The "distance travelled" psychology

[Iryrt3]

I grew up in outer London, surrounded by very competitive people. At university I was constantly surprised at peers (from very different backgrounds to my relatively poor one) whose families already had money, money which in some cases was already theirs through gift or inheritance, choosing fairly stressful, unpleasant, perceived as high status careers such as merchant banking when they had freedom that most don't. Then there is the phenomenon I've noticed over the years when people seek to energetically downplay the perceived financial security of their own parents/families, highlighting say lack of holidays or a parental period of unemployment in an otherwise secure background. I wonder if both are motivated by a desire for the social status perceived to accrue in direct proportion to the perceived financial and social distance travelled. So either by accruing wealth you don't need, or trying to push back the perceived starting point, they seek out this status.

Why does it matter?

Most people want to fit in. People who've had a good head start in life know they're lucky and that not everyone has that privilege. So they try to make themselves sound more "normal".

Can you explain in simpler language?

To be honest, OP, this comes across as a bit ‘aren’t I so wise and sage’. First of all, some people just like making a lot of money – there’s nothing wrong with that. Some people are attracted to certain positions – also nothing wrong with that. Regarding people who downplay their privilege – they are either ignorant of it or embarrassed by it. I don’t think it’s any more complex or mysterious than that.

Your post is very overwritten.

Sure

A tragic backstory makes achievements more impressive and can be used as an excuse for failure. People who succeed against the odds are admired. When someone has not had to overcome anything, they are seen as lucky rather than hardworking. Someone might want to become a merchant banker - and that's ok.

As a side note, your question really doesn't come across that well.

I perceive your post to be totally incomprehensible, but that's just my perception

Eh?

Say what?
Is that you ChatGPT?

I think there is a current value placed on emphasising ‘struggle’ and overcoming obstacles or difficulties, whether internal or external. And as a pp said, discussion of privilege in lots of different contexts leads to people trying to present themselves as not having had an easy ride.
I think this all changes significantly as people get older and more established in their own lives.
Unless you are a politician like poor Rishi Sunsk who didn’t have Sky TV, my heart bleeds for him (not), but he felt he had to say that and it’s part of the same thing you are describing.

These things seem to be two different themes, although it’s hard to tell as I struggle to read long posts without paragraphs.

Some people like to challenge themselves and look for careers where there is a high risk and reward. This is irrespective of background or wealth.

It’s a very British trait to downplay good fortune, nobody likes a show off.

I think you are underestimating the pressure to have a "successful and acceptable career" that people have even with family money.

The career isn't necessarily to make a lot of money, it is to say you have that career.

It is the "done thing" and I would argue they often may be under more pressure as certain jobs that working class parents would think are fine, wouldn't be acceptable.

Also it is human nature to try and relate to the people around us. For them, their parent being unemployed may have made them feel worried and financially insecure. They may have been "poorer" than they were accustomed to.

So... when talking to people they may bring up those things because they want to form a connection.

This reads like an AI post …………

I get what you mean, OP.

Possibly, but I think downplaying your status is a thing everyone does, surely you're aware of the 4 Yorkshiremen sketch?!

People may or may not want to demonstrate distance travelled but enduring people know you didn't always have it easy seems to be a thing to make you "more human". Even if that's "oh we had to manage with only one gardener"!

Took me a while to compute that post

I think people are quite judgmental about everything now so sometimes people over explain according to their audience

I haven’t done nearly as well as I should have. I tend not to talk about work but maybe people guess from that alone.

why are you calling it “distance travelled”, is that a thing?

@EmeraldRoulette OP is just talking about social mobility but fluffing it up for some reason. 🤷
you get more respect if you've not had everything handed to you on a plate. So it makes sense that people try to downplay good fortune and talk about the hurdles they've overcome. Someone from a well-off family can also have a good work ethic...

I voted YANBU but sometimes these things are true.

