Julie Burchill's attack on transsexuals...

[ymu]

He's a scary fucker, eh.

 

[co-op]

He's a scary fucker, eh.

Well I have my own machismo issues so I probably picked an argument or two with him just to show I don't mind having a pop at the Big Guy, pub stuff really bit childish really. But I have plenty of respect for what he knows.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And even if we somehow reached a point where we were sorted most of the time, the big challenge will always be when it is tempting to apply these issues cruelly against people deemed worthy of our hate. Thatcher and Cameron are hated for obvious reasons, and this will lead to a drop of standards and revelations about how far attitudes about certain things havent really come. A classic u75 example that springs to mind would be the thread about David Shayler when he developed a female alter ego. We wouldnt expect that situation to give rise to sensible discussion about gender and trans issues, because of the baggage he brought with him, ie the reasons people had for already disliking him, and indeed it did not.

Likewise u75 can feature people preaching sophisticated positions regarding issues such as mental health, drug addiction and autism, yet that offers few barriers against venom and hate on the occasions that someone struggling with one or more of these issues ends up talking shit here. It seems inevitable that such situations will quickly give rise to u75's equivalent of George Galloway on Big Brother saying 'poor me, poor me, poor me another drink' to Michael Barrymore, with the excuse that Barrymore has baggage and was behaving like a control freak at the time with some sinister menacing undertones oozing out of the tv set.

And it only takes a woman in the public eye to have a dodgy political opinion about something to unleash a stream of sexist, violent language or crude comments about how she looks. Or a closeted Tory suffering innuendo in the press to open the gates and let flow the nudge-nudge wink wink playground smears against teh gays. I dont see this changing, and the most I expect I'll be able to do about it is to simply acknowledge it once in a while.

People are human. They're susceptible to exhibiting their worst, as well as their best qualities.

BTW, your aside about the "closeted Tory" (only slightly) misses the point that one of the reasons he was so heavily slammed on Urban and suffered innuendo in the press was his perceived hypocrisy, given his voting record on gay issues. Does anyone slam "out" gay Tories for their sexuality? Not so much, IME. They have, at least, had the courage of their convictions. People, for example, stopped trading innuendo about Portillo at pretty much the same time he admitted that the rumours of his "experiments with homosexuality" during his uni years were true.

 

[ViolentPanda]

urban isn't sorted on a lot of fronts. a banning of someone for baiting on a disability thread was widely opposed.

In fact a lot of those who opposed the ban (of a poster who's serially-returned since then) couldn't even see what he'd done wrong.

there's a fair few posters who deliberately post up sexist funnies when women try to discuss their expereinces of living with sexism. and the recent threads on gay marriage really brought out some deeply unpleasent homophobia.

As well as some repulsive "moral conservatism"-based arguments that don't make any sense unless you do actually think that LGBT people are somehow of less social value than heterosexuals.

 

[elbows]

He's a scary fucker, eh.

I got pretty damn scared when he praised more than one of my posts . Shit, dont tell me I actually have a clue what I'm talking about sometimes, normally I see this guy pissing all over peoples inadequacies and feeble positions, how have I gradually managed to avoid this fate despite not being very well read on stuff that really matters? Did I manage to somewhat overcome my middle-class upbringing by treating footage of molotov cocktail throwing in Egypt as some kind of political sporting event?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm sure it also includes me! Although I find it easy to start sneering at and condemning ignorance, I dont think its a shootable offence or a completely solvable problem. Its when ignorance is used to justify the terrible treatment of someone or a group, that we should be looking to stand against the ignorami with urgency.

Personally I am a perpetual outsider with few opportunities to put anything I've learnt into practical use, apart from woffling on here about whatever subjects take my fancy. The bottom line for me, despite my often harsh criticisms, is that I'd rather have people speak their minds and run the risk of putting the foot in it, than have silence.

