<p>Now that I've read more of this thread:</p>
<p>I love US of A. Everyone has a chance. Some may have a better chance. You can have as many chances as you want, in fact the more times you play, the odds shift towards you. </p>
<p>Personally, a degree'd person is too much trouble to detrain. They expect too much for what they do. Give me some one with dreams with out learnings.</p>
<p>"I mean, given the fact that I don't have the financial ability to pave and pad my kids' way through life, I figured that giving them a few survival skills might do in a pinch."</p>
<p>Oops...here we go again. There is no <strong>necessary</strong> connection between money and survival skills. I have a relative with no money and no survival skills whatsoever; whereas if I dropped dead tomorrow, I trust fully that my "pampered" daughter could make her way in the world.</p>
<p>I think we need to drop the word "elitist" entirely. It serves no useful purpose whatever (except maybe to obfuscate), and is generally used only as an insult. </p>
<p>I don't think any less of people who go to state schools, and I don't think they should think less of my kids because they go to private colleges. Some rich kids are pampered, spoiled, and dependent; some are not. Some people without money are amazing people with a lot of hustle, get-up-and-go, etc; some have no money because they are lazy, unmotivated, or just not very smart. Some people, rich or poor, have faced vicissitudes of life or circumstances beyond their control.</p>
<p>And yes, there <em>are</em> rich snobs who think they are better than anyone else. The surprise is that there are poor snobs who believe they are morally superior to everyone else simply because they have no money!</p>
<p>
[quote]
And yes, there <em>are</em> rich snobs who think they are better than anyone else. The surprise is that there are poor snobs who believe they are morally superior to everyone else simply because they have no money!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I can't resist quoting Deng Xiaoping as he gave the green light for Chinese to ditch Maoism: "To be rich is glorious." He, for one, did not see virtue in poverty, for himself or for his country.</p>
<p>< I think we need to drop the word "elitist" entirely. It serves no useful purpose whatever (except maybe to obfuscate), and is generally used only as an insult. ></p>
<p>Ah, but that's where you're wrong, nedad. Labels, particularly ones as loaded as this one, serve a very useful purpose if one has a Political Agenda, covert or overt. Toxic and dangerous.....but useful. Divide and conquer -- with the operative catalyst being the amazing power of Guilt. Artificial class warfare is useful indeed.</p>
<p>On a practical, vs. political, plane, buy into Elitism trips, & you (anyone) have surrendered your own power. One may think that others are in a rarefied realm, but there are great levelers that are conveniently forgotten when the fantasy is paramount: deaths & other personal losses, mental illness & other emotional impairments, broken families & friendships, premature terminal illness or disability, even reversals of fortune. Many things money & status can't buy.</p>
<p>NEDAD's Post #62 is the summary of my thoughts on this.</p>
<p>NeDad--I guess snobbishness is one of those vices that can manifest itself at any income level. You got yer rich ones, yer poor ones and yer middle class ones . . .</p>
<p>I really don't understand the arguments in this thread.
Students are sent to elite schools. I think the people at Harvard would be insulted if the school wasn't thought of as an elite place.</p>
<p>Why can't people admit that they like the idea of their kid going to an elite place? Who doesn't want their kid to have every advantage?
Having our children go to an elite place, then having our kids telling people I went to ... and getting instant respect, that's bad?</p>
<p>What's BS is saying I sent my kid to this place because that's where he can get the best education. </p>
<p>There are many places where a person can get a top education.</p>
<p>People want more than just an education. They want fit, and sometimes fit means hanging around with other "elite" kids. Why? Because their want their own kids to be thought of as elite. Guilt by association.</p>
<p>I really don't see anything wrong with this. I want my kids to be well thought of and very respected.</p>
<p>Second verse. Same as the first. I'm Hen-e-ry the Eighth I am, Hen-e-ry the Eighth I am, I am. </p>
<p>I do believe calmom stopped posting back around #46. </p>
<p>I understand her middle-class parent's frustrations. I also understand the frustrations of the parents of BWRK's sloughed aside for the superstar Yo-yo Ma's. I also understand the frustrations of the parents of those kids left outside because they are $ comfortable but not "development" class wealthy or "underpriveleged" or "overcoming adversity" but the kids have the stats and EC's to match the best. I also understand the frustrations of the parents of the 3.7, 1300 with great potential who could truly benefit from a super-selective school and would bring something special and unique in return.</p>
<p>We love our children. </p>
<p>We want their dreams to come true and every door to open to them as they approach. We want them to be respected and understood and valued for what they are and what they could be if just given a fighting chance. </p>
