Isn't it time we said goodbye class stereotypes

Iwasfrozen

Canadel wrote: »

More access to education just means more people are entering the middle class, which is a good thing. And while access to education is vital, what is even more important is the value placed on education. I mean, surely with it's city centre location and ease of access, TCD should be over flowing with students from the south and north inner city? -no transport costs, no rent and equal access to Ireland's most reputable university through the equal opportunity CAO system.

But education on it's own is not a valid indication of class. For a person from a working class background a degree serves as a means to move up in the world but on it's own the degree doesn't mean anything.

As an extreme example an unemployed person with a phd who lives in council housing is still working class while a guy with no education who founded his own successful company is likely middle if not upper class.

One eyed Jack

steddyeddy wrote: »

But Jack you're using a circular argument. You're saying education isn't a good method of estimating social class because people are getting education despite their class. That doesn't work unless you define the parameters that make up a person's class.

Yeah that's true, and that's exactly why I questioned that other posters claim that a Bachelors is indicative of a person's class, I think they said it was an indication of middle class?

We can't really define social class based upon individual cases, because then we wouldn't be defining a social class, we'd merely be promoting those stereotypes you were saying earlier that we should be doing away with, and one of those stereotypes associating people who are unemployed, with people who are socially disadvantaged by virtue of the circumstances of their birth.

walshyn93

Canadel wrote: »

More access to education just means more people are entering the middle class, which is a good thing. And while access to education is vital, what is even more important is the value placed on education. I mean, surely with it's city centre location and ease of access, TCD should be over flowing with students from the south and north inner city? -no transport costs, no rent and equal access to Ireland's most reputable university through the equal opportunity CAO system.

Exactly. They just don't care enough. And the less they care about educating themselves and getting decent jobs, the less responsibility the current middle class ought to have for bailing them out.

walshyn93

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yeah that's true, and that's exactly why I questioned that other posters claim that a Bachelors is indicative of a person's class, I think they said it was an indication of middle class?

We can't really define social class based upon individual cases, because then we wouldn't be defining a social class, we'd merely be promoting those stereotypes you were saying earlier that we should be doing away with, and one of those stereotypes associating people who are unemployed, with people who are socially disadvantaged by virtue of the circumstances of their birth.

It now depends on the bachelors.

One eyed Jack

walshyn93 wrote: »

It now depends on the bachelors.

Exactly! I would be reluctant to suggest that simply being in possession of a degree (or any standard of education or employment status pertaining to the individual) is a sufficient indication of social class.

Social class refers to a group, not to individuals, and that's why I likened it to the BMI scale earlier which is useful in the context of populations, not any way useful at all when referencing individuals.

Earthhorse

The terms are meaningless in one sense, as evidenced by this thread, in that people assign different meanings to them so yes we should do away with them but then we should also probably do away with all these labels like left wing, right wing, feminist, social justice warrior, socialist, capitalist, fascist and so forth, that have multiple meanings which are usually obvious from the context but which people just to ignore and argue over the meaning they prefer instead.

John Locke once wrote "We should have a great fewer disputes in the world if words were taken for what they are, the sings of our ideas only, and for things themselves."

Stereotypes are fine; useful for negotiating new experiences and for humour but harmful if taken too seriously, that's all.

dandyelevan

It's probably a bit off the topic of 'class' but people in some jobs in Ireland were certainly looked down upon by society.
Soldiers especially, were singled out as being 'the lowest of the lower classes' at one time, and were never allowed forget their place in Irish society.
I joined the Army in the 1960s, and during recruit training our Instructors made no bones about where we stood in the Irish pecking order. Last!
In fact, we were lectured on how to make ourselves 'invisible to our employers, the general public' (for the want of a better phrase)
i.e. 'While in a shop waiting to be served, you not allowed to queue, but must wait until everyone else is served before venturing near a counter...and furthermore, while you are being served and a (civilian) customer arrives, you will step aside until that customer is served.'
There were more similar demeaning rules to make sure we kept our place at the bottom of the Irish food chain.
In many, many, shops, restaurants, Banks, and Garages in Ireland that refused service to soldiers, even up to the 1990s.

Maybe it's different nowadays.

