To think people underestimate impact of advantages

[brasty]

I think lots of people underestimate the impact of advantages in their life.
So having parents who value education and encourage you.
Having parents who find the best school for you.
Having loving parents who create a loving environment to grow up in.
Getting help with house deposits.
Having a parent who will help you out when things go wrong.

All or some of these things makes it so much easier to have a good life. Yet so many people underestimate the impact.

Whilst I agree with lots that have been said on is thread, what can we do about it?
I consider myself average. Average parents, average intelligence, average life. So what do I do, simply give money to people who had less advantages than me eg poor parents? Or should rich people give me money?
It seems like some utopian dream on MN to make everybody 'equal' and frankly thats never going to happen.
As has been already said we have won lifes lottery by living in the UK so what do we do give it all up and go and live in a mud hut somewhere?
I think on MN as in other spheres we all like to think we are important and life has a readon when really I believe we are just a freak of nature.

quercus- apologies, I read my post back and it sounded way harsher on the page than it was meant to be in my head. Sorry for the tone!

What I mean to say is that there are elements of advantage I would like to see diffused e.g. no child should grow up in poverty in a country where others have far too much comparatively. But there are elements here too of a prejudice that is comparable to racism or sexism, and like most prejudices it can be unconscious as well as conscious. If you look on almost every single thread that touches on any matter of taste on Mumsnet, I pretty much guarantee you will hear the thin end of it: snobbery, entitlement, a belief that disadvantage is in some way earned, and that advantage is the result of hard work, or that middle class mores are more correct. I would absolutely NOT like to see these diffused!! This prejudice, I think, needs to be recognised and spoken about: we should be more aware both its negative aspects (the wage gap, for instance, but also the psychological burden of "not belonging") as well as the positive knowledges that working class upbringing can confer that middle class childhoods largely do not.

And that not belonging thing runs deep. I'm working class myself, in a distinct minority in academia, and I encounter casual prejudice all the time. Someone asked me recently why working class parents don't love their children enough to take them on holidays abroad to cultural centres like Florence!! My friend is also working class and very high up the career structure (much higher than me). But he still thinks he will be unable to get promoted further because, in his opinion, the management simply won't allow a street kid from a rough part of the UK to advance over Oxbridge types at the very highest levels of all. I hope he is wrong, but I seriously fear he isn't.

I agree unlimited its is merely an opportunity, a possibility, to equalise or inspire not a guarantee of success.

There are so many other factors to consider.

I agree. My DSIL is convinced that most people on benefits should 'work their way up' from potato picking or whatever. She, however, has had a lot of financial help from her well-off family. She's never needed any state help, so is convinced that those who do are somehow getting it wrong.

fairyliz - there is loads we can do. Campaign against prejudice. Be aware of class snobbery and challenge it. Redistribute wealth both geographically and across the social hierarchy. Ban private education and force better investment in non-selective state schools. Introduce differential admissions for universities. Force employers to pay equal wages for equal work (something that would also benefit women and then BME community, disadvantage is often multi-purpose). And so on.

Bemused : "the positive knowledges that working class upbringing can confer that middle class childhoods largely do not."

I'm really interested in this. What would you say these are?

corythatwas excellent points. I believe growing up knowing you are loved, that your caregivers believe in you and back you 100% makes all the difference regardless of financial capability.

Introduce differential admissions for universities.

This I don't agree with. The problem needs tackling at a different level - the school level of opportunity. By doing a differential entry you don't tackle the root cause. Schooling needs tackling from the ground up. ALL children need access to quality schools (and daycare before that if needed) from the ground up. By uni it's too late

DC- I would say there is a whole knowledge of how the working class works that is valuable, and it's absence is painfully obvious in those middle class professions that deal with those who are less well off, without having experience of their lives. Public health, for instance, has glaring blindspots, as does the civil service. If I had to note qualities more generally, with the caveat that such things are a perilous business, I would maybe suggest street smarts (the upside of rough areas). Some measure of resilience (often achievements are gained in defiance of limiting expectations, but this can also be a disadvantage, breeding anxiety and a lack of entitlement or belonging). Some degree of worldly knowledge: for all its many downsides, lived experience of poverty massively complicates easy middle class assumptions. Some degree of geographical flexibility too: working class people who have become middle class still have the ability to go into a working class boozer and not stand out. I would say most working class people I know are also more usefully empathetic when confronted with distress, too, and will go further to try to help, but this doesn't necessarily add up to structural empathy for wider groups.

anatidae - it's not either/or, it's both. If you've been the recipient of an expensive education you should be expected to do better with the same personal input, therefore your grades should be higher than a kid from a rough school. We need to stop private education being an advantage.

