Common courtesy is, any other formal behavior is not, especially not the one that makes you pretend you're something you wish to be far from.
Advertisement
by Shinpitekina » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:55 pm
by Luveria » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:55 pm
Crumlark wrote:Ashmoria wrote:no it also includes those lower class people who want to act like upper class people.
formality IS the way upper class people act. if the behaviors were reversed it would still be considered that the upper class behavior was better and more formal.
I was abiding by a looser definition of ritualistic and repeated activities throughout daily life just before I read that post. Then I realized smoking breaks, breastfeeding, and using the bathroom would certainly be formal under this definition. I think I'll go by your definition from here on out.Luveria wrote:
No, it does not, and it was not a slanted question. You are making it into what you want it to be.Eugh, burden of proof is on me with this bit. The question operates on the assumption the lower class act more informal. I exaggerated when I said it implied the lower class were devoid of formality. However, when you said "Because they are not upper class" You made it seem that to be formal, you had to be upper class. A requirement.
And since I adjusted my stance on the issue, all this is proving you right. Still needed to be posted though, with you saying the question wasn't loaded.
by Forster Keys » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:55 pm
Caninope wrote:Forster Keys wrote:
If they keep acting like that you won't have to.
See, here's the thing.
I go to university with a bunch of people who might broadly be described as "upper class"- the old money, the new money, people from professional/managerial/corporate class(es). Everyone I've met so far has been amazing. No one I've met has been so classist, even the people who advocate the near dismantling of the state.
IOW, Vazdania is the exception, if he truly is monied.
by Unitaristic Regions » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:55 pm
by Unitaristic Regions » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:56 pm
Forster Keys wrote:Caninope wrote:See, here's the thing.
I go to university with a bunch of people who might broadly be described as "upper class"- the old money, the new money, people from professional/managerial/corporate class(es). Everyone I've met so far has been amazing. No one I've met has been so classist, even the people who advocate the near dismantling of the state.
IOW, Vazdania is the exception, if he truly is monied.
Point taken. I've got no hatred for the rich. One of my best friends is rich. See what I did there?
The fact is that I don't see their position, as a class, as optimal. In fact I think the current circumstances will soon be untenable. I don't wish them any harm as people, I want them to be liquidated as a class, but the individuals are quite often great people from which society can benefit.
by Grand Longueville » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:57 pm
by Ashmoria » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:59 pm
Crumlark wrote:Ashmoria wrote:no it also includes those lower class people who want to act like upper class people.
formality IS the way upper class people act. if the behaviors were reversed it would still be considered that the upper class behavior was better and more formal.
I was abiding by a looser definition of ritualistic and repeated activities throughout daily life just before I read that post. Then I realized smoking breaks, breastfeeding, and using the bathroom would certainly be formal under this definition. I think I'll go by your definition from here on out.
by Old Tyrannia » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:59 pm
by Seriong » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:59 pm
Vazdania wrote:Make your own company?
Luveria wrote:Without any money?
Vazdania wrote:There are many things to help people.
Luveria wrote:Like what?
Drawkland wrote:I think it delegitimizes true cases of sexual assault, like real dangerous cases being dismissed, "Oh it's only sexual assault"
Like racism. If everything's "racist," then you can't tell what really is racist.
Murkwood wrote:As a trans MtF Bi Pansexual Transautistic CAMAB Demiplatonic Asensual Better-Abled Planetkin Singlet Afro-Centric Vegan Socialist Therian, I'm immune from criticism.
by Forster Keys » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:59 pm
Unitaristic Regions wrote:Forster Keys wrote:
Point taken. I've got no hatred for the rich. One of my best friends is rich. See what I did there?
The fact is that I don't see their position, as a class, as optimal. In fact I think the current circumstances will soon be untenable. I don't wish them any harm as people, I want them to be liquidated as a class, but the individuals are quite often great people from which society can benefit.
Commeh in da building!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6ltwpapumE
by Crumlark » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:00 pm
Luveria wrote:Crumlark wrote:I was abiding by a looser definition of ritualistic and repeated activities throughout daily life just before I read that post. Then I realized smoking breaks, breastfeeding, and using the bathroom would certainly be formal under this definition. I think I'll go by your definition from here on out.Eugh, burden of proof is on me with this bit. The question operates on the assumption the lower class act more informal. I exaggerated when I said it implied the lower class were devoid of formality. However, when you said "Because they are not upper class" You made it seem that to be formal, you had to be upper class. A requirement.
And since I adjusted my stance on the issue, all this is proving you right. Still needed to be posted though, with you saying the question wasn't loaded.
No problem. I make faulty assumptions too sometimes.
I interpreted the topic of "Why do you think the Lower-Classes Act More Informal?" as really meaning "Why do you think the Lower-Classes Act More Informal than the upper classes?" I thought it would be self-explanatory that if the premise is that the upper classes act more formal than the lower classes, the primary difference is that the lower classes are not upper class.
by Glasgia » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:00 pm
Glasgia wrote:Vazdania wrote: How would working hard not get you anywhere?
Because you went to a shit school, where it looked far more profitable to join a gang then learn. So you worked bloody hard to keep your family going by doing your daily drug run, while those richer than you could afford to study. Rather than building up nine thousand in debt for university, you went to work down the local pit. You worked hard day in day out, but you had no education, no connections and that meant you had no way upwards.
When the pit closes, you have no job, no education, no experience elsewhere. You've worked hard to bring in income all your life, but now you're confined to a council house with no jobs available and just £6 a week unemployment benefit.
by United British Union » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:00 pm
by Arglorand » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:00 pm
Seriong wrote:Let me take this one, I got it Vazzie boyLuveria wrote:
Indoors when not having the space for it? When not having the money to pay for the growing equipment?
Then farm the 'local animals' if you catch my drift, cities are pretty densely populated with food, if you look for them. Apartment complexes actually put them right above, and beside you dwelling.Luveria wrote:
Without any money?
Find a small child with a lemonade stand, knock them over, steal the lemonade, reinvest all the profits into buying more lemonade.Luveria wrote:
Like what?
I don't know, but I've already given ways to get food and a job, what more do you want? /s
by Forster Keys » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:01 pm
United British Union wrote:Formality, manners and polite society are the only things that separate us from the animal kingdom. If one must ignore them...
by Arglorand » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:01 pm
United British Union wrote:Formality, manners and polite society are the only things that separate us from the animal kingdom. If one must ignore them...
by Crumlark » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:02 pm
Ashmoria wrote:Crumlark wrote:I was abiding by a looser definition of ritualistic and repeated activities throughout daily life just before I read that post. Then I realized smoking breaks, breastfeeding, and using the bathroom would certainly be formal under this definition. I think I'll go by your definition from here on out.
surely under the looser definition the lower classes act as formal as the upper class does, just differently.
by Vareiln » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:02 pm
United British Union wrote:Formality, manners and polite society are the only things that separate us from the animal kingdom. If one must ignore them...
by Grand Longueville » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:02 pm
by Frisivisia » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:02 pm
United British Union wrote:Formality, manners and polite society are the only things that separate us from the animal kingdom. If one must ignore them...
by Unitaristic Regions » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:02 pm
by Estado Paulista » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:03 pm
United British Union wrote:Formality, manners and polite society are the only things that separate us from the animal kingdom. If one must ignore them...
by Glasgia » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:03 pm
by Arglorand » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:03 pm
Glasgia wrote:Saying "Thanks" and "Please" is good manners.
by Shnercropolis » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:03 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bovad, Dimetrodon Empire, Juansonia, San Luis Abbey
Advertisement