If that were true, then what would be left?
quote:Originally posted by Seaquam:
If that were true, then what would be left?
You are a learned art person...negative space.
Seaquam;
A couple of thoughts about your dissertation.
1. Pay - (a) The teacher's union demands that P.E. teacher's be paid the same as chemistry, physics, and math teachers. I submit that the problem is not the amount a school district pays in salaries, but how they are allocated. (b) the teacher's union has the system rigged so that younger less experienced teachers make less than market and older teacher's with rank 1 ratings and 30 years get all the money for retirement reasons. Again, an allocation system designed by the teacher's union. (3) The teacher's union will not allow performance to be considered in pay, therefore, all teachers receive the compensation based on average performance.
2. Tenure - After a teacher obtains tenure, often by year 5 or before, it is almost impossible to get rid of them if they then downgrade to being a poor teacher.
3. Incompetent teachers - I have found that any school I walked into, I could ask the students and the teachers who the good teachers and bad teachers are, and in most cases get the same name from both. I have had teachers, that were friends, that advised me if my daughter was assigned to a class with certain teachers, to go in and get her changed to a different class. Knowing these bad teachers are amoungst them, they still want them protected by tenure. Personal experience - most of the poor teachers that I or my daughter had in high school (and we attended such 30 years apart) had the prefix "coach" or ass't coach in front of their name. To many "coaches" get teaching tenure, then bumped from coaching, and are left to degradate classrooms for years, imo.
4.For far to many school systems, the overriding principle trumping all other policies is social promotion. There is no law dictating such practices, so don't cry when kids show up in your class 2+ years behind academically. It is an educrat policy that puts them there. This combined with well documented grade inflation has created a system out of control and that has loss touch with reality.
In closing, I will say that I believe that there are a lot of very talented hard working teachers out there. They are not the problem, but the system which they and their union created is the problem. Unless we change the system, it's just moving chairs around on the Titanic, imo.
A couple of thoughts about your dissertation.
1. Pay - (a) The teacher's union demands that P.E. teacher's be paid the same as chemistry, physics, and math teachers. I submit that the problem is not the amount a school district pays in salaries, but how they are allocated. (b) the teacher's union has the system rigged so that younger less experienced teachers make less than market and older teacher's with rank 1 ratings and 30 years get all the money for retirement reasons. Again, an allocation system designed by the teacher's union. (3) The teacher's union will not allow performance to be considered in pay, therefore, all teachers receive the compensation based on average performance.
2. Tenure - After a teacher obtains tenure, often by year 5 or before, it is almost impossible to get rid of them if they then downgrade to being a poor teacher.
3. Incompetent teachers - I have found that any school I walked into, I could ask the students and the teachers who the good teachers and bad teachers are, and in most cases get the same name from both. I have had teachers, that were friends, that advised me if my daughter was assigned to a class with certain teachers, to go in and get her changed to a different class. Knowing these bad teachers are amoungst them, they still want them protected by tenure. Personal experience - most of the poor teachers that I or my daughter had in high school (and we attended such 30 years apart) had the prefix "coach" or ass't coach in front of their name. To many "coaches" get teaching tenure, then bumped from coaching, and are left to degradate classrooms for years, imo.
4.For far to many school systems, the overriding principle trumping all other policies is social promotion. There is no law dictating such practices, so don't cry when kids show up in your class 2+ years behind academically. It is an educrat policy that puts them there. This combined with well documented grade inflation has created a system out of control and that has loss touch with reality.
In closing, I will say that I believe that there are a lot of very talented hard working teachers out there. They are not the problem, but the system which they and their union created is the problem. Unless we change the system, it's just moving chairs around on the Titanic, imo.
Seaquam -
You never cease to amaze me. Bravo!
And thank you! And thank your wife also!
You never cease to amaze me. Bravo!
And thank you! And thank your wife also!
Sandy - a few comments:
1. a) While true regarding pay scale, I think you do a disservice to many PE teachers (and I am not a PE teacher). It isn't just "roll out the balls" any longer. At least in my district, there are essays and research and true studying involved in PE. There are specific goals and benchmarks toward earning the Presidential Award for Physical Fitness for all students. Students are only required to take PE for two years, and in many cases when there is an ROTC program at the school, those involved in ROTC don't take PE. b) Age doesn't matter in salaries, experience does (for better or worse). Advanced degrees do matter. c) Not necessarily true, but pretty close.
2. Absolutely false. As someone pointed out earlier, it is about documentation and a willingness for administration to pursue removal of the teacher. In fact, our superintendent (much to the happiness of this teacher) is pursuing action on roughly 25 teachers in our district.
