Priority of what to do to look put together and wealthy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the order of importance to “look wealthy” without any brands or labels?

- be skinny
- great skin
- great teeth
- hair “done”
- nice clothes
- nice accessories (bag, shoes)
- fine jewelry, watch

Like, if I’m skinny and have great skin and teeth do I need the other things to “look wealthy”?

Can you explain why you need to look “wealthy,” as opposed to simply put together and attractive? And if you are not actually wealthy why do you need to fake it?

Not OP, but wealthy people get a lot of privileges and perks that make life easier and more pleasant. Sometimes those are handed out purely on the basis of appearing wealthy.

Ok, that I definitely get, but is it worth it to try and go beyond regular “pretty privilege” to be something that is clearly not authentic to you? It’s just very weird and not healthy or worth it.

I frequently travel to my parents’ home country and over the years I realized that people treat me with a certain degree of deference because I present as an attractive and wealthy woman of a certain class. I could not “fake” this- it comes with my education and mannerisms and health and access to the United States.

It sort of worries me that so many Americans concern themselves with this now. It suggests that being a regular middle class person no longer affords access to regular decent treatment by other people so you now want to be perceived in a certain way. More evidence that our society may be deteriorating instead of becoming more egalitarian.

Oh, are we maybe in decline? Thank you so much for the observation, wannabe princess.

Girl, I’m not a wannabe anything, sorry if that triggers you.

[Anonymous]

It's mainly a question of grooming. Some of the things you have listed, such as great skin and teeth, are necessary but not sufficient. There is a lot more to it than that. And some of what you list not related to grooming is on point, but not in the way most think it is (for example take watches: Cartier Tank = probably not, your grandmother's Patek Phillipe, yes).

But as far as looks go, it tends to be grooming that is above and beyond what most do. For example with men -- eyebrows are groomed, hands are groomed, nose and ear hairs are trimmed, haircuts more frequent, skin moisturized, spf, they swap their razors out frequently rather than stretching time between, etc. For women, obviously it gets more involved, but you have the added consideration of not going into over-the-top territory lest you look arguably vulgar with things like lashes that are caterpillar like or nails pointy and long, etc. I like long pointy nails with designs, but you aren't going to look "wealthy" with them (even if some very wealthy people, say, oh, Adele comes to mind, wear them).

I'll add -- what I've mentioned above refers to this "look wealthy" stuff the OP is asking about. Plenty of rich-as-hell folks, my grandfather comes to mind, do not necessarily look like this (although he probably comes closer rather than not).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the order of importance to “look wealthy” without any brands or labels?

- be skinny
- great skin
- great teeth
- hair “done”
- nice clothes
- nice accessories (bag, shoes)
- fine jewelry, watch

Like, if I’m skinny and have great skin and teeth do I need the other things to “look wealthy”?

Can you explain why you need to look “wealthy,” as opposed to simply put together and attractive? And if you are not actually wealthy why do you need to fake it?

Not OP, but wealthy people get a lot of privileges and perks that make life easier and more pleasant. Sometimes those are handed out purely on the basis of appearing wealthy.

Ok, that I definitely get, but is it worth it to try and go beyond regular “pretty privilege” to be something that is clearly not authentic to you? It’s just very weird and not healthy or worth it.

I frequently travel to my parents’ home country and over the years I realized that people treat me with a certain degree of deference because I present as an attractive and wealthy woman of a certain class. I could not “fake” this- it comes with my education and mannerisms and health and access to the United States.

It sort of worries me that so many Americans concern themselves with this now. It suggests that being a regular middle class person no longer affords access to regular decent treatment by other people so you now want to be perceived in a certain way. More evidence that our society may be deteriorating instead of becoming more egalitarian.

So preferential treatment for me but not for thee?

What do you mean by this?

The poster said she gets preferential treatment due to her perceived attractiveness and wealth. She is concerned that so many Americans want to get the preferential treatment she says she receives.

I am the poster you are talking about. I am solidly middle class in America, but in my parents’ home country, having straight white teeth, knowing English, and wearing Puma sneakers from Costco signifies major wealth. So I get that preferential treatment- only because the country is so incredibly poor. I don’t want to be a rich person in a poor place. I want to be a middle class woman in a middle class place.

Great, you still get preferential treatment somewhere. It's easy to say you don't want it or that you are concerned other people want it when you get to experience it at least some of the time.

