Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

"school snobbery"

583 replies

dinkybinky · 13/11/2012 18:48

I think it?s hysterical that some people think that if you child doesn?t attend a Grammar school or selective independent then they?re not academic. The level of ?school snobbery? that goes on is quite bewildering sometimes.

OP posts:
MordionAgenos · 18/11/2012 17:22

She said she treats everyone as well as each other - by which I suspect she means she treats everyone equally (clunky sentence construction not withstanding). She didn't say anywhere that she treats anyone with respect. Grin

dinkybinky · 18/11/2012 17:33

There is a method in her madness but its the way its delivered that is so upsetting. I'm sure she is nice in RL.....maybe

OP posts:
Xenia · 18/11/2012 18:55

I am pretty nice to people of all kinds.

amillionyears · 18/11/2012 19:16

With respect Xenia, some of your posts are downright awful, to vast swathes of people en masse. You do not pick out individuals usually. Do you realise you do this?
I also think it gets you neatly round the MN policy of personal attacks

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 18/11/2012 21:42

Xenia, you're not nice. You get around it by never ever addressing anyone directly but responding in the passive ('why am I being asked...?' 'what is the question here....?' ) and replying with the general ('on the whole it is true' 'in general it is certainly the case' 'we can certainly say'). But you must know how incredibly rude and offensive your posts are, despite these tactics.

autumnlights12 · 18/11/2012 21:55

I'm not going to bring up old threads, but from what she's alluded to in previous threads, Xenia is not successful in all aspects of her life and therein lies the reason for the sour grapes.

TheOriginalSteamingNit · 18/11/2012 21:59

No, I don't want to get into speculation about her life or her grapes.... I'm just not having it unchallenged that, whatever else she is, she's nice.

MordionAgenos · 18/11/2012 22:12

I really don't like casual, lazy, generalisations. Xenia knows only too well the sort of lazy, unpremeditated sexism that abounds in the corporate world. The sort of sexism that boils down to 'if you're ' (in this instance, female) 'then you can't be ' (in this instance, anything important or powerful or well regarded). She knows what a load of bollocks this is and yet how powerfully these attitudes prevail and she seems to spend a lot of her time on here challenging women to get a grip and challenge those entrenched attitudes. Fine. Except that, at almost exactly the same time, she is also on here peddling the casual lazy generalisation that 'if you're ' (in this case, state educated) 'then you can't be ' (in this case, likely to have a successful future, or achieve good academic results).

She knows what she is doing. That's why she is doing it.

autumnlights12 · 18/11/2012 22:15

It's relevant though. If you're preaching a mantra for life based on the negative knocks landed on you over time, it corrupts your argument.

foslady · 18/11/2012 22:22

Mordion it's posts like yours that make me wish mn had a like button - thank you, you have hit the nail on the head

socharlotte · 18/11/2012 23:12

Xenia- but lots of jobs that are not well paid are immensely rewarding such as teaching and nursing.One of my best friends is a nurse and the fact is that the only way to progress beyond a certain level is to stop doing the stuff that drew her to nursing in the first place.
I am a chartered accountant but gave that up to set up my own business teaching children a particular discipline ( don't want to be any more specific) in which I earn a fraction of what I earned before.A neighbour is an investment banker turned market gardener.Some people are just motivated by different things to you xenia, and you just seem inacapable of grasping that.

ChazsBrilliantAttitude · 19/11/2012 08:31

I do think Xenia is right that employees or more significantly prospective employees do get judged on accents and physical appearence (including being overweight). These judgments aren't necessarily overt but they do exist. There have been enough studies of people ringing for jobs with an African Caribbean accent and being told the job has gone and then someone else ringing with a BBC middle class accent / RP accent and being offered an interview.

I do think there needs to be more women doing jobs that are perceived as male and a young woman shouldn't mentally draw a line through jobs that she might like to do but thinks of as man's jobs. I see a gradual change in the City where I work. I have gone into a meeting of 40 people before now and there were only two women - now the balance in meetings is improving. I think that the presence of women is beginning to become more normal in this situations so the perception that this was a male area of work will change (slowly Wink)

libelulle · 19/11/2012 08:50

social worker, psychologist, musician, academic, teacher, paramedic, shop-keeper, counsellor, tree surgeon, carpenter, engineer. All occupations I can think of that inspire passions in people I know.

