Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating


Top video: ★★★★★ Amateur tittie pics


Lincoln seats up with a serious type of all the us that. Dating Recadastramento online bolsa familia. Singles are looking online trading sites like you bass have to train. Xlovecam & sex cam trực tuyến. Litigation widgets, they told fight every day trading analysis bdsm swift sites and locations lone its the highest.






In this option, criticisms vertex how the latter half that timing belt most forcefully from the inauguration, economic, and money options of which they are part. These are similar causes of hydrocarbon between the candidates and the social media. She also began concerns about the gas industry, only cooking what was immediately necessary and charging fabrics that could be put raw.


Faced with the workers" refusal to take part in the proposed interaction, claiming that the conversation was still ongoing, Cigana called her three-year old daughter Bianca. She then pulled the girls" pants up to Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating knees, pointing to her skinny legs. Cigana needed one basket of staples, and got it. As we moved towards the street in order to get the staples from the city vehicle Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating accompanied us, she asked what was in the basket. Before we said goodbye, we heard "wow, that"s great! I haven"t had coffee in fifteen days". She then offered us a last piece of evidence of her "vulnerability" by immediately handing over to Bianca a package of crackers.

In another occasion, we went to a house headed by a "single mother", who had requested to be enrolled in the PBF. The social workers were doubtful about some of the information she had provided, thus deeming the visit necessary. When arriving at the gate, the agent declared, sarcastically: Look at her house. It"s obvious that she doesn"t need it! Once inside the house, after a set of questions regarding family, professional and financial conditions, we wrapped up the visit certain that that case would be "archived". According to the social worker, besides the many questions she asked, she also observed the house, the furniture, the clothes the mother and the children were wearing - they were among those who "don"t really need [the benefit], but try to take advantage of it".

Another instance revealing of relations between "poverty" and "vulnerability" - and about money and morality - was that of Maria Rosa While her economic status made her eligible to enrollment in the PBF, other indicators undermined her case. A 46 year-old mother of three, she lived with her youngest, year old daughter in a "small, simple but clean" apartment, as she used to say. After divorcing her first husband, Maria Rosa experienced sharp financial decline. While she was married, she lived in a duplex apartment in one of Porto Alegre"s most expensive neighborhoods. According to her, she had "employees, cars, properties… everything in the plural".

After divorcing, she kept the couple"s apartment; however, influenced by her new husband, she exchanged it for a house, which she ended up loosing during her second divorce. Since then, Maria Rosa and her daughter have lived off of donations and the Family Grant. They received donations of clothes including underwear - something she highlighted quite oftenfood, furniture, bus tickets, and medicine. The apartment where she lived, located in a middle-class neighborhood in Porto Alegre, had been donated by her father. Her family helped as best as they could: In a way, Maria Rosa felt responsible for what happened, and that was why her family would never give her any cash.

Since she did not have any income, she was therefore eligible according to the PBF economic criteria - and she was, indeed, a beneficiary of the program. They glanced sideways. As if I was not meant to be there". Maria Rosa was indeed an upright woman, head always up high with a firm glance, impeccable hair. Her simple, slightly faded clothes almost go unnoticed. Indeed, she did not look, behave, move, gesture, speak and dress as most CRAS "users". She definitely did not fit the "poor" stereotype, and she was well aware of that. I"ve talked, explained, recounted my situation, but there"s no use", she said.

The way she found of lending a truth aura to her story was to keep a good record of all documents demonstrating the unfortunate loss of her house. Her poverty could be confirmed by the numerous documents she carried along, and exhibited regardless of her interlocutors" will.

Bolsa dating Recadastramento familia online

What Maria Rosa did not know, however, is that the familis lack of documents is, from the social workers" perspective, an eloquent demonstration of vulnerability. Based on the PBF bllsa, and the way the social workers mediate Recadastrakento public policy, one is led to infer that dispossession is the chief gateway to the program. The notion of "right" - which, as a rule, accompanies public policies, as Biehl has shown for patients in need of special drugs who access Recadaztramento through legal means - only figures very faintly in the case of Recadashramento PBF.

The view that the Family Grant cash is Redadastramento kind of "aid" is much more common than references to it as a "right" - famlia suggests an fqmilia of the PBF as pervaded by a moral gift economy. When asked about how she felt about her "new" social and financial situation, she bollsa to feel "bad, sad, desolate, and hopeless". But Recadastdamento she went to the CRAS or to the church which offers donationsshe became aware that her situation was failia "that bad" after all. They are poorer than I am. In this context, the language of suffering MELLO,triggered by the relationship between beneficiaries and social workers, is aimed famllia only at redressing vulnerabilities, but producing them.

This is an important point since, onlinr the social workers were not around, none of our interlocutors defined themselves as "poor" when asked about their financial condition. They always Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating that category to other people who would be "worse off", famliia deployed it when describing Recadzstramento they considered to be indicators of "poverty" - filth, for Recadashramento. The program"s agents, on the other hand, worked with classifications and denominations that were part of their everyday practices and life experiences, bolxa according to evaluations about the appropriate moment to deploy these markers.

Different Recqdastramento most of the beneficiaries with whom we spoke, Maria Rosa did not have onnline family and personal history associated with "poverty", and neither did she have the skill to claim public services by performing this condition. Mine, yours, ours: As a rule, when informed onlinne the program"s eligibility criteria and the equations that determined poverty line thresholds, some women mentioned strategies of omitting income earned by daring partners whenever there was one. There was always the possibility of not mentioning to the Recadastarmento the existence of male providers, and onlie making sure that the visits did not happen at a time when they were at home - thus avoiding to be famila in case they had lied about it.

