Listening to the Today programme this morning I hear that apparently about 60% of people agree with the statement "I'm working class and proud of it". They had a couple of people on to discuss this, one of whom tried to define what it meant to be working class by suggesting that it was all about your family connections (he claimed Cherie Blair was working class because she lived close to her mum for childcare) in some nebulous fashion.
The whole thing struck me as rather odd. When I think of class, I tend to think of education at least for the lower 2 - nearly everyone who's been to university is at least middle class by the end of it while those people who never did any work then left after their GCSEs are generally working class.
So, what do you think?
[Poll #54709]
The whole thing struck me as rather odd. When I think of class, I tend to think of education at least for the lower 2 - nearly everyone who's been to university is at least middle class by the end of it while those people who never did any work then left after their GCSEs are generally working class.
So, what do you think?
[Poll #54709]
no subject
Date: August 20th, 2002 03:44 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 20th, 2002 03:53 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 20th, 2002 03:49 am (UTC)From:Re: class system and ideology
Date: August 20th, 2002 04:14 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 21st, 2002 01:34 am (UTC)From:Re: classes/status
Date: August 20th, 2002 06:46 am (UTC)From:I think everyone here is confused about the meaning of the word "class". It seems to me you are all getting mixed up between classes and status. Anyway, the subject of this talk is bollocks, as a person shouldn't be defined by their class. Class is a rather English idea, isn't it?
Re: classes/status
Date: August 20th, 2002 02:40 pm (UTC)From:And people are traditionally defined by their class -- either by themselves or others or of course both. Why fight against several centuriesworth of definitions? Hah he.
Re: classes/status
Date: August 21st, 2002 04:48 am (UTC)From:Maybe because it is such an old ideology, therefore not relevant to today's changing world!
Re: classes/status
Date: August 21st, 2002 01:56 am (UTC)From:With regard to what Jo said, background is essential to class definitions - the whole idea of class is a sociological thing to understand social stratifications that already exist, & it would be wrong to say that a person is no longer working class because they're "educated" (as if a working class person can't be), or because they've got a job traditionally associated with another class. Their kids might be said to be middle class, maybe.
So yeah, I agree, you'd be working class.
no subject
Date: August 21st, 2002 02:11 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 22nd, 2002 12:00 pm (UTC)From:No, but as I said, their kids might - as in your case. You're working from your personal conception of class, but there are specific ways to define it (which vary, a bit like technical definitions of gender).
it suggests that you can't move between classes which I strongly disagree with
The term for this is 'social mobility', which does of course happen - but a lot less than the right (and so-called centre) would have us believe. Studies of class consistently show that social mobility is still very restricted.
no subject
Date: August 24th, 2002 04:22 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 24th, 2002 04:38 pm (UTC)From:That's the highest estimate I've ever heard! Well, I'd like to see the reference for that. A lot depends, of course, on what signifiers researchers are using to denote class in the first place. But I've never seen a figure that high.
remember that social mobility is not just in one direction
Right, and in fact it may be that downward mobility is more common. Now I'm intrigued - I'll have to take a look at the sociology textbooks when I go back to work...
By "very restricted" I meant that it's harder than is usually acknowledged to move between classes. And at the time I was actually studying the subject, movement crossing the three categories - working class to upper class, and vice versa - was statistically so negligible as to be non-existent.
I tend to agree with Sonia
I thought I was agreeing with Sonia, too?
no subject
Date: August 29th, 2002 08:58 am (UTC)From:>>I tend to agree with Sonia
>I thought I was agreeing with Sonia, too?
I meant that I agree with Sonia that class is an odd concept - it just seems too simplified to me.
Re: classes/status
Date: August 22nd, 2002 05:02 pm (UTC)From:http://www.livejournal.com/talkread.bml?journal=blackcustard&itemid=458054&thread=2353734
no subject
Date: August 21st, 2002 01:57 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 21st, 2002 02:04 am (UTC)From:no subject
Date: August 21st, 2002 02:01 am (UTC)From:Re: links
Date: August 21st, 2002 04:03 am (UTC)From:Please check these links, they may have some relevance!
http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/Intro1.doc
http://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk/papers/Intro2.doc
http://www.sociology.org.uk/cdequal.htm
http://www.sociologyonline.co.uk/soc_essays/Class.htm