mAcademia Nut

So Megan decides to pontificate about grumpy academics. Oh Joy, this is going to be fun.

Megan starts off by taking her discrete experiences as representative of all reality. Even though she acknowledges the bias of her own views, she decides to "assume that I'm on to something." Assume away.

Why does Megan think academics are more bitter, despite the very real possibility that they aren't bitter than other professions?

1) The money is so low relative to the professions they might have gone into. Journalists also suffer from this bitterness. Interestingly, the more lucrative their current options are, the less bitter the professors seem to be--economists and engineers seem relatively cheerful compared to English and History professors.

Got that? Professors are bitter because they could have made more money doing something else, except for Professors of engineering and economics. They aren't bitter, despite the fact that they could have made MUCH more money doing the same thing somewhere else.

2) It's so easy to tell exactly where you rank in the academic hierarchy. Well, I don't find it easy, but they all seem to. Unless you're very near the top, your ranking is reinforced every time you attend any sort of professional event. If you are near the top, you promptly switch to wondering why you're paid less than an entry level investment banking analyst.

Um, how is it 'so easy to tell exactly where you rank in the academic hierarchy?' How is it 'reinforce[d] every time you attend any sort of professional event?' Do conferences now list your name, school, and US News ranking on the name tag? Hello My Name is Third Tier?

3) It's so hard to switch jobs. Job mobility is so low that you can't salve your ego by telling yourself that your current job is merely a waystop en route to something better.

But academics get to travel...for work...nevermind

4) Academics have few alternative status hierarchies Getting tenure is an all consuming process that leaves very little time for developing other hobbies. And the job virtually definitionally does not attract the kind of people who will be happy putting their career on a back burner to family or lifestyle.

What she forgets to mention is that many academics view their research as a hobby. Getting paid for doing your hobby tends to not embitter people.

5) Academics have virtually no control over where they live They usually seem to go where the best job is, regardless of whether or not the local area suits them. In many cases, this further focuses them inward on academia, because there aren't all that many other people around who share their interests.

This, actually, is a valid point.

Now to the commenters:

Lou farts this out:

But let's say you are an English professor and not passionate about your teaching. What else do you accomplish? In many fields the articles and books are only read by others in your field, and their only value is to convince others that you are smart. I.e. status. Literally, there is nothing else that they produce except for status. So of course you are all-consumed by relative status, there is nothing else in your life.

Seriously, Lou, if you think writing books is just an attempt at making other people look smart, you're a moron. And this is great: "Literally, there is nothing else that they produce except for status." Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, How was the play?