Why All The Striver Hate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these schools striver schools?
Johns Hopkins
Rice
Stern
Cornell.

Strivers are people not schools. I guess that there could be "striver schools" i.e. those obsessed over by stivers but Stern and Rice would not be among those schools. Ivies are "striver schools" because strivers (or Asian gunners as someone mentioned) are coveted because of their name and prestige, nothing in particular about any individual school really matters. Any kid who shotguns all 8 Ivies is likely a striver because those schools have nothing in common except prestige and an athletic conference. Same goes for kids who shotgun the T20 or obsess about Berkley, they are even worse in their desperate quest for prestige.

I am sure that there are many white "strivers" but my experience is that of the white upper class kids many go to top SLACs because they have little desire to be around "striver culture", or top publics if they really love engineering. They may apply to Ivies or other top schools but they don't obsess because they already have their brass ring, they are just polishing.

What a nonsense observation. Plenty of top SLACs have “striver” culture as well as sizable Asian populations (who I guess are all strivers).

The wealthiest students are also the ones that most covet the “striver” jobs in banking, consulting, P/E.

You obviously haven't spent much time around top SLACs and the kids that you are talking about. Asian populations at top SLACs are less than half of what they are at top universities. Entitled cultures exist but stiver culture not so much. What you care calling a "striver job" for the those referred to as "strivers" in this thread are not striver jobs for the wealthiest students. They are normal jobs and they don't "strive", rather they assume that they will succeed in getting one because if you are a wealthy, athletic, hard working smart kid at Williams or Middlebury and you really want to go into banking or consulting you will have that opportunity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never, never heard the term applied to white people. Rich, white people don’t have to strive. They already have money, legacy at top colleges, connections, etc. If they go to Ole Miss or Auburn, who cares? Mom and Dad will get them an internship in the summer through their connections. It is usually about social mobility, so I guess it could be applied to white kids that are not UMC or are first gen? Maybe kids use it differently than adults.

It’s because you don’t move in that space. If you’ve ever been to one of their gatherings, they point out the strivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never, never heard the term applied to white people. Rich, white people don’t have to strive. They already have money, legacy at top colleges, connections, etc. If they go to Ole Miss or Auburn, who cares? Mom and Dad will get them an internship in the summer through their connections. It is usually about social mobility, so I guess it could be applied to white kids that are not UMC or are first gen? Maybe kids use it differently than adults.

It’s because you don’t move in that space. If you’ve ever been to one of their gatherings, they point out the strivers.

I am a rich white person. I have been to plenty gatherings. No one points out strivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never, never heard the term applied to white people. Rich, white people don’t have to strive. They already have money, legacy at top colleges, connections, etc. If they go to Ole Miss or Auburn, who cares? Mom and Dad will get them an internship in the summer through their connections. It is usually about social mobility, so I guess it could be applied to white kids that are not UMC or are first gen? Maybe kids use it differently than adults.

It’s because you don’t move in that space. If you’ve ever been to one of their gatherings, they point out the strivers.

I am a rich white person. I have been to plenty gatherings. No one points out strivers.

Different than being wealthy.

Did your parents buy a wing at your college?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, now striver is a racist term. But a type of racism openly allowed on dcum.

It's white people talking about other white people.

Usually, yes.

Rich white people don't like MC or poor white people either.

It definitely has a strong racist connotation.

Here is how it typically goes (posts from this week):

"Emory is seen as the “fall back” or “consolation prize” for many kids who are wanting to attend an Ivy. "

"Emory struck me as very UMC immigrant/Northeast background/Ivy aspirant “striver-ish” "

"This is an accurate assessment. Emory has a lot of kids whose Asian immigrant parents want them to go to a top 20 school no matter what. It is filled with these type of striver kids."

On dcum, no one calls ivy schools striver schools. No one. They typically refer to second tier schools having a large percentage of Asian students.

These Asian students have the stats for ivies, but are excluded from attending one, albeit still attending a really top school.

Dcum feels like these schools are striver schools. To quote, one poster said that [admitting a large number of Asians] "is really a shame. It’s a disservice to the school and to [other] kids who go there".

Believe me, the racist is blatant on dcum. These are just posts from this week. You want to turn a blind eye. Fine.

Naive to think this is not a racist code word on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Ironically, for many DCUM serves as a place to manage their striver tendencies. People have questions about schools, rankings, etc and if they asked them publicly they would be perceived as strivers because those are topics strivers tend to obsess about. Here you can ask anonymously (though the quality of the responses is questionable).

