PDBY reserves the right to practice discretion when publishing letters, comments, tweets, or Facebook posts.

The multi-level marketing student dilemma

Kirsten Minnaar

Student participation in multi-level marketing (MLM) schemes is a growing and highly controversial phenomenon. Many MLM schemes may appear to be viable business opportunities, especially for those experiencing financial difficulties, such as students. These schemes can, however, leave their members in a much worse condition than before they joined.

The typical MLM is a business structure similar to a pyramid scheme. According to Marketing Schools, MLMs function through “sales reps receiv[ing] compensation for their own sales...[and] a percentage of the sales generated by other salespeople they recruit”. Consultants involved in MLMs usually sell products directly to consumers through relationships and word of mouth. MLMs such as Herbalife, Amway, Tupperware and “ Nu Skin have become increasingly popular in South Africa, and many consultants rely heavily on social media to promote their products.

The prospect of earning money while choosing your own hours may seem especially appealing to students. However, there are often more negative than positive consequences associated with participation in MLMs. According to “The Case (for and) against Multi-level Marketing” by Jon M. Taylor, the “[l]oss rates are extraordinary – over 99% for all of the MLMs for which I have been able to obtain relevant data”. Taylor explains that, since it is “[b]uilt on an endless chain of recruitment, MLM is inherently flawed, deceptive, and profitable only for founders and those at or near the top of a pyramid of participants – usually those at the beginning of the chain of recruitment. MLM is also extremely viral and predatory”. According to MLM Statistics, “[d]ue to the relatively low income, high costs, and difficulty in actually selling products, it’s extremely difficult to make a substantial profit with these companies”.

Students all over the world tend to be particularly financially vulnerable and this problem is only amplified in South Africa. According to the article “Does Financial Assistance Undermine Academic Success? Experiences Of ‘At Risk’ Students In A South African University”, which was published in the Journal of Education (University of Kwa-Zulu Natal), “the majority of South African households are unable to support a dependent at university”. According to BusinessTech, students from eight of South Africa’s top universities owed over R711 million on tuition fees and loans as of 2015. Most students in South Africa cannot afford to become entangled in a marketing scheme that costs them more than they can earn..

A second year genetics student spoke to PDBY about her experiences with Amway. She explained that, as an introvert, “making cold calls and prospecting people helped me come out of my shell”. She also explained that she “really [likes] the products”, and she still uses some of them. However, she did say that the “environment had a lot of toxic positivity. I realised that people weren’t really friends and some mentors in higher ranks didn’t really care about helping”. She states that these mentors would use their people skills to “give the people they recruited a false sense of friendship and belonging. It’s like they would love-bomb you and you would feel so good because human connection in the real world is so rare especially since making friends as an adult is so hard, so being welcomed felt comforting. But if you expressed doubt, wanted to leave the business or just shop then they would divert all that attention and find someone else. People would join genuinely believing they were helping themselves and they would invite friends because they genuinely wanted better for the friends and family.” She talked about how Amway encouraged

emotional manipulation, saying that when friends would express doubt the higher ranking members would encourage them to neglect those relationships. “[They] would make us feel like our doubtful friends didn’t care about us, didn’t want to succeed [and] said we should distance ourselves from them.” It reached the point where “people would prioritise the business so much that they were willing to miss weddings, birthdays etc to attend functions or not schedule as much time to spend with family”. She explains that the idea of “hustle culture” was stressful and that even though they promised flexibility, it really took up a lot of time. “My family and I spent a lot of money. I didn’t have any since I was about 18, 19 at the time and only made around R100 which mostly came from our own pocket and a little from the people we managed to recruit.” It’s like they would love-bomb you and you would feel so good because She spent a lot of money, since you cannot promote and sell products you human connection in the real world is so rare especially since making are not using yourself. “It was hard, people hate it when you’re trying friends as an adult is so hard, so being welcomed felt comforting. to sell something.” While leaders would say that anyone could become successful, she found that most of the people who were doing well “either joined years ago or when the business was new in their respective countries”. If you “didn’t do well or get a certain level, we were made to believe it’s completely our fault or that we didn’t work hard enough”. “The worst thing about this for me, is that when you’re in it feels like you could come out with something meaningful and useful. But if you put [in] a lot of effort, money, time and still don’t succeed… after leaving the business, you have nothing to show for it.” While the idea of earning money through one of these structures may seem harmless, MLM Statistics emphasises that before you join a multi-level marketing scheme, you should think carefully. “Look at the income disclosure statements, payment plans, and requirements for each company individually. Consider other ‘side-gigs’ that have a higher level of success. Make informed decisions based on accurate statistics.”

