Elitism at Oxford

[piso]

I thought I would post this, not to put people off, but rather to make them aware that Oxford isn't the bastion of egalitarianism that it claims to now be.

My Dd is in her first year at a well known Oxford college. It is an old prestigious one, that has a reputation for being particular pro state school.

In her year group, there is a clear clique of London schoolers, think St Pauls and Westminster. They tend to bother with one another only. "Do you have a place in London?" "I'm from London, smugly the middle bit" "Oh you're so South Ken"

Then there are the old Eton boys, Radley boys etc who seem to also stick to one another.

Private dining societies are still a big thing in Oxford. Whilst apparently they are open to non private school kids, you have to be invited and considered suitable. Ergo, those who come from certain families, went to certain schools.

Favourite activities are skiing and horses. Where are you going skiing this vac? Oh you don't ski? "Our family have known each other forever, we always ski together at Klosters"

DD's neighbour for example is a third generation Oxonian. She proudly caresses her signet ring when talking down to others. She said in freshers week that she'd only consider dating someone from Eton, or Harrow if she had to as she wants a husband like her dad. This girl didn't even get the entry requirements for her course, but after some negotiation got in.

My point being, far from reverse snobbery, is that there still is clearly a large group of hugely entitled people at Oxford. Being born wealthy is certainly none of their faults (nor is it a problem!). DH is from the boarding school type of family, but there seems to be a high preponderance of rich, London type who are keen on being exclusionary.

Never have I been asked in a snobbish way where I went to school, but dd has numerous times, and not in an interested way; a way to see if you are suitable for friendship.

Some friendship groups at her college this year were very much decided based on appropriate background. You get a tick if you're from London. A tick if you went to a select few schools. A tick if your parents know of one another. Another tick if you have a lodge somewhere too.

My DS is at Cambridge and he would not recognise anything in the OPs description. His friends seem to come from all over the U.K. and he has no idea which of them went to private schools as they never discuss it. It may depend on which college they attend and course I suppose.

Nobody thinks Oxford is a bastion of egalitarianism. I went there in the early 90s from a state school. There were lots of people like those you describe, but there were plenty of people who weren't like that at all. It's a long, and far too slow, road to make places like Oxford and Cambridge more egalitarian, but putting state school applicants off with stories about dining societies is not going to help that situation.

The world - I agree. The problem is that the other person may also be feeling insecure and is sensitive to perceived slights. That would mean they would think 'Wow they are a snob, why the hell are they asking me what school I go to? Are they so snobby that they will only mix with people from certain schools'.....and as you say end result is them and us. Prettty rubbish situation fall round. But posts that 'warn' all potential Oxbridge applicants that they are going to encounter a bunch of elitist snobs probably doesn't help. People are going to start with preconceptions that are inaccurate.

The real message is that most of the DC are all the same, in the same position, vulnerable, looking for friends and a bit in awe of their new surroundings (often with imposter syndrome and try to front it out). Don't judge a book by its cover.

...the reason why I said 'most DC' in that paragraph is because there will always be a tiny number of individuals who are just rude, arrogant idiots but that's not restricted to the so called elites.

It varies hugely by college. Unfortunately if you don’t come from schools that send a lot of pupils to Oxbridge, you don’t get that information; I made a horrible choice for that reason. For the PP whose daughter has yet to apply, choose the college taking the proportion of state school pupils into account. It might mean a less prestigious college but it’s worth it for a better experience, and Oxford is Oxford whichever college you go to.
For me it was better to encounter these people for the first time at college rather than at work.

I can totally believe the OPs Dd’s experience. I have told this story before - all the Durham parents and children (except us) were in the first class train carriage (we had a deal!) and all the Newcastle ones in standard. The parents in our carriage were speaking in the same language as in the OPs post; where they skied etc. Everyone was friendly but less so when they didn’t know the name of Dds school (state) and then that we weren’t looking at Durham (as the insurance for Oxbridge natch). It was very disappointing that these stereotypes aren’t stereotypes.
It put Dd off looking at Durham at a later date. But it annoys me that, as pp said it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
I recognised these types back in the day when I went to a different RG university. They were all standing by the bar, rugby collars up, chins up, bragging loudly and scouting for other public school types. I went to public school and legged it to the cool Dr Marten, denim jacket types in the corner. You can reinvent yourself at university too.

