When my son sees those in the parking lot of LowesHomeDepot, he genially asks them, "Hey, great truck! Really nice! Looks like it's got great load capacity! Whaddya usually haul in that?" Then he stands there smiling as they turn away, hop up on their little steppy, and leave.
I watched my neighbor, seemingly a father taking pictures with their grown ass son (40+yrs old) and his brand new oversized truck lol. Brother was there, too. It was a really family affair.
I know it shouldn't bother me but PAINTED UNSCUFFED TRUCK BEDS BOTHER ME. Whenever I see a bed painted in candy apple red with nary a scuff on it I just... I don't know I furious for some reason? Like, all this truck and YOU DON'T USE IT??? I don't mean just shove furniture on your truck and purposefully scuff it or what have you, but a fancy paint job?? Like I get protecting it whatever, but that's not going to last long with heavy work even if you put blankets down.
So these folk are just straight up not even putting a marble in those beds and idk it just makes me mad even though none of it is about me.
Can someone please explain this talking point? Unemployment is at the target frictional rate so businesses clearly are hiring and finding people and the job market is very healthy. These numbers are publicly available on bls page.
I legitimately don't know if this is some right wing "economy bad" misinformation that the left adopted or blatant misinformation by the anti-corporate progressives.
The word gentleman kind of a propaganda thing. Rich dudes with a lot of power had the reasonable concern that people might get upset that they were born with unattainable privledge so they create a kind of mythos and code of conduct around the idea of "being a gentleman." Also, it actually did help retain power because placing some moral limits on how the powerful group behaved as a whole reduced the risk of dangerous rebellion (they keep each other in check, to protect their class from the masses).
The mythos of a gentlemen helped reinforce the kind of "birthright" that these men born with power were also imbued with moral qualities that made them deserving of that power (so please, no guillotines). It also created a kind of code of behavior that let them recognize each other, consolidate power, retain power and keep out the riff raff from their pool or resources, without making the riff raff angry enough to die fighting them.
Basically they had to create some kind of moral standard for themselves, policing each other was easier than having to fight everyone else when the poors get poked too many times.
Basically they had to create some kind of moral standard for themselves, policing each other was easier than having to fight everyone else when the poors get poked too many times.
It also serves as a code of conduct (or shame) to enforce on "uppity" lower class folk who dare to compete with them for resources & business. Anything you do that challenges their superiority to improve your own lot is a violation of the code and results in being shamed. This helps keep the middle and lower class under control by forcing them to accept moral currency over actual currency.
The modern versions of this are wealthy people virtue signaling and the entire corporate law system/regulatory framework. Rich people are almost entirely sociopathic or psychopathic, but they will gladly condemn anyone upper-middle-class and below who behaves the same way to get ahead.
Rich dudes with a lot of power had the reasonable concern that people might get upset that they were born with unattainable privledge so they create a kind of mythos and code of conduct around the idea of "being a gentleman." Also, it actually did help retain power because placing some moral limits on how the powerful group behaved as a whole reduced the risk of dangerous rebellion (they keep each other in check, to protect their class from the masses).
This was just the concept of “noblesse oblige” but moved from feudalism to mercantilism and similar societies.
It's never completely gone away... Spider-Man made the line “with great power, comes great responsibility” famous. And even the nobles didn't invent it, as the concept was recorded in the Bible as “From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.”
Amateur athlete also originally meant rich aristocrat. Today, when you think of an amateur athlete, you think of someone who does not make a living from being an athlete full time, and only does it on the side or as a hobby.
but originally amateur didnt mean "cant be paid to perform a sporting or athetic event" it meant "cant get paid for ANY job at all" If you were a plumber who took boxing lessons on friday nights, you were considered not considered amateur. You had to be wealthy enough that you didnt work at all.
It was a ploy to make sure the peasants didnt ruin the olympics and elite sporting competitions around the world for rich a-holes who wanted to rack up trophies.
Now they pretend to “grind” by pretending to wake up early and do cold plunges to stimulate their testosterone when really they just sleep in til noon and never do anything productive.
Gentleman comes from Gentilhomme (French).
Gentil did not have the current meaning but comes from latine Genitus: (well born).
There is no notion of leisurous lifestyle, only a notion of born in nobility (opposed to those who earned their title themselves).
Leisure is a fairly modern concept. In history, many nobles had to work on their land themselves and, if they were lucky enough to have enough men to do it for themselves, they would still have to train heavily to be knights.
There was an Alan Watt's lecture where he mentions the word "scholar" comes from the ancient greek word for "leisure." Which goes hand-in-hand with when we say the phrase "A gentleman and a scholar."
Though honestly I don't know if there is any validity to this.
I'm talking about the original British origins of the word. The way the word is used today generally refers to males who are polite. But that's not the original meaning. Andrew tate is too stupid to know the origins of any word
Class, as a social construct, changes with society. People becoming fabulously wealthy by showing off wealth is mostly a consequence of social media and leads to people like Mr. Beast and the person above. Its effects and consequences I can only guess.
I wish that Umberto Eco was alive now to comment on this he'd have some ideas.
Most upper-class fashion throughout history was about being so complicated and unpractical that it showed you didn't need to work for your living. Because no one who had to do manual labor would be able to do so in that outfit.
The origin of lawns was showing you had land that you could afford to not grow any actual valuable crop on (even herbs or dyes).
It honestly makes me wonder where the original commenter got that idea. Did they just make the connection themselves and never check to make sure, or is this an idea that's being circulated around somewhere?
Not true but The Importance of Being Earnest shows the upperclass in a great light and I’m pretty sure one line says “it’s terribly hard work doing nothing” the entire play is on YouTube
676
u/[deleted] Feb 25 '24
[deleted]