Is it just me, or do others find the genre of "quitcher-beefin'" articles and letters really annoying as well? I am, of course, talking about the ones that take it upon themselves to scold graduate students (and other academic job seekers) for -- gasp! -- wanting to find decent jobs in the fields that they've trained for. Roy Hill's recent piece "Why Not Uproot?" comes to mind, as it is the most egregious example.

Typically, such pieces include a statement of puzzlement over how graduate job seekers could be so childish (whiny, irrational, etc.) as to express dismay at the difficulties involved in finding a job that matches their abilities and interests. Then they segue into a discussion of how there are (surely) lots of opportunities outside academia available -- which is beside the point -- and offer personal anecdotes of how they and others have survived in the "real" world. Inevitably, the tone of the article implies "gee, these spoiled kids -- why can't they just suck it up and deal? I have!" with a fillip of folksy reverse class elitism ("I've got just a lil' old piddly M.A.," for example).

Now, granted, those of us in the job-search trenches are guilty of our own sins. We do complain about the hardships we have gone through (give me a beer and I'm easily induced to recite my own litany of difficulties and disappointments). Perhaps some of us do border on the whiny when we suggest that we are somehow being deprived of jobs to which we are "entitled." And maybe our expectations are higher than warranted, and maybe some of us are elitist and consider non-academics as somehow less worthy.

But all of this is beside the point.

What is at issue here is not that some grad students are too fearful, immature, elitist -- whatever -- to grasp the opportunities at hand. Pointing this out does no justice or service to those of us who try to look at the job market with clear, sceptical, yet, somehow, still hopeful eyes.

Nor is the presence of non-academic career options for academics in doubt (though more could be done to educate career-services personnel on the difficulties of restructuring academic skills for the non-academic job market). The abundance of informative articles on this topic here at The Chronicle makes this clear.

The basic problem is very simple: A lot of highly trained, intelligent people wish to find positions that line up with our interests and skills, allow us a measure of dignity, provide adequate benefits, and pay well enough that we can contemplate doing things that other professionals take for granted, like raising a family. And we are having difficulty doing this.

Now, the reasons why some cannot attain such coveted positions may well be personal -- fear, desire to remain close to family and friends, personality flaws, etc. But not every failure is a personal one. When so many qualified people are in trouble, despite their best efforts, there is something else going on. If this were the case for nearly any other profession -- doctors, for example -- surely it would be cause for alarm and reassessment of the profession, not recriminations aimed at those in difficulty.

So why don't we have more thoughtful discussion of underlying structural problems? I mean, this is a time when the national economy is booming and college enrollments are rising -- so why is it so difficult to find even an entry-level, visiting-professor position at a third-tier institution (let alone a tenure-track one at a large, nationally-renowned university)? This is more than a personal problem; it is one about which the whole system of academia should be concerned.

It would also be nice to see sympathy and practical advice rather than paternalistic lecturing (or childish whining) disguised as advice. (I should note at this point that many articles and letters are supportive and helpful -- keep up the good work, guys! -- but I wish there were more of them.)

I, like many who come to check the job listings, still hold out hope that I will be able to work in the field in which I earned my doctorate. We know that we are probably tilting at windmills by hoping for that elusive tenure-track job (so why keep pointing it out?) and maybe someday we will give up and settle for something less than we want.

To those of you who have found contentment outside academia, I am glad it worked out for you. But implying that I, and those like me, are spoiled elitist children for wanting something different does none of us any good.

Enough is enough.

-- Rachel D. Shaw, Lecturer, Dept. of History, University of California at San Diego