<p>The super-selectives are "exclusive". My gosh, isn't that inherent in the definition? Not everyone desires that "exclusivity". The strange little bird that lives at my house may be one of them, but I'm not. I wish I were. That was the original impetus for Sinner's Alley in the Cafe, doddsdad and I admitting that while we don't want to care-we do care that our kids are or may be excluded from somewhere "special". A place to go when you admit the "exclusivity" bug had bit you and you were infected. (It is has since wonderfully morphed into a place for CC's ne'er-do-wells and other assorted or admitted heathens.) </p>
<p>I just think this process is stressful enough without caring parents turning on each other to say one or the other demo or individual has it all wrong, or has stopped making sense. They haven't. We are all just trying to survive a game with some very peculiar rules. As always, just my opinion.</p>
<p>There sure are a lot of threads on this board about elitism right now.</p>
<p>Elitism is a touchy subject . . . As we rev up for getting into the game full tilt once again, my 16 year old seems to be writing off a whole category of schools as too elitist to consider. An example of reverse snobbism? Perhaps I should just accept that, and not argue, after all, it does narrow down the list. She is going back and forth as she tries to get a handle on this process. I still don't have a handle on it, and have two in college. She wants to go to Boston, to visit colleges, but not really to visit colleges, just wants to go to Boston, but as long as we're there, she guesses we could stop by and take a gander at a few of the prestigious ones that she has <em>no interest</em> in attending, LOL . .</p>
<p>So, just out of curiousity, what would be the PC list of colleges for a student that wants top notch academics but no elitist schools? Just throwing that out there as an intellectual excercise, not trying to incite anyone!</p>
<p>Some topnotch schools in the Boston area that are not perceived as elitist (at least not to the same degree as HYP): Brandeis, Boston College, Tufts. BU has some great departments and faculty. You'll find pretty well-off students there, too, just as you'll find students from families of very modest means at Harvard. BU is supposed to be the destination of choice for wealthy internationals.
Wesleyan, lampooned in the movie "PCU," has the same demographic profile as HYP. Most likely, so does Trinity (Hartford), Skidmore, Bowdoin, Colby, Middlebury and many other LACs.</p>
<p>mstee: If the elite is a euphemism for costly, then many of the flagship state university honors programs have students with stats similar or better than most of the elites. The programs are structured similarly to the smaller LAC's, with small class sizes and access to Profs etc. These programs often offer the best of all worlds, great academics in a nurturing environment surrounded by peers with a similar commitment to academics, the resources of a major research university, fast track to great graduate or professional schools, and big time sports. The main thing lacking is immediate recognition by the great unwashed that one has attended a "prestigious" college.</p>
<p>I have actually seen an interesting phenomenon, though, where students are rejected from the state U honors program and have to turn to a pricey private, to which they were accepted, to get a similar environment.</p>
<p>Those schools Marite mentioned are elitist schools. You tell a person you went to Brandeis or BC and they think highly of you whether you deserve it or not (Hopefully, you do). You tell a person you went to UNLV and they look at you funny.</p>
<p>idad:
Your last comments are very right. For OOS applicants, UVA and UNC are more difficult to get into than many private colleges. Some state Unis just do not have Honors programs, but the cost difference between a private college and an OOS uni may not be that significant.</p>
<p>We all know the Groucho paraphrase: if my kids can get admitted, it's not good enough for them.</p>
<p>Dstark:</p>
<p>Wow. The list of elitis schools is going to be endless. I was confining myself to schools in the Boston area and a bit further. But if geography is no bar, then the number of elitist schools will expand to such an extent that it will be meaningless, won't it? is any top 100 school not tainted by the elitist label? Do only state uni qualify as non-elitist? Personally, I think of Cal, UCLA, UMich some other state unis as more elitist than some private colleges. And for OOS, they don't cost a whole lot less.</p>
<p>I think Cal, UCLA, Mich are elitist, especially out-of-state. There is a heirarchy of elite schools also, just as a Ferrari might be more elite than a Porshe. There are some schools in the top 100 that probably aren't elite .I don't think Arizona is elite. Like I said, I don't think wanting our kids to go to an elite place is bad. It's good. It's the denying I don't get.</p>
<p>It's the connection between wanting to send a child to particular schools and elitism that I don't get. If the motive is not to to enable that child to rub elbows with the rich and powerful, but just to get him/her a good education, is it sill elitist>
Are low SES families who accept full ride offers from HYP elitist for not sending their kids to the state uni (which might actually cost more)?
What in fact does elite school mean? more expensive? more selective?</p>
<p>I sometimes wonder if the focus on the negative aspects of "elite" schools isn't just a little bit of sour grapes? I'm sure it's human nature, but not one of our more attractive features.</p>