Drawing on ethnographic research in a homeless shelter, this article examines how caseworkers navigate an occupation that is often physically and morally trying, and at times, objectionable. Given this context, we examine the ways in which caseworkers identify and define "dirty work," often seen as a source of occupational degradation, according to two main typifications: the physical and the moral. Building on Erving Goffman's frame analysis, we examine the definitional and interactional strategies actors use to transform unpleasant first-order realities to more valued, meaningful, or workable second order realities, by keying particular frames of meaning. These involve framing dirty work through (1) a professional lens, (2) humanism and egalitarianism, (3) a negotiated interpretation of institutional rules, and (4) the use of humor. We conclude by reflecting on the constructed nature of dirty work, and the importance of framing strategies in the sociology of occupations, suggesting that a more generic application of these ideas may be useful across a number of other social contexts.

Drawing from previously untapped archival data, our research undertakes a crossnational analysis to understand how critical organizations within the global solidarity movement for East Timor in Canada, the United States, and Australia adapted their human-rights claims and rhetorical interventions to their specific national contexts to produce politically and culturally resonant motivational frames aligned with their states’ discourses of national identity and foreign policy to support humanitarian intervention in East Timor. We identify crossnational differences in the framing of their political discourse: (1) Canadian groups mobilized a humanitarian-peacekeeping frame, (2) U.S. solidarity groups tapped into a democratic-exceptionalist frame, and (3) Australian activists drew from a remembrance-moral debt frame. We conclude by underscoring the importance of discursive opportunities and national historical contexts for studying the mobilization of human rights and crossnational variations in motivational framing.

This article examines the East Timor Alert Network's (ETAN) claims-making strategies regarding support for human rights and self-determination of East Timor during the Indonesian occupation from 1975-1998. This research seeks to understand how ETAN attempted to persuade Canadians to care about a geographically distant horror. I examine various claims-making strategies that ETAN used to encourage Canadian audiences to evaluate the problem as an object of public concern, the Timorese as victims deserving of their sympathy, and Canadian government as condemnation-worthy. 1 | INTRODUCTION Indonesia's armed forces swept through East Timor on December 7 th of 1975, a small pacific island 300 kilometres northwest of Australia. Timor was a Portuguese colony throughout the 16 th century until the Dutch forced the imperial power to the eastern half of the island in 1641. With the overthrow of Portugal's authoritarian Salazar regime in 1974, its colonies were granted with the right to self-determination. Before the invasion, a brief civil war broke out between two rival political parties: Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (Fretilin) and the Democratic Union of Timor (UDT). Indonesia feared a newly independent state in East Timor would make alliances with external geopolitical threats, like the Soviet Union. Left to their own devices, a "Marxist tyranny" 1 would emerge. The Indonesian state depicted Fretilin as "a communist wolf wearing nationalist sheep's clothing." 2 Shortly after Fretilin declared East Timor to be an independent democratic republic (November 28 th 1975), on December 7 th , Indonesian forces invaded the island, committing various human rights abuses and atrocities. As the events in East Timor unfolded, a group called the East Timor Alert Network (ETAN) emerged in Canada. ETAN felt strongly that this was an issue that Canadians should be deeply concerned about, given that

Qualitative field research can capture the life worlds and definitions of the situation of informants often not reported in quantitative studies. Post hoc reflections of how more seasoned researchers de­fine, assess, and interpret the process of entering the field and the interview dynamic between the researcher’s subjectivity and the subjectivity of informants are widespread in the qualitative research literature. However, seldom are the personal stories and reflections of neophyte researchers voiced in published accounts. This article accounts for my experiences in researching the “dirty work” of front­line caseworkers and the importance of practicing empathy while managing a boundary. I emphasize the practical sense-making challenges of managing a delicate balance between under and over rapport in researching homeless shelter caseworkers as an occupational group. My experiences underscore the challenging dynamics of maintaining a professionally oriented research-role, as well as the crucial importance of boundary work and distancing as practical strategies to qualitative interviewing.