And the timing of this thread exposed something of a dilemma when it comes to identity politics, because immediately prior to the Suzanne Moore thing exploding on twitter people had been busy taking the piss out of identity politics and its failings.

Identity politics as a tool for encoding and decoding specific arguments are fine by me. Where they fall down, in my opinion, is when those tools are seen as the only valid analytic devices through which to filter any and all political and social arguments. It leaves no room, for example, for class: Probably the greatest overarching theme through which such arguments should (in my opinion) be analysed.

 

[ymu]

BTW, your aside about the "closeted Tory" (only slightly) misses the point that one of the reasons he was so heavily slammed on Urban and suffered innuendo in the press was his perceived hypocrisy, given his voting record on gay issues. Does anyone slam "out" gay Tories for their sexuality? Not so much, IME. They have, at least, had the courage of their convictions. People, for example, stopped trading innuendo about Portillo at pretty much the same time he admitted that the rumours of his "experiments with homosexuality" during his uni years were true.

That is true, but some of the innuendo crossed way over that line. The veneer of political correctness is sometimes paper thin (silver Rizla paper, that is).

 

[ViolentPanda]

That is true, but some of the innuendo crossed way over that line. The veneer of political correctness is sometimes paper thin (silver Rizla paper, that is).

Not wishing to be combative, but I'd rather people didn't feel constrained by ideas of political correctness in debate - in my opinion it makes it easier to educate people if you can show them "what's wrong" without reference to some nebulous concept of what is or isn't permissible to say for social/political reasons. I'd rather they can be shown "what's wrong" through reference to their own humanity and their lived experience as a social animal. If they then can't see that they're in error, there's no reason at all not to tear into them for being asocial shiteaters.

 

[ymu]

Without being combative, that comment was in no way supportive of 'political correctness'. Quite the opposite.

 

[elbows]

People are human. They're susceptible to exhibiting their worst, as well as their best qualities.

BTW, your aside about the "closeted Tory" (only slightly) misses the point that one of the reasons he was so heavily slammed on Urban and suffered innuendo in the press was his perceived hypocrisy, given his voting record on gay issues. Does anyone slam "out" gay Tories for their sexuality? Not so much, IME. They have, at least, had the courage of their convictions. People, for example, stopped trading innuendo about Portillo at pretty much the same time he admitted that the rumours of his "experiments with homosexuality" during his uni years were true.

Oh thats a big part of it but I'm always keen to pick on the trickier stuff that I've never been convinced is simply based on the crime of hypocrisy. And there is no way you'll convince me that most of the innuendo in the press was based on a dislike of hypocrisy.

The allegations about paedophiles in high places provided me with numerous opportunities to further observe related phenomenon, including a rehashing of some of the stuff you just mentioned and new varieties of it, especially when Cameron went on about the danger of gay witch-hunts - I was surprised how many people managed to deliberately avoid exploring what valid point he may actually have so they could just wibble on about fresh cover-ups, tory scum and sinister gays.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Oh thats a big part of it but I'm always keen to pick on the trickier stuff that I've never been convinced is simply based on the crime of hypocrisy. And there is no way you'll convince me that most of the innuendo in the press was based on a dislike of hypocrisy.

Personally, the only innuendo against foetus-boy that I found beyond-the-pale was that so many journos (and others) were happy to beat him over the head with the fact of his marriage's childlessness, as if that meant that he was obviously homosexual. As it was, he and his wife had a perfectly reasonable (but sad) explanation for it, something they shouldn't have needed to publicly-disclose.

The allegations about paedophiles in high places provided me with numerous opportunities to further observe related phenomenon, including a rehashing of some of the stuff you just mentioned and new varieties of it, especially when Cameron went on about the danger of gay witch-hunts - I was surprised how many people managed to deliberately avoid exploring what valid point he may actually have so they could just wibble on about fresh cover-ups, tory scum and sinister gays.