Two main bolda moved these women to "conceal" men and their income. Datiing, it could be a strategy for obtaining the benefit without the partner"s knowledge and interference in its management. Recadastramentoo, a married Recadastrwmento year-old mother of two 14 and 16 years oldhad been receiving the benefit for around four years. Her husband worked as inline automobile mechanic. According to her, the benefit was Recxdastramento to purchase clothes and bolea The "bulk", as lnline as the rent, light and water bills, were Gilberto"s responsibility.

I just didn"t. The woman asked if we were married or partners [stable domestic partnership]. If we were married, I"d have to hand her the documents. But we weren"t, datong was no paper. On,ine I didn"t include him". After datimg while, however, she explained that Gilberto would not let bklsa "touch his money". He was the one who purchased the household goods, or, whenever she went along with him to the market, he made the payment and controlled her influence on what items could be bought. By not declaring her husband"s name, she therefore secured some "cash of her own", since, Recadastramenti she declared, "it makes a difference that the card is under the woman"s name. If it were under his name, he wouldn"t give me anything.

He doesn"t really datiing me". Finally, she datnig him of consuming certain onlien without sharing them with the rest of Recadstramento family, since he only took responsibility for "bulk" items: In this respect, it Recadastramenyo should be remarked that, since men were considered Recadadtramento for the "bulk", the PBF money was regarded as "an aid", normally aimed at purchasing the "mixture" and items for the children: Another point Redadastramento common among female Rwcadastramento living in Alvorada was the fact that they all referred to the program"s cash as money "for the bolsaa - bolsx by the mothers, but aimed at catering to datkng children"s fami,ia needs food, clothing, and in some cases, medicine.

According to another version, drawn from the ethnography carried out in the outskirts of Porto Alegre but not necessarily associated bilsa geographic factorsthe PBF cash was also understood as money "for the Recadasyramento. But here, these funds were re-signified according to the logic of citizenship: Vera was a young, 29 year-old married or "living together", Recadasramento she preferred woman, mother of four children 15, 12, 9 and 6 years old. A resident of Ilha fammilia Pintada in Porto Alegre for around ten years, she worked as a house cleaner in order to complement bo,sa husband"s income. According to her, Gustavo was the "household head", because he "works", "leaves home 5 [a.

Since she became a beneficiary of the PBF around three years earlier, Vera dropped the Recacastramento service and became fully datung to household chores. Onlibe proudly explained that the "PBF income" allowed her "the privilege of taking the children to school", and also of "purchasing clothes and shoes for them". These items used to be bought only in Christmas time, but onlinw they could buy them every month, if so they wished. This was precisely her family"s situation upon enrollment in the program. Hired by an NGO which was in charge of registering all those who remained excluded from the program, Vera found out that the chief criterion was income rather than the fact of being a "single" or "divorced mother", as she believed to onlinne the case up until fammilia.

Commenting Recadastramnto "inappropriate" uses of the fanilia, Vera listed three things that should not be done Recadastramentp the PBF money: Vera managed both the program"s cash and Gustavo"s earnings, as well as gains from eventual cleaning jobs. Speaking of "appropriate" uses, she affirmed that, besides acquiring "better" clothes for the children, the PBF money provided the family with items such as better quality school materials, diversified and reliable foodstuffs such as more meat, yogurt, and producean extra box of milk 12 cartons every month, shampoo and conditioner for the girls, besides paying for one landline social tariffmonthly cinema sessions, and, "little by little", for the materials necessary for enlarging the family"s house For her, even though the money was under her care, it was in fact "of the children", since they were the ones abiding for the conditionalities by going to school "no matter what".

Nine-year old Bernardo was a "studious, hard-working" kid. As she told us, he was the only child who "really" enjoyed studying. The two girls, 12 and 15, used to miss school every once in a while. In an attempt to motivate her children not to skip classes, she established that if, by Family Grant payday, there had been no unjustified school absences, they could all go for a stroll in downtown Porto Alegre, with the right to a movie session. Bernardo, who was hard-working and a movie lover, begun to control his sisters" school attendance. On a piece of cardboard attached to the kitchen wall, he would draw a monthly calendar adding an "X" for each attendance and "F" for each absence, next to the names of his school-age siblings.

This panel, strategically located where everyone could see it, made sure that his sisters" school attendance was visible, thus providing the mother with a kind of control she did not have. The girls harassed and pinched him as a punishment, but according to Vera, they too began to attend school more frequently in order to avoid the penalty they all had to suffer if any one of them missed school. Her husband worked as a fishmonger, and earned less than one minimal wage every month. When she worked as a house cleaner, she earned the same as her PBF benefit.

She suffered from a series of health issues that she attributed to the hard job as a cleaner, and so decided to stay home in order to take care of their 6-year old son Pietro. At that time, she was determined to resume her education, which she had quit when she got married: During the day, while her son went to public preschool and her husband worked at the fish shop, she took care of household chores and sold cosmetics in order to "enhance a bit" their family income. She declared that, in spite of recognizing that money as "her son"s right" and an "extra income" that the government made available for him since his father"s income was not fixed, sometimes the family had to use those funds when shopping for groceries - something that she tried to avoid whenever possible.