I am a high achiever but like to be around people who “act like they’ve been there before.” (Love that phrase). Strivers don’t do that. They are constantly very publicly gunning to be the best rather than being more discreet about it. It often tends to be immigrants who don’t understand how the upper class in America socializes and haven’t properly assimilated but there are plenty of white folk who also do this.

My child got into a top selective school. When we visited we saw a ton of kids like this. We visited a class room where the teacher was discussing the school’s science curriculum and a kid raised their hand and asked what percentage of kids from this school go to Ivies. Not the time or place for the question (which can also easily be answered online). That is a striver. My child chose to go elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, now striver is a racist term. But a type of racism openly allowed on dcum.

It's white people talking about other white people.

Usually, yes.

Rich white people don't like MC or poor white people either.

It definitely has a strong racist connotation.

Here is how it typically goes (posts from this week):

"Emory is seen as the “fall back” or “consolation prize” for many kids who are wanting to attend an Ivy. "

"Emory struck me as very UMC immigrant/Northeast background/Ivy aspirant “striver-ish” "

"This is an accurate assessment. Emory has a lot of kids whose Asian immigrant parents want them to go to a top 20 school no matter what. It is filled with these type of striver kids."

On dcum, no one calls ivy schools striver schools. No one. They typically refer to second tier schools having a large percentage of Asian students.

These Asian students have the stats for ivies, but are excluded from attending one, albeit still attending a really top school.

Dcum feels like these schools are striver schools. To quote, one poster said that [admitting a large number of Asians] "is really a shame. It’s a disservice to the school and to [other] kids who go there".

Believe me, the racist is blatant on dcum. These are just posts from this week. You want to turn a blind eye. Fine.

Do most kids not care about seeing really large numbers of Asians at a college? My kids all noticed it right away and commented on it. It was a fact they were noticing - - high asian population. They still applied to the schools. Is it okay if black people notice there are not very many black kids on campus but not okay for a white kid to notice the large numbers of Asians? Curious.

dp.. nothing wrong with noticing it. I'm Asian American, and I would notice such things given that Asian Americans are a small % of the overall population here.

But, stating "[admitting a large number of Asians] "is really a shame. It’s a disservice to the school and to [other] kids who go there". is pretty racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, for many DCUM serves as a place to manage their striver tendencies. People have questions about schools, rankings, etc and if they asked them publicly they would be perceived as strivers because those are topics strivers tend to obsess about. Here you can ask anonymously (though the quality of the responses is questionable).

I am a high achiever but like to be around people who “act like they’ve been there before.” (Love that phrase). Strivers don’t do that. They are constantly very publicly gunning to be the best rather than being more discreet about it. It often tends to be immigrants who don’t understand how the upper class in America socializes and haven’t properly assimilated but there are plenty of white folk who also do this.

My child got into a top selective school. When we visited we saw a ton of kids like this. We visited a class room where the teacher was discussing the school’s science curriculum and a kid raised their hand and asked what percentage of kids from this school go to Ivies. Not the time or place for the question (which can also easily be answered online). That is a striver. My child chose to go elsewhere.

I am not so sure American has “upper class.” Who are they? Do you consider trump being one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, for many DCUM serves as a place to manage their striver tendencies. People have questions about schools, rankings, etc and if they asked them publicly they would be perceived as strivers because those are topics strivers tend to obsess about. Here you can ask anonymously (though the quality of the responses is questionable).

I am a high achiever but like to be around people who “act like they’ve been there before.” (Love that phrase). Strivers don’t do that. They are constantly very publicly gunning to be the best rather than being more discreet about it. It often tends to be immigrants who don’t understand how the upper class in America socializes and haven’t properly assimilated but there are plenty of white folk who also do this.

My child got into a top selective school. When we visited we saw a ton of kids like this. We visited a class room where the teacher was discussing the school’s science curriculum and a kid raised their hand and asked what percentage of kids from this school go to Ivies. Not the time or place for the question (which can also easily be answered online). That is a striver. My child chose to go elsewhere.

Upper class white people can be discreet about it because they already have the connection, money, legacy for the kids to get into a T10. Asian immigrant parents don't.

[Anonymous]

It’s also different with parents who were born and raised here in immigrant households, and attended selective colleges a generation ago. They may show some “striver” qualities but may also be more aware that a T-20 isn’t the be-all and end-all of everything. They may feel more confident or secure in some ways because they’ve already navigated this country’s education system?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s also different with parents who were born and raised here in immigrant households, and attended selective colleges a generation ago. They may show some “striver” qualities but may also be more aware that a T-20 isn’t the be-all and end-all of everything. They may feel more confident or secure in some ways because they’ve already navigated this country’s education system?