Unfortunately, we're all prey to speculation, in the absence of hard data. The best people can do in such a situation is either to shut up (unlikely!) or to couch their speculation within the framework of what is already known, and the context in which it occurred (hence, for example, me mentioning the firebombing and death of a household on the south coast that contained several former carees who were bringing a complaint against their local authority). Unfortunately, some people prefer to let their creative instincts have free rein, rather than staying within the bounds of reason and knowledge.

 

[elbows]

Identity politics as a tool for encoding and decoding specific arguments are fine by me. Where they fall down, in my opinion, is when those tools are seen as the only valid analytic devices through which to filter any and all political and social arguments. It leaves no room, for example, for class: Probably the greatest overarching theme through which such arguments should (in my opinion) be analysed.

I'm pretty underwhelmed by the crude way that the language of class is often applied to political discussions, as soon as it goes beyond the important core themes, eg political and economic analysis by the likes of Marx. It strikes me as often descending into another variety of crude sectarianism that actually plays into divide-and-conquer politics of the damned. If we dont want to be left eternally groaning at the sight of middle or upper class people pretending to be working class, drooling unproductively all over the place as a result of guilt and angst, or mangling, subverting or hijacking a variety of causes or movements, some kind of inclusive approach is required. Seeing the baby thrown out with the bathwater when it comes to everything from movements and struggles, useful press, identity politics etc because the non-working class whose hearts and politics are actually in the right place feel the need to overcompensate badly for the sins of their parents, privilege and indoctrination, doesnt seem useful to me. It doesnt seem very inclusive or part of a real solution, it seems to be condemning swathes of people for no good reason.

Bollocks to it. I no more intend to feel guilty about who I am and my background than I intend to patronise the working classes or deny them the opportunities I was lucky enough to have (and, incidentally, squander). And although I was so utterly class-blind at the time that I only realised it years later, one of the people who had the soundest and most just politics that I've ever met, appears to have had a family background so upper class that I believe someone once threw a bomb at one of her ancestors elephants! Her families historical role in empire does not stand in the way of her ability to work for the common good in the 21st century, probably quite the opposite.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I'm pretty underwhelmed by the crude way that the language of class is often applied to political discussions, as soon as it goes beyond the important core themes, eg political and economic analysis by the likes of Marx.

You have to start from a "crude" base in order to get to the good stuff, though. People, even those who're well-informed, tend to perceive class through a conflictual lens, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

It strikes me as often descending into another variety of crude sectarianism that actually plays into divide-and-conquer politics of the damned.

My issue with what you're saying reduces to "without retaining awareness of the roles that the various classes have historically played, we (as a people) lose any sense of what is or is not acceptable, of what may or may not work". It's not crude sectarianism if what you're saying is "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me". "Divide and conquer" isn't divide and conquer if it stops a movement being subsumed by another movement with different goals.

If we dont want to be left eternally groaning at the sight of middle or upper class people pretending to be working class, drooling unproductively all over the place as a result of guilt and angst, or mangling, subverting or hijacking a variety of causes or movements, some kind of inclusive approach is required. Seeing the baby thrown out with the bathwater when it comes to everything from movements and struggles, useful press, identity politics etc because the non-working class whose hearts and politics are actually in the right place feel the need to overcompensate badly for the sins of their parents, privilege and indoctrination, doesnt seem useful to me. It doesnt seem very inclusive or part of a real solution, it seems to be condemning swathes of people for no good reason.

I have plenty of time for individuals. What I don't have time for is the embodiment of the bourgeoisie and the ruling class. I'm not going to spit on an individual who wants to lend a hand or a brain, or even a group of individuals. I am going to spit on any group that pretends to represent my values in order solely to capture my loyalty, and then proceeds to piss on me.
As for people manifesting "middle class guilt", what sort of idiot feels guilty for something they had nothing to do with, that pre-existed their birth? What sort of idiot castigates an individual for something they had nothing to do with, that pre-existed their birth?