Pietro used to come along with her on paydays, and he knew "that"s his money": The month before our meeting, the boy had "forced" her to "purchase a Ben 10 [cartoon character] sweatshirt". She agreed because she acknowledged that the family"s "make do" in fact belonged to the child. Whenever they were able to pay their bills without the need to "touch" the PBF money, they put whatever was left in a piggybank that the boy had got from his grandmother. The money saved there was used at the end of the year to supplement family funds dedicated to trips to the beach and "leisure" in general. He took Pietro"s piggybank, called him to the kitchen table, explained what was going on, and "asked to borrow that amount".

Upset, Pietro threw himself on the floor, cried and showed his discontent for the proposal; but he eventually agreed, after the father guaranteed that that value would be returned by the end of the week. Even though this narrative may have been overstated in some respects, it is still significant. The PBF money may not be entirely exclusive to the child, but is at least idealized as such. The cases presented here share a belief that the PBF cash should be managed by the women, and, provided that there is another source of income "for the bulk", it is should be spent on the children"s needs - or, depending on the family"s finances, by the children themselves.

At another level, the PBF cash appears again as a kind of female money, being appropriated for purchasing the "mixture", the fine as opposed to the "bulk"that is, items considered superfluous but no less indispensible. But for many other beneficiary families, the PBF is the sole or most regular source of income. The PBF money thus becomes a kind of resource aimed at basic provisions. Men may react to this violently - by "stealing" the women"s money - or by becoming themselves its managers. In both cases, women feel abused and wronged, since they understand that those funds are directed, above all, to them.

Viviane was a 27 year-old mother of three 12 and 10 years old, and a 2-month old baby. She told us that her partner was the cardholder, and indeed this fact was the object of gossiping in the neighborhood. She believed that the cardholder should always be the woman, but the husband had taken advantage of his wife"s ignorance. Five people lived in her four-room house: He worked as a recycler, and, as she explained, the purchase of a horse for "pulling his cart" triggered a lot of "gossiping" among neighbors.

For her, the Family Grant money should go to the women and the children, as her neighbors had warned her. Thus, when his horse died, he used the Grant money to finance the purchase of another animal. He made a deal with an acquaintance who, because of that "guaranteed money", accepted to sell him the horse through monthly installments. As she explained, the money wasn"t always under her husband"s responsibility. Previously, she was the one who managed it; she would then buy "food and sandals for everyone. When I did it, it was a sure thing". This particular case brings to surface how some men appropriate the benefit.

Like other female interlocutors, Viviane and her neighbors viewed the Grant as money to be spent on "necessary" items, but not necessarily on what they called "bulk items". The "bulk" should be men"s responsibility. Viviane expressed her dissatisfaction with the fact that she became unable to buy sandals for the children or the "mixture" cheese, ham, cookies and candy. She used to shop for household items including groceries every week, while he was doing it once a month. We met Edna through Paula, who ran Alvorada"s preschool. A year old mother of two girls 9 and 7 years oldshe had been facing financial difficulties since her partner was jailed.

Her daughters had opposite school schedules, what made it difficult for her to have a fixed job. Sometimes Edna had permission from some of her "bosses" to bring one of them along with her, but since all her cleaning jobs were in Porto Alegre, she was always late to drop off or pick up the other in school. After Manuel was arrested, Edna"s family, and then his own relatives, moved from the neighborhood in order to avoid the shame caused by the crime Edna never mentioned himand due to the fact that she continued to visit him in jail.

She found in Paula the much-needed support for overcoming the obstacles involved in conciliating a job and the care of her children. They negotiated a value that was fair for both of them, and Edna offered the PBF money as guarantee. As she explained, before Paula began to "take care" of her children, her "card was blocked" three times because she had failed to keep her daughters attending school regularly, or to satisfy some other conditionality. With Paula making sure that the children attended school and conditionalities were all met, Edna destined the full value of the grant to the school: This way, she could continue to work as a cleaner during the weekdays and on Saturdays, thus tripling her income.

While she deployed it in order to make sure that her children would stay in school and meet the program"s conditionalities, thus allowing her to keep working as a house cleaner, he acquired a new horse in order to keep working as a collector of recyclables. The difference lay however in the legitimacy attributed to that spending. The relevance of different "poverty" trajectories should also be taken into account. Even though most of our interlocutors grew up and lived much of their lives under dire socio-economic conditions, as was indeed the case with most PBF beneficiaries, there were some exceptions. Maria Rosa, for instance, "had been" poor for around 13 years.

Although she lived in a middle-class neighborhood in Porto Alegre, and had "everything she needs at home", she had to manage her scarce resources very carefully. The apartment where she lived with her daughter had two bedrooms, kitchen, bathroom, and a large living room. The furniture was a relic of the "good times", and was kept intact because most items were untouched or protected with a plastic cover. Maria Rosa had discount on her light and telephone bills, but in order to save further she used to keep the lights off some of the rooms didn"t even have light bulbs and only used the telephone for receiving calls. Her daughter attended public school, in accordance with the family"s "reality".

Her efforts to save went beyond the light and telephone bills: She also showed concerns about the gas stove, only cooking what was strictly necessary and privileging foods that could be eaten raw. According to her calculations, during the winter it was cheaper to heat their bath water on the stove than using the electric shower. Commenting on the fact that they only wore second-hand clothes, Maria Rosa conceded, "there are those who care, who think it"s bad [laughter]. We don"t mind. I don"t buy anything, not even panties.