3. Your statement regarding coaches in insulting, and such a blanket statement is irresponsible - and yes, I am a coach (as well as the new Athletic Director at my school). In fact, there are very few coaches (in terms of percentage of teaching staff), who are actually teachers. At my school, as an example, only the girls golf coach (me), the volleyball coach, and the cross country coach are actually teachers. Additionally, there are only four former coaches who are still teachers (and they coached tennis, volleyball, cross country, and JV girls basketball), and three of them are PE teachers (as a side note, I think that within the next 10 years, at least in California if the economy doesn't turn around, high school sports will be gone, and it will become a privatized industry). As for bad teachers, they are absolutely out there. If my sons were to attend my school, I would certainly pick the teachers they have. But the same can pretty much be said in any industry. Have you ever had a manager that you worked for that you would not want your daughter to work for?
4. Social promotion is a huge problem. In fact, in my school district, many eighth graders were "forced" to take summer school before moving to high school. On the summer school report card, there was actually a box a teacher could check labeled "social promotion". When I pointed this out to a former superintendent, and how this was such a poor practice, the box "magically" disappeared for the next year's summer session, while the practice still took place. It isn't an "educrat" policy, but a state governmental problem. Believe me, almost every high school teacher that I know wishes this practice was abolished. Teaching at a school with roughly 85% of our students being minorities and roughly 80% close to or below the poverty line, thus receiving free or reduced lunch cost, there is likely grade inflation. But it also goes on at the "lily-white" rich kids school. I agree that it is a problem. And yes, in California, the system is out of control, and there is a general disconnect with reality. The problem is that the people making the decisions regarding education policy (our wonderful elected officials) have (with few exceptions) little to no classroom or education experience. How many businesses would be successful operating under this model?
Please don't blame it on the unions. I am not a union soldier by any means, but they do have a place to protect good teachers, and I have witnessed and experienced first hand rogue administrators who have tried to "mess with" teachers who had the audacity to disagree with one of the administrator's edicts. I recall a former administrator who declared in front of staff, "I don't care what Ed. Code says. I AM ED CODE!"
Lastly, I don't agree that the system needs to be changed, but it certainly needs to be fixed. And I am willing to bet that the vast majority of teachers would agree with that statement.
1. a) While true regarding pay scale, I think you do a disservice to many PE teachers (and I am not a PE teacher). It isn't just "roll out the balls" any longer. At least in my district, there are essays and research and true studying involved in PE. There are specific goals and benchmarks toward earning the Presidential Award for Physical Fitness for all students. Students are only required to take PE for two years, and in many cases when there is an ROTC program at the school, those involved in ROTC don't take PE. b) Age doesn't matter in salaries, experience does (for better or worse). Advanced degrees do matter. c) Not necessarily true, but pretty close.
2. Absolutely false. As someone pointed out earlier, it is about documentation and a willingness for administration to pursue removal of the teacher. In fact, our superintendent (much to the happiness of this teacher) is pursuing action on roughly 25 teachers in our district.
3. Your statement regarding coaches in insulting, and such a blanket statement is irresponsible - and yes, I am a coach (as well as the new Athletic Director at my school). In fact, there are very few coaches (in terms of percentage of teaching staff), who are actually teachers. At my school, as an example, only the girls golf coach (me), the volleyball coach, and the cross country coach are actually teachers. Additionally, there are only four former coaches who are still teachers (and they coached tennis, volleyball, cross country, and JV girls basketball), and three of them are PE teachers (as a side note, I think that within the next 10 years, at least in California if the economy doesn't turn around, high school sports will be gone, and it will become a privatized industry). As for bad teachers, they are absolutely out there. If my sons were to attend my school, I would certainly pick the teachers they have. But the same can pretty much be said in any industry. Have you ever had a manager that you worked for that you would not want your daughter to work for?
4. Social promotion is a huge problem. In fact, in my school district, many eighth graders were "forced" to take summer school before moving to high school. On the summer school report card, there was actually a box a teacher could check labeled "social promotion". When I pointed this out to a former superintendent, and how this was such a poor practice, the box "magically" disappeared for the next year's summer session, while the practice still took place. It isn't an "educrat" policy, but a state governmental problem. Believe me, almost every high school teacher that I know wishes this practice was abolished. Teaching at a school with roughly 85% of our students being minorities and roughly 80% close to or below the poverty line, thus receiving free or reduced lunch cost, there is likely grade inflation. But it also goes on at the "lily-white" rich kids school. I agree that it is a problem. And yes, in California, the system is out of control, and there is a general disconnect with reality. The problem is that the people making the decisions regarding education policy (our wonderful elected officials) have (with few exceptions) little to no classroom or education experience. How many businesses would be successful operating under this model?