What can we do about it?

Well, people need to be willing to give up their privilege for a start - actually give away money (if the top 100 wealthiest people in the world gave away 50% of their money, the world's economy could be re-structured).

Even 'normal' people in the UK would need to be prepared to see a difference in their lives. Capitalism requires inequality so someone has to lose money for others to gain it.

Education - classes on justice, equity & diversity should be compulsory, with some very stark facts about money and what it does for people. If we all grew up knowing the differences, then decision makers are far more likely to make 'fairer' decisions (e.g. Congressmen are more likely to vote for sex equality if they have daughters).

And for education to also address how we talk about 'other' people, so that we don't have lazy thinking about class, race, religion, sex etc with people being too easily influenced by stereotypes instead of seeing other people as people first and 'other' second.

I think if we turn it back-to-front, and say that there is a massive disadvantage in not having supportive parents, then that might make more sense. My friend went to posh public school, but her dad was an alcoholic and her mum not very nice, and when it came to university, her dad was having a three-year black out and refused to fill out forms or help in any way, and the mum had no idea about finances or paperwork and it was in the late 80s when grants were 'means tested' - this meant you had to get your parents to fill out the forms and if they wouldn't, you had to wait 3 years in order to qualify for a grant for yourself (not like today when you can get a student loan for yourself and go even if your parents don't want you to). So she didn't go.

I didn't go either, because either I wasn't clever enough to get the grades, or my local state school didn't push me hard enough... However, my parents bought me my first car, which saved me about £1000, but my friend had to save up for hers. My parents also helped me out with the deposit for my house, but my friend had to save up for hers.

I now live in a much bigger house than her and have always been better off. I married a man who had a well-paid job, so never had to work and she did not, and has worked in admin jobs since she was 18.

I am not a better person than her, and she is not a better person than me, but I have done better in life. She has terrible anxiety and is socially very cautious whereas I am much more outgoing and just generally happier.

Her parents are still very well-off - big house in the country, second home in the South of France, but they don't help at all.

anatidae - it's not either/or, it's both. If you've been the recipient of an expensive education you should be expected to do better with the same personal input, therefore your grades should be higher than a kid from a rough school. We need to stop private education being an advantage

My experience from both being that rough kid and from working in universities is that once kids get to uni the state school ones do better. I'm just uneasy about differential admissions policies :/
I would have hated it at the time. It would have felt like I was being patronised and that I wasn't as good but let in on. A quota

NotSuchASmug I opted out of that relationship wise and used donor sperm. I now have beautiful DD and no useless wanker partner (they all have been...). We are very happy I know I'm tough enough to do it alone and have proved that as she's nearly 2 and thriving. I dreaded the idea of having kids with any of my exes as I knew it'd be a nightmare.

Its Ok bemused ! I do that too!

I do agree with you in many ways however. Perhaps one of my points wasn't put well, so it has confused things.

But class/ socio-economic grouping doesn't fully take into account the effect on the individual of their parents' ability to love and nurture their child, and instill confidence or self worth... or empathy and concern for others for that matter.

As in my case you can be 'well educated' but almost destroyed by your parents behaviour which means you can't fully capitalise on your advantages (eg that there was a grammar school and ability to get into it. Although it had many big drawbacks too so I don't necessarily buy into that argument - but that is the traditional view fitting with socio-economic grouping.)

My own life has reflected both socio-economic and emotional/parental factors and predictors, but also been different or 'outperformed' in some ways particular ways as happens when you look more closely at the individual, but then I seem to be an odd one out in many ways!

I have also moved downward in 'class' since health has been an issue and this has been awful so I am well aware of the prejudice. If you don't have health then you can't be a hard working, deserving poor person, never mind try to make life any better for yourself (or just stop it getting worse and worse). But was lucky enough not to face that prejudice as a child, although my home was unstable in many other bad ways.

