5 ms·

> You can be poor and still act more “upper class” and you can be rich and still act “working class”. You are stunningly naive if you think that a poor person

> You can be poor and still act more “upper class” and you can be rich and still act “working class”. You are stunningly naive if you think that a poor person acting more "upper class" isn't reminded that they're "out of their lane" more than someone rich acting "working class".

jmt_ 5y ago
Spot on. Every time I wear "fancy" clothes I'm constantly worrying that everyone is pointing at me thinking "we know who you really are, you're poor and don't deserve to be acting this way". This is despite me moving away from my poor town years ago and establishing a solid job for myself. Nobody in my new town knows me at all yet I assume they know I came from a "less than" background. A poor person must undo decades of the effects poverty inflicts to truly appear "rich" where a rich person must simply "lower their standards" to act working class.
- xyzelement 5y ago
  > must simply "lower their standards" to act working class. You make that sound easy, but I see the situation as symmetric. For example, my wife grew up wealthier than I did - and when it came time for us to buy a car, her first question was "how big a car would we need to comfortably move our family around" while mine was "what's the most affordable?" it's a completely different mindset - she is frustrated that I default to a poor mindset and I am frustrated that she defaults to a rich one. Neither one is easy to switch.
  - jmt_ 5y ago
    I'm talking about the case where a person doesn't get to "choose" to act poor. The poor person doesn't get to choose to think other than what is affordable, where someone with more money gets the choice to thinking of things other than affordability, like comfortably. The mindset that develops from a lack of agency in one's life is more traumatizing than one that does have that agency but must learn to change their mindset. Different people might not be as effected by poverty however.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  You don't need anything even close to overly "fancy"; if you're the average poor person, you can vastly improve your image simply by wearing any sort of formal clothes, as in a suit and tie. Even if others "know who you really are" they'll still appreciate that you're making the effort to relate to them, and that's what matters. We tend to forget stuff like this as we lose sight of the value of enduring traditions, but if you look at visual records of how older generations behaved you'll see plenty of poorer folks looking quite comfortable in formal wear.
  - jmt_ 5y ago
    But poor people hate feeling like they have to change their appearance to get the approval of the privileged classes. Feeling like you have to visually and verbally code switch to get "better" people to respect you just feels bad. Spending precious money on the cheapest formal wear you can find just so people will take you seriously further cements the divide poor people feel.
    - zozbot234 5y ago
      > But poor people hate feeling like they have to change their appearance to get the approval of the privileged classes. You say that like everyone else isn't doing the exact same thing. Being privileged is all about playing the "get everyone else's approval" game. But coming from a different social context it's even more basically a way of showing others respect and earning their trust, so it's not without consequence.
      - fossuser 5y ago
        It loops back around at the top. It’s why there’s an eccentric rich person trope and why it’s called “fuck you” money. If you’re totally financially independent you’re more free to do what you want, independent of class behavior expectations (or even in contradiction of them). They no longer matter that much (unless you’re doing something that requires politics or people).
      - jmt_ 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dcx 5y ago
No need to go for the throat there. And especially not when you're not totally correct. Paul Fussell's Class documents the exact phenomenon OP describes. Wealth is not class [1]; class is much more complex. For example, poor academics are higher class than rich blue-collar workers. Donald Trump is crazy rich but affects many of the working-class behaviours described in said book (technically "high prole"). Barack Obama has much less money but most would view him as upper-middle class. Nobody would accuse the above of being "out of their lane". My very rough approximation: class is something like the integral of wealth over very long periods of time. Being rich and well-connected for long periods gives you a chance to accumulate high-status behaviours and preferences, which can persist even when the wealth doesn't, and continue to confer benefits. Preferring golf or tennis to say, bowling, doesn't necessarily come with a major difference in affordability. But being good at golf might help your career more than bowling. Reading more helps in tons of ways, and most people only pick up this habit if they grow up with access to good education and parental cognitive surplus. [1] https://resourcegeneration.org/breakdown-of-class-characteristics-income-brackets/ https://resourcegeneration.org/breakdown-of-class-characteri...
- fossuser 5y ago
  Yeah - I agree with all of this. On a related note, I think the US approach to dismissing class is preferable to the UK where it’s very explicit. While both approaches have issues, when it’s explicit in the culture people seem to discriminate on it more (or even self-sort themselves based on identity). I think ideally it’s better for a culture to try to not do that, but pragmatically it’s good to be aware of its existence in order to be successful. I mostly chalk it up to social skills. On specifically being told to “stay in your lane” my point was more that if you’re behaving a certain way you won’t be told that, because the other people will assume you’re like them. It’s not only about wealth (though as in the article, the behavior is often related).
  - 2cb 5y ago
    > On a related note, I think the US approach to dismissing class is preferable to the UK where it’s very explicit. Huh. My perception has always been that America is far more obsessed with class and “keeping up with the Joneses” than Britain. That said, I have in the past been called “rich” in a derogatory manner just for owning an iPad. But that’s more an amusing anecdote than social commentary. I find this type of thing to be the exception rather than the norm. For context I’m a Brit with a decent job but my family is certainly not upper middle class or even middle class and all my friends are working class because those are the people I naturally get along with. For the most part the fact I make more money doesn’t cause any friction in those social circles. One of my mates even said to me if he didn’t know better he’d assume I lived on a council estate. I guess the point I’m trying to make is the class lines are very blurred in modern day British society except for at the extremes. As such it’s not something people tend to obsess over. On the other hand I’ve found that, in general, middle class Yanks tend to care more about being perceived a certain way so people know they’re middle class or upper middle class or whatever else. I’ve even seen them argue over exactly what constitutes “real” upper middle class compared to regular middle class. Not something I’ve ever seen Brits do.