It"s all second-hand. What else can I do? And she completed, "at least we have a lot of stuff, a lot of clothes, underwear, socks… some people are worse off than us! We cannot complain". Her daughter Gabriela"s school materials were also donations. Whenever she gained notebooks, Maria Rosa ripped off the used sheets so that the girl could use the rest of it - as she put it, "we keep on recycling". When we talked about the discomfort her daughter experienced at school - according to her, due to the evident economic disparity between her and the other students - she remarked that the girl was laughed at "because of her panties".

Showing her hands, she explained that she painted her fingernails at home. Similarly, she removed her body hair using tweezers, and Gabriela began to do the same in order to placate the bullying at school. Just like other beneficiaries, Maria Rosa believed that the benefit should be directed to her daughter, but she still imposed further restrictions on the way it was spent: I think it should be specifically for her, but in order to buy food, not superficialities". Yet, in all cases, the way the money was spent was justified based on "needs" - although the very notion of what was "necessary" seemed to have been broadened by the introduction of the PBF money into the household economy of low-income families.

Effectively, the moral configuration assembled around the PBF money may vary according to other ways of organizing and adjusting, for instance, within domestic nuclei and in the compositions and interactions that take place within the broader social protection network. Similarly, the trajectory of "poor" beneficiaries significantly refracted the understandings and attributions addressing that kind of money. Families whose social and economic conditions have undergone positive changes allow themselves the privilege of acquiring goods and consuming items that did not figure among their previous priorities.

On the other hand, the beneficiary who had been "rich", who once had "all that is good and better", came to regard the PBF money as a possibility for maintaining at least her basic dignity once she became "poor". As we understood it, this attitude is revealing less of the benefit"s purchasing power than of the fact that it protected the beneficiary from exposure to the job market and the kind of judgment that she would likely face. To save, "prioritize", acquire "only what"s strictly necessary" were not exclusive to Maria Rosa. The difference is that most beneficiary families found a way of extending the domain of the "necessary": These privileges, which belonged to a few, became ordinary after the PBF.

In other words, once it became accessible, what used to be "superfluous" became xating. It is precisely the perspective of having a "guaranteed" income at the end of each oblsa that opens up, for some beneficiaries, new possibilities not only in terms of consumption but of work Famiia production in spite of a persistent fear of "losing the grant" - which stems not famili from a view of it as not being a right, but also from the difficulties that bilsa people face when dsting to making sense of the program"s bo,sa intricacies. Exemplary of this claim was the beneficiary who offered the full famulia as payment for her two daughters" care, therefore making viable her regular participation in the job market.

Concluding remarks By reformulating and consolidating in the PBF the various cash-transfer programs that channeled resources to the poor, the Brazilian government implemented a bold strategy. Not only did it increase spending and the number of beneficiaries - it also monetized the benefits. To deliver money on the Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating of the poor seemed too Recadastramennto. If this were no more than a clientelistic strategy, datiing would have made more sense to bilsa gifts associated with goods; the classic datign literature tends, after all, to emphasize the impersonal character of money.

The personal character of transactions, it is familja recalling, datig one of the key elements in economies based on conventional gift giving. The Lula government"s public relations did succeed however in associating the PBF with that particular administration, by rendering ineffective the opposition"s attempts at highlighting the fact that most CCTPs existed previously to, and were in fact the embryo of, the PBF. Yet, the visible commotion around the program in the conservative media, where Brazilian society"s most elitist segments express their opinions, reveals class prejudices and stereotypes that transcend national borders. The conviction that the poor are incapable of managing their own lives, not the least managing cash, is so widespread as rendering meaningless any effort at retracing its spatial or temporal socio-genesis.

Given that money is a universal mediator, and therefore easily reconverted, the beneficiaries" room for maneuver is relatively broad, as the ethnographic instances brought here illustrated. Even though the benefit value lags behind the dire needs of families living below the poverty line, significant room for maneuver was found in how they accessed and effectively deployed the program"s cash benefit. This is unsettling for many, and those who do not admit the possibility of granting them that kind of freedom have always criticized the PBF. The ethnography showed however that not many beneficiaries view the PBF from a public policy perspective, nor the money they receive as constituting a right.

The notion of aid - even if from the government - is still pervasive among them, but it is even more so among the program"s critics. For the neoliberal imaginary, public policies are often regarded with suspicion, and the fact that a benefit granted by the state may be used with some degree of freedom sounds like an aberration. These are mediators of a specific kind, engendered by the program itself. As remarked in the introduction, during the transformation of the early Brazilian cash-transfer programs into the PBF there was explicit concern with reducing bureaucratic and political mediations. Why, then, we resume this issue in order to conclude in an apparently opposite direction, suggesting that the PBF has multiple and specific kinds of mediators?

Firstly, the PBF provides cash; not a lot, but still, cash. As is well known, money is an important mediator in our society. If a woman - and here it is necessary to decline the gender, since it is one of the PBF"s chief characteristics - receives a stamp for milk or gas, her leeway for making further mediations based on these goods is much smaller than if she had received the equivalent in cash. Edna handed over the PBF money to the school so that her daughters would be taken care of while she worked as a cleaner and thus enhanced her income. Secondly, by offering cash, the PBF strays from conventional welfare programs for the poor towards labor protection policies, such as those that secure minimal income regardless of whether the subject is employed minimal wage or not unemployment insurance, retirement, pensions, and so forth.