I inherited a small flat in London from my parents and people tell me how lucky I am, but then I tell them I had to care for a severely mentally ill father and a terminally ill mother in my 20s until they both died to get it and I would gladly swap lives with them to have a living family. Funnily enough no one chooses dead parents.

So what's the AIBU?

OP is saying she knows people who start out rich, but place value on getting wealthier even if this means stressful jobs (so even if you are in a good place you want to move up a good distance), and people who downplay their backgrounds to make it seem like they've "moved" a good way to get where they are. Like Vicky Beckham making out she had it tough when she was driven to school in a Rolls Royce.

So wherever you are in life, you seek to look like you have "travelled" the furthest from previously to now.

Not sure it's a phenomenon I recognise- I suspect it's a mixture of things.

This is the point I was trying to make. I find it difficult to empathise with social status & the associated manoeuvring as a primary motivation, as mine was always attaining baseline financial security. I imagined that had I, like many contemporaries, already had a financially secure base, I would seek fulfilment and enjoyment rather than sacrifice these on the altar of social approval.

This goes back to the fact that I grew up initially in a very working class environment, then entered academic environments where almost everyone was relatively well off. This was 1980s Surrey/Outer London and many of the better off people around me absolutely worshipped Margaret Thatcher, thought the Royal family were gods, the UK armed services could do no wrong, and perceived the neoliberal game they'd already "won" by the age of 18 to be a perfect meritocracy which therefore meant they were great and poor people were all thick or morally questionable.

Many of them spoke openly of their contempt for Irish people, using the activities of the IRA as justification, and had little more regard for gay or BAME people.

I didn't relate to them then, and I don't know, but I sometimes wonder what it is like to be them, amd to understand what drives them.

That does sound quite tough for you, I would say it’s quite unusual to have work in an environment with such universal opinions.

Did they show contempt to you, I have the impression English isn’t your first language, do you think they were anti immigration?

I think people are motivated by different things and find it uncomfortable when people generalise about classes/cultures/sexes as though they are all the same. I am sorry that you went through hardships growing up, but I’m not sure it’s helpful to stereotype anyone.

I know one or two people who imagine themselves from poor backgrounds but it's pretty far from the truth, I think they like to convince the selves of it. Especially among champagne socialist types. Poverty and disadvantage is a badge of honour and its all the fault of the Tories.

Why do you need to empathize with anyone's personal choices to make/not make money? You just seem resentful that people have had different starting points than you in life.

Throwing in casual racism is a red herring. You seem to want people to tell you these people are horrible- and sure they are if they're as racist as you say.
But people who have been born into better circumstances than you are not horrible because they also want to strive at something.

Having this chip on your shoulder since the 1980s most have been exhausting.

I found this post judgmental, and creating a false cognition that I was suggesting that all those who had a different starting point in life also had a character flaw such as racism.

Has it not occurred to you that the child of, say, a successful investment banker might be under serious pressure to achieve similar professional success? The reason being that the banker parent knows their child has the intellectual and educational potential to do a high level stressful job, and they would find it wasteful and lazy for the child to just “do something they enjoy”. It’s not about the money in a lot of these families, it’s about professional pride.

I came from a family that knew very little about hierarchy within law firms. When I qualified as a solicitor and got my first job in law my parents had no idea that many people see a lawyer as a “failure” unless they make partner or become a KC. One day I was at my Mum’s work- she was a dental receptionist- and she told her boss proudly that I’d just qualified. The first thing he said was not “congratulations” but “Ah, so you’ll be aiming for partner next then?” If he’d been my Dad I imagine the qualification bit would have meant as much to him as getting good marks in a primary school spelling test.

Who are you announcing my judgmental post to and what exactly is false cognition? Racism isn't a character flaw, it's discriminatory prejudice.

It seems like you've been upset for decades that these people thought they were better than you in the 80s. Now you over compensated by speaking/writing in really weird sentences, I'm guessing, in an attempt to convince everyone that you're just as clever as the upper middle class Thatcher people?