Relatives who just don't get it

[charis]

You don’t get to say “yawn” when you’re clearly the one carrying a chip on your shoulder.

Former SAHM who also didn't read these posts as being negative to SAHPs.  I will also say that maybe I was weird, but I had plenty of free time when I stayed home and have never understood the busy-ness that so many people describe even though I did chase around two children and did volunteer work. I went back to work because I was bored...maybe I was doing it wrong.

Whatever. (Yawn). Hope you get all the thumbs up that you're looking for from the other posters.

Yeah, no.  Get yourself together and stop taking it out on everyone else.

[Fiscal_Hawk]

Had a relative remark over Christmas that it would probably take longer to pay off the CC after this year's Christmas than last years. She then said that last year the CC wasn't paid off until October!

My first thought was how much did you spend on presents?

[MgoSam]

Had a relative remark over Christmas that it would probably take longer to pay off the CC after this year's Christmas than last years. She then said that last year the CC wasn't paid off until October!

My first thought was how much did you spend on presents?

A second thought could be, how much of a balance do you normally keep? I highly doubt someone would carry a large balance for several months solely on account for Christmas. There's a good chance they've been stringing things along.

[Dave1442397]

Interesting to see everyone's differing definitions of "busybody".

My definition of "busybody" is to compare the action / peron up against an example from my childhood.    She was the neighbor on the corner, that knew immediately when you received a home delivery (furniture, appliance box), or a visitor just left, because she watched out the window, and came over within 1 hour with a pretense ("I have an extra zucchini for you", "Do you have any coffee? I'm out..."), simply to scope out what you just bought, who that person was, and why.

We had a neighbor like that right across the street from us. Back in those days, people rarely bought TVs or VCRs, and would just rent them month-to-month. My friend's family owned an appliance store, so as a lark I grabbed empty Sony TV and VCR boxes and propped them up against the garbage cans on garbage day. Then, we
 purposely never mentioned it and waited for the neighbor to crack. He lasted around six weeks, at which point he just had to ask us how we liked our new TV. Us: "What TV?". And then he didn't know what to say, so changed the subject.

[Imma]

I help my sister out with her taxes. She asked me if I earned more or less than her, and I answered in all honesty I earned a bit more (but not a lot).

My sister has the kind of job that sounds really fancy (she deals with famous people and visits nice places and is travelling a lot). I work in finance in IT and live a pretty frugal life - no car, non-fancy house, boring clothes, I go home at 5. Over Christmas dinner my mum found it necessary to tell the whole family that my sister worked so hard and was paid so badly "even Imma gets paid more!"

I did tell her I only earned a bit more, not much, and she explicitly asked for it, but I guess she feels very sorry for herself that even a pauper like me earns more than her.

[Playing with Fire UK]

Over Christmas dinner my mum found it necessary to tell the whole family that my sister worked so hard and was paid so badly "even Imma gets paid more!"

How wildly and incredibly rude.

[Maenad]

DH had a family funeral this week and it reminded me of how brilliant he is to have learned from his parents' mistakes.

FIL decided a couple of years ago that he wanted to retire to Colorado. The right way to do this would be:
1. Research properties/rentals in the areas he wants to live in. Keep an ear to the ground as to how prices are moving.
2. Look over savings, determine how much he can get for his current house here.
3. Make sure all the numbers work out, put in some kind of earnest money on a place in CO.
4. Put house here up for sale, quit job, move to CO.

What does FIL do?
1. Decides he wants to live in CO (before pot was legalized there). Ignore impact of legalization on housing market, stick head in sand.
2. Quit job.
3. Sell home here.
4. Move out to CO and realize he can no longer afford anything other than a place a mile away from the Federal Supermax prison.
5. A couple of years later, remodel part of his house into a rental so that he has enough money to live off of.

Just a little more forethought and he would have been OK, but he tends to leap before he looks and he makes things harder on himself as a result.

BIL is a whole other story. His life of bad choices has resulted in him spending this past summer sleeping in his truck, homeless. He has his own small eBay business, since he "really likes working for himself", but it obviously isn't enough to actually support him. Since he's spent most of his adulthood mooching off of FIL I'm guessing he'll end up in CO as well. At least no one expects us to help him out.

[mustachepungoeshere]

Over Christmas dinner my mum found it necessary to tell the whole family that my sister worked so hard and was paid so badly "even Imma gets paid more!"

How wildly and incredibly rude.

Beat me to it, PFUK.

@Imma, it sounds like your sister would lord it over you however that conversation went. If she made more than you, you'd never hear the end of that either. I just can't believe your mother weighed in on this.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

[Just Joe]

Just another reason to keep your financial info all to yourself. ;)

[Imma]

Just another reason to keep your financial info all to yourself. ;)

I guess that's what I'm going to do from now on. It's a shame because as a family we've always been open about money and I'm really glad about that. I learned about things like investing and budgeting because my mum discussed these things openly with us (not giving us all the details, but explaining them in an age-appropriate way) and I guess because of that my siblings feel comfortable asking me to help them out with their taxes. In my s/o's family money is a huge taboo and I hate that.

