Neither Trumpain, nor child-optimizing for meritocracy?

[Anonymous]

The Vox article about America's UMC and their "child optimization" strategy really hit home for me.

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/22673605/upper-middle-class-meritocracy-matthew-stewart

Is there a middle way somewhere in this country - not Trumpian, and not child-optimizing for meritocracy? Have you found it? If so, where and how do you resist the pressure on either extreme?

[Anonymous]

Thanks for sharing. I've been thinking about these questions for a while now, and I think I've gotten so addicted to this site because it's sort of a window into how the 9.9% think.

"I think that meritocracy mostly gets invented after the fact...People make this false assumption precisely because the inequality is already there, and they’re looking for a justification."

I see a lot of this on DCUM - posts twisting logic into knots to argue that they deserve their privilege, and everyone else must just be lazy.

The one part of the article I disagree with is about hiring nannies...most of the nannies I know do not have education backgrounds, and aren't optimizing kids. It's just much more convenient than daycare for many reasons, so if you can afford it, why not? And once you get up to 2-3 kids, I don't think it's much more expensive than daycare. Even middle-class people I know have nannies (assuming there are two working parents), they just refer to them as babysitters.

Anyway, the answer to how you as an individual can avoid this is pretty simple. Just don't do it. I posted a couple of weeks ago about how we moved to a "middling" school district, and several people thought I was a troll because this concept is apparently so shocking to the UMC mind. But you can do this, and it's not going to screw your kid up.

Actually, since that post, I've connected with several families in our district who are in the same position, some with much older kids. And everyone's fine and happy. No one is Trumpian

We do still live in the UMC bubble to some degree, and I don't think you ever can fully leave it, so that insecurity about making different choices than everyone else, about going against these values that seem so ingrained in our society, will always be there and I don't like it. But it's definitely better than the alternative. And knowing others who are doing the same thing helps so much.

What I'm more curious about is how do we change this on a societal level. I've noticed most UMC people refuse to talk about this (80% of the time), get really defensive (10% of the time), or acknowledge it and feel bad, but refuse to do anything to change it (10% of the time). I am actually curious how many responses you'll get here, since there really doesn't seem to be much appetite for this kind of thing in the DCUM crowd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for sharing. I've been thinking about these questions for a while now, and I think I've gotten so addicted to this site because it's sort of a window into how the 9.9% think.

"I think that meritocracy mostly gets invented after the fact...People make this false assumption precisely because the inequality is already there, and they’re looking for a justification."

I see a lot of this on DCUM - posts twisting logic into knots to argue that they deserve their privilege, and everyone else must just be lazy.

The one part of the article I disagree with is about hiring nannies...most of the nannies I know do not have education backgrounds, and aren't optimizing kids. It's just much more convenient than daycare for many reasons, so if you can afford it, why not? And once you get up to 2-3 kids, I don't think it's much more expensive than daycare. Even middle-class people I know have nannies (assuming there are two working parents), they just refer to them as babysitters.

Anyway, the answer to how you as an individual can avoid this is pretty simple. Just don't do it. I posted a couple of weeks ago about how we moved to a "middling" school district, and several people thought I was a troll because this concept is apparently so shocking to the UMC mind. But you can do this, and it's not going to screw your kid up.

Actually, since that post, I've connected with several families in our district who are in the same position, some with much older kids. And everyone's fine and happy. No one is Trumpian

We do still live in the UMC bubble to some degree, and I don't think you ever can fully leave it, so that insecurity about making different choices than everyone else, about going against these values that seem so ingrained in our society, will always be there and I don't like it. But it's definitely better than the alternative. And knowing others who are doing the same thing helps so much.

What I'm more curious about is how do we change this on a societal level. I've noticed most UMC people refuse to talk about this (80% of the time), get really defensive (10% of the time), or acknowledge it and feel bad, but refuse to do anything to change it (10% of the time). I am actually curious how many responses you'll get here, since there really doesn't seem to be much appetite for this kind of thing in the DCUM crowd.

One of the most innate characteristics is wanting your children to succeed. That won't change. There is no reason to expect that rich, UMC, MC and lower class parents will do everything in their power to position their children for success. The difference is that the rich don't actually have to do anything other than pass on some of their wealth. UMC parents who have to work for their money have to find a way to get their children relative advantages that will result in their kids being able to get similar jobs. Best of luck finding a way to ban those advantages be it private school, the ability to let their children graduate with no debt or even calling friends to get their kids interviews.

[Anonymous]

I am not sure what your mean by Trumpian, but if that's a hint on the lack of critical thinking, it's not hard for us at all to resist that. We read, we talk, we discuss - that's how we grew up and how we are [unintentionally] raising our kids.