Bollocks to it. I no more intend to feel guilty about who I am and my background than I intend to patronise the working classes or deny them the opportunities I was lucky enough to have (and, incidentally, squander). And although I was so utterly class-blind at the time that I only realised it years later, one of the people who had the soundest and most just politics that I've ever met, appears to have had a family background so upper class that I believe someone once threw a bomb at one of her ancestors elephants! Her families historical role in empire does not stand in the way of her ability to work for the common good in the 21st century, probably quite the opposite.

The thing with class-blindness is that it mostly only manifess in those whose situation allows them to be blind to it. Having your nose rubbed daily in your perceived social inferiority opens your eyes early!

 

[elbows]

I like everything you've said there. And I would expect that I've made my points badly since its probably the first time I've ever tried to explain my feelings on this.

I am not advocating class blindness, or a denial of the historical and contemporary role of classes in society, economic and power structures, etc.

Nor do I do know much about middle class guilt. What I am probably keen to explore is what causes a person such as Laurie Penny to turn out the way they do, and how productive the variety of attacks on her and her ilk actually are. As such, I find the way you have put things in your post to be a very good starting point that avoids most of what I was moaning about. Perhaps what I am trying to get at is whether some of these people who are doing harm, actually still have the potential to have values that are in alignment with the rascal multitude and just struggle, but they need help to get there. And that attacking them in certain ways is counterproductive as it leads to a defensiveness which reinforces their unsavoury values rather than the ones that have potential. Perhaps I am just too naive or charitable, but I dont like to give up on anyone who isnt a right wing, hate filled exploitative bag of shit. And there do seem to be rather a lot of people whose hearts are in the right place but whose heads have gone wrong, and that seems like a crucial waste that hampers struggle significantly. This is probably also why I've easted much time on comspiraloons who dont actually seem to be right0wing but end up hoovering up right0wing agendas due to an imbaance of cynicism and knowledge.

I'm sure these posts of mine are not exactly my finest hour but I thought I'd take the risk of stumbling badly into this territory anyway, I dont mind making a fool of myself.

 

[ymu]

There's nothing unreasonable in what you say elbows, but it ignores the fundamental problem. Middle-class lefties have louder voices - not just in terms of access to the media but also in terms of their ability to dominate discussion simply because they have the confidence and articulacy and sense of entitlement afforded by their life experience. And it does damage because middle-class preoccupations get priority and working-class priorities get side-lined.

Why does identity politics virtually ignore class? Because it was hijacked by the middle-class left.

Why has feminism landed us in a situation where two partners have to be in work to earn the same spending power as one did thirty years ago when there's still the same amount of housework and childcare to do (and still mostly done by women)? Because it was hijacked by middle-class women whose primary concern is access to the same jobs and salaries as middle-class men. The cleaner and the nanny can sort the rest out when they've abandoned their leftist principles in favour of convenience.

It's not about criticising someone for the circumstances of their birth or choices their parents made (although plenty of that does go on), it's about asking middle-class lefties to work on their perspective before stomping all over the agenda. In exactly the same way as men would be asked to at a meeting about sexual equality. Those who have the privilege need the humility to just shut the fuck up and listen.

 

[elbows]

The thing with class-blindness is that it mostly only manifess in those whose situation allows them to be blind to it. Having your nose rubbed daily in your perceived social inferiority opens your eyes early!

In my case it may be because other social inferiorities trumped it. I have yet to even partially recover from being told I was ugly, uncool, unloveable, a loser with no sporting ability who would grow old and die a sad lonely wanker. The relative safehaven of academic success did not last past GCSE level, and relishing in my own geekiness is not proving to be an adequate substitute for having a life. A perpetual lack of wealth/security and an inability to ever earn anything approaching £20k+ a year adds to the sense of underdog chip on shoulder.

I'm aware that this personal woe is me shit is not on topic, but it is an attempt to explain why I may have some vague understanding of struggle despite being white, male & middle class.

