like a word nailed to its meaning

Freudenberger's epiphany came at the St. Mark's Free Clinic, where, in the early 1970s, he served as a volunteer counselor to the throngs of hippie youth who congregated in the East Village. He would arrive around six p.m., after putting in a full day at his private practice on Park Avenue. To get to St. Marks Place, he had to traverse an East Village pockmarked by burned-out buildings. Some areas, particularly blocks with a large number of Puerto Rican residents, lost more than half their housing during the decade. The peak hours for arson in these years fell just after midnight, right when Freudenberger tended to leave the clinic.

In 1971, after a year of sixteen-hour days, the psychologist found himself unable to get out of bed, having succumbed to what he would soon term 'staff burn-out'—a condition that he associated with over-dedicated and overachieving professionals, especially care workers like himself. Years later, when Freudenberger related the experience for a broad audience, he reasoned from the ruins surrounding the clinic: 'What had once been a throbbing, vital structure is now deserted.' Not reducible to stress, depression, or exhaustion, Freudenberger's burnout was a symptom of high expectations that went unfulfilled. 'The American dream is no longer a reality,' he told the Los Angeles Times in 1982, 'but many of us are still operating as if it were.' If Freudenberger was looking for a symbol that could evoke those dashed dreams, he couldn't do much better than the burned-out building. Though he failed to acknowledge it in his own exploration of the term, those torched buildings had generated value by being destroyed. Freudenberger's burnout unwittingly suggested how depletion, even to the point of destruction, could be profitable.

Despite its poignance, burnout had obscured the conditions that gave it meaning. Gone were the landlords and underwriters, the agents of government austerity, the torches, and the constellation of other forces that obliterated the built environment. Freudenberger even evicted from his analogy the tenants who had in actual fact been burned out. He described his prototypical patient in this way: 'I came from a pretty good home, I went to school, settled into a career, married someone I loved, had children. We're a pretty successful family. Money, home, cars—but something is missing.' In this early formulations Burn Out was thus reserved for the well-to-do suburbanite: the byproduct of accumulation, rather than dispossession. An indifferent worker putting in twelve-hour days on the assembly line was definitionally unfit for the diagnosis. 'It would be virtually impossible for the underachiever to get into that state,' Freudenberger wrote. That the tenants who had literally been burned out were deemed ineligible for the diagnosis was typical of an arson discourse rife with elisions, smokescreens, and amnesia."

here is a map of the path of the eclipse (from timeanddate)

it is also widely accepted that women get raises less often because they don't ask as much as men. this is objectively not true.

it is also widely accepted that women are more talkative than men. this is objectively not true.

it is also widely accepted that women are taken less seriously when speaking because their speech patterns are associated with a "lack of confidence". this is objectively not true. [1][2][3]

every time we talk about gender discrimination, people look for an explanation that starts with women's behavior.

and every fucking time, actual research shows that across the board, women actually don't behave that differently from men.