Anyone else culturally rich but asset-poor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Culturally rich in White people speak means they read books, admire stolen artifacts and rewritten histories in museums, stare at art locked behind glass in galleries, and consider themselves ‘civilized’.

It’s not culture as POC would define it.

Oh, stop. This is so tiresome, little miss keyboard activist

But am I wrong? The ‘literati’ pp and ‘sophisticated’ pp in the apartment full of dusty books have corroborated.

Literati, here: Yes, Keyboard warrior. I will lend you my Lorde and Anzaldúa. I actually have quite a bit you would probably like.

There have been a lot of assumptions made on this board but what strikes me the most is the contempt for what we could call the "mid
intellectual classes"--the lawyers, PhDs, and people with grad degress in the social sciences/humanities who have PowerPoint jobs. Like it is a crime to be a well-read middle manager who doesn't make enough to fly business class to see Klimt whenever they want, but they have seen it and Amsterdam and will probably go to Amsterdam again before they die. If this angers the actual rich--the question is why? Why do they even care?

I’m not rich. I don’t go to Amsterdam to see Klimt. I’ve been adding that the white people definition ‘culturally rich’ is different from POC. It’s a viewpoint that should be considered within the context of this topic.

Since you’re so worldly and well educated, taking consideration of that seems like it shouldn’t strike such a nerve. But go ahead and read about it and discuss it as lofty conversation pieces in your echo chamber then call me a keyboard warrior for sharing my experience of this definition because you don’t want to think about culture in any other way than what fits your self description.

DP: As a POC whose tastes align with having lots of 'dusty books,' going to museums and who has even been known to spend a few days in the archives, what rubbed me wrong about your response is that you generalized their experience to be that of "white people" and put it contrast to a generic "POC" experience. I can relate to being culturally rich in the sense of deeply valuing culture and spending more energy on developing my understanding of culture than optimizing money. Which is what I think OP was talking about. OP's definition of 'culturally rich' may not align with your definition of 'culturally rich' -- but there are people of every race who align more with learning than optimizing money.

But is books and museums how you define culture? Obviously, reading and education are valued in some people of every race, ethnicity, and nationality. But that is usually not the definition of culture in other groups. It’s being well educated. Educated in books, educated in arts, educated in science.

Well educated, highly educated, a connoisseur of the arts, etc.

While white people here use the term culture to describe the above. For example, telling a person from Vietnam that might live in the suburbs in an enclave where there are a lot of Asians that they live in DC where there is culture is going to cause a disconnect of language usage.

Truly I cannot understand why the ‘cultured’ cannot understand this nuance and not be so defensive of it.

Because they never made the claim that theirs was the only definition of culture. You assumed it.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Culturally rich in White people speak means they read books, admire stolen artifacts and rewritten histories in museums, stare at art locked behind glass in galleries, and consider themselves ‘civilized’.

It’s not culture as POC would define it.

Oh, stop. This is so tiresome, little miss keyboard activist

But am I wrong? The ‘literati’ pp and ‘sophisticated’ pp in the apartment full of dusty books have corroborated.

Literati, here: Yes, Keyboard warrior. I will lend you my Lorde and Anzaldúa. I actually have quite a bit you would probably like.

There have been a lot of assumptions made on this board but what strikes me the most is the contempt for what we could call the "mid
intellectual classes"--the lawyers, PhDs, and people with grad degress in the social sciences/humanities who have PowerPoint jobs. Like it is a crime to be a well-read middle manager who doesn't make enough to fly business class to see Klimt whenever they want, but they have seen it and Amsterdam and will probably go to Amsterdam again before they die. If this angers the actual rich--the question is why? Why do they even care?

I’m not rich. I don’t go to Amsterdam to see Klimt. I’ve been adding that the white people definition ‘culturally rich’ is different from POC. It’s a viewpoint that should be considered within the context of this topic.

Since you’re so worldly and well educated, taking consideration of that seems like it shouldn’t strike such a nerve. But go ahead and read about it and discuss it as lofty conversation pieces in your echo chamber then call me a keyboard warrior for sharing my experience of this definition because you don’t want to think about culture in any other way than what fits your self description.