I think in most families people are cast in a certain role at a young age and it's hard to get out of that. My younger sister has always been the hardworking spendypants career girl and I have always been the frugal housewife with a deadend job. I think many people underestimate my job (we never talk about it, they barely know what I do) and overestimate hers. I don't show off my money, but at least I know I'll retire at some point. I already can't wait to announce that to my family :)

[Sun Hat]

Imma, I've never met you or your family, so my guess isn't an informed one, but I wonder if you're overlooking something in how your family sees you.
If you're the one that they turn to for tax help, it may be that they respect you and see you as the sensible one. If your sister has a high-paced job that comes with associating with rich people, she may feel pressured to spend in a way to keep similar appearances to them and feel stressed that she can't.

If your mom had the good financial sense to teach you about budgeting, she may be playing up the glamor in your sister's job to make her feel better about her life. I doubt that she would teach you about budgeting and consider you dull for being financially sensible. She probably just doesn't want to boast about your smart money skills around your sister, lest your sister feel badly. 

[Just Joe]

I already can't wait to announce that to my family :)

May your retirement be early, unexpected and cause much hilarious drama on their part. And you can smile all the way home.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

<snip>
However, If we look back to the original post that brought this all on, @TheGrimSqueaker was saying he has a nasty relative who judges his lifestyle, where due to her own personal circumstance cannot appreciate why TGS and fam choose to live that way. (TGS I think I summarized this sufficiently, but I don't want to put words in your mouth).

You paraphrased me accurately. Sorry for the delayed response; I have been distracted by a houseguest who flew out this morning. The visit was less painful than anticipated partly because, although I didn't achieve complete "Didn't-erot" during the visit, I successfully fended off most of the spending opportunities and the relative and I had long and meaningful discussions about financial priorities. This was possible due chiefly to my skill at making things ferment. Respect was exchanged. Nobody was fed to the Venomous Spaz Beast.

Having returned to this thread to discover the mess I made, I think I should probably do what I can to clean it up since it's fallout due to something I said.

I believe that what touched off the SAHM debate was my post in which I bitched about my well-heeled relative's lack of respect for my financial priorities. @jinga nation illustrated an example of divergent financial priorities involving two people who had exactly the same income and household expenditure (being a married couple) but radically different attitudes toward the appropriate use of money because only one half of the couple was actively involved in earning it. His example was not a criticism of the (generally successful) breadwinner/homemaker partnership but an example of how it can go badly wrong because of divergent financial perspectives and priorities between the partners which led to a very unhealthy, dysfunctional relationship characterized by mutual lack of respect.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

FIRE for many, if not most, people here means a life exactly as you describe, of unpaid work for themselves, their family and their wider community. Few people here would assume that no paid work means no life or no contribution to society. That's half the point of MMM!

Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.

It might be a good time to acknowledge that not all the activities people choose when FI (be it through inheritance, retirement, or partnership with a breadwinner) are productive or positive. Some things, such as personal education or travel, are neutral. They're a form of consumption that benefits nobody but the people who provide the products or services being consumed. Of greater concern are the people who engage in self-destructive behavior to the point where they undermine the financial well-being of their household and actually create financial or lifestyle problems for others. A problem gambler, for example, can easily fritter away what could otherwise be the nest egg that supports the next generation. Even just one spendthrift can plunge a household into bankruptcy-inducing levels of consumer debt.

[Imma]

Imma, I've never met you or your family, so my guess isn't an informed one, but I wonder if you're overlooking something in how your family sees you.
If you're the one that they turn to for tax help, it may be that they respect you and see you as the sensible one. If your sister has a high-paced job that comes with associating with rich people, she may feel pressured to spend in a way to keep similar appearances to them and feel stressed that she can't.

If your mom had the good financial sense to teach you about budgeting, she may be playing up the glamor in your sister's job to make her feel better about her life. I doubt that she would teach you about budgeting and consider you dull for being financially sensible. She probably just doesn't want to boast about your smart money skills around your sister, lest your sister feel badly.

I hope it's this, but I'm not sure. This isn't the first time similar things have happened but they are indeed very out of character for my mother. She's sensible with money and she's not a mean kind of person. She did work a similar job as my sister in her 20s and still feels to this day she was massively underpaid, so maybe she's projecting that on my sister.

I always feel like I'm considered to be the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative, but that could just as well be in my head.

[Just Joe]

I'll bet a bunch of us could say the same about feeling like the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative. Forget about it. Stay on your chosen mission to be self-sufficient and retire early.

I expect many of us will return to work to listen to coworkers describe their expensive holidays and all their travels. And then in a month or so they might start moaning about bills and credit cards. ;)

[Zamboni]

Just coming to vent. I have a relative who actually changes her voice tone when going into pathetic mode . . . she has a quite specific "you should feel sorry for me now" voice. I suppose lots of little kids have this type of whiny "feel sorry for me now" voice, but don't most people outgrow this? Seriously the most similar sounding voice I've heard this year was from the 4-year-old boy in the grocery checkout line appealing to his Mom in response to her rejection of his candy bar purchase request.