Earthhorse

Hadn't heard any of that before, dandy. Perhaps the idea was to reinforce the concept of the soldiers serving the citizenry but even so it seems a touch far! But surprised to hear some places refused them service, that's nuts!

dandyelevan

Earthhorse wrote: »

Hadn't heard any of that before, dandy. Perhaps the idea was to reinforce the concept of the soldiers serving the citizenry but even so it seems a touch far! But surprised to hear some places refused them service, that's nuts!

Don't take my word for it, just ask any old soldier.

walshyn93

dandyelevan wrote: »

Don't take my word for it, just ask any old soldier.

Did this apply to soldiers of all rank? Officers, even?

Iwasfrozen

dandyelevan wrote: »

Don't take my word for it, just ask any old soldier.

I can understand a disdain for the military. I think we spend far too much on ours but that's a disdain for the military as an institution, discriminating against soldiers on a personal level is too far imo.

dandyelevan

No, not to my knowledge did it extend to Officers.

Earthhorse

The only soldier I know is an officer so I've no one to ask. I'll take your word for it.

Canadel

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

As an extreme example an unemployed person with a phd who lives in council housing is still working class while a guy with no education who founded his own successful company is likely middle if not upper class.

Those people are also both outliers.

walshyn93 wrote: »

Exactly. They just don't care enough. And the less they care about educating themselves and getting decent jobs, the less responsibility the current middle class ought to have for bailing them out.

They don't care because they don't know the importance of caring, which goes back to my original point - it's not the equality of access but the importance placed on that equality by those who should be benefiting from it but are not.

quadrifoglio verde

the_syco wrote: »

The middle class being those who work, and the working class being the unemployed, yes?

How can someone be working class and not be working?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

How can someone be working class and not be working?

They're the terms often used and show the nonsense of of all.

One eyed Jack

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

How can someone be working class and not be working?

Because social class doesn't apply at individual level, it applies to groups, so someone can easily be working class, as in they have the potential to gain employment, but they may not actually currently be employed.

That's how they can be a member of the working class, yet as an individual not currently gainfully employed.

Canadel

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

How can someone be working class and not be working?

People who work for very low wages are not that far off financially from a lot of people living off benefits and so fall under the same umbrella here in after hours i.e. not people you generally want to live beside, and definitely not associate with.

Whitewinged

I always thought that working class meant living week to week by your means something like that.

Middle class is more comfortable.

Upper Class is where you mostly dont need to work.

Obviously there are many different levels and grey areas within the classes.

You can be on welfare and still fit into any of the classes. Like the example steddyeddie gave of his friend who lived with his middle class mother and recieved the dole. If you had a new "welfare class" then there would be different classes within that. What would he be? Privelged welfare middle class? He does still hold the class of his parents because her worth will be his entitlement. He could recieve the same amount of welfare as a lower working class person who also lives with his mother of lower working class. She wont have anything to leave him. Both are on the dole but still different class.

Class is usually defined using a variety of metrics such as education, wealth (as in assets), occupation/profession, and income.

One common yardstick is this: If you can keep control of and plan your finances until the end of the week/month, you're working class. If you can control and plan your finances for the next decade, you're middle class. If you can plan and control your finances beyond your life expectancy, you're in an elite class. Upper class isn't applicable in a country like Ireland as it usually pertains to titles. You can be upper class and in millions of debt.

Or you can use generations: If you earn enough to look after yourself, you're working class. If you earn enough to look after yourself and and your children past higher education, you're middle class. If you earn enough to look after yourself, provide for higher education for your children, and leave assets to your grandchildren, you're in the top tier.

I never judge a person on their accent, education or address. Humans are too complicated for such simple yardsticks. Sometimes people who want class stereotypes disregarded are upwardly mobile working class, who are often the first to decry the 'spoilt, pampered middle-class brats living on Daddys dime'. You want rid of class stereotypes, it works both ways.

walshyn93

They don't care because they don't know the importance of caring, which goes back to my original point - it's not the equality of access but the importance placed on that equality by those who should be benefiting from it but are not.

Their loss.

I just remembered my Granddads 'furniture' definition of class.

If you were donated furniture, you're working class.

If you bought your furniture, you're middle class.

If you inherited your furniture, you're upper class.

sonny.knowles

Candie wrote: »

I just remembered my Granddads 'furniture' definition of class.

If you were donated furniture, you're working class.

If you bought your furniture, you're middle class.

If you inherited your furniture, you're upper class.

And if you got it from a skip?

sonny.knowles

sonny.knowles wrote: »

And if you got it from a skip?