By the same token, it's hard to draw a clear line where the "optimizing for meritocracy" begins. For example, for several years my friends and I ran a theater group for our children. We'd get together and rehearse weekly, and put out 2 plays a year. Did we do it for fun? Absolutely, that was the primary driver, the parents enjoyed working on the scripts, directing, making props, handling tech + music, and, of course, socializing. Did it benefit our kids? Of course, it developed them in many ways, some of which might even be useful for college admissions. Did we try to be inclusive? Nope, not at all, the group was for our kids only, we did not reach out to anyone outside our circle. Did we intend to hoard the opportunity? Nope, just the practical considerations. And so on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What I'm more curious about is how do we change this on a societal level. I've noticed most UMC people refuse to talk about this (80% of the time), get really defensive (10% of the time), or acknowledge it and feel bad, but refuse to do anything to change it (10% of the time). I am actually curious how many responses you'll get here, since there really doesn't seem to be much appetite for this kind of thing in the DCUM crowd.

I am part of this group and I would like to see higher taxes specifically to fund programs that benefit lower income families, such as parental leave, subsidized childcare, early childhood education, jobs retraining programs, universal healthcare, etc. I am willing to pay more (and we pay a lot because we have high income and basically no tax shelters), but corporations and people with passive income also need to pay more such that their contribution is commensurate with that of the UMC at least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for sharing. I've been thinking about these questions for a while now, and I think I've gotten so addicted to this site because it's sort of a window into how the 9.9% think.

"I think that meritocracy mostly gets invented after the fact...People make this false assumption precisely because the inequality is already there, and they’re looking for a justification."

I see a lot of this on DCUM - posts twisting logic into knots to argue that they deserve their privilege, and everyone else must just be lazy.

The one part of the article I disagree with is about hiring nannies...most of the nannies I know do not have education backgrounds, and aren't optimizing kids. It's just much more convenient than daycare for many reasons, so if you can afford it, why not? And once you get up to 2-3 kids, I don't think it's much more expensive than daycare. Even middle-class people I know have nannies (assuming there are two working parents), they just refer to them as babysitters.

Anyway, the answer to how you as an individual can avoid this is pretty simple. Just don't do it. I posted a couple of weeks ago about how we moved to a "middling" school district, and several people thought I was a troll because this concept is apparently so shocking to the UMC mind. But you can do this, and it's not going to screw your kid up.

Actually, since that post, I've connected with several families in our district who are in the same position, some with much older kids. And everyone's fine and happy. No one is Trumpian

We do still live in the UMC bubble to some degree, and I don't think you ever can fully leave it, so that insecurity about making different choices than everyone else, about going against these values that seem so ingrained in our society, will always be there and I don't like it. But it's definitely better than the alternative. And knowing others who are doing the same thing helps so much.

What I'm more curious about is how do we change this on a societal level. I've noticed most UMC people refuse to talk about this (80% of the time), get really defensive (10% of the time), or acknowledge it and feel bad, but refuse to do anything to change it (10% of the time). I am actually curious how many responses you'll get here, since there really doesn't seem to be much appetite for this kind of thing in the DCUM crowd.

I’m in Los Angeles and from NYC and I do agree with the nanny part. More and more nannies I we are college educated Americans women and it’s does definitely make a difference in the child’s early education. Yes, there are still the housekeeper/nanny types but it’s a changing profession.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure I see the connection to Trump; is the question about places in the country? Like some places are "Trumpian" and others are full of UMC resource hoarding strivers?

As for the bigger problem of the "the 9.9%," the only way out is not to play the game. Be satisfied with less and teach your kids to be satisfied with less. The games that the UMC play are about grasping for resources, those resources are, admittedly, scarce, but undergirding all of that is the belief that certain standards of success (elite college admission, certain jobs, houses in certain neighborhoods) are necessary for happiness. They're not. Buy a smaller house in a poorer neighborhood with "worse" schools. Send your kid to ordinary daycare, rather than hiring a nanny. Live an an actual middle class life (not a DCUM $400K middle class life). You'll be fine! Your kids might end up in Ocean City for vacation, rather than St. Croix, but you'll be okay.

The game sucks, but the only way to change it is not to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure I see the connection to Trump; is the question about places in the country? Like some places are "Trumpian" and others are full of UMC resource hoarding strivers?

As for the bigger problem of the "the 9.9%," the only way out is not to play the game. Be satisfied with less and teach your kids to be satisfied with less. The games that the UMC play are about grasping for resources, those resources are, admittedly, scarce, but undergirding all of that is the belief that certain standards of success (elite college admission, certain jobs, houses in certain neighborhoods) are necessary for happiness. They're not. Buy a smaller house in a poorer neighborhood with "worse" schools. Send your kid to ordinary daycare, rather than hiring a nanny. Live an an actual middle class life (not a DCUM $400K middle class life). You'll be fine! Your kids might end up in Ocean City for vacation, rather than St. Croix, but you'll be okay.