If I actually wanted that treatment, I could live in that country full time. You can also easily get that treatment pp- go live in a third world country where a US Passport gives you access to the best lifestyle possible, made possible by the exploitation and poverty of the native population.

Colonization pays well enough to create generational wealth and influence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really depends on your starting point.

Clean, good condition, well fitting clothing in neutral or solid colors. Smooth even toned skin without visible makeup (but yes, makeup in a groomed and enhanced sense), good teeth (not blindingly white), clean nails that are NOT over-done. Smooth neat hair in any style but nothing too attention getting. Nothing too flashy.

I don't necessarily agree that fine jewelry or accessories are necessary. Sure, a budget purse from TJ Maxx is going to look decided NOT rich, but a $10 tote bag with the right brand (New Yorker, NPR, a museum, Trader Joe's maybe) is $0-$15 and absolutely could be part of the"rich" look.

This is very much an UMC look, not a "rich" one. In fact, what was that famous book about class that came out in the mid-20th century? I forget what it was called, but it had illustrations in it, and there was one for an UMC woman, and she had a MOMA tote. The author talked about how UC people virtually never declare their interests/activities in that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the order of importance to “look wealthy” without any brands or labels?

- be skinny
- great skin
- great teeth
- hair “done”
- nice clothes
- nice accessories (bag, shoes)
- fine jewelry, watch

Like, if I’m skinny and have great skin and teeth do I need the other things to “look wealthy”?

Can you explain why you need to look “wealthy,” as opposed to simply put together and attractive? And if you are not actually wealthy why do you need to fake it?

Not OP, but wealthy people get a lot of privileges and perks that make life easier and more pleasant. Sometimes those are handed out purely on the basis of appearing wealthy.

Ok, that I definitely get, but is it worth it to try and go beyond regular “pretty privilege” to be something that is clearly not authentic to you? It’s just very weird and not healthy or worth it.

I frequently travel to my parents’ home country and over the years I realized that people treat me with a certain degree of deference because I present as an attractive and wealthy woman of a certain class. I could not “fake” this- it comes with my education and mannerisms and health and access to the United States.

It sort of worries me that so many Americans concern themselves with this now. It suggests that being a regular middle class person no longer affords access to regular decent treatment by other people so you now want to be perceived in a certain way. More evidence that our society may be deteriorating instead of becoming more egalitarian.

Meh. It's just the "aesthetic" of the day, just another "clean girl" or "cottagecore" thing. It's great for influence marketing. It's just sales. Not much deeper than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's mainly a question of grooming. Some of the things you have listed, such as great skin and teeth, are necessary but not sufficient. There is a lot more to it than that. And some of what you list not related to grooming is on point, but not in the way most think it is (for example take watches: Cartier Tank = probably not, your grandmother's Patek Phillipe, yes).

But as far as looks go, it tends to be grooming that is above and beyond what most do. For example with men -- eyebrows are groomed, hands are groomed, nose and ear hairs are trimmed, haircuts more frequent, skin moisturized, spf, they swap their razors out frequently rather than stretching time between, etc. For women, obviously it gets more involved, but you have the added consideration of not going into over-the-top territory lest you look arguably vulgar with things like lashes that are caterpillar like or nails pointy and long, etc. I like long pointy nails with designs, but you aren't going to look "wealthy" with them (even if some very wealthy people, say, oh, Adele comes to mind, wear them).

I'll add -- what I've mentioned above refers to this "look wealthy" stuff the OP is asking about. Plenty of rich-as-hell folks, my grandfather comes to mind, do not necessarily look like this (although he probably comes closer rather than not).

No. Lots of wealthy people don't give a rat's behind about how they look and are not in the habit of paying attention to their bodies in this way. You guys really have to stop the narrative that wealthy means obsessive upkeep of one's appearance. Perhaps you only know people who are in public-facing roles, or who are naturally very social and attention-seeking?

The truth is that the public will never see wealthy people who live quiet lives and don't go out to parties or famous conferences. Most wealth hides itself, I hope you realize this. The majority of wealthy people in the world look like normal people. Their faces are not splashed onto magazines or business reports because they're not photogenic and they don't seek to attract attention to themselves.

You should all grow up a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the people who wear an obviously expensive timepiece or those instantly recognizable (and unvariably ugly) jewelry pieces from Cartier/Tiffany etc. to be try-hards. It’s gauche IMHO.

100%. Why wear an obsolete machine with only one feature of telling time when you've access to time on your phone? If you must then get a smart watch with capability to track your health and fitness and calling 911 and your next of kin in case you need help.

