Anonymous wrote:OP here.
Yes, I'm being so judgmental! And I feel guilty about it. But, I just don't understand it. It's the FLASHY part I don't get.
Anonymous wrote:OP, you are in a crazy bubble. I *wish* I was you.
Truth is I could afford to send both my kids to private school and keep our large house, full time nanny (I WOHM but that is irrelevant here) and nice cars. Truth is I tried to, but my child has special needs and no private school will accept or keep him. My only choice where I live is public school or homeschooling. Among those choices I choose public school because I get better services than I could buy and he gets social exposure. Even with that it's really really hard.
What you don't get is that I spend a lot of money on services for my child with private therapists, psychiatrists and other things.
I know you are thinking "oh no, I'm not talking about your special disabled child, I am thinking about all those kids that I see running around that look normal." But the truth is that few kids are disabled enough that they appear physically compromised on first sight and at every moment have dramatically abnormal behavior. Being an SN parent I can tell you that the vast majority of SN kids even if they need *a lot* of help to get through school and life as a whole actually seem totally fine if you see them on the street, in a shop, at a birthday party, because you are not seeing the places and times where they fail.
Honestly, you suck. If only my problems were being judgmental about blond women with fancier cars than you that you feel superior to because you perceive you have better priorities than they do. It's not like my life is so bad, yes I am wealthy and successful and my child will survive, so I am grateful for all of that. But the idea that you are judging me too (although I am not blond and carry a Tumi briefcase, not a YSL handbag) is really just over the top. Can't you find something else to keep you busy?
Anonymous wrote:OP here. I clearly did touch a nerve. Predictably I suppose.
I want to clarify that what I find odd is not that there are SOME wealthy families who send their kids to public school, but that there’s a particular obsession at some public schools with being flashy. YSL handbags are like the least expensive designer handbags you can buy - but people buy them in part because they scream “I’m expensive” even to those who know nothing about handbags. And I guess I don’t understand that mentality - wanting to look expensive to strangers - when MOST of those women are not super wealthy. And most wealthy women I know don’t carry an entry-level YSL logo handbag.
Anyway, i don’t really understand what it is I’m getting at, but this thread is helping me realize it’s less about school choice and more about displays of wealth and their meaning that I find confusing, and interesting, particularly in certain subcultures (where half the moms carry the same handbag).
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Does everyone realize that teachers that work in private school don't even need to be certified and make less money? Most are trying hard to get into public schools to make more money but they aren't getting selected. Private schools aren't better- just good at keeping the kids you don't want your kids to go to school with out.
True - they don't need to be certified by the gazillion schools that offer certification. Instead they often have advanced degrees from quality schools, and are happy to trade a modest amount of income for other perks and benefits of teaching at a private school.
Anonymous wrote:I don't understand parents who send their kids to private school. I mean, the public schools around here are really good, so shouldn't they save their money for college? I'm trying really hard not to be judgmental here, but I think these parents are stupid, and their poor choices with money (meaning, not choices I would make) are hard to understand....
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Your premise is wrong. There are plenty of wealthy families who PREFER public school over private school.
I am a product of excellent European private schools. Today, none of the still-excellent schools I went to are nearly as expensive as the DC area privates. I simply do not want to give money to the latter, which will go to luxurious facilities, athletics, administrators pockets, maintenance of those acres of pristine environmentally-unfriendly lawns and unnecessary tech in every classroom... when private school teachers are really not great because they are paid less than public school teachers. It's very easy to have good academic results when you select at entry. If the money went to excellent teachers, I would reconsider. But it doesn't, and it never will in this country.
Our kids have been in public and private in this area and the teachers at the high end private have overall been WAY better educators (many have PhDs in their subjects and are passionate about the kids and way more focused on thoughtful classroom discussion/critical thinking skills) than the public school teachers at the high school level - the public school teachers are burned out from huge classrooms and disruptive students and teaching to the SOL etc. Our kids complained they often discourage discussion. While I agree that teachers in public are paid more and have better benefits overall, that doesn't make them better as teachers at all. Also, a lot of that fancy stuff you mention at privates is actually paid for by the wealthiest families/alums through fundraising/capital campaigns. Your logic is flawed. However, I agree that to each his/her own. Public can be awesome for some kids, while private is
better for others.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow OP you really touched a nerve with all the public school parents who still want to be perceived as wealthy. This thread is funny.
+1
Here come the new money private school parents who think anything you pay for is always better. You'll learn.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow OP you really touched a nerve with all the public school parents who still want to be perceived as wealthy. This thread is funny.
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm in N. Arlington and frankly there are a lot of moms of a certain type: they all have YSL logo handbags, huge diamond rings and other expensive jewelry, often blonde hair, expensive clothing, etc. And they all send their kids to public school.
The thing that I find weird is not just that they spend a lot of money on things other than tuition (private school is crazy expensive, and I understand the choice to go public) but that they seem to spend money on things that make them LOOK wealthy but they are obviously not that wealthy since their kids go public. I see a lot of expensive handbags at my kids' private school, but they are almost always Celine or Tod's or Ferragamo or other less flashy brands than a YSL logo, and plenty of the richest families drive a minivan (so practical, no matter how lame) whereas these public school moms in N. Arlington are so often in flashier luxury cars.
I'm trying hard not be judgmental, but I just don't understand the culture of being really flashy with money (I mean, I don't like YSL handbags for that reason to begin with) and I especially don't understand it among people who send their kids to public school.
I'm sure I hit a lot of buttons with this post, I'm just wondering if anyone else has observed what I have.
Logic isn't your first language, is it?
Anonymous wrote:Wow OP you really touched a nerve with all the public school parents who still want to be perceived as wealthy. This thread is funny.