Please don't blame it on the unions. I am not a union soldier by any means, but they do have a place to protect good teachers, and I have witnessed and experienced first hand rogue administrators who have tried to "mess with" teachers who had the audacity to disagree with one of the administrator's edicts. I recall a former administrator who declared in front of staff, "I don't care what Ed. Code says. I AM ED CODE!"
Lastly, I don't agree that the system needs to be changed, but it certainly needs to be fixed. And I am willing to bet that the vast majority of teachers would agree with that statement.
Dom'n'Vin'sDad;
Thanks for the reply; In response:
1. Supply and Demand forces should be used, at some level, at schools, imo. In the past couple of States I've lived in, the State Schools (not including the private colleges) were graduating 3-4+ elementary school teacher for every opening that was available. The numbers for the sciences and math were much smaller and closer to 1-1. We can agree to disagree about the practice of paying all teacher's on the same scale, I just think it creates far more problems than it solves.
2. NYC is currently spending over $300 million per year to pay school teachers to stay at home and not work. They don't want them in the classroom and the tenure system does not allow their removal. This is well documented, you can google it if you want. Some States the tenure rules are stricter than others.
3. You did make one good point about coaches. In my current State of Kentucky, the teacher's union negogiated a deal in that all coaches must be current active teachers. In other States, this is not the case. Colorado had a system similiar to CA where the school could hire outside people to come in and coach, a much better system, imo. Here, and in other similiar states, coaches are hired on their coaching abilities, not their teaching abilities. I can literally tell horror stories of coaches in the classrooms. What do you do with a coach that majored in consumer studies? Most often they are put where they don't belong!
4. My last comment will be on the education side. My first wife was a teacher, and the comments she made 35+ years ago are the same as I hear from today's grad. The MAE programs are a complete waste of time and money for the teachers. One's comment was that there is absolutely no exhange of knowledge during the entire program. The programs are there and mandated to give people with ph.Ds in Ed a job! So touting teachers having a Masters Degree doesn't go far with much of the population. I've seen States accept "self improvement" classes such as yoga and ball room dancing as 3 hour credit programs for their Rank 1 certification. This varies from State to State, but why a history teacher would get credit toward higher pay for taking ballroom dancing is mystifiying. IMO, for high school and probably even Jr. high, the teachers should be getting masters in thier area of work ie, history, english, math, chemistry, etc. not MAEs. Some graduate programs allow up to six hours of outside specialty work to be included, so if those are ed classes that's OK, but not 30 hours of ed classes!
I believe that as long as the practice of social promotion continues, the education system cannot be fixed.
Thanks.
Thanks for the reply; In response:
1. Supply and Demand forces should be used, at some level, at schools, imo. In the past couple of States I've lived in, the State Schools (not including the private colleges) were graduating 3-4+ elementary school teacher for every opening that was available. The numbers for the sciences and math were much smaller and closer to 1-1. We can agree to disagree about the practice of paying all teacher's on the same scale, I just think it creates far more problems than it solves.
2. NYC is currently spending over $300 million per year to pay school teachers to stay at home and not work. They don't want them in the classroom and the tenure system does not allow their removal. This is well documented, you can google it if you want. Some States the tenure rules are stricter than others.
3. You did make one good point about coaches. In my current State of Kentucky, the teacher's union negogiated a deal in that all coaches must be current active teachers. In other States, this is not the case. Colorado had a system similiar to CA where the school could hire outside people to come in and coach, a much better system, imo. Here, and in other similiar states, coaches are hired on their coaching abilities, not their teaching abilities. I can literally tell horror stories of coaches in the classrooms. What do you do with a coach that majored in consumer studies? Most often they are put where they don't belong!
4. My last comment will be on the education side. My first wife was a teacher, and the comments she made 35+ years ago are the same as I hear from today's grad. The MAE programs are a complete waste of time and money for the teachers. One's comment was that there is absolutely no exhange of knowledge during the entire program. The programs are there and mandated to give people with ph.Ds in Ed a job! So touting teachers having a Masters Degree doesn't go far with much of the population. I've seen States accept "self improvement" classes such as yoga and ball room dancing as 3 hour credit programs for their Rank 1 certification. This varies from State to State, but why a history teacher would get credit toward higher pay for taking ballroom dancing is mystifiying. IMO, for high school and probably even Jr. high, the teachers should be getting masters in thier area of work ie, history, english, math, chemistry, etc. not MAEs. Some graduate programs allow up to six hours of outside specialty work to be included, so if those are ed classes that's OK, but not 30 hours of ed classes!
I believe that as long as the practice of social promotion continues, the education system cannot be fixed.
Thanks.