Because you hate being that connected to your phone all the time and want to distance yourself from it? Let's all have less screen time, not more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the order of importance to “look wealthy” without any brands or labels?

- be skinny
- great skin
- great teeth
- hair “done”
- nice clothes
- nice accessories (bag, shoes)
- fine jewelry, watch

Like, if I’m skinny and have great skin and teeth do I need the other things to “look wealthy”?

Can you explain why you need to look “wealthy,” as opposed to simply put together and attractive? And if you are not actually wealthy why do you need to fake it?

Not OP, but wealthy people get a lot of privileges and perks that make life easier and more pleasant. Sometimes those are handed out purely on the basis of appearing wealthy.

Ok, that I definitely get, but is it worth it to try and go beyond regular “pretty privilege” to be something that is clearly not authentic to you? It’s just very weird and not healthy or worth it.

I frequently travel to my parents’ home country and over the years I realized that people treat me with a certain degree of deference because I present as an attractive and wealthy woman of a certain class. I could not “fake” this- it comes with my education and mannerisms and health and access to the United States.

It sort of worries me that so many Americans concern themselves with this now. It suggests that being a regular middle class person no longer affords access to regular decent treatment by other people so you now want to be perceived in a certain way. More evidence that our society may be deteriorating instead of becoming more egalitarian.

Non-white people in America have always used appearances and style as a sort of armor to assert our humanity. Now, more than ever in recent times, appearances are a way to survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's mainly a question of grooming. Some of the things you have listed, such as great skin and teeth, are necessary but not sufficient. There is a lot more to it than that. And some of what you list not related to grooming is on point, but not in the way most think it is (for example take watches: Cartier Tank = probably not, your grandmother's Patek Phillipe, yes).

But as far as looks go, it tends to be grooming that is above and beyond what most do. For example with men -- eyebrows are groomed, hands are groomed, nose and ear hairs are trimmed, haircuts more frequent, skin moisturized, spf, they swap their razors out frequently rather than stretching time between, etc. For women, obviously it gets more involved, but you have the added consideration of not going into over-the-top territory lest you look arguably vulgar with things like lashes that are caterpillar like or nails pointy and long, etc. I like long pointy nails with designs, but you aren't going to look "wealthy" with them (even if some very wealthy people, say, oh, Adele comes to mind, wear them).

I'll add -- what I've mentioned above refers to this "look wealthy" stuff the OP is asking about. Plenty of rich-as-hell folks, my grandfather comes to mind, do not necessarily look like this (although he probably comes closer rather than not).

No. Lots of wealthy people don't give a rat's behind about how they look and are not in the habit of paying attention to their bodies in this way. You guys really have to stop the narrative that wealthy means obsessive upkeep of one's appearance. Perhaps you only know people who are in public-facing roles, or who are naturally very social and attention-seeking?

The truth is that the public will never see wealthy people who live quiet lives and don't go out to parties or famous conferences. Most wealth hides itself, I hope you realize this. The majority of wealthy people in the world look like normal people. Their faces are not splashed onto magazines or business reports because they're not photogenic and they don't seek to attract attention to themselves.

You should all grow up a bit.

Did you read the whole thing before you started sputtering? PP specifically said "Plenty of rich as hell folks ... do not necessarily look like this." Clearly it's you, with your desperate need to blah blah blah at people in such an aggressive way, who "should grow up a bit."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the people who wear an obviously expensive timepiece or those instantly recognizable (and unvariably ugly) jewelry pieces from Cartier/Tiffany etc. to be try-hards. It’s gauche IMHO.

100%. Why wear an obsolete machine with only one feature of telling time when you've access to time on your phone? If you must then get a smart watch with capability to track your health and fitness and calling 911 and your next of kin in case you need help.

Because you hate being that connected to your phone all the time and want to distance yourself from it? Let's all have less screen time, not more.

+1. I’m actually the PP they were responding to. I wear a watch sometimes, but it’s not some $30k cry for help

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's mainly a question of grooming. Some of the things you have listed, such as great skin and teeth, are necessary but not sufficient. There is a lot more to it than that. And some of what you list not related to grooming is on point, but not in the way most think it is (for example take watches: Cartier Tank = probably not, your grandmother's Patek Phillipe, yes).

