Is admiring the vibe of private students a shallow motivation for sending our children to private?

[Anonymous]

I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

It’s not unique to this particular forum It’s brought up in almost every forum on this website. Gag

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

This might be right generally, but the concerns about country clubs aren’t necessarily coming from people who can’t afford them. The CC posts seem to reflect concerns about clubs that have long histories of discrimination and racism, among other issues. We can easily afford a cc. Most of our friends can. We all send our kids to privates. We have second (and third) homes. But the history of these clubs, along with an ethos of exclusion with no relation to merit, is what we’ve observed can create some pretty intolerant and entitled kids and families. We’re not anti-money. But discrimination? A history of race-based exclusion? We’re white but don’t want part of that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Boy, I shied away from clicking on this thread for days and eventually gave in. Should have stayed strong.

Private schools are not the cause of the "private school attitude." The relationship runs the other way -- the kind of parenting and upbringing (no judgments) that creates this attitude is delivered by parents more likely to send their kids to private schools.

IME, school is definitely part of it.

There are good sides, as some posters have described. It doesn't outweigh the negatives, IMHO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

This might be right generally, but the concerns about country clubs aren’t necessarily coming from people who can’t afford them. The CC posts seem to reflect concerns about clubs that have long histories of discrimination and racism, among other issues. We can easily afford a cc. Most of our friends can. We all send our kids to privates. We have second (and third) homes. But the history of these clubs, along with an ethos of exclusion with no relation to merit, is what we’ve observed can create some pretty intolerant and entitled kids and families. We’re not anti-money. But discrimination? A history of race-based exclusion? We’re white but don’t want part of that.

That’s your bias. Update it or keep ripping on people who join or weren’t part of 60 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know. I have seen unpolite kids in both worlds. I have seen brand clothes/electronics crazyness in both worlds.

Kids in private schools have more opportunities to speak in public and/or show their work. But many of them, are, indeed, very entitled (but because their parents are entitled).

So, whatever you choose, have in mind that the values your DC learn at home are more important than anything. And, as someone said above, kindness should be on your top list. This is missing everywhere, public and private.

I don't think that's necessarily true. At my private and at my kids' current private, there is a big emphasis on community service, kindness, inclusion, etc. The schools have the luxury of spending time on stuff like this because they aren't bogged down by state requirements, standardized tests, etc.

No, public schools do all that too. Actually, my kids in public had more of this in school than my kids in private because the private schools seem to assume you'll do it anyway (esp. the service as a resume padder).

Ok, well not all private schools are created equal. Mine gave us a week off classes a year for service-oriented trips. I've never heard of a public school doing that.

Public schools don't do service trips; obviously, that is a prohibitive expense. But perhaps the expense of such an endeavor surprises you, in which case, you are probably a student still? They do service within their own communities. They have service days that involve the whole school, they have independent service hours requirements (100 hours for high school), they have IB capstone service projects in 8th and 12th grades, the have projects for the MLK day of service, and so on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

This might be right generally, but the concerns about country clubs aren’t necessarily coming from people who can’t afford them. The CC posts seem to reflect concerns about clubs that have long histories of discrimination and racism, among other issues. We can easily afford a cc. Most of our friends can. We all send our kids to privates. We have second (and third) homes. But the history of these clubs, along with an ethos of exclusion with no relation to merit, is what we’ve observed can create some pretty intolerant and entitled kids and families. We’re not anti-money. But discrimination? A history of race-based exclusion? We’re white but don’t want part of that.

That’s your bias. Update it or keep ripping on people who join or weren’t part of 60 years ago.

Um, have you looked at the membership of, say, ccc? It’s close to 100% white. Today.

[Anonymous]

My kids have both been in private school. Never has either had instruction—formal, informal, subliminal—in how to shake hands or look people in the eye. This comes from us, his parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids have both been in private school. Never has either had instruction—formal, informal, subliminal—in how to shake hands or look people in the eye. This comes from us, his parents.

