Is mumsnet aimed at rich families ?

[starsparkle08]

I’ve seen quite a lot of threads on here where families seem to have a huge amount of disposable income .
Im a single parent without a huge amount and wondering if I am in the minority on here ?
I’ve noticed there seems to be more people with lower incomes on netmums ? Am I generalising or have others noticed this also

I genuinely like that there is such a mix on here. I love reading the threads by rich people who don't think they are rich and some think people who aren't rich obviously haven't worked hard enough.

I have a friend they live with their partner in a 2 bed nice new build rented flat in Stoke newington ( not HA) they have just over 50k between them they are doing fine they go out for dinner have holidays they don't have a car they mostly cycle to work or walk they don't have the best of everything but they are managing just fine in London on a very average salary each, sure their rent would be £500 less in birmingham
it is totally disingenuous to suggest that there is no property to be within 10 miles of central London for under £500k, there are places under 300K only flats not houses but still property

the average price in greater London is 475K (september 2018 published by GLA) so there must be plenty under that for it to be the mean average

Omg I can see it’s still going on.

I DONT THINK PEOPLE WHO ARE ON SIX FIGURE SALARIES ARE LIVING ‘HAND TO MOUTH’ IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. I WOULD NEVER IN MY LIFE ARGUE THAT. I’M INSULTED THAT YOU WOULD EVEN THINK I’M STUPID ENOUGH TO DO SO. NEVER MIND TONE DEAF ENOUGH TO DO SO ON A THREAD LIKE THIS.

FOR THE RECORD, WHEN I USE TERMS SUCH AS ‘COULD BE SAID’ I AM SPEAKING IN THEORETICAL TERMS ONLY, AND IN A VERY SPECIFIC CONTEXT, USUALLY TO MAKE AN ILLUSTRATIVE POINT.

I SAID THIS ONLY IN THE CONTEXT OF ILLUSTRATING TO SOMEONE (WHO I”M SORRY, BUT I’M STARTING TO THINK IS ONE OF THE LESS DIMWITTED AMONGST US) WHOSE COMMENT IRRITATED ME BECAUSE THEY CLAIMED THAT EVERYONE ON HERE WHO SAYS THEY ARE ON A VERY HIGH INCOME MUST BE LYING. THEY SPECIFICALLY USED THE MARKERS I MENTIONED WHICH IS WHY I ADDRESSED THEM.

IF IT’S MY OWN OPINION I WILL STATE THAT OPINION AS ABSOLUTE FACT. IF I HAVEN’T DONE SO THEN IT’S NOT MY OPINION!!

FFS STOP LECTURING ME. I AM A WOMAN OF SIGNIFICANT INTELLECT AND INTELLIGENCE. YOU ARE EXPLAINING SIMPLE THINGS TO ME, THE KIND OF LAUGHABLY SIMPLE THINGS THAT ANYONE WITH ANY KIND OF INSIGHT ALREADY KNOWS.

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST.

THERE IS NO FORM OF WORDS THAT I CAN USE TO MAKE THIS ANY CLEARER FOR YOU.

AND THIS TIME I AM FUCKING SHOUTING.

Are you saying there's no working class parents raising families in london/south east?

BejamNostalgia sorry, it's you that's talking nonsense. I have lived in inner London all my life, for the last nearly 30 years in a borough notorious for deprivation - although there is also a lot of wealth and gentrification. Many of the schools have high proportions of children on FSM. There are huge council estates and social housing. In 2016 28% of children in the borough lived in poverty; i.e. where household income was under £14,000 a year. People may not be able to "afford" to raise families, they are doing it nonetheless.

Yes, if you’d read my original post before having a pop at me you would have noticed I said that social housing was the only way to live in London on low wagesd, but the availability of that in London is virtually nil and it’s almost impossible to get into, they routinely send people out of London now if they’re homeless.

Your figures just don’t stack up at all. The cheapest private sector rentals in London for a two bed is one in Eltham for £15k per year.

So unless they’re overcrowded or living on fresh air, low income families without access to social housing just can’t afford it.

The year I was in London I was single no kids. But when I lived elsewhere in south east that included a period as a working class single mother.

Apologies to the OP whose thread has been derailed to such an excessive degree.

I’m going to answer your question now.

Yes there are lots of people on MN with much more money than an average person, and even an average couple. I wouldn’t let it worry you. It doesn’t worry me, even though I am very much on the lower end of that particular spectrum.

I take everything with a grain of salt, but I also don’t let anyone else’s moralising, worthiness or privilege affect how I think about me and my life. I stand firm in the courage of my convictions, which allows me to keep a good distance from much of the nonsense that is spouted here by people who don’t have a clue. I don’t judge myself or my circumstances in relation to others’ circumstances just because others might - who the fuck are they?!

I appreciate the intelligence, the intellectual bent, the quick wit and the very many clever, strong, intelligent and educated women who help make this place what it is. I very much appreciate the strong feminist bent, the fact that people say it like it is, that you don’t get hunned or hubbied to death and that it’s a challenge to my intellect. I love the funny threads, the swearing, the general feel of the place. I like a good combative discussion from time to time.

When my daughters settle into relationships I will point them to AIBU and Relationships to make sure they always have somewhere to go where the vipers will ensure they stand tall and demand the respect they’re entitled to.