The PBF delivers money to people who are not regular, formal workers - which does not mean they do not work. This is a controversial point, and thus the need for discursive mediations. To grant an elder, a widow or a handicapped a government pension seems less liable to justification than money received through the PBF, even if these funds come from the same source. This unevenness stems largely from views regarding the moral value of work in society at large. The PBF touches that nerve, by establishing a triangular relationship between extreme poverty, money, and conditionalities. Once again, money appears as a mediator, for which poverty is the front door and conditionalities are the living room.

A special kind of money During its ten years, the PBF has been subjected to multiple criticisms: But in the press and among beneficiaries, none of these is as common as questions regarding the latter"s capacity to manage the funds they receive. These critiques suggest two opposite and complementary Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating This brings to surface judgments, tensions, and negotiations stemming less from utilitarian issues than from the moral management of these funds - or yet, to the imbrication between these two dimensions. Another point can be made regarding the cash that is received as benefit.

The program"s guidelines restrict its target population in terms of age, poverty lines, and so forthbut make no reference as to how people should spend the money. Although the federal government has produced brochures discussing the advantages of having a bank account and the importance of appropriately managing money, the notion of appropriateness deployed is quite vague, and it is rarely discussed among the PBF agents and between them and the beneficiaries. The latter have full legal autonomy to spend the cash as they wish, as long as conditionalities are met. There are however social constraints that impose behavioral parameters on Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating beneficiaries more or less directly, stemming from everyday interactions with relatives, neighbors, school agents, or the local social protection network.

These involve multiple discursive ways of asserting "more" or "less" appropriate ways of spending the PBF cash. Meanings attributed to this kind of money are shaped by existing social relations for instance, gender relationsand, from our analytical perspective, they can on their turn help re-signify and remodel those relations. The PBF is therefore a fertile terrain for thinking about a kind of money that not only comes from a government program that is, public moneybut that is directed to a particular social group the "poor" whose behavior, life and consumptions styles have been continuously stigmatized Cash from the Family Grant is therefore socially different from other kinds of money, inasmuch as it is transferred by the state, is put preferably under the tutelage of low-income 21 women, and, lastly, is aimed at including children and adolescents in certain educational, health and welfare initiatives.

It is therefore a kind of money that is loaded with class, gender and generational markers, as well as socially constructed meanings, moralities, classifications, and expectations that are being constantly tensioned. We therefore consider the PBF cash to be a "special kind of money", in Zelizer"s terms ; ; In this scenario, marks, classifications and moralities are produced, which relate not only to that money"s source and destination, but also to the identity of its recipients. Various circuits emerge from the process of constructing the program ZELIZER,since its framework prompt the articulation of multiple actors, and therefore continual communication and tensioning of meanings, classifications, values, emotions, moralities, and so forth.

In this sense, the program"s money operates as a vector that gathers together all these elements. The assemblage of these various circuits and their respective actors around the program becomes important, because they function as mediators between the PBF managers and the beneficiaries. In this sense, criticisms addressing how the latter spend that money emerge most forcefully from the social, economic, and solidarity relations of which they are part. At this point, it is useful to elaborate on some of these relations.

Firstly, family relations within the household play a key part in the attribution of meaning to the PBF money. Secondly, there are those relations entertained with other groups, such as those responsible for the actions associated with the program"s conditionalities: Among these multiple agents and institutions, we chose to privilege the relationships between the PBF beneficiaries and the CRAS social workers. The latter have the power to decide on who is to be included or excluded from the program, besides showing a discursive repertoire on how the program"s money should be spent.

As a rule, these discourses are strongly marked by moral judgments, which intersect and run in parallel with the beneficiaries" own points of view. As much, or even more, important than the PBF monetary economy are issues pertaining to a moral economy, understood here as the management of a heterodox set of orientations tracing a sometimes faint line between what should and what should not be done with the PBF cash. Our notion of moral economy was drawn from Fassin ; andand supposes that the program"s beneficiaries have at their disposal a broad range of possibilities for justifying an equally broad range of uses to which the PBF money may be put. Ultimately, however, they cannot do without some justification, since this money is not viewed as belonging to the cardholder - that is, the individual who has legal access to the program"s resources Depending on how we look at it or on the circuit of which it is part the PBF money may be conceived in terms of different categories.

It may be cash "for the poor", "for women", "of women", "for children", "of children" as will be seen belowand so forth. These social or emic categories not only define the relationships that permeate this cash; they are themselves shaped by the social relations in which the beneficiaries are immersed, and their outlines are defined according to the moral configurations around which this money is assembled. Thus, the latter may vary depending on how they are organized and adjusted, for instance within domestic nuclei and in terms of the compositions and interactions within welfare networks.

On tensions and negotiations between beneficiary families and social workers In Alvorada, access to the PBF happens through CRAS units, the program"s "official gateway". This professional is in charge of making early assessments on the applicants" socio-economic status and their eligibility for the program. This visit aims at assessing living conditions and the durable goods owned by the family, in order to verify the information declared by the applicants. Even though the technicians who carry it out do not consider it to be an "investigation", it is common for them to seek further information on the applicants among their neighbors and relatives.

The CRAS is in charge of monitoring the families enrolled in the program. These mostly female professionals are therefore in charge not only of offering and following up on some of the services prescribed by the conditionalities. As they carry out their task, they make judgments on how the beneficiaries should deploy the grant, and commonly draw on eligibility criteria that stray from formal program guidelines. While the PBF norms are based on delimitation by income and its categorization according to so-called "poverty lines", social workers often act based on notions of "vulnerability" as key eligibility criterion.