 

[ViolentPanda]

In my case it may be because other social inferiorities trumped it. I have yet to even partially recover from being told I was ugly, uncool, unloveable, a loser with no sporting ability who would grow old and die a sad lonely wanker. The relative safehaven of academic success did not last past GCSE level, and relishing in my own geekiness is not proving to be an adequate substitute for having a life. A perpetual lack of wealth/security and an inability to ever earn anything approaching £20k+ a year adds to the sense of underdog chip on shoulder.

I'm aware that this personal woe is me shit is not on topic, but it is an attempt to explain why I may have some vague understanding of struggle despite being white, male & middle class.

I'll take you off "the list" and put you on secret probation, in that case.

 

[elbows]

I'll take you off "the list" and put you on secret probation, in that case.

Be sure to send me regular evaluation reports so that I know whether I am slipping back into condemned territory. I like to dwell on my fate in advance.

 

[elbows]

There's nothing unreasonable in what you say elbows, but it ignores the fundamental problem. Middle-class lefties have louder voices - not just in terms of access to the media but also in terms of their ability to dominate discussion simply because they have the confidence and articulacy and sense of entitlement afforded by their life experience. And it does damage because middle-class preoccupations get priority and working-class priorities get side-lined.

I am interested as to whether there is any likely escape from that problem. How come relatively few working class people managed to gain the confidence etc during the generation or two that actually did have better educational opportunities? Teachers still being knobs and sucking all the confidence out of kids from an early age, peers & family taking the piss out of swots and eggheads or what?

And, for those that did manage to gain a level of confidence, articulation and expectation, were they able to blend these skills authentically with working class priorities and their roots or did it make them rather likely to end up with the same priorities and shortcoming as those middle class for whom that journey was often much easier?

Dennis Potter is an obvious example, since early in his career he publicly struggled with the gulf that his educational opportunities set up between him and his family & community. He said something on the telly that hurt his dad, and it seems hard to change your communication abilities and forms without affecting the essence of social relations, identity, priorities etc.

 

[ymu]

There's a bit of a difference between being born middle-class and becoming middle-class.

If you were born middle-class, you never expected to end up working for minimum wage or thought you had to work particularly hard to avoid it. Your parents peer group are mostly highish earners and you know the kinds of opportunities out there for the taking. Yeah, education matters and if you can get good grades, go for it. You'll have your own space to work, always plenty of food in the house, no going to school hungry, usually at least one parent around to help with schoolwork because they're neither working two jobs nor afraid of their own lack of knowledge, probably not many of your classmates going hungry or being neglected (financially, at least), so getting good grades should be pretty easy. But if you can't be arsed or school doesn't suit you, it's fine. Mum or dad can introduce you to some people who'll give you a job if they don't have any jobs to offer you themselves. Or they'll pay for private tuition, or if you fuck your degree up, they'll pay for a masters to make up for it.

It's got fuck all to do with what people do with the opportunities afforded to them. It has everything to do with expectations and the ease with which doors open.

A lad from a 'troubled' family used to come and visit me when things got fraught at home. He turned up one Friday night for a session on the playstation and was gutted to find me packing to go away for the weekend. I was going straight to a meeting for work after that so I was packing books as well as clothes and shit.

"Why do you need books? "
"You need books for work? What kind of work is that?"
"You get to work on a computer all day? Really? They pay you to work on a computer? Fucking hell, that's cool!"

He'd just been excluded from school and his mother was refusing to speak to the head about it. Fed up with middle-class do-gooders making her life harder. What chances did he have, really?

You need to know what the options are before you can take advantage of the opportunities out there, and you need to know that you have a decent shot at getting there to find the energy to even try.