Sandy, I wish that we could sit down over a couple of glasses of wine and have a deep discussion of these issues. Discourse through an internet bulletin board is so inefficient for this kind of conversation.
I'm going to reply when I have a bit more time. Social promotion is far more prevalent in younger grades. I just talked to my wife about this. Her reply in brief was, 'just think about the impact of a 12-year old boy in a class with 9-year old girls.' And think of the impact on both of them. It gets complicated.
Anyway, that'll be our starting point.
I'm going to reply when I have a bit more time. Social promotion is far more prevalent in younger grades. I just talked to my wife about this. Her reply in brief was, 'just think about the impact of a 12-year old boy in a class with 9-year old girls.' And think of the impact on both of them. It gets complicated.
Anyway, that'll be our starting point.
quote:Originally posted by Dom'n'Vin'sDad:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
"irregardless"
Teacher pet-peeve alert!!!
And I apologize about de-railing the thread and not coming back sooner to discuss some of the complete and total misconceptions (and just plainly stupid statments) that people have regarding teachers.
THANK YOU for calling me on this... Can't believe I still make this mistake on occasion.
quote:Immediate gratification is so much more practical and important than an indeterminate future.
This might just be the single greatest sentence ever posted on these boards.
Absolutely brilliant!
Seaquam;
I look forward to your comments. Perhaps we should move them to DoubleD's thread on education. I plan to post some thoughts there later this evening.
Concerning social promotion and your comments. I did not attend a one room school house, but my parents and grandparents, etc. did. Having 12 year old boys in the same classroom as 9 year old girls was a common occurence for years during our history. We didn't have social promotion in our rural school and in my 8th grade class, of mostly 13-14 year olds, we did have one boy age 16, along with a couple of 15 year olds. He was slow (obviously) and had little, if any, impact on the girls or boys in the class.
Oh, for your comments, I am not a self-esteem trumps all type guys!
I look forward to your comments. Perhaps we should move them to DoubleD's thread on education. I plan to post some thoughts there later this evening.
Concerning social promotion and your comments. I did not attend a one room school house, but my parents and grandparents, etc. did. Having 12 year old boys in the same classroom as 9 year old girls was a common occurence for years during our history. We didn't have social promotion in our rural school and in my 8th grade class, of mostly 13-14 year olds, we did have one boy age 16, along with a couple of 15 year olds. He was slow (obviously) and had little, if any, impact on the girls or boys in the class.
Oh, for your comments, I am not a self-esteem trumps all type guys!
Did I miss something? The entire thread on Education disappeared!
Haven't even seen Squires delete a thread on education!!!
Haven't even seen Squires delete a thread on education!!!
I was wondering the same thing. Anything juicy?
quote:Originally posted by jburman82:
As some of you on the board know, I have a stutter.
Jack-
I look forward to hearing more about your time in the military the next time we share a glass of wine.
Fwiw, when I met you, it wasn't your stutter that bothered me, it was your flip-flops.
quote:Originally posted by DoktaP:
Am I missing something here? There's a problem with any thread when the topic is clothing and people are feeling insulted. I will drink with Jack, or any other board member that I have had the pleasure of meeting, in jeans, T-shirts and sandals. At most restaurants that I frequent, my money looks like everyone elses. At my house, I dress as I feel comfortable, and my guests are welcome without a dress code.
I like your style, DoktaP.
quote:Originally posted by gigabit:quote:Originally posted by jburman82:
As some of you on the board know, I have a stutter.
Jack-
I look forward to hearing more about your time in the military the next time we share a glass of wine.
Fwiw, when I met you, it wasn't your stutter that bothered me, it was your flip-flops.
Airborne (JB, not me obviously as I am a wuss)
Have avoided this thread. The older I get, the less I care what anyone else thinks and the less interested I am in formality. As someone who has to wear a suit and tie daily, I have no interest in putting them on away from the office unless absolutely necessary. With that said, I do attempt to dress to what is acceptable and would not show up in a t-shirt and jeans to a formal restaurant or one with a jacket and tie requirement - although I may not put a tie on and may wear an alternative albeit sylish jacket rather than a blazer or suit jacket.
One of the reasons I love Key West as there is no place in town I can't show up in flip flops if I feel like it (which is most of the time, who am I kidding, all of the time).
Also, without making any value judgments or personal criticism, as a general rule, I think most people would find anyone who uses the work "bespoke" to be a wee bit pretentious.
quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Also, without making any value judgments or personal criticism, as a general rule, I think most people would find anyone who uses the work "bespoke" to be a wee bit pretentious.
Seriously? If you owned a yacht and called it as such, wouldn't it be a little harsh to refer to you as prententious because you simply don't call it a boat? You use the word bespoke because that is what it is, the same as a yacht is a yacht. Unbelievable.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Also, without making any value judgments or personal criticism, as a general rule, I think most people would find anyone who uses the work "bespoke" to be a wee bit pretentious.