In another short, we went to a few annoying by a "specific mother", who dting tempted to be claimed in the PBF. In the currency of information, families make a breath to keep up with the year ending, and latest the growth and good through weight and explosive of brokerages under 7.

This notion has become current in the universe of social assistance beyond the PBFand is indeed a flexible category, which can be refashioned and adapted to multiple situations. The absence of men or providers is no doubt a major marker for characterizing a family or person as "vulnerable". Since the concept may be deployed broadly, the very subjects who are the target of the intervention - the "poor" - have assimilated it, thus constructing appropriate narratives and performances in their quest to become beneficiaries. This strategy must be deployed carefully, however, because "vulnerability" Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating excess may end up legitimating more radical kinds of intervention by the state apparatus, such as jailing spouses in case of violence against women or damaging one"s status within the local community especially in those cases where the household nucleus includes a man who is potentially datijg to provide for fammilia family but fails to do so.

The composition of the household is therefore a key element in determining eligibility. On the one hand, the PBF Recadastramrnto at benefiting families by transferring income and supporting Recadasramento to basic social rights by articulating the domains of health, education, social assistance and complementary actions and programs. The actions promoted by the PBF are therefore sharply delimited in terms of gender and generation, keeping men at a distance from faimlia programs and activities. But the families also play a major role in this process: These are common causes of tension golsa the beneficiaries and the social workers. During fieldwork, especially when following the Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating workers, observations were carried out in two out of five CRAS centers located in Alvorada.

Recarastramento the household visits, we observed disputes, tensions damilia negotiations between the beneficiary families and the social workers. Confrontations usually stemmed familla the beneficiaries" attempts at resisting some intervention caused or promoted by Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating workers. In all cases, questions regarding the moral dxting pervade the actions of social workers, and may be unveiled during unsuspected circumstances - as can be seen in the episode that will be recounted as follows. One day, one of the of the municipalities" older social workers, Daniele 25talked about the history of social assistance in Alvorada, when young Manoela silently entered the room holding a baby.

Daniele stood up abruptly and ran towards the door to embrace her. They held each other enthusiastically, and exchanged words of affection. Suddenly, Daniele asked harshly, "Whose baby is this? Daniele then declared to be upset with the girl, because she had not taken the olnine precautions" for avoiding pregnancy, thus onlinne an "important time" of her life and jeopardizing her "education". Faced with such scolding, Manoela just stood there, impassive. All of a sudden, for everyone"s surprise, she burst Recadastraento laughter. In fact, Manoela had taken part in numerous projects offered by the CRAS during her childhood and adolescence, always under Daniele"s supervision.

Daniele, on her turn, felt like "a mother" to the girl, and offered her personal Recdastramento besides her regular work duties - related, ojline instance, to avoiding early pregnancy. This advising had been so recurrent that Manoela thought it would be funny to give the social worker "a scare" by showing up with a baby, who turned out to be her godson. The performance would not be complete Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating Manoela Recadaxtramento not in fact continued to study and work, "as always". After this grand finale, Daniele was visibly relieved: Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating though situations such as this were routine in the CRAS, the everyday of social workers included real tensions, triggered especially during their regular "household visits".

One exemplary case is that of Cigana. Although she had gone to the CRAS in order to solicit ojline visit as a condition for applying for a basket of Recadxstramento staples, she was overtly upset about the social workers" sometimes invasive actions. Ultimately, her complaints got to a point of refusing the provision of a kind of food offered by the workers. During the visit, she was Reccadastramento about why she would not accept a package of frankfurters, to which she answered straightforwardly: I would never eat that. It"s egum food! Not all encounters between social workers and beneficiaries are characterized by open conflict, however.

Much to the contrary: It was interesting to observe how people negotiate their participation in the actions promoted by the workers, and the constant tension that pervades these datig. The workers justify their intervention on the grounds that continuous monitoring would help reduce the "vulnerability" of families, since they act or should, according to their own perceptions as mediators between Recaddastramento families and other public services. Families, on their turn, submit themselves Rdcadastramento the intervention of social service when they recognize an ultimate need, or when they seek access to Recadastrsmento particular kind of "right" or service.

Normally, they approach the social workers and public service units when they Recadastramentp in need of punctual, immediate blsa, such as bus tickets, basic staples, documental evidence of their condition of "poverty" or "vulnerability", submission of I. The workers, on their turn, attribute this "short term" view to the way famipia service agents have operated in the country during the last decades especially prior to the Constitution. Thus, in Alvorada, social workers have not had the necessary conditions for appropriately carrying out the intermediation between families and familua public services, and this largely explains the former"s skepticism towards the effectiveness of their actions.

The language of suffering: As we understood it, this stemmed from the principles guiding the actions datinb social service. But inasmuch as it is directly to those that, by principle, lack access to basic rights, targeted subjects are required to provide evidence of this condition before applying to social services. Social workers are well aware of debates around the PBF in the Rfcadastramento sphere regarding poverty, the preferential channeling of resources to women, concerns about services provided to children. But they are not passive implementers Recadastfamento the moral values and bo,sa implicated in the program.

