A Profession As a Lifestyle

[DV8]

I was recently told a story about a guy who wasn't cut out to be a lawyer at a big law firm because he was more of a "heavy metal guy" than a lawyer. It struck me as odd that those things could be mutually exclusive until I realised that a large law firm probably don't want non-conformists - at least not in a certain sense. I'm sure they'll be delighted with someone creatively non-conformist who can get attain success by looking at things in a different light, but I can see how that person not being the suite-and-tie type might interfere with their view of how their business should be run. I think that what you'll get is the belief that a choice of profession - in this case, being a lawyer - is a choice of lifestyle; dressing a certain way, acting a certain way, doing particular things, etc. If you're surrounded by the same type of people at work for twelve hours a day, who all try to act according to what they've been taught someone in your profession looks and acts like, you'll become convinced that the stereotype - or rather, the archetype - is true. It's a self-affirming situation.

I understand the push to remove individuality in the military. I understand that large companies might want to do the same; conformity is easier to manage, after all. It does offend me, however, to think that I would have to move away from desire to be stereotype disconfirming in order to excercise a particular profession. Companies like Google embrace the differences that define us as individuals instead of part of the herd, and yet, they can probably also only allow that up until a certain point before your quirks and oddities start interfering with their ability to get you to do what they need you to do, so even there individual expression, while not stifled, is put to bounds. Perhaps people's tendency to be underachievers, coupled with the unnatural instinct to be individuals, free to express themselves however they feel, leads to less success driven people who have jobs rather than careers. It's often said that in order to be successful at your career, you have to live your chosen field, rather than just work in it.

And yet, the concept of letting your profession dictate your life to the extent that your profession has become your lifestyle, bothers me.

[UncleJoseph]

And yet, the concept of letting your profession dictate your life to the extent that your profession has become your lifestyle, bothers me.

It should bother everyone. What bothers me more, is that so many people just accept it, or don't even realize their individuality has been taken away. Or, worse yet, they get caught up in it, and willingly, with no reservations, "drink the Kool-Aid." It's a form of corruption, in my book.

To me, the entire concept is similar to politics. Let's say a do-gooder wants to change things from the inside, so he/she works very hard to be accepted by those on the inside, and rise to power so that he/she can makes some real changes. But, by the time the do-gooder rises to a position of power, he/she has drunk enough "Kool-Aid" to become corrupted by the system...he/she has become a part of the system, and is no longer the person he/she used to be.

My profession is very, very big on conformity. We have policies stating what we can and can't talk about, what opinions we're allowed to give (both on or off duty), the kinds of activities we engage in, etc. Now, it is important to walk the talk. So we don't want a bunch of law enforcement running around committing crimes after work. But the required amount of conformity is staggering. We're not the military, and we have lives outside of work. The amount of conformity (and adherence to tradition, for the sake of adhering to tradition) is one of the things I hate about my job. If I don't like sports, or to eat wings and drink beer, or whatever, I'm seen as an outcast (of course, I've been an outcast most of my life). There is simply very little room for individuality in my line of work. I've struggled with this for my entire career.

Great post, Deev...you introduced a topic I've been thinking about/dealing with for a long time.

[paladin2019]

Professions ARE lifestyles. That's kind of the point. How restrictive the lifestyle is and should be IS a consideration in whether you choose to pursue it. And FWIW, my profession s nowhere near as restrictive as 'Unca Joe' makes his sound.

I don't even know why law enforcement should be so restrictive, except for <inflammatory comment deleted>

[DV8]

Professions ARE lifestyles. That's kind of the point.

You can't actually say that and then not elaborate and explain.

[paladin2019]

Professons are controlled by governing bodies. The point of said body is to regulate the minimum stndards the customer can expect from a member; those who don't make the grade are prevented from practising. Different professions exercise different levels of control, different degrees of formality in that control, and different extents of that control.

For example, while the AMA and ABA are not the sanctioning authorities for their professions, they advise and promote the standards the state boards use. And no one in the state board's area of control may practice without the approval of the board, under penalty of law.

Police departments serve a similar function to these boards, though obviously at the municipal level, and with a far less overbearing advisory organization. Thus, while the profession has certain qualities the customer can expect from a constable anywhere, local character is far more variable.

Many professions do consider the "total person" when considering who to admit. The idea is that a member's conduct outside the "shop" can have just as much impact on the profession as a whole and thus they seek to regulate that, too. Obviously, different professions have different expectations here, both in what is considered acceptable and how much oversght is necessary.

But, a profession is a community one joins and that community has its own rules and culture and that makes a profession a lifestyle choice just as much as purple mohawk.

[3278]

Professions ARE lifestyles.

They don't have to be. Some professions are, but many are just jobs you do for an extended period of time.

[paladin2019]

Professions ARE lifestyles.

They don't have to be. Some professions are, but many are just jobs you do for an extended period of time.

Then you're either confusing the definitions of "profession" and "long-term job" or the profession in quesion is very light on its lifestyle aspects.

Consider plumbing vs. soldiering. While both purport to control the profession and set minimum standards for professionals, one obviously has a stricter idea of acceptable behavior.