 

[elbows]

If you were born middle-class, you never expected to end up working for minimum wage or thought you had to work particularly hard to avoid it. Your parents peer group are mostly highish earners and you know the kinds of opportunities out there for the taking. Yeah, education matters and if you can get good grades, go for it. You'll have your own space to work, always plenty of food in the house, no going to school hungry, usually at least one parent around to help with schoolwork because they're neither working two jobs nor afraid of their own lack of knowledge, probably not many of your classmates going hungry or being neglected (financially, at least), so getting good grades should be pretty easy. But if you can't be arsed or school doesn't suit you, it's fine. Mum or dad can introduce you to some people who'll give you a job if they don't have any jobs to offer you themselves. Or they'll pay for private tuition, or if you fuck your degree up, they'll pay for a masters to make up for it.

This is why I find working & middle class labels rather inadequate at times. My parents were teachers, so I had the benefit of help getting started with learning and reading, space at home to work, and I never went hungry. But my parents only seemed to know other teachers, and knew nobody who could give me a job. Hell I struggled to even find a weeks work experience placement. There was no money for a new family car, foreign holidays, private tuition, and we had a variety of 2nd hand televisions until I was about 12. I'd never have gone to university if it wasnt for the maintenance grant & lack of tuition fees, and when I was at school people took the piss because I grew out of my trousers too quickly and my mum had to turn down the bottoms. When I fucked up my degree I ended up working in a factory and eventually got myself a job in a computer shop where I got to watch the boss charge me out at £35+VAT per hour while I earnt something like £4.60 an hour. When I went round working class peoples homes their furnishings and electronic goods were way nicer than ours, but the areas they lived in were far rougher. And at my last place of work, which I lingered in for over a decade before it went bust, I saw a succession of working class people find jobs there with relative ease because they drank in the same pub as the owners or were related in some way. And when I pop round their houses to look at their computers for them, their kids have way more stuff than I ever had. On reflection, most of my school, college & uni friends had middle-class background that were a lot closer to what you describe, but I was only vaguely aware of it at the time.

So what does that make me? The privilege I received was almost entirely on the education front, which has certainly left me with some advantages in life, including that confidence to communicate at great length, but relatively few opportunities to harness these abilities.

Anyway sorry for taking this thread so off-topic, but I think the main thrust of the original topic had mostly run out of steam here for now anyway?

 

[ymu]

Binary labels are never going to be adequate for something as complex as class. I was trying to explain why your question "How come relatively few working class people managed to gain the confidence etc during the generation or two that actually did have better educational opportunities?" is a bit insulting, that's all.

 

[teuchter]

unless you do actually think that LGBT people are somehow of less social value than heterosexuals.

As might be suggested if someone were to put the word "women" in scare quotes in an attempt to insult, you mean? Someone who'd do that and then try and ignore any questioning of it?

 

[elbows]

Binary labels are never going to be adequate for something as complex as class. I was trying to explain why your question "How come relatively few working class people managed to gain the confidence etc during the generation or two that actually did have better educational opportunities?" is a bit insulting, that's all.

Thats fine, that question of mine was meant to be blunt and stupid anyway. I believe I can often learn things more directly by sloppily putting my foot in it, and your response was helpful in that regard. Although I dont think it quite answered the question I was getting at, but thats probably my own fault for putting it in a crap way.

So this difference between being born middle class and becoming middle class. Is it possible to go to university and yet still be able to speak confidently of working class priorities? If so, how come we dont see more of these types in the media or other political spheres, counteracting the exceedingly middle class bollocks, and if not, how the hell are we ever going to get anywhere?

 

[ViolentPanda]

As might be suggested if someone were to put the word "women" in scare quotes in an attempt to insult, you mean? Someone who'd do that and then try and ignore any questioning of it?

Ignore? Replying in terms you don't agree with isn't ignoring, however much you wish to paint it as such.

 

[ymu]

Thats fine, that question of mine was meant to be blunt and stupid anyway. I believe I can often learn things more directly by sloppily putting my foot in it, and your response was helpful in that regard. Although I dont think it quite answered the question I was getting at, but thats probably my own fault for putting it in a crap way.

