Is Westminster School the best school on Earth? STATESMOM returns

[statesmom]

I have a lot to say, don't know if anyone remembers the thread. Let me know if you want to hear from me.

We all want happiness for our children but you don’t have to have an Ivy League education to achieve it.

I think it is absolutely tremendously funny that you think you can tell me how I feel about my child!

There is no need to be insecure because he got a great education, is happy and decided (with most of his friends, mind you) to work on Wall Street. There's nothing wrong with teaching in a state school and there's nothing wrong with working for Citigroup, even though your inability to do the same thing might grate with you.

Missing text: start second para:
I’ve not done a comparison…

No one said you did, and if someone did believe that they'd be an idiot.

There are a lot of strawmen on this thread looking to be blown over, no?!

So why have you focused so much on the Ivy League education - your DC’s is in no better position than my DT’s who went to RG UK Unis?

I guess you couldn't get the subtext of my answer: As I want his happiness, if becoming a plumber was his avenue to that goal I would support it.

But you do have to realize, that with the backgound these kids get: private school, private planes (seriously!!! not mine!!!), top education, travel, mansions whatever, while some may become teachers most will gravitate towards the professions.

As an aside, this is what Charles Murray talks about when he talks about assortive mating. My son could have done anything, and I pushed him away from finance as I don't see much of a future in it compared to tech, but that is his interest. Fine. He'll be making a million bucks by 30, 35 at the latest if things go well for him. And he'll be happy and if he's not he'll do something else.

But here's the Murray insight:

Who is he going to marry? A checkout girl at Macy's? Maybe, but most likely not. He's going to be in the Hamptons, or in Italy, or at the University Club in New York, or at work, and what kind of girl is he going to meet there? One from a good family, who went to a top school, who is in a top job, who values family and education and religion and so on.

That's the kind of girl he is likely to marry and they will bring their children up focused on family, education, success however defined and so on. And this is where the real inequality derives from. Assortive mating.

Stating, 'there's nothing wrong with teaching in a state school' is not the same as saying, 'I would be more than happy if my son ended up teaching in a state school'.

All this faux hilarity at everything anyone else says is incredibly tiresome and just makes you look a little pathetic.

Also, you have no idea what anyone else on this thread does for a living because we have zero interest in telling you. It is you that started a thread with the main intention of telling a bunch of strangers how wonderful you and your son are.

THIS POST IS HILARIOUS!!!!!!!! THANK YOU

You haven't really answered, you've just said he wants to be an investment banker.

The irony is that being male and private school educated counts against you in many professional service careers in the U.K., including investment banking.

They're very keen to look/be more inclusive and, as a grammar school educated woman, it definitely helped my chances when I was applying for corporate finance jobs as they were desperate to attract more women and the state school part was a bonus.

I can see it with my sons where certain internships and summer schemes are only open to women, people of certain ethnicities and also, in a few cases, state school educated pupils only.

There's nothing wrong with that but being private school educated has its downsides if you're starting out in your career at this point, rather than 20 years ago when you could trade on your connections.

"assortive mating"
Interesting, genuine question - do you believe in eugenics?

@blue345 - that’s at entry level. Meanwhile there is a massive global connected elite building that is international and mobile and part of that thinking is to experience top education in different countries. Precisely so the kids in question understand different systems and are “supra national.”

Lol. My husband and I pretty much killed ourselves in those industries for years so that our kids don't have to. They'll inherit enough to have been able to value education for its own sake and be able to do jobs they love and/or are rewarding in other ways.

Also, aren't you concerned that your son needed quite so much, um, assistance, to get an ivy league place? I have three kids, all went to a highly regarded London private, no extra assistance other than a little SAT/ACT prep, they're good kids, general all-rounders, but not elite athletes or anything, and between them they did very well. One got into 2 ivies and Oxbridge, went Oxbridge, one got 3 ivies and Oxbridge, went ivy, and one applied early decision to a NESCAC liberal arts and went there. Of the three of them, the small liberal arts was by far the best educational experience. If I were doing it again, I'd encourage that for all three.

There are some serious things to be said about UK vs US educations and quality of life, but OP isn't saying them.

Pecunia vincit omnia.

“I guess you couldn't get the subtext of my answer: As I want his happiness, if becoming a plumber was his avenue to that goal I would support it.”

Assuming the type of plumber, with scale up business model like Pimlico Plumbers and exit strategy with large private equity deal or VC payoff.

@blue345 - that’s at entry level.

Yep, as I said, it's the case for grads starting out. And in time, it will become less of an old boys' network. I work in an industry which has its fair share of that, and I don't have a big issue with it, but you can see change.

There's also less scope for nepotism and some applications are uni and school blind. That doesn't mean you can't excel, particularly as you're more privileged than many in the educational resources you've had at your disposal, but you can't leverage it in the same way you used to be able to.

I do wonder whether some of the posts are intended as a parody though.

It’s quite depressing isn’t it.

Well, that was quite the eugenic screed.

I will say that if I had a strongly academic child and could afford private school I would be keener on the IB than A-Level.

For what it's worth: eldest went to public high school in America and now goes to a prestigious liberal arts college. I would say a bit less competitive than the Ivies for various reasons but considered academically comparable; she liked the smallness of it. No consultants, no hothousing. One of my others will likely be attending the public university nearby as I suspect they won't be ready to move away. Different routes for all!

It is funny. In their, frankly bizarre, contempt of what I have to say, not one but two posters ignorantly think that I'm talking about eugenics!!!!

They almost certainly don't know who Charles Murray is, which is fine, but I am talking about the present day social (not genetic, people) reality of assortive mating.

Maybe you should google it? It is a great contributor to inequality and it is only going to get more extreme as we have some people who go to good schools and value education and some people who don't know the meaning of words.

Children from families in the former group are likely to marry with children from families in the former group. The days of the high powered lawyer marrying his secretary are mostly long gone.

Is every "high powered lawyer" a man?

I am extremely familiar with both Charles Murray and assortative mating. The post was not simply a neutral description of the phenomenon.

Hey, OP. Did you see my post above where I'm wondering why your child needed quite so much 'help' getting an ivy league place?

Not so sure that buying his way in supports Charles Murray's (absolute garbage) theses as all that assistance is really just a different variety of social welfare program, surely?

@statesmom

I'm not sure why you think what essentially boils down to 'rich people are more likely to marry other rich people than they are to marry poor people' or 'people are more likely to marry within their socioeconomic class (for want of a better term) than outside of it' would surprising concepts to people?

It's pretty obvious isn't it?

Oh Christ, the op actually cites Charles Murray! Run away people. Utter racist shite spouted by him in the Bell Curve. Awful man. My old boss (right wing, rugby, Oxford, horribly racist) used to cite him too. Ok good luck op.

No, it is not obvious, and it's a relatively new phenomenon as women's opportunities for education and work have become equal to men's.

In the 1950s the doctor married the nurse (and yes people, the doc was a man).

Today the (male) orthopedic surgeon marries the (female) OBGYN.

Hmmm no, I didn't see the post. Why do you think my child "needed quite so much help"?

I think you are quite anxious to tell me why!