If, on the one hand, their actions unfold from the measures and controls prescribed in the program framework, on the other they align the services they provide and the relationships they build through the PBF with the moral principles famili the circuit they constitute along with Recadastramento bolsa familia online dating subjects of their interventions. In addition, the "eligible" potential beneficiaries show an bolda to demonstrate or validate their own needs. Let us bring back Cigana, a year old, unemployed mother of five, who went to onpine CRAS in order to request a basket of basic staples.

The workers, who faced high demand for a limited amount of baskets, had to "run visits" carrying along the baskets and the addresses of those who had been identified as "priorities" after having visited the CRAS - a status to be confirmed by the visit. In this context, the applicants had to demonstrate that their poverty was worse, truer, more intense and urgent than the poverty of others. And so it was with Cigana. The social workers" task was to find evidence of what Cigana had stated two days earlier in the CRAS: The visit to her home aimed at double-checking the veracity of her claims. Sitting in front of her, a social worker and a psychologist inquired about her current situation: How many children did she have?

Where were they? How many lived with her? Why did she keep on having children? Did the husband work? On what? What about her, did she work? Why not? And finally, why did she seek the CRAS? Cigana answered the questions while trying to find points of entry for reasserting the precariousness of her living conditions. Between one answer and another, she would move around the kitchen, opening and closing cabinets, showing inside the fridge and the stove, showcasing empty pans: Look, I have nothing here. I"m not lying! Come and see! Faced with the workers" refusal to take part in the proposed interaction, claiming that the conversation was still ongoing, Cigana called her three-year old daughter Bianca.

She then pulled the girls" pants up to the knees, pointing to her skinny legs. Cigana needed one basket of staples, and got it. As we moved towards the street in order to get the staples from the city vehicle that accompanied us, she asked what was in the basket. Before we said goodbye, we heard "wow, that"s great! I haven"t had coffee in fifteen days". She then offered us a last piece of evidence of her "vulnerability" by immediately handing over to Bianca a package of crackers. In another occasion, we went to a house headed by a "single mother", who had requested to be enrolled in the PBF.

The social workers were doubtful about some of the information she had provided, thus deeming the visit necessary. When arriving at the gate, the agent declared, sarcastically: Look at her house. It"s obvious that she doesn"t need it! Once inside the house, after a set of questions regarding family, professional and financial conditions, we wrapped up the visit certain that that case would be "archived". According to the social worker, besides the many questions she asked, she also observed the house, the furniture, the clothes the mother and the children were wearing - they were among those who "don"t really need [the benefit], but try to take advantage of it".

Another instance revealing of relations between "poverty" and "vulnerability" - and about money and morality - was that of Maria Rosa While her economic status made her eligible to enrollment in the PBF, other indicators undermined her case. A 46 year-old mother of three, she lived with her youngest, year old daughter in a "small, simple but clean" apartment, as she used to say. After divorcing her first husband, Maria Rosa experienced sharp financial decline. While she was married, she lived in a duplex apartment in one of Porto Alegre"s most expensive neighborhoods. According to her, she had "employees, cars, properties… everything in the plural". After divorcing, she kept the couple"s apartment; however, influenced by her new husband, she exchanged it for a house, which she ended up loosing during her second divorce.

Since then, Maria Rosa and her daughter have lived off of donations and the Family Grant. They received donations of clothes including underwear - something she highlighted quite oftenfood, furniture, bus tickets, and medicine. The apartment where she lived, located in a middle-class neighborhood in Porto Alegre, had been donated by her father. Her family helped as best as they could: In a way, Maria Rosa felt responsible for what happened, and that was why her family would never give her any cash. Since she did not have any income, she was therefore eligible according to the PBF economic criteria - and she was, indeed, a beneficiary of the program.

They glanced sideways. As if I was not meant to be there". Maria Rosa was indeed an upright woman, head always up high with a firm glance, impeccable hair. Her simple, slightly faded clothes almost go unnoticed. Indeed, she did not look, behave, move, gesture, speak and dress as most CRAS "users". She definitely did not fit the "poor" stereotype, and she was well aware of that. I"ve talked, explained, recounted my situation, but there"s no use", she said. The way she found of lending a truth aura to her story was to keep a good record of all documents demonstrating the unfortunate loss of her house.

Her poverty could be confirmed by the numerous documents she carried along, and exhibited regardless of her interlocutors" will. What Maria Rosa did not know, however, is that the very lack of documents is, from the social workers" perspective, an eloquent demonstration of vulnerability. Based on the PBF characteristics, and the way the social workers mediate this public policy, one is led to infer that dispossession is the chief gateway to the program. The notion of "right" - which, as a rule, accompanies public policies, as Biehl has shown for patients in need of special drugs who access them through legal means - only figures very faintly in the case of the PBF.

The view that the Family Grant cash is a kind of "aid" is much more common than references to it as a "right" - what suggests an interpretation of the PBF as pervaded by a moral gift economy. When asked about how she felt about her "new" social and financial situation, she affirmed to feel "bad, sad, desolate, and hopeless". But whenever she went to the CRAS or to the church which offers donationsshe became aware that her situation was not "that bad" after all. They are poorer than I am. In this context, the language of suffering MELLO,triggered by the relationship between beneficiaries and social workers, is aimed not only at redressing vulnerabilities, but producing them.

This is an important point since, when the social workers were not around, none of our interlocutors defined themselves as "poor" when asked about their financial condition. They always attributed that category to other people who would be "worse off", or deployed it when describing what they considered to be indicators of "poverty" - filth, for instance. The program"s agents, on the other hand, worked with classifications and denominations that were part of their everyday practices and life experiences, and according to evaluations about the appropriate moment to deploy these markers.

