/lit/ - Literature

>>12155637
Erm, what did I actually say though? I don't think I mentioned any multi-billionaires. No, I know I didn't mention any. I don't know any.

> country club

What the fuck is that?

>blue collar

If stacking shelves at Sainsbury's isn't "blue collar", I don't know what is. Oh wait, he doesn't even live in the house or donate income for me or my brother any more. My mistake for including him in my ancestry. And my mum makes even less than him.

Not sure what you're trying to prove, because my parents are objectively working-class. No, I'm not homeless, though I suppose I could have been at one point. Thing is, not living in the pits of destitution does not negate my background. Most people in my primary and secondary schools were somehow better off than me. Not complaining, my mum was good with money, and it never seemed like a big deal. But you're barking up the wrong tree. What is it? You want to believe that Oxford is more exclusionary than it already is? That someone couldn't possibly prove themselves in an entrance test and interview? Because you could. It's only your attitude that is leaving you behind.

>>12155700
Nope, upper class is the landed gentry. People with genteel ancestry. Who will barely have to work a day in their lives, and will at least inherit a significant sum of money. Get your facts right.

My Oxfriends don't live in mansions.. just houses way nicer than I'd ever seen before, or even imagined desu.

My homefriends live with their parents, not having pursued higher education due to fucked up home lives. Obviously, Oxford admissions do not catch people like this, because they don't apply.. they don't have A-levels. Their economic background is not any better or worse than mine.

upper-middle-class. top lol.