But as far as looks go, it tends to be grooming that is above and beyond what most do. For example with men -- eyebrows are groomed, hands are groomed, nose and ear hairs are trimmed, haircuts more frequent, skin moisturized, spf, they swap their razors out frequently rather than stretching time between, etc. For women, obviously it gets more involved, but you have the added consideration of not going into over-the-top territory lest you look arguably vulgar with things like lashes that are caterpillar like or nails pointy and long, etc. I like long pointy nails with designs, but you aren't going to look "wealthy" with them (even if some very wealthy people, say, oh, Adele comes to mind, wear them).

I'll add -- what I've mentioned above refers to this "look wealthy" stuff the OP is asking about. Plenty of rich-as-hell folks, my grandfather comes to mind, do not necessarily look like this (although he probably comes closer rather than not).

No. Lots of wealthy people don't give a rat's behind about how they look and are not in the habit of paying attention to their bodies in this way. You guys really have to stop the narrative that wealthy means obsessive upkeep of one's appearance. Perhaps you only know people who are in public-facing roles, or who are naturally very social and attention-seeking?

The truth is that the public will never see wealthy people who live quiet lives and don't go out to parties or famous conferences. Most wealth hides itself, I hope you realize this. The majority of wealthy people in the world look like normal people. Their faces are not splashed onto magazines or business reports because they're not photogenic and they don't seek to attract attention to themselves.

You should all grow up a bit.

Did you read the whole thing before you started sputtering? PP specifically said "Plenty of rich as hell folks ... do not necessarily look like this." Clearly it's you, with your desperate need to blah blah blah at people in such an aggressive way, who "should grow up a bit."

Sorry, you sound like you're the one triggered. Maybe stop describing people's grooming habits. It's creepy and meaningless and has no bearing on this conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's mainly a question of grooming. Some of the things you have listed, such as great skin and teeth, are necessary but not sufficient. There is a lot more to it than that. And some of what you list not related to grooming is on point, but not in the way most think it is (for example take watches: Cartier Tank = probably not, your grandmother's Patek Phillipe, yes).

But as far as looks go, it tends to be grooming that is above and beyond what most do. For example with men -- eyebrows are groomed, hands are groomed, nose and ear hairs are trimmed, haircuts more frequent, skin moisturized, spf, they swap their razors out frequently rather than stretching time between, etc. For women, obviously it gets more involved, but you have the added consideration of not going into over-the-top territory lest you look arguably vulgar with things like lashes that are caterpillar like or nails pointy and long, etc. I like long pointy nails with designs, but you aren't going to look "wealthy" with them (even if some very wealthy people, say, oh, Adele comes to mind, wear them).

I'll add -- what I've mentioned above refers to this "look wealthy" stuff the OP is asking about. Plenty of rich-as-hell folks, my grandfather comes to mind, do not necessarily look like this (although he probably comes closer rather than not).

No. Lots of wealthy people don't give a rat's behind about how they look and are not in the habit of paying attention to their bodies in this way. You guys really have to stop the narrative that wealthy means obsessive upkeep of one's appearance. Perhaps you only know people who are in public-facing roles, or who are naturally very social and attention-seeking?

The truth is that the public will never see wealthy people who live quiet lives and don't go out to parties or famous conferences. Most wealth hides itself, I hope you realize this. The majority of wealthy people in the world look like normal people. Their faces are not splashed onto magazines or business reports because they're not photogenic and they don't seek to attract attention to themselves.

You should all grow up a bit.

Did you read the whole thing before you started sputtering? PP specifically said "Plenty of rich as hell folks ... do not necessarily look like this." Clearly it's you, with your desperate need to blah blah blah at people in such an aggressive way, who "should grow up a bit."

Sorry, you sound like you're the one triggered. Maybe stop describing people's grooming habits. It's creepy and meaningless and has no bearing on this conversation.

PP here. Grooming habits are at the center of the entire conversation here -- it's like you can't even read or something.

[Anonymous]

No matter you are wealthy or not, such focus on facade us shallow and sad.

[Anonymous]

*is

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find the people who wear an obviously expensive timepiece or those instantly recognizable (and unvariably ugly) jewelry pieces from Cartier/Tiffany etc. to be try-hards. It’s gauche IMHO.

100%. Why wear an obsolete machine with only one feature of telling time when you've access to time on your phone? If you must then get a smart watch with capability to track your health and fitness and calling 911 and your next of kin in case you need help.

Because you hate being that connected to your phone all the time and want to distance yourself from it? Let's all have less screen time, not more.

Well, if you think about it, the development of timepieces was the precursor to our overly connected lifestyles. Before watches time was a lot less precise