Skip a class. Obv.


...I think it would count as a donation.

kunst nugget

sonny.knowles wrote: »

And if you got it from a skip?

You're a hipster...

steddyeddy

Whitewinged wrote: »

I always thought that working class meant living week to week by your means something like that.

Middle class is more comfortable.

Upper Class is where you mostly dont need to work.

Obviously there are many different levels and grey areas within the classes.

You can be on welfare and still fit into any of the classes. Like the example steddyeddie gave of his friend who lived with his middle class mother and recieved the dole. If you had a new "welfare class" then there would be different classes within that. What would he be? Privelged welfare middle class? He does still hold the class of his parents because her worth will be his entitlement. He could recieve the same amount of welfare as a lower working class person who also lives with his mother of lower working class. She wont have anything to leave him. Both are on the dole but still different class.

How so? Well in fairness you did explain it but I don't buy it. This guy doesn't value education and has an assault conviction. There's no way he wouldn't be classified as the lowest rung of society IMHO. Especially so since he lives off his mother.

Whitewinged

steddyeddy wrote: »

How so? Well in fairness you did explain it but I don't buy it. This guy doesn't value education and has an assault conviction. There's no way he wouldn't be classified as the lowest rung of society IMHO. Especially so since he lives off his mother.

Because your class is not based on assault convictions. Its not based on whether or not you recieve social welfare either. It doesnt matter whether he values education or not.

Your class is also not only defined by you and your wealth, education etc. but your family's class and the family you marry into based on their wealth and assests and your possible or eventual entitlement to those.

Also I would not say someone of lower working class is the "lowest rung of society" rather it is the description of their position or status in society based on a number of factors. Your friend maybe a lowest rung of society but it doesnt mean he is of lower class. He is not classy though.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

kunst nugget wrote: »

You're a hipster...

A Skipper surely.

steddyeddy

Whitewinged wrote: »

Because your class is not based on assault convictions. Its not based on whether or not you recieve social welfare either. It doesnt matter whether he values education or not.

What you've done here is defined class based on what it's not rather than impose any real metrics. Several people have said one of the indicators of being middle class is valuing education. Why are they wrong and you're right? You see what I'm getting at? Everyone here has various ideas about class. They're all saying what they think is the correct definition. Each definition has bordered on flimsy. How am I meant to take it seriously?

Your class is also not only defined by you and your wealth, education etc. but your family's class and the family you marry into based on their wealth and assests and your possible or eventual entitlement to those.

In science we referred to your argument as the species fallacy. Species was hard to define as a concept so some people said "no it's not your DNA, behavior or phenotype it's what your parents were". Which ultimately is valueless because it means that their parents were defined by their parents.

One of my old lecturers is a royal society member and discovered something that progressed biochemistry and therefore medicine hugely. His parents lived in a council estate in a part of Dublin and their parents couldn't afford education for them. By definition of some he is working class yet he is more cultured than most I know. His child might not value education and become a drug dealer (had to pick the extreme didn't I?). Therefore his child is middle class or working class or what is he? Your definition isn't clear.

Also I would not say someone of lower working class is the "lowest rung of society" rather it is the description of their position or status in society based on a number of factors. Your friend maybe a lowest rung of society but it doesnt mean he is of lower class. He is not classy though.

Ok so he's not lower class but possesses no class. You'll forgive me if I'm none the wiser. As I said before I think class is something to hold onto. To the criminal who lives with his mother that thinks he's middle class because his parents worked hard to someone who insists their working class for whatever reason.

Whitewinged

Candie gave some good definitions on each class in her post.

I think your confusing class with the sterotypes of class.

If your friend had a conviction it has no impact on his class. Even if he "values" education or is educated, there are other factors and you dont have to be educated to be a certain class. And even if you are educated it doesnt mean that education is used alone to determine class.

A working class man may have a conviction and not value education. A middle class man may have a conviction and not value education and an upper class man may have a conviction and not value education.

the only information you gave about your friend that could determine his class is that his mother who he lives with is middle class which directly impacts his class.

Your college professer may have moved from his working class family to middle or upper class. I dont know his income but he is educated and has a good career so would suggest so he probably has his own house etc. Some people get stuck in a class and it can be difficult to move from that class. Some do by education like your professor but he used that education.

Pablo escabar was a drug dealer but he was upper class.