|
Post by zemira on Jul 26, 2007 14:50:44 GMT -5
It's different standards for each country, and almost each city. In America, lower-middle is basically...you work...you have a little bit of money for frivolous items, but it's more that you can afford to get popcorn at a movie. Working class, in America, is poorer than lower-middle...I think. I could be wrong about that.
|
|
|
Post by shyviolet on Jul 26, 2007 15:16:32 GMT -5
In merry old England, you have:
Royalty: obviously, those in line for the throne or related to said. Landed/Titled Aristocracy: Lords, ladies, Baronets. People with hereditary titles. Aristocracy: People who have the money and upbringing to mingle with the Landed aristocracy. Upper Class: All the rich people who don't fit into any of the above but still, say, send their children to expensive private schools and buy them ponies and such. the Aristocracy can be snobbish to them. Upper-Middle Class: This is me, people who COULD send their children to private school, but have little enough money that it would be a significant drain on their finances. Wealthy but not rich. The Upper classes can be snobbish to us. Middle Class: comfortable, but not rich per se. Lower-Middle Class: Another step down basically. Live in smaller houses, don't have as many cars, but not poor either. Working Class: So called because back in the mists of time they would have done manual labour (some still do). Can't afford real designer clothes or flashy cars, some live comfortably, some live in very tight situations. Originally this was the place you tried to work your way out of to give your children a better life, now they can either do that, or practice inverted snobbery and pretend they're better than people with lots of money. This is the class that 'chavs' come from. Anyone with good manners gets to be snobbish to chavs.
Obviously that's really simplified, but it gives you a basic overview. It's probably worth mentioning that the Upper Classes, while technically the highest, have much less influence than they used to. There's less emphasis on birth now and more on money.
|
|
|
Post by kaiku on Jul 27, 2007 9:30:50 GMT -5
Thanks for that! I never really understood the boundaries between some of the classes.
I'd say we're probably ... lower-middle. It's not too bad down this end of the scale, though I did still have to go to a school that was about 80% charvas (the mackham word for 'chav') which wasn't too fun.
|
|
|
Post by zemira on Jul 27, 2007 10:47:31 GMT -5
My turn for a question from the all-knowing shyviolet. ^_^ Or anyone, really. What's "chav" or "charvas"?
|
|
|
Post by shyviolet on Jul 27, 2007 11:11:02 GMT -5
They're a subculture of teenagers, associated with low intelligence, poor education and lack of respect for society or other people. They tend to practice inverted snobbery. They wear shiney tracksuits, fake designer clothes, lots of jewellery. They quite often get pregnant when below the age of consent... At the risk of sounding like a snob, they're just really, really common. They're loud and rude and wear heavy make-up (if female) and tacky jewellery... Generally a chav would be someone who has all these characteristics, obviously not everyone who wears tacky jewellery is a loudmouth yob. If you want a more detailed view I'm sure they have their own wikipedia article. Oh, and I'm pretty sure a 'charva' has a different set of fashion stereotypes, but the same antisocial behaviour. edit: I found a picture one of my friends drew of a stereotypical chav - www.deviantart.com/deviation/48149739/
|
|
|
Post by zemira on Jul 27, 2007 12:45:09 GMT -5
Ahhh...I see. Thanks. Being American in a Chris Wooding world is lonely at times, lol.
|
|
|
Post by kaiku on Jul 28, 2007 7:09:41 GMT -5
Oh, and I'm pretty sure a 'charva' has a different set of fashion stereotypes, but the same antisocial behaviour. edit: I found a picture one of my friends drew of a stereotypical chav - www.deviantart.com/deviation/48149739/Nope, same stereotypes all round. We just like to pronounce things differently up here to confuse people . Besides, if you said the word 'chav' up here, you'd probably get beaten up by a gang of them ... And that picture is great! Haha! Ahhh...I see. Thanks. Being American in a Chris Wooding world is lonely at times, lol. Aww, but you can at least be thankful that, being an American, you have no such thing as chavs/charvas. Although I suspect that they might invade sometime in the future - be afraid!
|
|
|
Post by zemira on Jul 28, 2007 11:24:35 GMT -5
You'd be surprised...We have them, we just don't have a specific name for them. But they started "appearing" sometime in the 80's or so. Unfortunately, most of America is like them in some way or another. And if not, then they want to be like them. >_<
|
|
|
Post by shyviolet on Jul 29, 2007 2:57:45 GMT -5
Well chavs like being chavs because it comes with a good deal of arrogance. We just hate them 'cause we're middle class.
You should look through the rest of her gallery, Holly is AMAZING. I'm so jealous of her talent.
|
|
marleen
Full Member
Wazowski!
Posts: 122
|
Post by marleen on Jul 30, 2007 3:08:38 GMT -5
You'd be surprised...We have them, we just don't have a specific name for them. Not "white trash"? In Germany, we call them "Proll" or "Assi"... I think. In Danish they're just called "Brian" all of them, which makes me feel sorry for anyone with the name of Brian.
|
|
|
Post by zemira on Jul 30, 2007 7:46:21 GMT -5
Maybe, although that term has somewhat faded now. White trash was a 90's term, and I haven't heard anyone use it for quite some time. >_<
|
|
|
Post by bluephoenix on Aug 4, 2007 2:10:27 GMT -5
Well, if we're talking soceity class, I live in a area called Maplewood...most call it Maple-Hood. I live in St. Louis white-trash central. yay...
also, I'd live Violet's bit about inverse snobbery. Was nice.
|
|
|
Post by zemira on Aug 6, 2007 7:56:49 GMT -5
Wow, you live in Maplewood? That's like 25 min away from me...Small world. I live in the Valley Park/Ballwin area.
|
|
|
Post by Aryeec {E.F. Forester} on Aug 9, 2007 16:19:12 GMT -5
back to the book
|
|