Private schools teach their students that they are equal to or better than the teachers and administration. Some parents like this, others don't. Some don't notice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids have both been in private school. Never has either had instruction—formal, informal, subliminal—in how to shake hands or look people in the eye. This comes from us, his parents.

Private schools teach their students that they are equal to or better than the teachers and administration. Some parents like this, others don't. Some don't notice.

Pretty big generalization. Catholic schools definitely don’t.

[Anonymous]

Why do private-school parents need constant affirmation from strangers that they made the right choice in sending their kids to private school?

I swear 50 percent of the threads in this section of DCUM are just private school parents fishing for compliments. Why are you so incredibly needy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

This might be right generally, but the concerns about country clubs aren’t necessarily coming from people who can’t afford them. The CC posts seem to reflect concerns about clubs that have long histories of discrimination and racism, among other issues. We can easily afford a cc. Most of our friends can. We all send our kids to privates. We have second (and third) homes. But the history of these clubs, along with an ethos of exclusion with no relation to merit, is what we’ve observed can create some pretty intolerant and entitled kids and families. We’re not anti-money. But discrimination? A history of race-based exclusion? We’re white but don’t want part of that.

That’s your bias. Update it or keep ripping on people who join or weren’t part of 60 years ago.

Um, have you looked at the membership of, say, ccc? It’s close to 100% white. Today.

So what are you saying exactly about the people there? You seem to be very very angry at them. Today. Today's people. What's your issue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

This might be right generally, but the concerns about country clubs aren’t necessarily coming from people who can’t afford them. The CC posts seem to reflect concerns about clubs that have long histories of discrimination and racism, among other issues. We can easily afford a cc. Most of our friends can. We all send our kids to privates. We have second (and third) homes. But the history of these clubs, along with an ethos of exclusion with no relation to merit, is what we’ve observed can create some pretty intolerant and entitled kids and families. We’re not anti-money. But discrimination? A history of race-based exclusion? We’re white but don’t want part of that.

That’s your bias. Update it or keep ripping on people who join or weren’t part of 60 years ago.

Um, have you looked at the membership of, say, ccc? It’s close to 100% white. Today.

So what are you saying exactly about the people there? You seem to be very very angry at them. Today. Today's people. What's your issue?

I'm none of the above posters but I will say that I belong to the private clubs I want to be part of (example: Soho House) and not the clubs I don't (example: Jonathan Club). What do the reasons matter for either?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thinks this forum is full of women insecure of their socioeconomic status.

They react with pain to threads that touch on class differences - expensive education, country clubs, what cars millionaires drive, etc.

This might be right generally, but the concerns about country clubs aren’t necessarily coming from people who can’t afford them. The CC posts seem to reflect concerns about clubs that have long histories of discrimination and racism, among other issues. We can easily afford a cc. Most of our friends can. We all send our kids to privates. We have second (and third) homes. But the history of these clubs, along with an ethos of exclusion with no relation to merit, is what we’ve observed can create some pretty intolerant and entitled kids and families. We’re not anti-money. But discrimination? A history of race-based exclusion? We’re white but don’t want part of that.

That’s your bias. Update it or keep ripping on people who join or weren’t part of 60 years ago.

Um, have you looked at the membership of, say, ccc? It’s close to 100% white. Today.

I said nothing about them. Those clubs just don't reflect our values, which is a response to the a$$hole poster--you?--who said anyone who doesn't like country clubs is poor and jealous.

So what are you saying exactly about the people there? You seem to be very very angry at them. Today. Today's people. What's your issue?

[Anonymous]

So it’s not the people that PP hates it’s the “values of the club.”
What are the values of those clubs today that you hate so much? All I know is there are people that pay to join in order to exercise, local community hanging out, kid birthday parties, swimming, bowling, tennis, golf.

What’s your beef with country clubs in 2020?