I think sites like this are bound to have a bigger take up of middle-class families, whatever the aim. I remember when it first started many families were put off for this reason. Similarly, middle classes will take up and sometimes dominate other resources like child and baby groups/activities. Different things appeal to different people. There is no way this site represents a good cross-section. Some of the flavour of judgmental posts would put a lot of people off. Particularly those who criticise posters spelling or grammar. In all walks of life you have to feel comfortable with the company you keep. Quite a few posters on here have a disposable income /lifestyle alien to many. Certainly many poster see themselves as more educated

I find it really interesting to compare mumsnet with netmums. I was on netmums first and it's quite a different environment, "mumsnet" was a dirty word there, they call it ruthless here! It's much more slanted towards SAHMs, heaven forbid you try to explain you choose to work, and you can't discuss feminist issues as there's a couple of arsehole mansplainers on there that make it entirely infuriating. When I finally braved this site I was relieved by how honest it was, less of the "didn't want to read and run, hugs" shit and the feminism board is enlightening, and comforting.

I have felt there are more affluent women this side, more professional, and more intelligent frankly but intelligence is not an indicator of class, I think there's a mix of women in terms of backgrounds.

My first forum was baby and bump, they don't let people discuss abortion...at all.

Absolutely, intelligence is not an indicator of class. Which is why I mentioned strong and intelligent women above, not just education level. I love it here because intelligence is fluid, it’s organic, as opposed to educational level which is often dictated to people by circumstances outwith their control. Anyone can become better informed, more analytical and more educated (in terms of knowledge, not necessarily in terms of structured education), more self-assured and better understanding of their own and others’ positions and perspectives, no matter their specific circumstances. That right there, is one of Mumsnet’s biggest strengths - it is by the people, for the people, as laughable as that might sound. It’s a hugely important resource for a whole cross-section of women. And it simply wouldn’t be if it was all hugs and cupcakes all the time!

Meh not sure that ‘intelligence is fluid’ is really what I wanted to say there - I’m aware that in some ways intelligence is quite rigidly set - but i certainly think that how well one’s natural intelligence can be put to use in one’s particular set of circumstances is very fluid and can be vastly improved upon. Knowledge is power, and again, that is one of Mumsnet’s biggest strengths.

@Ninkaninus sorry my comment wasn't directed at you, I was correcting myself that intelligence isn't related to class as I used it as an adjective after affluent, as if women were wealthier and therefore more intelligent but I was incoherently trying to say I felt there were wealthier AND intelligent women (from all backgrounds) if that makes any sense. Clearly not talking about myself, on either count ha.

Yes that makes sense. I have met plenty of polished, confident and not very bright well off people.

"The cheapest private sector rentals in London for a two bed is one in Eltham for £15k per year."

Really?

www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-70036516.html

Took me 2 mins to find!

Oh I know - I was just agreeing with you and then adding further comment. You’re completely right, it isn’t a reliable class indicator at all (or doesn’t need to be - obviously in most cases it can be a fairly good, if not unequivocal, marker, in conjunction with other factors), and it’s one of the things that makes Mumsnet so valuable as a female empowerment resource - I think there’s enough diversity of background and experience, with enough overlap of education and intelligence, to make it a far more robust entity than many others where the aim and intention is so fixed as to render it almost of no value. I’m not looking to be mollycoddled in my thinking - I’m looking to be met with, and engage with, breadth and width of knowledge and understanding, and multi-faceted people with multi-faced lives, with well-developed critical faculties and the wisdom and strength that comes from it.

I do think this site is more aimed at people with more disposable income. If you look at the adverts you don’t see Wilko or new look. It is Fancy teas and national trust.

Ugh I do write clumsy and convoluted sentences sometimes! Hopefully it still makes sense! I’m off this week and had a very good but very late night last night so I’m not necessarily all with it today...

Took me 2 mins to find!

A snip at 10 grand a year. And a deposit of nearly a grand.

Minimum wage earners need not apply.

and flat shares are highly practical for a family.

That property is a flatshare, so I'm pretty sure that cost is only for one of the rooms. And the advert says "Not Suitable for Families / Children"

It states bedroom and bathroom, most definitely not the whole place.

To yourself I mean.

of course it's not the whole place, you pay for one room only.

That’s a bedroom in a houseshare Graphista. One bedroom and shared facilities. It specifically says no families or children in the advert.

The cost of the 2 bed flat altogether is £1,700 per month, in excess of £20,000 per year

I don’t mind rubbing shoulders with better or worse off folks (we’re lower income, but muddling on well enough with social housing, used furniture/clothes etc that we have money for extras and don’t feel poor). We have been on our knees though.

Some daft comment do piss me off sometimes. Like a comment I saw a while back, “who buys their own kid just one Bday present?” Um, we do? When you’re not well off, your kid’s bday is in winter (no bouncy castle in the garden) and your house is too small for umpteen kids to bounce round in so you hire soft play it really adds up when you’re not rolling in it.

Ok I didn't think that was a flat share, my mistake in that particular link, pretty sure this one isn't

www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/property-79847399.html

These prices are not that much higher than private rents where I live - in Scotland! And certainly in glasgow or Edinburgh not too dissimilar. I've also lived in other parts of the U.K. That were way more expensive than London.

This idea that London is the ONLY expensive place to live is nonsense.

And that's just looking on rightmove too certainly I know where I live they tend to hold the more expensive properties, local letting agents and ads tend to be where you find the less expensive properties but as I'm not now familiar with who the reputable local advertisers are for umpteen London boroughs I'm not trying to trail through multiple websites trying to figure that out.