One of the main differences between the middle class and working class cultures is that middle class children are encouraged to be different from others to be proud of their individuality, to develop their unique style in everything. Working-class culture attaches greater importance to solidarity and group membership.
Some strive to be different, others are happy to merge with the group. This is manifested not only in the choice of clothing, but also in the choice of linguistic designs, willingness to use other people's words such as quotations from advertising, memes or sayings, or, conversely, in the rejection of them, in the claim that both speech and thinking speaker are unique and completely unorthodox.
Symbols of class statute
Main thing in managing your classroom experience is to pretend you're not trying to manage it at all. The impression that is made, despite the apparent unwillingness to make it, is the strongest. The worst thing that can happen is to be caught in the fact that you are trying to pass for someone you are not (a celebrity with whom you have a remote property, a glamour star from a women's magazine). When buying expensive bags, the size of the logo will be negatively correlated with the income of the buyer. As one witty study has shown, the higher the income, the smaller the emblem; the richest will prefer not to see it at all. The largest emblems are usually found on counterfeit products.
The emblem of a well-known manufacturer should be so the thumbscrew immediately after the purchase of the thing (and if it cannot be removed, the thing should not be bought). If the clothing is allowed to signal the owner's class at all, it should do so at the expense of the cut and material, not the brand. A real top-class person has his own tailor. The transfer of the signaling function to the material results in the unconditional rejection of a cheap and stable synthetic fabrics in favor of cotton, linen or wool. The role of “naturalness” in class symbolism is the subject of many pages in Paul Tassel's beautiful book “Class: A Guide to the American Class System.” general, the higher the class hierarchy, the more important is attached to attribute for which it is impossible to say whether they are due to the efforts of the individual or are a gift of destiny, but which in any case are attractive and enviable, such as physical health.
The important thing is not so much what you find yourself in, for example, in a restaurant (if you throw away quite extreme options such as a swimsuit), but whether it will be visible to you that you regularly visit these places and know how to behave in them.
And don't publish selfies against the backdrop of the Eiffel Tower: you might get the impression that you want to brag, firstly, and secondly, that you've been to Paris, which is not unusual for the middle class to visit. Cultural rigor and appearance common feature of the current status cultures of the highest middle class in 1981, societies is their low "lattice", a property first described by anthropologist Mary Douglas.
Latency means maintaining a rigid classification grid that distinguishes the categories of individuals (men from women, elders from juniors) and situations (official and unofficial, working and family). In high-resolution culture a man is always dressed and trimmed (differently) than a woman at home, dressed (differently) than at work, and at a solemn moment (differently) than in a routine one. Paul Tassel noticed that in America, the most accurate scale for measuring the social status will be the distance between home, and front office clothing: the top middle class is always dressed in about the same thing, and the aisles go home in training pants, and on solemn occasions wear a suit in which they feel desperately uncomfortable. It is important to note that the low resolution of the status culture of the top class is not universal.
The culture of the European aristocracy has been highly accurate for centuries. A guest at friends' house, Bertie Wooster had to change at least four times a day. However, as early as the 1930s, the ritual of having to change for lunch and dinner became a thing of the past, and everywhere except a few royal courts, funeral businesses and conservative banking circles, there was another model that blurred the boundaries between situational decency and between what had previously marked the differences between categories of people, such as men and women. The long hair of men, and short hair of women, the shifts from the traditional “girly” colors of the female scale (pink, white, tender blue) to more.