DP: As a POC whose tastes align with having lots of 'dusty books,' going to museums and who has even been known to spend a few days in the archives, what rubbed me wrong about your response is that you generalized their experience to be that of "white people" and put it contrast to a generic "POC" experience. I can relate to being culturally rich in the sense of deeply valuing culture and spending more energy on developing my understanding of culture than optimizing money. Which is what I think OP was talking about. OP's definition of 'culturally rich' may not align with your definition of 'culturally rich' -- but there are people of every race who align more with learning than optimizing money.

But is books and museums how you define culture? Obviously, reading and education are valued in some people of every race, ethnicity, and nationality. But that is usually not the definition of culture in other groups. It’s being well educated. Educated in books, educated in arts, educated in science.

Well educated, highly educated, a connoisseur of the arts, etc.

While white people here use the term culture to describe the above. For example, telling a person from Vietnam that might live in the suburbs in an enclave where there are a lot of Asians that they live in DC where there is culture is going to cause a disconnect of language usage.

Truly I cannot understand why the ‘cultured’ cannot understand this nuance and not be so defensive of it.

Because they never made the claim that theirs was the only definition of culture. You assumed it.

The title makes the distinction of culturally rich and asset poor. That was a definition. I simply added to that another definition for the sake of a balanced discussion. That clearly can’t happen with the ‘sophisticates’ it seems.

[Anonymous]

I dunno why everyone is so triggered by the OP. I take it to mean focusing your money on experiences, either for your family or yourself instead of putting your money into a large mortgage, luxury car, or vacation home. Could be in the form of private school, travelling wherever you want when you want without being concerned about a mortgage or other high dollar assets. Maybe this question doesn’t offend me because I often ask myself and my spouse if we wouldn’t be better off cutting our mortgage and size of house in half, and use that extra money to show our kids different parts of the world. Is that so crazy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I dunno why everyone is so triggered by the OP. I take it to mean focusing your money on experiences, either for your family or yourself instead of putting your money into a large mortgage, luxury car, or vacation home. Could be in the form of private school, travelling wherever you want when you want without being concerned about a mortgage or other high dollar assets. Maybe this question doesn’t offend me because I often ask myself and my spouse if we wouldn’t be better off cutting our mortgage and size of house in half, and use that extra money to show our kids different parts of the world. Is that so crazy?

Just because someone has "things" by your definition, does not mean they do not value, nor have they had varied and valuable travel experiences, nor a rich cultural background. So much judgment!

You can buy experiences, but you can't buy a soul.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Culturally rich in White people speak means they read books, admire stolen artifacts and rewritten histories in museums, stare at art locked behind glass in galleries, and consider themselves ‘civilized’.

It’s not culture as POC would define it.

Oh, stop. This is so tiresome, little miss keyboard activist

But am I wrong? The ‘literati’ pp and ‘sophisticated’ pp in the apartment full of dusty books have corroborated.

Literati, here: Yes, Keyboard warrior. I will lend you my Lorde and Anzaldúa. I actually have quite a bit you would probably like.

There have been a lot of assumptions made on this board but what strikes me the most is the contempt for what we could call the "mid
intellectual classes"--the lawyers, PhDs, and people with grad degress in the social sciences/humanities who have PowerPoint jobs. Like it is a crime to be a well-read middle manager who doesn't make enough to fly business class to see Klimt whenever they want, but they have seen it and Amsterdam and will probably go to Amsterdam again before they die. If this angers the actual rich--the question is why? Why do they even care?

I’m not rich. I don’t go to Amsterdam to see Klimt. I’ve been adding that the white people definition ‘culturally rich’ is different from POC. It’s a viewpoint that should be considered within the context of this topic.

Since you’re so worldly and well educated, taking consideration of that seems like it shouldn’t strike such a nerve. But go ahead and read about it and discuss it as lofty conversation pieces in your echo chamber then call me a keyboard warrior for sharing my experience of this definition because you don’t want to think about culture in any other way than what fits your self description.

DP: As a POC whose tastes align with having lots of 'dusty books,' going to museums and who has even been known to spend a few days in the archives, what rubbed me wrong about your response is that you generalized their experience to be that of "white people" and put it contrast to a generic "POC" experience. I can relate to being culturally rich in the sense of deeply valuing culture and spending more energy on developing my understanding of culture than optimizing money. Which is what I think OP was talking about. OP's definition of 'culturally rich' may not align with your definition of 'culturally rich' -- but there are people of every race who align more with learning than optimizing money.