Dont lump Cambridge in with Oxford. Asked my child if they met a lot of this when they arrived and asked one of their friends later. They said there were a few like that but not many, mostly people dont ask about schools. Of course there may be some colleges where it happens.

Agree with lots of PPs that Cambridge wasn’t really like that. People didn’t really ask about schools and when they did it wasn’t a big deal, people bonded over other stuff like subjects, location of room, music, going out, sports...

What on earth is wrong with people skiing? Millions do it. Students and parents can take offence at others for all sorts of reasons and if students find their tribe, they find it. Some know how to find it via connections and they may well know each other before Oxford. So what? They are not talking down to your DD. They are just talking. Who said they were loud? This isn’t the preserve of the better off? Not judging by city centres on a Saturday night anyway!

If she wants a supper club - start one. If you are just moaning about others, it sounds like jealousy. She could even try skiiing? If she has friends, likes her course and is happy, why worry about others? Or is it just you needing to stoke up the class divide? Live and let live.

I went to another Russell group uni and to be honest we had the same snobby characters you describe - girls walking around in riding boots and jodhpurs, discussions about where their parents ski chalet was or their place in the Caribbean. It's just more so at Oxford. Interestingly have several friends at or finished Cambridge from state school or regional day schools (not famous boarding schools) and they have had no issues, perhaps it's about the people who choose Oxford.

Cliques form in all Universities as some will stick to their own. I knew someone who found it near impossible to break into groups of Scousers at Liverpool. My daughter says there are a surprising number from provincial private, often boarding, schools at her University who stick together like clams. Others just leave them alone. That said, I can see why specific groups might stick out.

DD was at one of the schools mentioned in the OP. She chose not to apply to Oxbridge, partly because, though she had absolutely loved her school, University was a new chapter and she was happy to start afresh. The school recommend that pupils apply to a mix of colleges, so there is no obvious reason why larger groups should occur, though they seem to. DS said that one of his friends ended up at the same Oxford college as five others from the year, and was not thrilled. Ditto a very bright friend of DDs in a randomly allocated first lab group of about 12, found she already knew 7. The supervisor was astonished whilst DDs friend felt quite sorry for another girl who seemed quite overwhelmed by the coincidence.

From the outside, DDs friends who did not go to Oxbridge have noted how some of their peers still hang out together and are pleased that they have been in a better position to widen their social group. And this cliquishness is not true of everyone. Plenty have been happy to branch out socially. The problem is that the first group are the ones who stand out.

The snobbishness goes both ways. DD was not aware of how her school was regarded till she worked a ski season with a family ski company. She and her colleagues (who had never heard of the school) were pretty astounded at the reaction of some guests. The favourite was one who looked her up and down and said "I dont believe you", others were openly hostile, and others keen to learn more about the entry process at times rudely blanking her colleagues.

University is the time when they all leave the bubbles they grew up in and have to fend for themselves. Wherever they came from they earned their places, and they all have open futures to be determined by results, emotional intelligence, ambition, luck etc. If some are cliquey, so be it. Ignore them, unless you want to be in a profession like law; in which case you have early warning of what you might be up against.

When I was at Cambridge everyone was very normal and down to earth, and the couple of public school boys all looked a bit embarrassed and mumbled when asked where they went to school

I do think stories like the OP's create a self fulfilling prophecy, putting off state school applicants from applying.

There are groups of posh arseholes at most universities to be honest.

Yes and there are groups of rude self styled “working class” idiots too! Some types at the extremes won’t mix but does it matter? Just be happy with who you are and what you wear is irrelevant. Does anyone seriously wear riding boots at university? Perhaps they should all wear clogs and cloth caps? Who really cares?

It's definitely more common at Oxford than Cambridge IME, and especially for certain courses like PPE. It's not that there's so many kids who are that posh in the country, but every last one who has a hope of some decent A-levels will be applying.

I ended up at a public school (expat brat) so usually encountered people in my home town not wanting to talk to me when they found out the name of the school. So fresher's week for me had me answering 'near townname' when asked where I was from and went to school. Eventually I had to mention the name.

'Really? I broke in there once!' said a young local lad who was the opposite of posh. He married an incredibly posh girl, in the end.

Posh people are like everyone else - some lovely, some arse holes, and at 18 their upbringing isn't their fault.