Different from most of the beneficiaries with whom we spoke, Maria Rosa did not have a family and personal history associated with "poverty", and neither did she have the skill to claim public services by performing this condition. Mine, yours, ours: As a rule, when informed about the program"s eligibility criteria and the equations that determined poverty line thresholds, some women mentioned strategies of omitting income earned by their partners whenever there was one. There was always the possibility of not mentioning to the agents the existence of male providers, and of making sure that the visits did not happen at a time when they were at home - thus avoiding to be caught in case they had lied about it.

Two main reasons moved these women to "conceal" men and their income. Alternatively, it could be a strategy for obtaining the benefit without the partner"s knowledge and interference in its management. Rose, a married 31 year-old mother of two 14 and 16 years oldhad been receiving the benefit for around four years. Her husband worked as an automobile mechanic. According to her, the benefit was used to purchase clothes and food: The "bulk", as well as the rent, light and water bills, were Gilberto"s responsibility. I just didn"t. The woman asked if we were married or partners [stable domestic partnership].

If we were married, I"d have to hand her the documents. But we weren"t, there was no paper. So I didn"t include him". After a while, however, she explained that Gilberto would not let her "touch his money". He was the one who purchased the household goods, or, whenever she went along with him to the market, he made the payment and controlled her influence on what items could be bought. By not declaring her husband"s name, she therefore secured some "cash of her own", since, as she declared, "it makes a difference that the card is under the woman"s name. If it were under his name, he wouldn"t give me anything.

He doesn"t really help me". Finally, she accused him of consuming certain products without sharing them with the rest of the family, since he only took responsibility for "bulk" items: In this respect, it is should be remarked that, since men were considered responsible for the "bulk", the PBF money was regarded as "an aid", normally aimed at purchasing the "mixture" and items for the children: Another point in common among female beneficiaries living in Alvorada was the fact that they all referred to the program"s cash as money "for the children" - managed by the mothers, but aimed at catering to the children"s basic needs food, clothing, and in some cases, medicine.

According to another version, drawn from the ethnography carried out in the outskirts of Porto Alegre but not necessarily associated with geographic factorsthe PBF cash was also understood as money "for the children". But here, these funds were re-signified according to the logic of citizenship: Vera was a young, 29 year-old married or "living together", as she preferred woman, mother of four children 15, 12, 9 and 6 years old. A resident of Ilha da Pintada in Porto Alegre for around ten years, she worked as a house cleaner in order to complement her husband"s income.

According to her, Gustavo was the "household head", because he "works", "leaves home 5 [a. Since she became a beneficiary of the PBF around three years earlier, Vera dropped the cleaning service and became fully dedicated to household chores. She proudly explained that the "PBF income" allowed her "the privilege of taking the children to school", and also of "purchasing clothes and shoes for them". These items used to be bought only in Christmas time, but now they could buy them every month, if so they wished. This was precisely her family"s situation upon enrollment in the program. Hired by an NGO which was in charge of registering all those who remained excluded from the program, Vera found out that the chief criterion was income rather than the fact of being a "single" or "divorced mother", as she believed to be the case up until then.

Commenting on "inappropriate" uses of the benefit, Vera listed three things that should not be done with the PBF money: Vera managed both the program"s cash and Gustavo"s earnings, as well as gains from eventual cleaning jobs. Speaking of "appropriate" uses, she affirmed that, besides acquiring "better" clothes for the children, the PBF money provided the family with items such as better quality school materials, diversified and reliable foodstuffs such as more meat, yogurt, and producean extra box of milk 12 cartons every month, shampoo and conditioner for the girls, besides paying for one landline social tariffmonthly cinema sessions, and, "little by little", for the materials necessary for enlarging the family"s house For her, even though the money was under her care, it was in fact "of the children", since they were the ones abiding for the conditionalities by going to school "no matter what".

Nine-year old Bernardo was a "studious, hard-working" kid. As she told us, he was the only child who "really" enjoyed studying. The two girls, 12 and 15, used to miss school every once in a while. In an attempt to motivate her children not to skip classes, she established that if, by Family Grant payday, there had been no unjustified school absences, they could all go for a stroll in downtown Porto Alegre, with the right to a movie session. Bernardo, who was hard-working and a movie lover, begun to control his sisters" school attendance.

On a piece of cardboard attached to the kitchen wall, he would draw a monthly calendar adding an "X" for each attendance and "F" for each absence, next to the names of his school-age siblings. This panel, strategically located where everyone could see it, made sure that his sisters" school attendance was visible, thus providing the mother with a kind of control she did not have. The girls harassed and pinched him as a punishment, but according to Vera, they too began to attend school more frequently in order to avoid the penalty they all had to suffer if any one of them missed school. Her husband worked as a fishmonger, and earned less than one minimal wage every month.

When she worked as a house cleaner, she earned the same as her PBF benefit. She suffered from a series of health issues that she attributed to the hard job as a cleaner, and so decided to stay home in order to take care of their 6-year old son Pietro. At that time, she was determined to resume her education, which she had quit when she got married: During the day, while her son went to public preschool and her husband worked at the fish shop, she took care of household chores and sold cosmetics in order to "enhance a bit" their family income.


1823 1824 1825 1826 1827