St. Patrick’s vs NPS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:St. Pat's is incredibly wealthy to the point where even though most don't try to flaunt their wealth, it's just unavoidable. But, for the most part, people are fairly low-key.

As far as social climbing, I honestly have no idea what people are talking about. Lots of families there are already fairly established. I admit there are a few, but the rest seem fairly secure.

Aside from the usual parents on the infamous Dexter St and that surrounding neighborhood, the rest of the parents are friendly enough. I am of color and UMC parent, I never had too many problems. The worse was that I was mistaken as a cook, but that family is known to be terrible and luckily my daughter has moved on to other friends.

I have gotten that from white people that are well below my class level and I don't assume that the parents at St. Pat's are immune to it.

Oh my goodness.

I have no idea why this would shock you. This is pretty much a common occurrence in the POC world. I don't really let it bother me because there's nothing wrong about being a cook. Also, it's also a character flaw to treat people differently because of their occupation. I might correct them, but eventually they will figure it out and have to deal with awkwardness.

Yup. I'm a Latina parent (kids attend another school -- not St. Pat's or NPS) and am frequently mistaken for "the nanny". One parent told my husband (who is Swedish and German by descent) that I was very attentive and loving with the kids I'm going to ask her for a letter of recommendation.

I keener re reading this and can’t figure out why you’d ask a nanny for a letter of recommendation. I must be reading it wrong but it’s still bothering me that I can’t figure out what you’re saying!

PP is joking that she is going to ask the mother who mistook her for a nanny (and told PP's husband hwat a good nanny she is) for a reference. Its funny but also sad. I had a mother once make a comment to me that made it clear she thought another mother was the nanny. I set her straight but it sucked. It would have sucked way more though if I had been the mom she mistook for the nanny. Too many people can be so stupid and thoughtless.

And BTW, its not elitist or classist to say that because no mother wants strangers to assume she is just the paid help to her own kids and its espcially eggregious when a stranger assumes you are a in "less-skilled" profession just because of how you look.

[Anonymous]

I am caucasian and was frequently mistaken for the au pair of my first kid b/cause I was a young mom. This town! :

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn't say St Pats is more academic, and think that they are fairly comparable in terms of outplacement (though would give NPS the edge).

Both schools have caring teachers and administrators and well thought out curricula. I wouldn't trade the elementary only experience for a K-12 for a million dollars.

See where you feel most comfortable as a family and go from there.

So you sent children to both then? Or let me guesss: just NPS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:St. Pat's is incredibly wealthy to the point where even though most don't try to flaunt their wealth, it's just unavoidable. But, for the most part, people are fairly low-key.

As far as social climbing, I honestly have no idea what people are talking about. Lots of families there are already fairly established. I admit there are a few, but the rest seem fairly secure.

Aside from the usual parents on the infamous Dexter St and that surrounding neighborhood, the rest of the parents are friendly enough. I am of color and UMC parent, I never had too many problems. The worse was that I was mistaken as a cook, but that family is known to be terrible and luckily my daughter has moved on to other friends.

I have gotten that from white people that are well below my class level and I don't assume that the parents at St. Pat's are immune to it.

Who are the "infamous Dexter St." parents.

[Anonymous]

Social climbing is a reference to STP parents who try to bootstrap the school into a way to get into a certain country club.

[Anonymous]

I just dont get the country club thing. There is so much fun stuff to do in this area without belonging to a club. I dont begrudge it, but I also dont get it. I guess the biggest advantage I see is swim team and tennis, some of which are very good and your child might be good at. Are those closed to member and what are the alternatives? Sorry, I digress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am caucasian and was frequently mistaken for the au pair of my first kid b/cause I was a young mom. This town! :

Same here! I was 28 but looked 24 and it happened all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:St. Pat's is incredibly wealthy to the point where even though most don't try to flaunt their wealth, it's just unavoidable. But, for the most part, people are fairly low-key.

As far as social climbing, I honestly have no idea what people are talking about. Lots of families there are already fairly established. I admit there are a few, but the rest seem fairly secure.

Aside from the usual parents on the infamous Dexter St and that surrounding neighborhood, the rest of the parents are friendly enough. I am of color and UMC parent, I never had too many problems. The worse was that I was mistaken as a cook, but that family is known to be terrible and luckily my daughter has moved on to other friends.

I have gotten that from white people that are well below my class level and I don't assume that the parents at St. Pat's are immune to it.

Who are the "infamous Dexter St." parents.

More accurately, that street, Wesley Heights and Berkeley. They intentionally tend to try to stay segregated from the other parents -especially duel incomers. They literally talk about it in the open with each other. Even parents from other schools, know their reputation. I never seen so many terrible people congregate via real estate.

It's not the country club parents that you have to watch out for, it's those that live around each other. They are the ones that will have a birthday party at 3:00pm on a weekday. They know parents that work can't attend, so it's their way to segregate themselves from the workers. I would never judge someone for what they have or don't have. What does matter, however, is your character and that place is a black hole.

[Anonymous]

I think grouping entire neighborhoods into one category may be a bit extreme.

And you may be reading a bit much into an afternoon birthday party. Often, parents have afternoon birthday parties because people (both nannies and parents) find it easier to go straight from pick-up. Which is much easier for people who live far away from the school, like I do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:St. Pat's is incredibly wealthy to the point where even though most don't try to flaunt their wealth, it's just unavoidable. But, for the most part, people are fairly low-key.

