you've been labelled 'privileged' when you had to work 'entire summer break' and can't get Centrelink because your parents are too rich. Either your original comment was genius satire or you have a very surface understanding of what privilege means and how it operates.

ADM
13/4/2016 02:40:31 pm

Have you tried not being poor?

NLE
13/4/2016 02:59:21 pm

What do you mean? I'm not sure I follow...

Jk
14/4/2016 07:38:37 pm

Pretty sure this was a meme involving Mitt Romney.

Anon
13/4/2016 10:41:33 pm

Please stop calling yourself riffraff. No one who went to private school walks around saying they won't talk to people who didn't. Don't attack people who want to fix the problem.

KV
14/4/2016 01:52:52 pm

STOP INSULTING YOUSELF STOP INSULTING YOURSELF

http://giphy.com/gifs/loop-stop-hitting-bdn4mVgumSK7C/fullscreen


Comments are closed.
    Picture

    Archives

    December 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014

  • Home
  • ABOUT US
  • Podcast
  • Your Learned Friend
  • Anonymous Feedback
  • Art
  • Get published!
  • Constitution
  • Archive
    • 2018
    • 2017
    • 2017 >
      • Semester 2 (Volume 12) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (election issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
    • 2016 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 9) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 10) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8 (Election Issue)
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
        • Issue 13 (test)
    • 2015 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 7) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
      • Semester 2 (Volume 8) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
    • 2014 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 5) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
      • Semester 2 (Volume 6) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 12
    • 2013 >
      • Issue 1
      • Issue 2
      • Issue 3
      • Issue 4
      • Issue 5
      • Issue 6
    • 2012 >
      • Semester 1 (Volume 1) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12
      • Semester 2 (Volume 2) >
        • Issue 1
        • Issue 2
        • Issue 3
        • Issue 4
        • Issue 5
        • Issue 6
        • Issue 7
        • Issue 8
        • Issue 9
        • Issue 10
        • Issue 11
        • Issue 12