Summary Of The Logic Of Stupid Poor People

In The Logic of Stupid Poor People by Tressie McMillan, she states, “Why do poor people make stupid, illogical decisions to buy status symbols?” (538). Poor is not only a status but a state of mind. Money may be short, but there can be happiness when making the most of what has been earned. Some people just have expensive taste and want what they want. Maybe they saved to buy that $2500 handbag, maybe it was on sale or maybe it was given to her. How can anyone know? Poor people buy status symbols to elevate their status in their own community and in turn feel better about themselves. Equality is relative. She says, “First they insist on being poor when it is so easy to not be poor.” (536). The poor are mostly poor because they are

lazy but refuse to do the long-term work to get out of poverty.

McMillan also states, “One thing I’ve learned is that one person’s illogical belief is another person’s survival skill. And nothing is more logical than trying to survive.” (537). Status symbols are not a survival skill. It is a way to make a poor person feel better about themselves and appear to other to be better than they are. It gives the illusion that this person has more money than that person and, in turn deserves more respect. McMillan talks about how being able to talk like white folks gave them the ability to do things the less fortunate could not. She states, “that there was a price we had to pay to signal to gatekeepers that we were worthy of engaging.” (537). In this instance, the purchase of a nice suit and pear earrings was not an illogical decision. In fact, it was probably the most logical purchase her mother could have made. Clearly, dressing somewhat above her social class not only helped the less fortunate, but made her feel better about herself.

She states, “we do what we can within the limits of the constraints imposed by a complex set of structural and social interactions designed to limit access to status, wealth, and power.” (538). This statement contradicts what she previously stated about being able to “get done what the elderly lady next door had not been able to get done in over a year.” (537). Her mother seems to have found a way around the limits of constraints and obtain a higher status in her social class whether she thinks so or not. Limits can be eliminated making status, wealth, and power obtainable for anyone that works for it. She says, “belonging to one group at the right time can mean the difference between unemployment and employment, a good job as opposed to a bad job….” (538). Although belonging to a group can make a difference, the poor that are buying status symbols don’t really want to climb the social ladder, they just want to be top dog in their current class. Being on top gives a sense of respect, control, and boldness that would otherwise come from a position in a higher social class or better job.

The gatekeeper that McMillan keeps mentioning appears to be an idea she has that only white men are privileged. She states, “There is empirical evidence that women and people of color are judged by appearances differently and more harshly than are white men.” (539). There are many white men that are poor as well as people of color that are wealthy. Maybe her limited social status did not allow her to see outside her little part of the world, therefore, she would not have known about anything other than what she experienced in her own community.

McMillan also states, “You have no idea what you would do if you were poor until you are poor.” This statement rings true. It would be quite difficult for a wealthy person to let go of their ingrained expectancy of the luxuries their social status provides. The wealthy will never understand the logic of poor people just as poor people will never understand the wealthy until they have been in their situation. Just as the wealthy condemn poor people for buying items they deem too expensive the poor often condemn the wealthy when they buy things that are ridiculously expensive when they could be doing more charitable things with their money.

Finally, in her essay, McMillan seems to believe that presentation is the main difference between being stereotyped and treated badly and being treated better when dressed well.

Stereotyping can have negative effect for some people, but for others it has a positive effect. McMillan states, “I do not know how much my mother spent on her camel colored cape or knee-high boots but I know that whatever she paid it returned in hard-to-measure dividends.” (538). The stereotype her mother obtained by dressing well and “speaking like white folk” had a positive outcome. Being well dressed and clean makes a difference in how others view worthiness. It doesn’t matter where the clothing came from since most people don’t know the difference between JC Penney and Goodwill clothing. Even fewer people know the difference between a suit from Goodwill and an Armani suit. Hell, in some places, the Armani suit may have come from Goodwill! She says, “Presentable is the bare minimum of social civility.” (538). Being presentable is an equality all its own and, with social civility, inequality can be stopped and put all social classes on the same level. Presentable does not make an equal. Unfortunately, our minds and hearts is what makes equality a reality. Equality starts within and works its way

outward.