Same reaction here. First PP thinks culture = white, and I guess rap = black and tacos = brown.

Such ignorance and, well, racism.

Huh? You guys have gone off on some weird tangent on how this is racist. OP didn't say anything about race just in general about being asset poor and culturally rich.
Firstly, as a Mexican American, tacos are absolutely brown. Not sure why they are not?
Secondly, go to CDMX right now and anyone in the city with money trying to be cultured is flying to Europe or Vail. It's such a thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, I am ignoring the sophomoric argument above. You described my family. Two PhDs whose house is full of books--everything from Journey to the West to Terry Pratchett. A friend of mine calls us "the literati." We talk a lot of politics, talk a lot about social justice, and what books we read. However, we are so broke (poor is systemic). It is what it is. We hope our kids also have rich intellectual lives and have a good education. That is what we can give them. I do want to distinguish that it isn't champagne tastes. I don't want anything from Van Cleef & Arpels. I don't care about your NYC or Paris shopping trip. Nor do I care about cars or the size of your house. I just don't care. This means I can't identify with a lot of the people in the DC suburbs. I literally got caught in a convo once about how Kia has a luxury car brand. It was not my thing.

It is interesting that you associate money with shopping, cars or luxury jewelries. Money is much more than that. Money allowed me to take my kids to more than 50 countries around the world and experience different cultures not from books, but to have first hand experience. Money allowed me to send my kids to great private schools that also expand their horizons. For example, when they studied about Ancient Greece in middle school, the traveled to Greece and drove across the country for two weeks as part of their class work. Money allowed us to learn several languages (each family member speaks 4-5 languages). I don't buy jewelry either, even the cheaper ones, but I buy business class flight to Vienna to see Klimt's Kiss one more time even though I've seen it dozen of times before or flight to Amsterdam to see the latest exhibit or concert. Money allowed me not just talk about social justice but actually do something about it. I don't care about your talks because people like you they are just that, talk and no action.

OMG. You sound awful. Not only do you pollute the planet with your senseless traveling. I learned everything your kids learned and my parents weren’t wealthy. My kids learn Latin, speak 6 languages and we aren’t wealthy. You sound uncultured, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dunno why everyone is so triggered by the OP. I take it to mean focusing your money on experiences, either for your family or yourself instead of putting your money into a large mortgage, luxury car, or vacation home. Could be in the form of private school, travelling wherever you want when you want without being concerned about a mortgage or other high dollar assets. Maybe this question doesn’t offend me because I often ask myself and my spouse if we wouldn’t be better off cutting our mortgage and size of house in half, and use that extra money to show our kids different parts of the world. Is that so crazy?

Just because someone has "things" by your definition, does not mean they do not value, nor have they had varied and valuable travel experiences, nor a rich cultural background. So much judgment!

You can buy experiences, but you can't buy a soul.

Well yeah if you have enough money and privilege you can buy all the things and buy all the experiences you want. Not everyone can, and they have to choose between assets or travel, etc.

[Anonymous]

Op, I know what you’re talking about.

I think is quite common with a large number of people who have bachelors and/or masters degree and even phds.

All too often people conflate college educated with having money and it’s not true.

I think this topic should be discussed in the larger society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a little confused by the level of hostility some people are displaying here towards people with less money (ie, the OP). OP didn't say anything insulting about people with money, but some posters seem defensive an are implying there's some sort of moral superiority in having wealth. I think OP was just observing that there are different vectors of privilege, and they felt that they were rich in one but not the other. It's definitely possible to be cultured with or without money, and the same for being uncultured.

this is it.

Class is a complex subject. There are levels to all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Culturally rich = prestigious degree from top university with somewhat prestigious job in a low earning profession, but oops no trust fund or spent it or something went wrong. Married someone similar and neither had any money sense, but feels somehow culturally superior despite those values leading to a less affluent less materially successful lifestyle. Aka came from money but didn’t make money themselves. See: Henry James, Edith Wharton, Theodore Dreiser, EM Forster.

nailed it! boom!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think OP means they are well educated, well traveled, own original art, read great books, music...but the bank accounts are thin.