The game sucks, but the only way to change it is not to play.

Yes, this is it. When you parent, the emphasis is on spirituality, emotional wellness, relationships, a sense of wonder, loving life for what it is rather than constantly seeking more, being satisfied with enough, blah blah blah.

It’s hard. On the one hand I sincerely believe what I’m saying here, and on the other hand I get incredibly anxious at the thought of my child getting mediocre grades and making an average income (we are top 1%). I just do my best to let that anxiety pass.

I

[Anonymous]

Really interesting article. Thanks for posting, OP.

You can see this phenomenon and proof on DCUM all the time. Clearly a lot of us are in the 9.9%. The thread about “daycare is fine if you want your kids to go to public school” and various threads in the college forum about the percentages of graduated of the Big 3 who get into the top 20 colleges as compared to public schools and lesser private schools.

Hard work alone is a myth. But is it really that different than in other generations? I do not doubt that the UMC was much larger but the optimizing quest is still the same

[Anonymous]

Read the thread about the gender inequality for AP Scholars, for contrast and perspective. This thread seems focused on very young children. Older kids are a different story.

[Anonymous]

I am firmly in the population the article is describing, but I don't relate at all. I'm not sure if it's where I live in DC, but the parents around here are pretty chill. I guess it just depends on your neighborhood maybe?

[Anonymous]

One other random thought I have on this.

The top 1% will always be able to buy their way into everything. They and their kids are set.

And elite institutions are now focusing heavily on diversity and inclusion, which is GREAT. I'm 100% in favor of that.

But this 9.9% group typically doesn't fit into either of those categories.

So there is definitely a feeling that there are fewer and fewer slots for this cohort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure I see the connection to Trump; is the question about places in the country? Like some places are "Trumpian" and others are full of UMC resource hoarding strivers?

As for the bigger problem of the "the 9.9%," the only way out is not to play the game. Be satisfied with less and teach your kids to be satisfied with less. The games that the UMC play are about grasping for resources, those resources are, admittedly, scarce, but undergirding all of that is the belief that certain standards of success (elite college admission, certain jobs, houses in certain neighborhoods) are necessary for happiness. They're not. Buy a smaller house in a poorer neighborhood with "worse" schools. Send your kid to ordinary daycare, rather than hiring a nanny. Live an an actual middle class life (not a DCUM $400K middle class life). You'll be fine! Your kids might end up in Ocean City for vacation, rather than St. Croix, but you'll be okay.

The game sucks, but the only way to change it is not to play.

This. It can be really hard to buck the standard UMC parent script. I felt it first when my kids were in preschool. With #1 we signed him up for all the activities the other kids did (and that he wanted to do), soccer, t-ball, music class, etc. And even then weren't the most enriching parents since we didn't think it necessary to be in multiple sports at once. Then #2 was a different kid who absolutely refused to participate in any organized activity outside of preschool. She just wanted to play outside, splash in streams, build stuff with sticks, etc. and I learned to embrace that. But I definitely felt weird and out-of-the-loop that she wasn't in dance class or on the soccer team. It affected my friendships with other parents since I was never there on the sidelines. But, in the long run, that was good for me. To focus on the kids I had and what was right for them.

In HS, that meant not pushing them to take the highest level classes in everything but focusing on their strengths. Letting them decide what amount of ECs they wanted to do. I definitely had anxiety about that with #1 when he was in HS and, seemingly swapping places with #2, now decided he didn't want anything to do with school ECs. But he found his own way and the couple things he did at our church turned out to be much more enriching to him than I knew until I read his college essays.

At the same time, you are not going to make parents not make the investments they think are important to their kids. We paid a lot of $$ for #1's neuropsych evaluation (ADHD), for tutors as needed for specific classes when they hit rough spots, for a daily tutoring center when DL was a disaster last year. And I think it sucks that others can't get these resources when they need them. I would be fine with a higher tax rate to better fund supports and reduce inequality but along with that corporations and billionaires absolutely have to pay their fair share.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One other random thought I have on this.

The top 1% will always be able to buy their way into everything. They and their kids are set.

And elite institutions are now focusing heavily on diversity and inclusion, which is GREAT. I'm 100% in favor of that.

But this 9.9% group typically doesn't fit into either of those categories.

So there is definitely a feeling that there are fewer and fewer slots for this cohort.

I think you mean the top 0.01%. I'm top 1% and we can't buy our kids' way in anywhere. But I take your overall point.

[Anonymous]

How does the Great Resignation fit in with this, OP?