Seriously? If you owned a yacht and called it as such, wouldn't it be a little harsh to refer to you as prententious because you simply don't call it a boat? You use the word bespoke because that is what it is, the same as a yacht is a yacht. Unbelievable.
I call my tonka truck a bentley.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Also, without making any value judgments or personal criticism, as a general rule, I think most people would find anyone who uses the work "bespoke" to be a wee bit pretentious.
Seriously? If you owned a yacht and called it as such, wouldn't it be a little harsh to refer to you as prententious because you simply don't call it a boat? You use the word bespoke because that is what it is, the same as a yacht is a yacht. Unbelievable.
I think how people phrase things is also a regional phenomenon. I grew up up in a small town in Texas but was educated and trained in Boston and New York. I have seen both sides of the fence.
A good (and wealthy) friend here in Houston owns a sprawling ranch with lakes, deer, 2 story ranch home with pool. He calls it the farm. That's just how he is and no doubt is attributed to his upbringing.
I find that those who live in big metropolitan cities to use different terminology - some see it as pretentious, I see it as a regional difference in language.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
Seriously? If you owned a yacht and called it as such, wouldn't it be a little harsh to refer to you as prententious
I know several owners of boats that are certainly in "yacht" territory size/displacement-wise. I honestly cannot ever remember any of them refering to their craft as yachts. Not once. They almost always refer to them as "the boat".
PH
Actually, I know plenty of gents who have their suits custom tailored too. I don't think I've ever heard the term bespoke used other than in writing. It's kind of like the PhD who insists on being addressed as "Doctor." It does come off just a little snooty. My 2¢.
PH
PH
quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Have avoided this thread. The older I get, the less I care what anyone else thinks and the less interested I am in formality. As someone who has to wear a suit and tie daily, I have no interest in putting them on away from the office unless absolutely necessary. With that said, I do attempt to dress to what is acceptable and would not show up in a t-shirt and jeans to a formal restaurant or one with a jacket and tie requirement - although I may not put a tie on and may wear an alternative albeit sylish jacket rather than a blazer or suit jacket.
One of the reasons I love Key West as there is no place in town I can't show up in flip flops if I feel like it (which is most of the time, who am I kidding, all of the time).
Also, without making any value judgments or personal criticism, as a general rule, I think most people would find anyone who uses the work "bespoke" to be a wee bit pretentious.
You know, in some circles using the words "albeit" and "pretentious" in the same conversation would be considered a wee bit show-offy.
Well, either that or just really, really impressive.
quote:Originally posted by PurpleHaze:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
Seriously? If you owned a yacht and called it as such, wouldn't it be a little harsh to refer to you as prententious
I know several owners of boats that are certainly in "yacht" territory size/displacement-wise. I honestly cannot ever remember any of them refering to their craft as yachts. Not once. They almost always refer to them as "the boat".
PH
+1
quote:Originally posted by PurpleHaze:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
Seriously? If you owned a yacht and called it as such, wouldn't it be a little harsh to refer to you as prententious
I know several owners of boats that are certainly in "yacht" territory size/displacement-wise. I honestly cannot ever remember any of them refering to their craft as yachts. Not once. They almost always refer to them as "the boat".
PH
And however they want to refer to their yacht, that is their business... Whether they want to call it a yacht or a boat or the SS Minnow, I don't care, and I certainly wouldn't call them pretentious if they referred to it as a yacht. The same as I wouldn't call someone pretentious for saying they had a bottle of 61 Mouton in their cellar as opposed to merely a "bottle of grapes."
As I said, for a group that doesn't want to be judged based on their attire, they sure have a lot of strong opinions of others based merely on how they refer to their attire.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
And however they want to refer to their yacht, that is their business... Whether they want to call it a yacht or a boat or the SS Minnow, I don't care, and I certainly wouldn't call them pretentious if they referred to it as a yacht. The same as I wouldn't call someone pretentious for saying they had a bottle of 61 Mouton in their cellar as opposed to merely a "bottle of grapes."
TPE - I think you're missing the point. No one is questioning anyone's right to call their boat whatever they want. And if you don't find the term yacht pretentious sounding:
"I think I'll spend the afternoon on my yacht."
or the term bespoke used in this context:
"Nice suit, TPE!"
"Thanks, it's bespoke."
then that is also your right. My yacht owning friends would say something like, "I'm headed to the boat slip. My dingy needs a little attention. Or, "Thanks for the compliment on the suit. I've got a great tailor on East 42nd street who makes them for me.