There are always "in" crowds. When I was at university there were the Hoorays, the religious ones, the Angry donkey-jacket wearing ones, the cool partying types etc etc. And, of course, lots of "ordinary" students too.

Ds is currently at Oxbridge. He has a large group of friends (astonishing!!) from varying backgrounds. Most of his fellow students (old college) are just normal.

It sounds as if OP's dd is actually impressed with all of this to notice it so much. Does she notice who the Engineers, say, hang out with or what they do or where they go? Hmmm, thought not.

Who defines 'elite'?
There is an estate which serves DD's old school. There are families who have lived there for generations. They all know each other. They all worked in the same large factory until it closed down because it couldn't compete. They all support the same football team. If the DC do go to University, they tend to daily-commute to one of the nearby, newer ones. I don't see a lot of difference between that and the people who OP was describing: it seems quite closed-minded and tribal.

Definitely research your college choices as some are known for this sort of issue. However I agree that it can happen at many other Unis....

The real message is that most of the DC are all the same, in the same position, vulnerable, looking for friends and a bit in awe of their new surroundings (often with imposter syndrome and try to front it out). Don't judge a book by its cover.

I remember Prince Charles once saying in an interview that when he was a young man at school and university, and at that time not especially confident or outgoing, he found it difficult to make friends, because people assumed he wouldn't want to know them, and left him alone. But he said he might have liked to know them, if only he'd had the chance.

Wherever they came from they earned their places, and they all have open futures to be determined by results, emotional intelligence, ambition, luck etc. If some are cliquey, so be it. Ignore them, unless you want to be in a profession like law; in which case you have early warning of what you might be up against.

Needmoresleep I don't understand the connection you make between the rather silly sounding croquet wielding girls as described by the OP and law. In my experience what determines success at the competitive end of the law is very definitely not to do with money and all its trappings, whether old or new. I find that a very strange connection indeed probably the worst profession to choose as an example of how wielding croquet mallets will help you advance.

Out of interest would anyone be prepared to say which colleges seem to experience more elitist tendencies (actual not reputation)? I am just interested as now DD is at Oxford, I often get asked for advice so it is good to know. DD would sadly fit into the box of skiing and private schools but, thankfully, she is in a college where no one cares where you came from.

The OP mentions St Pauls and Westminster.

I doubt many fit a description of

"the rather silly sounding croquet wielding girls"

Something like "scarily accomplished" might be more apt. Students, whatever their background, earn their places at Oxbridge. Some may lack social skills. Few are silly.

Dancingdreamer my DC all seem to agree that ChristChurch is still the most obviously divided.

That said, I'm not sure how they all managed to emerge from Oxford with a range of firm friends from a very wide variety of schools, including the top independents. I think they went to Oxford with open minds and found that the cliques who want to stay exclusive to their schools weren't large in number or the types of people they'd choose as friends - they just apparently make a disproportionate amount of noise. There didn't seem to be any problem in just tuning it out and getting on with life.

People are lapping up the OP's description and, honestly, it really is not like this from what I have seen. I think people want to believe that Oxford is still all Brideshead Revisited full of Bullingdon Cllub types and gels wearing ball dresses and quaffing champagne.

I still maintain that the OP's dd is seeking these people out and then being offended when she's not admitted to their clique. There are masses of people to be friends with at Oxbridge. If one or other group is "exclusive", then fuck 'em. It's just like school when some pupils (and unfortunately it's always girls) are weeping and wailing that they're left out/bullied yada yada and actually it's because they desperately want to be in the Mean Girls clique.

Needmoresleep the OP's description makes them sound really very silly indeed.

Pupils at Westminster and SPGS should all be reasonably bright at the point of entry but 'scarily accomplished' is a bit of stretch if you mean that each and every pupil - or even the majority - ticks that box at the point of exit, even with all the educational advantage those schools confer. The OP's DD at Oxford will know that Westminster and SPGS students don't universally stick out above the rest within the uni (some will of course), so what you say about watching out for that lot if you want to go into a competitive field just doesn't make sense.

If OPs daughter is struggling at Oxford, she will not find it any easier in some professions...the sort of professions MN seems to spend a lot of time discussing.

My observation is that the sort of girls who go to Oxford from Westminster or SPGS are often on the accomplished end of the silly to accomplished scale. But that is presumably true of many of the girls who go to Oxford.

Do you honestly believe there are not swathes of Aristos and established MC at oxbridge who are their by the grace of their name and position?