What does "posh" mean to you?

[FlatteredFool]

What is it about someone that would make you describe them as posh? I would think it's relative and depends on how much you assign class to people but I find it interesting.

I've been called posh a few times and it bugs me because I'm not posh at all. What does posh even mean? Money? Privately educated? Big house? Second home? Plummy accent? High flying career? Having friends in high places? Owning horses? Private jet? Those things just say to me that someone has plenty of money. None of them apply to me and the people I know that do have some of those things aren't posh to me either. Is "posh" the opposite of "common" ( I know how mumsnet hates that term, sorry) or is it something that can't be pinpointed exactly?

Their teenage children will be encouraged to marry well?

I'm not sure it's conducive to happiness, especially as the losses were self-inflicted

Yes, I agree. I think if my father had handed over a property to the National Trust or sold it I’d want to move as far away as possible though sometimes the house goes and the farmland is kept.
The other thing is primo geniture which is illegal in some other European countries. There’s a family with a famous historic house + works of art, paintings and loads of land including chunks of towns.. The 2 younger siblings were given £15,000 a year. Now, most people including me would be absolutely thrilled to have that and it would make a huge difference to most people’s lives.
However it was a very small . of a % of what the eldest son inherited.

@ConsuelaHammock

Their teenage children will be encouraged to marry well?

Alas, I don’t think three geeky boys, two with diagnosed SN, are necessarily likely to be much of a catch on the ‘marrying well’ market of the kind I imagine you mean!

So would you make primogeniture illegal? I am genuinely interested.

Why not? The Royal Family has scrapped it.

If I was a younger sibling no I wouldn’t.
Some of these houses have incredible collections as a result of primo geniture and many (most) are open to the public.
Say primo geniture became illegal then these collections would be split up and much of the stuff sold. Galleries would no doubt buy some and some would have to go for death duties.
Other fine works of art would be bought by rich overseas buyers and never be seen again.
Should one person inherit so much?
That’s a different argument but following on from that, say Chatsworth was divided up then should 3 people inherit so much?
As I said earlier there’s no law stopping spending and gambling so those who are opposed to so much being in the hands of one person then read a Splendour and Squalor by Marcus Scrivens which describes the downfall of once fabulously rich families.
Maybe the fate to a rich aristocratic near you soon

@23PissOffAvenueWF

Why not? The Royal Family has scrapped it.

do you think primogeniture means firstborn child

Or firstborn son?

The absolutely critical thing is the network (family and friends rather than colleagues). The smartest people all know one another, have friends in common, went to school together, run into each other, are distant cousins etc. For this reason there is nothing to prove because you are already on the inside of the circle. Nothing says 'not posh/smart' like the wealthy, RP speaking, range rover driving, Hermès wearing, polo playing public school parent who isn't part of the Set, isn't related to anyone else at the party, doesn't have school friends in the group, wasn't at Toots and Bunny's wedding, and can't reminisce about fun times they all had together as kids. Because that person never feels there by right, can't relax into it and has to try too hard to fit in, so doesn't. The smartest people are the ones who don't have to try.

Primogeniture means first born son.

So if it’s changed to first born, as in the case of the Royal Family, then there is no need to split estates and assets.

If an aristocratic family only has girls (and there’s no entail), then the estate passes to the first born girl anyway*. So it’s not as if the sky is going to fall on anyone’s head if the laws around primogeniture change to mean ‘first born’.

• See QEII for a good example of the first born daughter (well, niece) inheriting. And - I think we can all agree - doing a somewhat better job than most of the chaps.

@23PissOffAvenueWF

Primogeniture means first born son.

So if it’s changed to first born, as in the case of the Royal Family, then there is no need to split estates and assets.

To be precise, that is male primogeniture

They may seem the same if you are operating in a culture where females are invisible and discounted without thought.

UK rules of succession are now primogeniture

No longer male primogeniture.

If you look back to early laws, they simply omitted mentioning the Male, becaue it went without saying.

I don’t think that’s correct.

Primogeniture in the UK still means first born son. It was changed for the Royal Family, shortly before Prince George was born.

Anyone who calls dinner/tea, supper

Darbishire has it nailed.

@longwayoff

Sorry to drag Harry and Meghan into this thread but did anyone, posh or otherwise, fall about laughing at their proclaiming to live an 'authentic'life standing in their chicken shed? With Oprah and a camera team. Are they posh? How can they not be?

Harry is posh, having been born into the Royal Family. She is not and never will be.

Having said that, @MagicSummer, for some older families, the RF are comparative johnny-come-latelies and a bit ho hum. I mean, the type of aristocrats who already thought the Tudors were upstarts.

@MagicSummer

As you say, snobbery prevents the acceptance of anyone who is not PLU.

Funny that it is applied most vindictively by the RWR gutter press.

As you say, snobbery prevents the acceptance of anyone who is not PLU

Except maybe in certain groups. Racing for example where horses are the common denominator or classical music where music is what counts.

If anyone you know is part of the smart/posh universe, and says you're okay/family/related, you will be invited to big (impersonal) parties. If you fit, you'll get personal invitations thereafter. PLU is only part of it; most established groups like fresh faces and new input.

@Howmanysleepsnow

I don’t know. I get called posh. I put it down to a non-local accent, a large vocabulary (DH laughs at words I use routinely) and being or appearing reasonably well educated. I’m not rich and never have been (my parents ended each month overdrawn as did I until a few years ago. I went to private school (full scholarship). I am pretty unaffected and don’t worry about how I appear to others.

This! I get called posh because I moved around enough to lose my local accent, and I have a reasonable vocab. Up to a certain point it's surely just in the eye of the beholder, but I think you get to a certain point where everyone (themselves included) think they're posh (private jets paid for by Daddy etc)

Posh is not giving an arse about the class system, for a start.

My understanding of posh doesn't encompass private jets, but a private jet wouldn't make you acceptable in large parts of rural England. It would say you were successful and affluent, but it would never make you posh... because posh is not really about wealth.

Calls their evening meal "dinner". Doesn't have a discernible regional accent.

Read Darbishire's post. She understands the reality of the smart set. And why you belong, or not. I don't belong. But DS probably could, if he wanted to. Despite not having a fortune. And no estate.

I was speaking to someone really quite posh on the phone today that I didn't know. We did the polite standard introductories, the swift exchange of relevant info and indulged in a little of the name exchange. I then accidentally stumbled over my words of goodbye and mumbled something distinctly incoherent instead of "goodbye then". It was an utterly meaningless jumble of sounds.

The person on the other end of the phone then mumbled something equally incoherent back in response!!

This is obviously some posh code that I have cracked.