Just because a term is accurate doesn't mean it doesn't carry the air of elitism. Both bespoke, and yacht when used by the posssessor of these things comes off a little snooty. It just does.
and who, exactly is this "group" you speak of regarding attire and judgement. I've read a pretty varying set of opinions in this thread. Do tell!! Am I in it??
PH
quote:Originally posted by Seaquam:quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
Have avoided this thread. The older I get, the less I care what anyone else thinks and the less interested I am in formality. As someone who has to wear a suit and tie daily, I have no interest in putting them on away from the office unless absolutely necessary. With that said, I do attempt to dress to what is acceptable and would not show up in a t-shirt and jeans to a formal restaurant or one with a jacket and tie requirement - although I may not put a tie on and may wear an alternative albeit sylish jacket rather than a blazer or suit jacket.
One of the reasons I love Key West as there is no place in town I can't show up in flip flops if I feel like it (which is most of the time, who am I kidding, all of the time).
Also, without making any value judgments or personal criticism, as a general rule, I think most people would find anyone who uses the work "bespoke" to be a wee bit pretentious.
You know, in some circles using the words "albeit" and "pretentious" in the same conversation would be considered a wee bit show-offy.
Well, either that or just really, really impressive.
Guilty as charged
quote:Originally posted by PurpleHaze:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
And however they want to refer to their yacht, that is their business... Whether they want to call it a yacht or a boat or the SS Minnow, I don't care, and I certainly wouldn't call them pretentious if they referred to it as a yacht. The same as I wouldn't call someone pretentious for saying they had a bottle of 61 Mouton in their cellar as opposed to merely a "bottle of grapes."
TPE - I think you're missing the point. No one is questioning anyone's right to call their boat whatever they want. And if you don't find the term yacht pretentious sounding:
"I think I'll spend the afternoon on my yacht."
or the term bespoke used in this context:
"Nice suit, TPE!"
"Thanks, it's bespoke."
then that is also your right. My yacht owning friends would say something like, "I'm headed to the boat slip. My dingy needs a little attention. Or, "Thanks for the compliment on the suit. I've got a great tailor on East 42nd street who makes them for me.
Just because a term is accurate doesn't mean it doesn't carry the air of elitism. Both bespoke, and yacht when used by the posssessor of these things comes off a little snooty. It just does.
and who, exactly is this "group" you speak of regarding attire and judgement. I've read a pretty varying set of opinions in this thread. Do tell!! Am I in it??
PH
I think using language that's specific to clothing in a discussion of clothing is appropriate. Even the original subject line used "Attire" instead of "clothes"; is that pretentious?
We discuss wine here often. We use words such as "bouquet" to mean smell, and "finish" to mean aftertaste. Is that pretentious? I'm guessing to a casual observer it might be so. But it's the language of the topic of discussion. There are other examples as well.
I think "bespoke" is part of the vocabulary of clothing. Maybe dropping a comment about "my new bespoke suit" out of the blue would be pretentious, but I don't think it is here.
It's all about context, no?
Spot-on post, PH!
(I hope that doesn't come across hoyty-toyty in any way)
(I hope that doesn't come across hoyty-toyty in any way)
quote:Originally posted by Seaquam:
It's all about context, no?
100% correct. That's why the use of a term like bespoke, at least outside a very knowledgeable group of clothes horses SOUNDS pretentious. Just like the term bouquet, used at a NASCAR race to describe the aroma of a Bud light would probably draw a few sidelong glances.
PH
quote:Originally posted by PurpleHaze:
Just like the term bouquet, used at a NASCAR race to describe the aroma of a Bud light would probably draw a few sidelong glances.
And possibly an ass kicking.
quote:Originally posted by PurpleHaze:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
And however they want to refer to their yacht, that is their business... Whether they want to call it a yacht or a boat or the SS Minnow, I don't care, and I certainly wouldn't call them pretentious if they referred to it as a yacht. The same as I wouldn't call someone pretentious for saying they had a bottle of 61 Mouton in their cellar as opposed to merely a "bottle of grapes."
TPE - I think you're missing the point. No one is questioning anyone's right to call their boat whatever they want. And if you don't find the term yacht pretentious sounding:
"I think I'll spend the afternoon on my yacht."
or the term bespoke used in this context:
"Nice suit, TPE!"
"Thanks, it's bespoke."
then that is also your right. My yacht owning friends would say something like, "I'm headed to the boat slip. My dingy needs a little attention. Or, "Thanks for the compliment on the suit. I've got a great tailor on East 42nd street who makes them for me.
Just because a term is accurate doesn't mean it doesn't carry the air of elitism. Both bespoke, and yacht when used by the posssessor of these things comes off a little snooty. It just does.
and who, exactly is this "group" you speak of regarding attire and judgement. I've read a pretty varying set of opinions in this thread. Do tell!! Am I in it??
