S/O pageants - Activities and SES

Mrs.Hizzo

I saw a lot of people suggesting that pageants are popular with a certain SE group. Are there other activities that you associate with class? For instance, say you met a mom and she looked average, not rich or poor, and you couldn't tell by talking to her what sort of education she had. What activities could she say her kids were really into that might make you form an opinion about her?

notkateanymore

Around here, competitive cheerleading is kind of not high class...LOL trying to beat around the bush. That being said, DD wants to do it and if she could tumble, I'd let her. I've watched cheer competitions my whole life.

LatteLady5

Mermaids&Magic said:

If someone's kid is into fencing, horseback riding  or polo, I'm going to go with them being wealthy.

I rode and had horses (thanks to my grandmother) and my parents were far from wealthy. Around here I don't assume anyone is wealthy because of an extracurricular they participate in. We don't have fencing or polo though. All of our sports are offered through the Y and community theatre for kids is free as it's funded by a foundation set up by a deceased woman from this town. I suppose private lessons of anytime could indicate some sort of money but then again I took private voice lessons, piano, and horseback and my grandmother funded it all.

Andrewsgal

We did competitive Cheerleading last year and I agree with Kate the clientele was not high class even though it cost an arm and a leg.

Minipenguin

letranger said:

When I say it is a trashy I don't mean low income families. I mean people who are trashy at any income.

Yeah, IME "trashiness" depends on how someone was raised, not how much money they have now.

Any kind of competitive riding I consider upper class (polo, dressage, etc). Honestly, TV is a huge indicator, only people of a certain class let their kids watch tv all day long.

You can also tell by the kids shoes and clothes... Is the baby in timberland's or brand new uggs? Trashy. IME, people who are from a higher SES don't waste their money on $200 shoes for a baby that can't walk yet.

Christmas, too. For some reason people who don't have a lot of money always seem to get their kids 500 gifts for Christmas.

JeffandLeslie

auroraloo said:

Hockey.

eta: not so much their SES, though I'd assume they're fairly upper middle class, but the type of person they are. This comes from teaching in some serious hockey schools.

This, also lacrosse.

Minipenguin

JeffandLeslie said:

auroraloo said:

Hockey.

eta: not so much their SES, though I'd assume they're fairly upper middle class, but the type of person they are. This comes from teaching in some serious hockey schools.

This, also lacrosse.

What type of person plays hockey/lacrosse? Seriously, I don't know what would come to mind.

notkateanymore

Our town is getting into lacrosse big time. I actually hope that LO will pick that over baseball and football.

hmd

Yes, lacrosse and field hockey scream East Coast private school to me too.  We had a lot of East Coasters at my midwestern private university.  

Horses are expensive, but I know people who don't have a lot of money who have them.  

Traveling teams and private lessons are more upper class, I guess, although I have no experience with that yet.  

Minipenguin

I went to private school just outside Boston and I played lacrosse in high school. Maybe that's why I didn't know it was a stereotype? Lol, I always thought it was just a sport people played, like soccer.

Minipenguin

Diapers&Wipes said:

Minipenguin said:

Yeah, IME "trashiness" depends on how someone was raised, not how much money they have now.

Any kind of competitive riding I consider upper class (polo, dressage, etc). Honestly, TV is a huge indicator, only people of a certain class let their kids watch tv all day long.

You can also tell by the kids shoes and clothes... Is the baby in timberland's or brand new uggs? Trashy. IME, people who are from a higher SES don't waste their money on $200 shoes for a baby that can't walk yet.

Christmas, too. For some reason people who don't have a lot of money always seem to get their kids 500 gifts for Christmas.

I totally disagree with the tv part.  I know parents who are checked out in all income brackets. They let their kids watch tv so that don't have to interact with them.  

I know Christmas was a huge deal in my poor family because it was the one time of year my mom would save for to actually get us stuff.  She just wanted us to feel normal and have a decent Christmas like our peers.  We didn't get much else throughout the year, but Christmas was the one she tried her best to "keep up with the Jones". 