As far as social climbing, I honestly have no idea what people are talking about. Lots of families there are already fairly established. I admit there are a few, but the rest seem fairly secure.

Aside from the usual parents on the infamous Dexter St and that surrounding neighborhood, the rest of the parents are friendly enough. I am of color and UMC parent, I never had too many problems. The worse was that I was mistaken as a cook, but that family is known to be terrible and luckily my daughter has moved on to other friends.

I have gotten that from white people that are well below my class level and I don't assume that the parents at St. Pat's are immune to it.

Who are the "infamous Dexter St." parents.

More accurately, that street, Wesley Heights and Berkeley. They intentionally tend to try to stay segregated from the other parents -especially duel incomers. They literally talk about it in the open with each other. Even parents from other schools, know their reputation. I never seen so many terrible people congregate via real estate.

It's not the country club parents that you have to watch out for, it's those that live around each other. They are the ones that will have a birthday party at 3:00pm on a weekday. They know parents that work can't attend, so it's their way to segregate themselves from the workers. I would never judge someone for what they have or don't have. What does matter, however, is your character and that place is a black hole.

Must be hard walking with that heavy chip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think grouping entire neighborhoods into one category may be a bit extreme.

And you may be reading a bit much into an afternoon birthday party. Often, parents have afternoon birthday parties because people (both nannies and parents) find it easier to go straight from pick-up. Which is much easier for people who live far away from the school, like I do.

It never occured to me of having a children's party in the middle of the week. A playdate, sure. Otherwise, it just looks like you're trying to exclude kids in the extended day programs. It's also fairly predictable who intentionally does this. Most of us -even the most clueless- can almost guess the parents that always pull that move.

As far as that neighborhood, these schools are pretty small. Word gets around and people can't help themselves but to talk. When your reputation extends to other schools, because of common experiences, then it's more than just a generalization. Just be careful of whom you express your prejudices to. You might think just because someone lives on your street and is also a SAHM doesn't mean they like you or agree with your values. Kids also talk to each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:St. Pat's is incredibly wealthy to the point where even though most don't try to flaunt their wealth, it's just unavoidable. But, for the most part, people are fairly low-key.

As far as social climbing, I honestly have no idea what people are talking about. Lots of families there are already fairly established. I admit there are a few, but the rest seem fairly secure.

Aside from the usual parents on the infamous Dexter St and that surrounding neighborhood, the rest of the parents are friendly enough. I am of color and UMC parent, I never had too many problems. The worse was that I was mistaken as a cook, but that family is known to be terrible and luckily my daughter has moved on to other friends.

I have gotten that from white people that are well below my class level and I don't assume that the parents at St. Pat's are immune to it.

Who are the "infamous Dexter St." parents.

More accurately, that street, Wesley Heights and Berkeley. They intentionally tend to try to stay segregated from the other parents -especially duel incomers. They literally talk about it in the open with each other. Even parents from other schools, know their reputation. I never seen so many terrible people congregate via real estate.

It's not the country club parents that you have to watch out for, it's those that live around each other. They are the ones that will have a birthday party at 3:00pm on a weekday. They know parents that work can't attend, so it's their way to segregate themselves from the workers. I would never judge someone for what they have or don't have. What does matter, however, is your character and that place is a black hole.

Must be hard walking with that heavy chip.

I don't carry it all the time. It's only when they smile in my face or I have to interact with them because my DC and theirs decide to be friends. Then I have to carry the chip and pretend it doesn't bother me. At that point, even driving to a playdate is hard.

[Anonymous]

Then apply out. Why go through that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think grouping entire neighborhoods into one category may be a bit extreme.

And you may be reading a bit much into an afternoon birthday party. Often, parents have afternoon birthday parties because people (both nannies and parents) find it easier to go straight from pick-up. Which is much easier for people who live far away from the school, like I do.

It never occured to me of having a children's party in the middle of the week. A playdate, sure. Otherwise, it just looks like you're trying to exclude kids in the extended day programs. It's also fairly predictable who intentionally does this. Most of us -even the most clueless- can almost guess the parents that always pull that move.

As far as that neighborhood, these schools are pretty small. Word gets around and people can't help themselves but to talk. When your reputation extends to other schools, because of common experiences, then it's more than just a generalization. Just be careful of whom you express your prejudices to. You might think just because someone lives on your street and is also a SAHM doesn't mean they like you or agree with your values. Kids also talk to each other.

What does this mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think grouping entire neighborhoods into one category may be a bit extreme.

And you may be reading a bit much into an afternoon birthday party. Often, parents have afternoon birthday parties because people (both nannies and parents) find it easier to go straight from pick-up. Which is much easier for people who live far away from the school, like I do.

Either way you are clueless. It's makes no sense to have a mid week party and it should be expected that many kids for a variety of reasons won't be able to attend, ie two working parents, older siblings after school activities etc. And I've only seen SAHM's pull this so I think that says something. As to St. Pat's, I have friends who have kids there, they are lovely but as noted there is certainly a a cliquey snobby mean mom contingent that is much more prevalent at St. Pats than at any other school. My vote is NPS. It's a really lovely school, never met a parent I didn't like.