PH
Bespoke may carry an air of elitism, but so does drinking 61 Mouton, wouldn't you agree? If you were to say you are going to take your Porsche out for a nice drive with the wife, wouldn't I be a little harsh for saying, it's just a car? You paid the money for a Porsche, and there is value in that brand, so call it what it is... It was your money! And I am not a label-whore... You can ask Winetarelli, who complimented me on my attire at the offline, and I didn't say, "Thanks, it's so-and-so." I simply said, "Thank you very much!"
As I stated earlier, the only reason I have had my suits custom-made is because I have a very difficult time finding suits off the rack that fit my body proportionally, and the ones that do fit off the rack, the price is the same if not less to have it custom-made. If I could find a suit at The Men's Warehouse that fits as well as a custom-made suit, I would buy it, the same as if I could find something that tastes as good as 78 DRC for the price of Yellow Tail. Unfortunately, I can't, so I have to pony up the cash.
The reason I guess I am so passionate about this particular topic is because people keep saying "don't judge me, don't judge me!" Simply put, that is BS. This forum is one of the most opinionated, passionate, and particular groups of people one could come across- AND I LOVE THAT! People have varying opinions on Bordeaux vs. CA Cab, Australian, Italian and Young v. Old, and there are plenty of opinions and judgments made against others based on what they purchase or drink...
But when it comes to attire, all of a sudden, everyone is judgment-free? People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you know what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing? Is it simply because your value judgment does not align with that other person's? In that case, the "don't judge me" argument is hollow and hypocritical.
quote:Originally posted by Seaquam:
It's all about context, no?
"My Dicky really could use a good pressing"
Yeah, I totally see what you mean, Seaquam.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you no what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing?
I'm not quite in agreement there, TPE. Of course, if someone was passionately into 2-buck Chuck than it is highly unlikely that they would want to hang out with alot of the people on this forum. They just wouldn't be that keen on the details of wine that we love to discuss. That said I do feel the need to claify that the offlines are very very few that I run into situations of anyone feeling that someone brought an 'inferior' bottle to the offline. While some in life are certainly more financially capable of supplying more expensive bottles of wine. If someone brings a well made wine...period....they are just as welcomed into the group as the other. Actually, I've found that it is not the wine, but indeed the person, that is welcomed into the group. Who they are, their interests, their humor, their outlooks. These are what most find attractive.
My observation.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you know what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing?
TPE:
I don't disagree with much of what you have had to say on this thread. But isn't there a diference between judging someone by their actions (bringing 2 buck chuck) vs. by their appearance (attire, race, etc)? I guess you could make the staement that we shouldn't be judging people at all, but that would never happen around here.
FWIW, we have had a similar off-line situation down here. It wasn't pretty.
Doh! Just noticed KSC02's post. Beat me to the "post now" button!
quote:Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you know what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing?
TPE:
I don't disagree with much of what you have had to say on this thread. But isn't there a diference between judging someone by their actions (bringing 2 buck chuck) vs. by their appearance (attire, race, etc)? I guess you could make the staement that we shouldn't be judging people at all, but that would never happen around here.
FWIW, we have had a similar off-line situation down here. It wasn't pretty.
Doh! Just noticed KSC02's post. Beat me to the "post now" button!
I am glad you bring this up, and the answer is No, I don't think there is a difference between someone's actions and attire. Race is completely different from the other two. The whole argument has revolved around one's comfort in wearing cargo shorts, sandals, tank tops, etc at nice restaurants. Couldn't I just as easily say I don't feel comfortable spending more than $5 for wine. To me maybe wine just isn't that important. However, whatever anyone else wants to bring, be my guest. When you are getting dressed, that is an action in and of itself, no?
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:quote:Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you know what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing?
TPE:
I don't disagree with much of what you have had to say on this thread. But isn't there a diference between judging someone by their actions (bringing 2 buck chuck) vs. by their appearance (attire, race, etc)? I guess you could make the staement that we shouldn't be judging people at all, but that would never happen around here.
FWIW, we have had a similar off-line situation down here. It wasn't pretty.
Doh! Just noticed KSC02's post. Beat me to the "post now" button!
I am glad you bring this up, and the answer is No, I don't think there is a difference between someone's actions and attire. Race is completely different from the other two. The whole argument has revolved around one's comfort in wearing cargo shorts, sandals, tank tops, etc at nice restaurants. Couldn't I just as easily say I don't feel comfortable spending more than $5 for wine. To me maybe wine just isn't that important. However, whatever anyone else wants to bring, be my guest. When you are getting dressed, that is an action in and of itself, no?