[Jeff Hauze]

Consider plumbing vs. soldiering. While both purport to control the profession and set minimum standards for professionals, one obviously has a stricter idea of acceptable behavior.

I know, right? They really need more regulation on the whole "soldier's crack" issue.

[3278]

Professions ARE lifestyles.

They don't have to be. Some professions are, but many are just jobs you do for an extended period of time.

Then you're either confusing the definitions of "profession" and "long-term job" or the profession in quesion is very light on its lifestyle aspects.

Or professions aren't lifestyles. Seriously.

Consider plumbing vs. soldiering. While both purport to control the profession and set minimum standards for professionals, one obviously has a stricter idea of acceptable behavior.

Plumbing isn't a lifestyle, unless you're using some novel definition of "lifestyle." Perhaps more clarity might be in order. What do you mean when you say that a profession is a lifestyle?

[Kai]

I think professions all have a certain expected lifestyle, some are just more restrictive than others. If your profession is a banker, or a lawyer, there is a certain expected level of propriety, neatness, and responsible actions even when not at work. If you are a police officer, a federal marshall, someone in a position of law enforcement, you are expected to be a role model even off duty. If you are a member of the press, there's a certain code of conduct even off record you are expected to maintain to maintain your credibilty.

But it really is more of a profession thing, there is no expectation for 'temp secretary' or 'guy who works at the 7-11' or anything like that, and some professions, like software engineer, rely far more on the company than the profession as to acceptable behavior and non, working for a credit bureau or a gov't office is going to be way more restrictive than a dot com startup or a game developer for instance.

I think most people are unconsciously aware of these expected lifestyles and take that into account when deciding whether or not they really want to get into the profession.

[Serious Paul]

I think this discussion, like so many seems to be getting ahead of itself. Much of the problem here is that each of us seem to have a different definition of what Professional means, and is.

Meriam Webster's define it in the following manner:

Main Entry: pro·fes·sion
Pronunciation: \pr&#601;-&#712;fe-sh&#601;n\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English professioun, from Anglo-French profession, from Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin profession-, professio, from Latin, public declaration, from profit&#275;ri
Date: 13th century

1 : the act of taking the vows of a religious community
2 : an act of openly declaring or publicly claiming a belief, faith, or opinion : protestation
3 : an avowed religious faith
4 a : a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation b : a principal calling, vocation, or employment c : the whole body of persons engaged in a calling

That's interesting but let's see if that's common elsewhere shall we?

This one, by Farlax I choose at random:

pro·fes·sion (pr-fshn)
n.
1.
a. An occupation or career: "One of the highest compliments a child can pay a parent is to choose his or her profession" (Joan Nathan).
b. An occupation, such as law, medicine, or engineering, that requires considerable training and specialized study.
c. The body of qualified persons in an occupation or field: members of the teaching profession.
2. An act or instance of professing; a declaration.
3. An avowal of faith or belief.
4. A faith or belief: believers of various professions.

So an interesting pattern emerges. I know people hate Wikipedia, but they have a similar definition. They also continue to mention this:

Classically, there were only three professions: Divinity, Medicine, and Law.[2] The main milestones which mark an occupation being identified as a profession are:

1. It became a full-time occupation;
2. The first training school was established;
3. The first university school was established;
4. The first local association was established;
5. The first national association was established;
6. The codes of professional ethics were introduced;
7. State licensing laws were established.[2]

The ranking of established professions in the United States based on the above milestones shows Surveying first (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln were all land surveyors before entering politics), followed by Medicine, actuarial science, Law, Dentistry, Civil Engineering, Logistics, Architecture and Accounting.[3] With the rise of technology and occupational specialization in the 19th century, other bodies began to claim professional status: Pharmacy, Logistics, Veterinary Medicine, Nursing, Teaching, Librarianship, Optometry and Social Work, all of which could claim to be professions by 1900 using these milestones.[4]

Just as some professions rise in status and power through various stages, so others may decline. This is characterized by the red cloaks of bishops giving way to the black cloaks of lawyers and then to the white cloaks of doctors.[5] With the church having receded in its role in western society, the remaining classical professions (law and medicine) are both noted by many as requiring not just study to enter, but extensive study and accreditation above and beyond simply getting a university degree.[citation needed] Accordingly more recently-formalized disciplines, such as architecture, which now have equally-long periods of study associated with them.[6]

Although professions enjoy high status and public prestige, all professionals do not earn the same high salaries. There are hidden inequalities even within professions.

So yeah that's a lot to digest right? So those of you still with me will notice a pattern-Profession's certainly bear great resemblance to a career, or jobs; even occupations. And certainly we can agree that Employment has changed greatly-not just in the jobs or vocations themselves, but also how we view them.

[Serious Paul]

For my own opinion I generally think most people have unrealistic expectations not only of themselves, their careers, vocations; but conversely of their employees as well. I'm not sure if this is just a personal bias that I hold, but nearly universally everyone I've talked to about their job, as well as it's effects on their life, tend to have a lot of complaints about how their work place is. I, myself have done this. This leads me to wonder if, as a whole, society really prepares people for who the real world operates. Academia teaches one thing; reality often greatly differs from it.

[Serious Paul]

Killed it dead huh?

[Bonefish]

Jack-ass.