Queer representation in film

Muskaan Singh

The non-threatening gay man: white, middle-class and straight-passing. He is queer representation for straight audiences.

Representation is an important aspect to consider in film, and one that is increasingly taken into account. The past few years have given us a number of mainstream queer hits—Love, Simon and Call Me by Your Name come to mind immediately—which is a clear sign of increasing queer representation. But what does more representation mean if it only represents a single queer identity? What does more representation mean if it enforces stereotypes instead of subverting them? If representation is shallow and aims to simply check the box for diversity, is it not doing more harm than good? Representation matters, but responsible, intersectional representation matters more.

Despite the progress made in recent years with queer representation, the acknowledgement of the breadth of queer experiences is still severely limited. Yes, there are more and more queer characters on screen—characters that are often well developed - but certain members of the queer community are consistently excluded. For example, in a 2020 Studio Responsibility Index report by GLAAD, a queer media advocacy group, it was found that 22 out of 118 films by the eight largest studios included queer characters, which was the highest representation percentage in the eight years of the report. However, no male bisexual characters were included. Nor were there transgender characters for the third consecutive year. The number of queer characters of colour had decreased for the third year in a row. It is clear that even in terms of quantity, queer representation in film is lacking. Even with white gay men being the most represented of the queer community in media, this inclusion is still limited, with more than half of all queer characters appearing on screen for less than three minutes.

Of course, a purely quantitative analysis of the inclusion of queer characters in movies is not one that will provide an accurate view of the shortcomings of film in this regard. Even in terms of plot and character development, when it comes to queer characters, diversity is often included for diversity’s sake. Take, for example, the ‘Bury Your Gays’ trope, where queer characters are killed off to progress the plot lines of the straight main characters. Moreover, queer characters are often written as characters whose defining personality trait is the fact that they are queer. In such cases, stereotypes are, more often than not, enforced rather than subverted. Of course, there are movies, such

Image: Cassandra Eardley

Representation, when it is authentic and empathetic, broadens perceptions, challenges stigmas, and allows people to feel seen

as Rocketman, where a character’s queer identity is central to the plot. But, there is a need for characters that just happen to be queer and for representation that doesn’t centre around suffering, ostracisation and tragedy. We need to see queer characters depicted holistically. The subtle ways in which the queer community has been villainised is also interesting to consider. Take queer-coding villains in Disney movies, for example. Queer-coding is the subtextual characterisations of a character as queer through the use of recognisable stereotypes. Often these traits are used to signify or characterise villains. For example, Hades in the Disney film Hercules or Him from The Powerpuff Girls. Both villains are queer-coded and their characterisation as such is used to villainise them.

So, while there may be more representation of the queer community in film today, the way in which it is portrayed enforces stereotypes, caters to a particular demographic (white, middle-class and straight-passing) and adds little value to the film. However, it is not all doom and gloom. For the many movies with terrible representation of the queer community, there are movies that handle representation well, introduce queer media to the heterosexual mainstream and characterise the experience of the queer community in holistic and empathetic ways, such as Moonlight and The Half of It. The importance of movies that represent queer characters in this way cannot be understated. Representation, when it is authentic and empathetic, broadens perceptions, challenges stigmas, and allows people to feel seen. Film not only represents reality, but affects change in reality. It is a tool to explore the human condition and share the lived experiences of different kinds of people; a means of relating to others and understanding them. Queer representation matters, and it needs to be expanded.