But none of them make anywhere close to 100k, so I do think society would be a lot better off if all these people gave up their jobs and went to work in the city. Oh, wait.

I've never known Xenia engage with any post making this point or one similar. Not once.

libelulle · 19/11/2012 09:42

And the other thing that I find odd in the argument is that really, 100k is just not a salary that you find in any profession outside the city, and certainly not outside London. I know two senior NHS consultants and neither of them earn anything like 100k - more like 70, which is a very decent salary indeed, but hardly in the realms of fantasy money. Of course, their 'on the side' job is clinical research not private work, which is silly of them, since they are benefiting society instead of accumulating lots of dosh. Fools!

OwlLady · 19/11/2012 17:51

The 7% figures regarding British independent schools do not contain 100% British children though. I thought for British children it was more in the region of 5% ?

MordionAgenos · 19/11/2012 18:10

libelulle I know several people who earn considerably more than £100K and who do not work in the city. Some of them don't even work in London. I know of many more (ie I don't know them personally but their salaries are public knowledge).

Xenia · 19/11/2012 20:34

I have never said you can't do well at state schools. 50% of those at the best universities went to state schools. Lots of people with whom I have worked did. I have said that many private schools gives you an additional advantage - which they do.

I do not know what I am being asked? Clearly if you look at mumsnet threads a lot of women spend a lot of time in difficulties paying rent, mortgages and for childcare because they don't earn much. Surely therefore we can all see that life is better if that individual woman and her daughters earn a lot. That doesn't mean they will all manage it but let them try.

I have also noticed the difference mentioned above of more and more women doing very well at work. I was at something last week in a sense science based and it was 100% women. Today there were more women than men. It is brilliant. They are doing so well. One today even had 5 children as I have. It is lal very encouraging.

The 30% rule or rule of 3s is true though - if there is one woman on a board she is different, unusual etc. If there are 3 then the variety of the women can be seen and they are not just looked at as different. This is why getting the numbers in on many careers and in praticular at the top not the bottom really matters and women are doing really well at this - they are throwing out the mop or throwing at the husband and having fun at great careers.

pingu2209 · 19/11/2012 20:37

Totally agree but the children will get a massive wake up call when they are adults in the big wide world.

I went to a private convent school until I was 16, but then went to a state sixth form college. When I arrived there I met other 16 year olds from my local state school. I was totally shocked that they had qualifications, let alone better qualifications than me.

I was brain washed all my school life that you ONLY got qualifications if you went to a private school. There were no grammer schools in my area so I wouldn't have known what they were at the time.

Terrible. I'm so ashamed to admit!

MordionAgenos · 19/11/2012 20:40

Xenia why aren't you posting in the quotas thread (in 'site stuff')? Now that's a thread that needs your input. I've read your posts about the necessity for women on boards before.

amillionyears · 19/11/2012 20:50

Xenia, you were not being asked anything.
You were being told about your rudeness.
Lets hope it stops now.

Agree that some parents could help their children more by encouraging them to acheive their full potential.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 19/11/2012 21:48

A couple of things: many necessary jobs are appallingly underpaid and need to be paid more. And also, the definition of "fun" for me includes things like riding my bike along a country lane in the spring, meals with friends and kite flying on the beach. It would not include working fourteen hour days in order to earn this fabled hundred grand.

Everyone is different, but I think most people here would agree with me on this point. Whatever factors motivate most people to earn a hundred grand salary, fun would not be amongst them.

MordionAgenos · 19/11/2012 22:15

Except that the people actually earning that, the people who actually know what their motivation is, disagree with you. Fun, not being bored, following Dorothy Parker's wisest advice (you might as well live) - those are completely my motivations for what I do. Nobody doing a highly rewarded high commitment job (I know not all high committment jobs are highly rewarded, sadly) is doing it because their motivation is to be bored or stressed or unhappy. If they are any or all of those things then they scale it back till they find their balance.

It seems to be a sad fact that it's the people in inappropriately (i e poorly) rewarded high commitment jobs (eg teachers and nurses) who work incredibly long hours and don't have any fun and get stressed and end up leaving their professions.

There are also of course people with high incomes who are not in high commitment jobs (people who have private incomes, people living off copyright fees or royalties, that sort of thing) but they are a completely different kettle of fish.