I can see your point, but I think that we will have to respectfully agree to disagree. I tend to subscribe to the actions speak louder than words camp. Or in this case, actions speak louder that attire.
quote:Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:quote:Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you know what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing?
TPE:
I don't disagree with much of what you have had to say on this thread. But isn't there a diference between judging someone by their actions (bringing 2 buck chuck) vs. by their appearance (attire, race, etc)? I guess you could make the staement that we shouldn't be judging people at all, but that would never happen around here.
FWIW, we have had a similar off-line situation down here. It wasn't pretty.
Doh! Just noticed KSC02's post. Beat me to the "post now" button!
I am glad you bring this up, and the answer is No, I don't think there is a difference between someone's actions and attire. Race is completely different from the other two. The whole argument has revolved around one's comfort in wearing cargo shorts, sandals, tank tops, etc at nice restaurants. Couldn't I just as easily say I don't feel comfortable spending more than $5 for wine. To me maybe wine just isn't that important. However, whatever anyone else wants to bring, be my guest. When you are getting dressed, that is an action in and of itself, no?
I can see your point, but I think that we will have to respectfully agree to disagree. I tend to ascribe to the actions speak louder than words camp. Or in this case, actions speak louder that attire.
I would say far more people care about their attire than they do about wine. For most people, they couldn't tell the difference between a 2 Buck Chuck and a Chateau Lafite. So if you were to bring them 2 Buck Chuck, they would probably be pretty happy, and it would be drunk at some time. Yet these same people can tell the difference between a Gucci and an LV bag, and if you were to give them a Kirkland purse from Costco, they would never be caught dead in it. So again, I can't see the difference between the action of bringing a certain wine and attire... Especially when most people would be happy with the wine choice.
quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:quote:Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:quote:Originally posted by Red guy in a blue state:quote:Originally posted by TPEwinedrinker:
People would certainly judge me if I showed up at the next offline, and brought a bottle of 2 Buck Chuck for everyone to sip on while I poured glass after glass from everyone's first-growth Bordeaux, Beaucastel and Rayas Reserve. You can be certain I wouldn't get invited back to drink with that group again, because you would have made a judgment about me based on what I contributed, and you know what- YOU WOULD BE RIGHT! So what is the difference when someone judges you based on what you are wearing?
TPE:
I don't disagree with much of what you have had to say on this thread. But isn't there a diference between judging someone by their actions (bringing 2 buck chuck) vs. by their appearance (attire, race, etc)? I guess you could make the staement that we shouldn't be judging people at all, but that would never happen around here.
FWIW, we have had a similar off-line situation down here. It wasn't pretty.
Doh! Just noticed KSC02's post. Beat me to the "post now" button!
I am glad you bring this up, and the answer is No, I don't think there is a difference between someone's actions and attire. Race is completely different from the other two. The whole argument has revolved around one's comfort in wearing cargo shorts, sandals, tank tops, etc at nice restaurants. Couldn't I just as easily say I don't feel comfortable spending more than $5 for wine. To me maybe wine just isn't that important. However, whatever anyone else wants to bring, be my guest. When you are getting dressed, that is an action in and of itself, no?
I can see your point, but I think that we will have to respectfully agree to disagree. I tend to ascribe to the actions speak louder than words camp. Or in this case, actions speak louder that attire.
I would say far more people care about their attire than they do about wine. For most people, they couldn't tell the difference between a 2 Buck Chuck and a Chateau Lafite. So if you were to bring them 2 Buck Chuck, they would probably be pretty happy, and it would be drunk at some time. Yet these same people can tell the difference between a Gucci and an LV bag, and if you were to give them a Kirkland purse from Costco, they would never be caught dead in it. So again, I can't see the difference between the action of bringing a certain wine and attire... Especially when most people would be happy with the wine choice.
Again, I see your point, but I still think there is a difference between judging an action (gift of wine, purse, etc) vs. jusdging someone on based only on appearance. FWIW, I have been give 2 buck chuck as a gift (from people who knew I liked wine) and appreciated the sentiment.
On a slight tangent, what about overwhelming use of perfume/fragrances, body odor, etc. That reflects considerably less respect for fellow diners than one's clothes choices in my opinion.
quote:Originally posted by Jcocktosten:
On a slight tangent, what about overwhelming use of perfume/fragrances, body odor, etc. That reflects considerably less respect for fellow diners than one's clothes choices in my opinion.
Absolutely, positively, and I stated that earlier as well. Nothing worse than going to a mall and seeing an Abercrombie across the way from the food court... Ghengis Khan's chow mein tastes like A&F Fierce.
Thanks for pouring gas on another fire thread, JC!