There are so many uncultured, tacky people who work jobs they hate to make huge mortgage and car payment, they buy tattoos, long fake nail and inject stuff into their bodies and their bank accounts are healthy. Go figure.

Please let me know which music makes one culturally rich? I'm guessing music written by dead white guys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think OP means they are well educated, well traveled, own original art, read great books, music...but the bank accounts are thin.

There are so many uncultured, tacky people who work jobs they hate to make huge mortgage and car payment, they buy tattoos, long fake nail and inject stuff into their bodies and their bank accounts are healthy. Go figure.

Please let me know which music makes one culturally rich? I'm guessing music written by dead white guys.

I worked once with a group of ethnomusicologists and they definitely were studying and enjoying much more than dead white guy music.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Culturally rich in White people speak means they read books, admire stolen artifacts and rewritten histories in museums, stare at art locked behind glass in galleries, and consider themselves ‘civilized’.

It’s not culture as POC would define it.

Oh, stop. This is so tiresome, little miss keyboard activist

But am I wrong? The ‘literati’ pp and ‘sophisticated’ pp in the apartment full of dusty books have corroborated.

Literati, here: Yes, Keyboard warrior. I will lend you my Lorde and Anzaldúa. I actually have quite a bit you would probably like.

There have been a lot of assumptions made on this board but what strikes me the most is the contempt for what we could call the "mid
intellectual classes"--the lawyers, PhDs, and people with grad degress in the social sciences/humanities who have PowerPoint jobs. Like it is a crime to be a well-read middle manager who doesn't make enough to fly business class to see Klimt whenever they want, but they have seen it and Amsterdam and will probably go to Amsterdam again before they die. If this angers the actual rich--the question is why? Why do they even care?

I’m not rich. I don’t go to Amsterdam to see Klimt. I’ve been adding that the white people definition ‘culturally rich’ is different from POC. It’s a viewpoint that should be considered within the context of this topic.

Since you’re so worldly and well educated, taking consideration of that seems like it shouldn’t strike such a nerve. But go ahead and read about it and discuss it as lofty conversation pieces in your echo chamber then call me a keyboard warrior for sharing my experience of this definition because you don’t want to think about culture in any other way than what fits your self description.

DP: As a POC whose tastes align with having lots of 'dusty books,' going to museums and who has even been known to spend a few days in the archives, what rubbed me wrong about your response is that you generalized their experience to be that of "white people" and put it contrast to a generic "POC" experience. I can relate to being culturally rich in the sense of deeply valuing culture and spending more energy on developing my understanding of culture than optimizing money. Which is what I think OP was talking about. OP's definition of 'culturally rich' may not align with your definition of 'culturally rich' -- but there are people of every race who align more with learning than optimizing money.

Same reaction here. First PP thinks culture = white, and I guess rap = black and tacos = brown.

Such ignorance and, well, racism.

Huh? You guys have gone off on some weird tangent on how this is racist. OP didn't say anything about race just in general about being asset poor and culturally rich.
Firstly, as a Mexican American, tacos are absolutely brown. Not sure why they are not?
Secondly, go to CDMX right now and anyone in the city with money trying to be cultured is flying to Europe or Vail. It's such a thing.

I'm afraid you are not following the conversation.

Tacos might have been originally Mexican, but now everyone eats tacos and doing so doesn't make you Mexican. Right?

So when some PP started saying only White people care about culture things A and B....hopefully you get the point. All kinds of people care about A and B, doing so doesn't mean you are "White", and thinking it does makes one a....racist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought it meant highly educated and well-traveled, knowledgeable about the arts, but not wealthy. I think this describes a lot of people in academia, particularly in the humanities.

+1

Also applies to diplomats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think OP means they are well educated, well traveled, own original art, read great books, music...but the bank accounts are thin.

There are so many uncultured, tacky people who work jobs they hate to make huge mortgage and car payment, they buy tattoos, long fake nail and inject stuff into their bodies and their bank accounts are healthy. Go figure.

Please let me know which music makes one culturally rich? I'm guessing music written by dead white guys.

I didn't see the OP designating anything as particularly defining of culturally rich--rather that they valued their cultural experiences more than financial assets. Different people started the argument about what constitutes "cultured" based on their differences of opinion about that.