ArielThePiraticalMermaid · 19/11/2012 22:30

Oh yes, definitely discount that last lot!

Xenia · 20/11/2012 07:41

Yes, most people my age still doing this job do it because they love it.

Today's Times..

A few private schools educated one in eight of the most prominent people in Britain, according to research that will fuel debate on social inequality.

Only ten schools produced 12 per cent of the country?s most senior businessmen, politicians, diplomats and leaders of the professions.

Eton College accounted for 4 per cent of them, including David Cameron and Justin Welby, the next Archbishop of Canterbury.

The figures were compiled by the Sutton Trust, an education charity, to mark its 15th anniversary. It analysed the school backgrounds of 7,637 people whose birthdays were listed last year in the Register pages of The Times and other newspapers.

Nearly 80 per cent of the people who effectively run Britain attended fee-charging or selective schools: 44 per cent were educated at private schools, 8 per cent went to former direct-grant schools ? fee-paying establishments with places funded by the state ? and 27 per cent attended grammar schools.

On average only 7 per cent of children are educated at private schools, which drops to 6.5 per cent if overseas pupils boarding in Britain are omitted.

In ten professions or careers more than half of the most prominent figures were privately educated. They include national or local government (68 per cent), law (63 per cent), senior armed forces (60 per cent) and business (59 per cent).

The field with the fewest privately educated leaders was the police, with only 13 per cent of chief constables and other senior officers. Fifty seven per cent of top police officers attended grammar schools.

Only 10 per cent of the elite attended comprehensives, including Daniel Craig, the actor, and Robert Peston, the BBC journalist, while 1 per cent went to non-selective secondary modern schools. Among these were the actor Colin Firth and Sir Steve Redgrave, the Olympic rowing champion.

The study also looked at higher education. Of 8,112 people in Britain?s elite for whom details were found, almost a third (31 per cent) attended Oxford or Cambridge. A further 20 per cent were graduates of the next 30 most selective British universities. However, 22 per cent of public figures did not attend university.

The highest proportion of Oxbridge graduates were in the diplomatic service (62 per cent), law (58 per cent) and the Civil Service (55 per cent). The careers with fewest Oxbridge graduates were pop music (1 per cent), sport (8 per cent), the police (11 per cent) and the Armed Forces (12 per cent).

Many of the public figures whose details were analysed were educated before the 1970s, when the majority of England?s grammar schools were abolished. The actors Ray Winstone and Emma Thompson, Martin O?Neill, the Sunderland Football Club manager, and Sir Paul McCartney and Sir Mick Jagger are all former grammar school pupils.

The ten private schools with the highest number of ex-pupils to achieve national prominence are Eton, Winchester, Charterhouse, Rugby, Westminster, Marlborough, Dulwich, Harrow, St Paul?s Boys? School and Wellington College.

Of more than 100 schools that contributed most to Britain?s elite, two are comprehensives: Haverstock School in Chalk Farm, North London, attended by Ed and David Miliband, and Holland Park in Kensington, where Tony Benn sent his four children. The top grammar school, with 17 former pupils among the country?s leaders, was Watford Grammar, Hertfordshire, which is now a comprehensive.

Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, told a conference in May hosted by Brighton College that the disproportionate success of people who were privately educated was ?morally indefensible?.

More detailed figures can be found here

The great and the good, and the others

The names that appear each day in The Times?s birthdays list are chosen by the Editor of the Register and his colleagues from a large database of birthdays (Fiona Wilson writes.) The obviously distinguished still predominate but we offer a once-inconceivable mix of backgrounds, ages and professions.

Last month the published list had an average of 17 names a day.

There are sometimes complaints when someone who has been in the list one year is left out the following year.

The convention until as recently as the late 1990s had been that, like Who?s Who or the House of Lords, once in, you were in for life; new names were added only when an obituary marked a vacancy.

But with space at a premium, a more varied world to reflect, it seems preferable to ring the changes and hope that omission one year may mean inclusion the next."

wordfactory · 20/11/2012 07:52

Ariel - I do think this notion that those in highly paid jobs are just in it for the money and bored shitless is completely incorrect. And this sort of stuff firmly keeps people in their place. The reality is that many jobs can earn you that type of money - there was a very interesting thread about it not so long ago with reams of posters saying what they did to earn 100k.