Generalisations are just that; general overviews. It doesn't they mean nothing, but it doesn't mean they mean everything.

And just because we can't fix everything easily or quickly, it doesn't mean we should do nothing.

Just wanted to point out that proportionally, poor people give more of their income to charity than better off people.
Sadly in general I think poor people are more willing to help out someone genuinely in need,as they know what it is like.
So what can you do? At the very least if you have money, give and/or leave money to help others.

Contextual offers are already made by many universities.

However, care needs to be taken. In the university where I worked most recently we found that the recipients of those offers did not always fare well, especially when they dipped below a certain margin.

In addition, the universities with the lowest grade requirements often have the worst drop out rates. Now this in part is due to external factors such as poverty, health etc but it is also accepted that many of the students accessing tertiary education with very low grades do not have the ability to see it through.

I agree with you.

As just one of many examples, I remember a thread a while back where the OP was proclaiming that she and her husband had worked really hard and never had any help and all that stuff that successful people always seem to come out with. However, later on in the thread she casually mentioned that her parents had helped with a house deposit and that her husband worked in the family business. But she didn't see either of those things as 'help' or any kind of advantage, and just seemed to think that they were normal things that happened to normal people.

Did anyone hear Stella McCartney on desert island discs? Talk about deluded! Kate Moss - yes - that Kate Moss the supermodel, walked the runway for her graduate fashion show. Nowt to do with whose daughter she is natch. She said 'she probably felt like doing a graduate show...' and Kirsty sniggered. Gimme a bloody break Stella.
So many talented designers out there with no famous parents.

I think that when you have always had a life which is blessed with advantage, it's difficult to see anything else.

A bit like imagining having to wash everything by hand and use a mangle. Like our grandmothers did. We don't think every day 'wow I'm lucky to have a washing machine'. But we are lucky.

It's all about perception isn't it?

I try to find something positive in my life each day. Even though others might be more advantaged than me. Water my own grass rather than wishing I had the green grass of my friend.

I've seen both sides. I came from a very seriously disadvantaged childhood. We are now quite wealthy and successful (if judged by wealth, education, marriage).
I do believe there is a mindset that allows people to drive themselves up the ladder. I also believe some people just can't see this as something they could do and make all sorts of excuses. Truth is they don't want it badly enough badly enough to give up other things and make choices that allow it to happen. It is definitely harder from a position of disadvantage.
Our children have had significant privilege and a much easier ride. I don't doubt they'll achieve as much or more than us but then their expectations are much higher. There was never and doubt they'd go to university. Never any doubt they'd drive and own cars. Never any doubt they'll each buy their own property by the time they're about 27/28. Never any doubt they'd be employed in high earning jobs.
Yes, I suspect they don't quite realise how fortunate they've been.

Well, people need to be willing to give up their privilege for a start - actually give away money (if the top 100 wealthiest people in the world gave away 50% of their money, the world's economy could be re-structured

All well and good redistributing wealth by taking it off the rich and giving it to the poor but what good would it do long term.

If people got into this position by not supporting themselves when the money runs out what then?

For some it may offer a way out but for others it would just be a few good parties and back to square one.

I have worked damned hard and gone without to get to where I am today. Give me one good reason why I should then give someone who preferred to sit around laughing at me going to work anything.

I don't think wealth redistribution is the way to go - fair taxation should take care of that (that is wealth redistribution if done well.)

Communism has never worked for any society that's tried it. Capitalism seems to be the least worst system we have. If we can get more of a social democratic type than a cut throat type then that's probably the best we can do just now.
What's important is equality at the start - so whether your parents are mega rich, or in the gutter you should have equal schooling and equal access to opportunities at the beginning. To a degree we have that in Sweden. It's not perfect by any means but it's a damn sight better than many places.

The way to raise people up isn't to knock down high achievers, it's to lift everyone else.

We have a far more unequal society than many other western capitalist countries.

It's interesting about Sweden's Early Years programme, Anatidae, it actually costs the same as the UKs possibly a tiny bit more on average - the difference is who pays - in Sweden it's the government and in the UK it's the parent. So for providers there isn't the need to cut costs to raise profits

At least when I was researching it a few years ago