jmt_ 5y ago

Spot on. Every time I wear "fancy" clothes I'm constantly worrying that everyone is pointing at me thinking "we know who you really are, you're poor and don't deserve to be acting this way". This is despite me moving away from my poor town years ago and establishing a solid job for myself. Nobody in my new town knows me at all yet I assume they know I came from a "less than" background. A poor person must undo decades of the effects poverty inflicts to truly appear "rich" where a rich person must simply "lower their standards" to act working class.

xyzelement 5y ago
> must simply "lower their standards" to act working class. You make that sound easy, but I see the situation as symmetric. For example, my wife grew up wealthier than I did - and when it came time for us to buy a car, her first question was "how big a car would we need to comfortably move our family around" while mine was "what's the most affordable?" it's a completely different mindset - she is frustrated that I default to a poor mindset and I am frustrated that she defaults to a rich one. Neither one is easy to switch.
- jmt_ 5y ago
  I'm talking about the case where a person doesn't get to "choose" to act poor. The poor person doesn't get to choose to think other than what is affordable, where someone with more money gets the choice to thinking of things other than affordability, like comfortably. The mindset that develops from a lack of agency in one's life is more traumatizing than one that does have that agency but must learn to change their mindset. Different people might not be as effected by poverty however.
zozbot234 5y ago
You don't need anything even close to overly "fancy"; if you're the average poor person, you can vastly improve your image simply by wearing any sort of formal clothes, as in a suit and tie. Even if others "know who you really are" they'll still appreciate that you're making the effort to relate to them, and that's what matters. We tend to forget stuff like this as we lose sight of the value of enduring traditions, but if you look at visual records of how older generations behaved you'll see plenty of poorer folks looking quite comfortable in formal wear.
- jmt_ 5y ago
  But poor people hate feeling like they have to change their appearance to get the approval of the privileged classes. Feeling like you have to visually and verbally code switch to get "better" people to respect you just feels bad. Spending precious money on the cheapest formal wear you can find just so people will take you seriously further cements the divide poor people feel.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > But poor people hate feeling like they have to change their appearance to get the approval of the privileged classes. You say that like everyone else isn't doing the exact same thing. Being privileged is all about playing the "get everyone else's approval" game. But coming from a different social context it's even more basically a way of showing others respect and earning their trust, so it's not without consequence.
    - fossuser 5y ago
      It loops back around at the top. It’s why there’s an eccentric rich person trope and why it’s called “fuck you” money. If you’re totally financially independent you’re more free to do what you want, independent of class behavior expectations (or even in contradiction of them). They no longer matter that much (unless you’re doing something that requires politics or people).
    - jmt_ 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dcx 5y ago

No need to go for the throat there. And especially not when you're not totally correct. Paul Fussell's Class documents the exact phenomenon OP describes. Wealth is not class [1]; class is much more complex. For example, poor academics are higher class than rich blue-collar workers. Donald Trump is crazy rich but affects many of the working-class behaviours described in said book (technically "high prole"). Barack Obama has much less money but most would view him as upper-middle class. Nobody would accuse the above of being "out of their lane". My very rough approximation: class is something like the integral of wealth over very long periods of time. Being rich and well-connected for long periods gives you a chance to accumulate high-status behaviours and preferences, which can persist even when the wealth doesn't, and continue to confer benefits. Preferring golf or tennis to say, bowling, doesn't necessarily come with a major difference in affordability. But being good at golf might help your career more than bowling. Reading more helps in tons of ways, and most people only pick up this habit if they grow up with access to good education and parental cognitive surplus. [1] https://resourcegeneration.org/breakdown-of-class-characteristics-income-brackets/ https://resourcegeneration.org/breakdown-of-class-characteri...

fossuser 5y ago
Yeah - I agree with all of this. On a related note, I think the US approach to dismissing class is preferable to the UK where it’s very explicit. While both approaches have issues, when it’s explicit in the culture people seem to discriminate on it more (or even self-sort themselves based on identity). I think ideally it’s better for a culture to try to not do that, but pragmatically it’s good to be aware of its existence in order to be successful. I mostly chalk it up to social skills. On specifically being told to “stay in your lane” my point was more that if you’re behaving a certain way you won’t be told that, because the other people will assume you’re like them. It’s not only about wealth (though as in the article, the behavior is often related).
- 2cb 5y ago
  > On a related note, I think the US approach to dismissing class is preferable to the UK where it’s very explicit. Huh. My perception has always been that America is far more obsessed with class and “keeping up with the Joneses” than Britain. That said, I have in the past been called “rich” in a derogatory manner just for owning an iPad. But that’s more an amusing anecdote than social commentary. I find this type of thing to be the exception rather than the norm. For context I’m a Brit with a decent job but my family is certainly not upper middle class or even middle class and all my friends are working class because those are the people I naturally get along with. For the most part the fact I make more money doesn’t cause any friction in those social circles. One of my mates even said to me if he didn’t know better he’d assume I lived on a council estate. I guess the point I’m trying to make is the class lines are very blurred in modern day British society except for at the extremes. As such it’s not something people tend to obsess over. On the other hand I’ve found that, in general, middle class Yanks tend to care more about being perceived a certain way so people know they’re middle class or upper middle class or whatever else. I’ve even seen them argue over exactly what constitutes “real” upper middle class compared to regular middle class. Not something I’ve ever seen Brits do.