So this difference between being born middle class and becoming middle class. Is it possible to go to university and yet still be able to speak confidently of working class priorities? If so, how come we dont see more of these types in the media or other political spheres, counteracting the exceedingly middle class bollocks, and if not, how the hell are we ever going to get anywhere?

The working-class people who go to university are less likely to be those who were on free school meals, and those that go to the kind of university that opens media doors are vanishingly unlikely to have been on free school meals. Binary labels do not cut it.

My best mate in first year at Oxford was from Newcastle, her whole family thrown on the dole by Thatcher. They accepted her without O' level maths because her inner city school hadn't bothered to get her through it. She was bullied for even thinking about going to university, let alone applying to Oxford, let alone getting in.

Once there, the condescending liberals who wanted to increase the social mix didn't bother giving her the help she would need with maths to get through first year economics (after which she could drop the subject entirely). She failed that one paper of three and got kicked out.

A lad who failed all his history papers was allowed to stay because his dad bought the college a new boathouse.

Being born working-class is no guarantee of understanding working-class priorities. Alan Sugar didn't go to university but he reckons there's no excuse for being poor because people can do exactly what he did. All can succeed no matter how many millions are trying to do the same entrepreneurial thing.

I don't see why you have to have been to university to speak for the working-class. The media do. Because they're middle-class.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Thats fine, that question of mine was meant to be blunt and stupid anyway. I believe I can often learn things more directly by sloppily putting my foot in it, and your response was helpful in that regard. Although I dont think it quite answered the question I was getting at, but thats probably my own fault for putting it in a crap way.

So this difference between being born middle class and becoming middle class. Is it possible to go to university and yet still be able to speak confidently of working class priorities? If so, how come we dont see more of these types in the media or other political spheres, counteracting the exceedingly middle class bollocks, and if not, how the hell are we ever going to get anywhere?

You can be from the class, and represent* the class, but you cease to be of the class when your interests move away from those of the people you represent.

*By "represent", I mean "choose to speak for".

An under-appreciated problem (at least in my opinion) with "the class debate" is that people are often wary of reflecting on the fact that social mobility inevitably means ideological and class mobility too. It means that you're faced by a barrage of new discourses aimed at shaping your views away from those of your previous "station" and towards those of your new "station". Even when people know this and attempt to consciously work around it, they still often subconsciously conform.

 

[teuchter]

Ignore? Replying in terms you don't agree with isn't ignoring, however much you wish to paint it as such.

Doing no more than repeatedly calling me a "cunt", and suchlike, to me very much represents a deliberate attempt to ignore the questions about what you originally said.

 

[smokedout]

This is why I find working & middle class labels rather inadequate at times. My parents were teachers, so I had the benefit of help getting started with learning and reading, space at home to work, and I never went hungry. But my parents only seemed to know other teachers, and knew nobody who could give me a job. Hell I struggled to even find a weeks work experience placement. There was no money for a new family car, foreign holidays, private tuition, and we had a variety of 2nd hand televisions until I was about 12. I'd never have gone to university if it wasnt for the maintenance grant & lack of tuition fees, and when I was at school people took the piss because I grew out of my trousers too quickly and my mum had to turn down the bottoms. When I fucked up my degree I ended up working in a factory and eventually got myself a job in a computer shop where I got to watch the boss charge me out at £35+VAT per hour while I earnt something like £4.60 an hour. When I went round working class peoples homes their furnishings and electronic goods were way nicer than ours, but the areas they lived in were far rougher. And at my last place of work, which I lingered in for over a decade before it went bust, I saw a succession of working class people find jobs there with relative ease because they drank in the same pub as the owners or were related in some way. And when I pop round their houses to look at their computers for them, their kids have way more stuff than I ever had. On reflection, most of my school, college & uni friends had middle-class background that were a lot closer to what you describe, but I was only vaguely aware of it at the time.

?

i hate to break it to you, but you dont sound that middle class

 

[goldenecitrone]

i hate to break it to you, but you dont sound that middle class

The squeezed out middle.