I don't know, that just never made sense to me. Wouldn't it be better to get a few presents, save the money, and use it throughout the year as a treat or to buy toys at other times? I guess I just don't understand the rush to get a pile of gifts for one holiday. But then, birthdays were always a bigger deal than Christmas in my family, so maybe that's why.

ETA: I'm really not trying to be offensive or criticize your mom. Just saying I don't understand the desire for an excessive amount of gifts in one day, not that it's wrong or whatever.

Minipenguin

Lamb29 said:

This thread kinda makes me uncomfortable.
Trashy does not equal poor, classy does not equal rich.
I think what sports/activities you are involved in has more to do with the area you live in, and whats available than with income bracket.

I know some very well off parents who let their kids watch TV all day.  Rich parents does not mean good parents. 

Some of the classiest women I've ever met in my life have been "poor". 

I did say it doesn't have to do with how much money they have now. Socio-econmoic status isn't just about the money, it's about the social class, too. And IME, that doesn't change when your income goes up.

kcisthebombdotcom

Diapers&Wipes said:

Minipenguin said:

Yeah, IME "trashiness" depends on how someone was raised, not how much money they have now.

Any kind of competitive riding I consider upper class (polo, dressage, etc). Honestly, TV is a huge indicator, only people of a certain class let their kids watch tv all day long.

You can also tell by the kids shoes and clothes... Is the baby in timberland's or brand new uggs? Trashy. IME, people who are from a higher SES don't waste their money on $200 shoes for a baby that can't walk yet.

Christmas, too. For some reason people who don't have a lot of money always seem to get their kids 500 gifts for Christmas.

I totally disagree with the tv part.  I know parents who are checked out in all income brackets. They let their kids watch tv so that don't have to interact with them.  

I know Christmas was a huge deal in my poor family because it was the one time of year my mom would save for to actually get us stuff.  She just wanted us to feel normal and have a decent Christmas like our peers.  We didn't get much else throughout the year, but Christmas was the one she tried her best to "keep up with the Jones". 

I'm sure there are plenty of wealthy women who use tv as a babysitter but there is a correlation between increased television usage and lower income families. They are less educated about the dangers of television in excess.

Minipenguin

Lamb29 said:

Minipenguin said:

Lamb29 said:

This thread kinda makes me uncomfortable.
Trashy does not equal poor, classy does not equal rich.
I think what sports/activities you are involved in has more to do with the area you live in, and whats available than with income bracket.

I know some very well off parents who let their kids watch TV all day.  Rich parents does not mean good parents. 

Some of the classiest women I've ever met in my life have been "poor". 

I did say it doesn't have to do with how much money they have now. Socio-econmoic status isn't just about the money, it's about the social class, too. And IME, that doesn't change when your income goes up.

I'm totally confused then.  If you aren't judging these people on the amount of money they make, why are you judging how much money they spend on their children for Christmas? 

I didn't say I was judging them. Scrolling through my facebook newsfeed at Christmas time, the only people who went overboard with gifts are people who came from a lower SES. I didn't say I thought it was wrong to get them a ton of gifts for Christmas. It doesn't make them bad parents and it doesn't necessarily mean their kids are spoiled. But, okay, for example, my MIL came from a very, very poor background and she will buy DD 40 things that cost 50 cents but would never buy one thing that cost 20$. Even though it's the same amount. People who come from a lower SES seem to think that way.

alli2672

letranger said:

Crew! Is the total white person rich people sport in my opinion.

lol...I was wondering when someone was going to say this.  Women's crew is changing some with all of the scholarships from Title IX, but men's crew is a rich white kid sport to stay

alli2672

letranger said:

letranger said:

Crew! Is the total white person rich people sport in my opinion.

lol...I was wondering when someone was going to say this.  Women's crew is changing some with all of the scholarships from Title IX, but men's crew is a rich white kid sport to stay

Lol I have to bike past the regatta and they don't get more Rich and entitled. Actually some old rich white guy told me a 1 yr old m and I didn't belong on the bike path he wanted to stop in the middle of.

haha...I can see it.  I coached and rowed for a little over a decade.  I absolutely love being on the river at dawn, but some people are a little nuts about it.