Hi Ashley, unfortunately no.
Striver is perceived. Your third generation precious Asian kids will be perceived the same as the second generation Asian kids. We are all the same to them, unless your kid put a post-it note on forehead "I am a third generation Asian" every day.

SLACs have a lot more third/fourth generation Asian kids and far less second generation immigrant Asian kids. But they are already complaining about too many Asians there, and some thinks SLACs are striver schools now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are these schools striver schools?
Johns Hopkins
Rice
Stern
Cornell.

Strivers are people not schools. I guess that there could be "striver schools" i.e. those obsessed over by stivers but Stern and Rice would not be among those schools. Ivies are "striver schools" because strivers (or Asian gunners as someone mentioned) are coveted because of their name and prestige, nothing in particular about any individual school really matters. Any kid who shotguns all 8 Ivies is likely a striver because those schools have nothing in common except prestige and an athletic conference. Same goes for kids who shotgun the T20 or obsess about Berkley, they are even worse in their desperate quest for prestige.

I am sure that there are many white "strivers" but my experience is that of the white upper class kids many go to top SLACs because they have little desire to be around "striver culture", or top publics if they really love engineering. They may apply to Ivies or other top schools but they don't obsess because they already have their brass ring, they are just polishing.

What a nonsense observation. Plenty of top SLACs have “striver” culture as well as sizable Asian populations (who I guess are all strivers).

The wealthiest students are also the ones that most covet the “striver” jobs in banking, consulting, P/E.

You obviously haven't spent much time around top SLACs and the kids that you are talking about. Asian populations at top SLACs are less than half of what they are at top universities. Entitled cultures exist but stiver culture not so much. What you care calling a "striver job" for the those referred to as "strivers" in this thread are not striver jobs for the wealthiest students. They are normal jobs and they don't "strive", rather they assume that they will succeed in getting one because if you are a wealthy, athletic, hard working smart kid at Williams or Middlebury and you really want to go into banking or consulting you will have that opportunity.

Again…complete nonsense. Williams is full of kids that meet DCUM’s definition of “striver”.

The Asian population at Pomona is 22%…it’s 17% at Brown…it’s 14% at Williams…it’s 12.5% at Dartmouth…or are Brown and Dartmouth now not striver schools either.

Please, stop spewing shit.

[Anonymous]

The very term “striver” is inherently classist. It implies that someone is reaching for something beyond their station. People who don’t know their place. The terms drips with your disdain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ironically, for many DCUM serves as a place to manage their striver tendencies. People have questions about schools, rankings, etc and if they asked them publicly they would be perceived as strivers because those are topics strivers tend to obsess about. Here you can ask anonymously (though the quality of the responses is questionable).

I am a high achiever but like to be around people who “act like they’ve been there before.” (Love that phrase). Strivers don’t do that. They are constantly very publicly gunning to be the best rather than being more discreet about it. It often tends to be immigrants who don’t understand how the upper class in America socializes and haven’t properly assimilated but there are plenty of white folk who also do this.

My child got into a top selective school. When we visited we saw a ton of kids like this. We visited a class room where the teacher was discussing the school’s science curriculum and a kid raised their hand and asked what percentage of kids from this school go to Ivies. Not the time or place for the question (which can also easily be answered online). That is a striver. My child chose to go elsewhere.

I am not so sure American has “upper class.” Who are they? Do you consider trump being one?

Trump actually personifies striver. But he is worse. He is low class trash.

He desperately wanted to be accepted by the upper class. But they constantly rejected him. This is what fuels his grievances. Lots of articles about this.

Strivers think Trump is great. Those who have made it are horrified by him. It is a great litmus test. And not simply political - I know people who think he is crass and horrible but vote for him.

And I know plenty of highly accomplished immigrants who are not strivers. They are working hard to be successful. But they know how to be subtle about it. From what I have heard, contrary to what someone above said, Sundar Pichai is extremely not striver. Worked hard at Wharton without being a jerk, worked his way up but knew when to talk and when to shut up. Doesn’t advertise his wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have never, never heard the term applied to white people. Rich, white people don’t have to strive. They already have money, legacy at top colleges, connections, etc. If they go to Ole Miss or Auburn, who cares? Mom and Dad will get them an internship in the summer through their connections. It is usually about social mobility, so I guess it could be applied to white kids that are not UMC or are first gen? Maybe kids use it differently than adults.

It’s because you don’t move in that space. If you’ve ever been to one of their gatherings, they point out the strivers.

I am a rich white person. I have been to plenty gatherings. No one points out strivers.

Different than being wealthy.

Did your parents buy a wing at your college?

That is a whole different level and most of them are actually a bit low key about it.

How do you define wealthy?