She uses the same odd voice for talking about "I'm injured" issues as she does for "I'm broke" issues. The thing is, when the thing she wants sympathy for is financial, which is usually is, I simply don't feel sorry for her. She made (and continues to make) a series of terrible choices regarding money over the course of her long life. Don't get me wrong: I won't let her starve. But unless it comes to that, she is going to have to figure it out. Using whiny-voice mode hoping I will volunteer to pay for xyz every time I talk with her is not going to work. I wonder if it works on anyone else in our extended family? Hmmmm.

[Megma]

Imma, I've never met you or your family, so my guess isn't an informed one, but I wonder if you're overlooking something in how your family sees you.
If you're the one that they turn to for tax help, it may be that they respect you and see you as the sensible one. If your sister has a high-paced job that comes with associating with rich people, she may feel pressured to spend in a way to keep similar appearances to them and feel stressed that she can't.

If your mom had the good financial sense to teach you about budgeting, she may be playing up the glamor in your sister's job to make her feel better about her life. I doubt that she would teach you about budgeting and consider you dull for being financially sensible. She probably just doesn't want to boast about your smart money skills around your sister, lest your sister feel badly.

I hope it's this, but I'm not sure. This isn't the first time similar things have happened but they are indeed very out of character for my mother. She's sensible with money and she's not a mean kind of person. She did work a similar job as my sister in her 20s and still feels to this day she was massively underpaid, so maybe she's projecting that on my sister.

I always feel like I'm considered to be the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative, but that could just as well be in my head.

I think I would stop doing her taxes Imma. This would have made me mad enough that I wouldn’t help her anymore. incidentally similar issues are why my mom doesn’t get told any financial details because she tells my sister, who has the world’s biggest mouth and not only tells the rest of the family but will make snarky comments.

[MgoSam]

Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.

I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

[MgoSam]

I see a lot of people booking hotel rooms for NYE. I can see some of the benefits (don't have to drive or use Lyft/Uber and you have a room and bed nearby if you're single and get lucky).

[ketchup]

My BIL spent $275 (with his ex/roommate - so not sure how it was divided) on a hotel night for new year's eve. They got a room and 2 drink tickets each for the party.  Paid with a CC and said he'll probably be paying it 'till his birthday in July.

Jesus, am I so out of touch? $275 sets this guy back by seven months!?

[aceyou]

I'll bet a bunch of us could say the same about feeling like the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative.

This.  That's the #1 reason this forum is so popular.  It's a place to hang out where talking about sensible/boring things is cool:)  In real life if I talk about IRA's, people look at me like I'm an alien.

[shelivesthedream]

Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.

I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

I was reading an autobiography the other day and in the 60s this man's friend was still putting "Gentleman" as his occupation on his passport. "Lady who lunches" is another good phrase, but I think a bit more derogatory than "gentleman of leisure".

[Imma]

I'll bet a bunch of us could say the same about feeling like the sensible, but plain, boring and uninteresting relative.

This.  That's the #1 reason this forum is so popular.  It's a place to hang out where talking about sensible/boring things is cool:)  In real life if I talk about IRA's, people look at me like I'm an alien.

True. That's why I like my volunteer job of filing taxes for members of my union so much. All my coworkers there are tax geeks too. Every january we have a few classes about this year's changes in the law and everyone's really excited for the new tax season. Very few people will understand that.

[Zamboni]

^wow. I hope she did not indulge him with "windshield money."

[Just Joe]

Perfect example, after talking about the hotel stay he talks about his suv needing a windshield because of a good size crack on it. But the windshield is $420(installed), he then asks his Mom (my mil), "How am I supposed to come up with that kind of money?

Just like everyone else: earn, save, etc.

[MgoSam]

Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.

I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

I was reading an autobiography the other day and in the 60s this man's friend was still putting "Gentleman" as his occupation on his passport. "Lady who lunches" is another good phrase, but I think a bit more derogatory than "gentleman of leisure".

Agreed, I feel that is horribly derogatory.

[shelivesthedream]

Interestingly, if my relative's branch of the family is any example, not being the person who generated the family's wealth never seems to translate into "nothing to do". They simply focus on things besides paid employment. It could be entertaining, art, fashion, academia, charitable ventures, a hobby business, or homemaking for someone who wants to expand the household wealth even more. These things often benefit the family unit and sometimes society overall.

I believe in the more aristocratic days in England they referred to men who came from family money and thus didn't need to get a paid job as "gentlemen of leisure."

I was reading an autobiography the other day and in the 60s this man's friend was still putting "Gentleman" as his occupation on his passport. "Lady who lunches" is another good phrase, but I think a bit more derogatory than "gentleman of leisure".

Agreed, I feel that is horribly derogatory.

Ive only ever heard people use it of themselves in a joking way (e.g. my mother, when she retired, said with relish "Now I can just be a lady who lunches!"...then proceeded to get politically active and take dance classes etc etc). So to me it falls into the category of "gentle ribbing" rather than "How dare you say that!"

[MgoSam]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

[shelivesthedream]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

[RetiredAt63]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

[RWD]

Over the holidays I had one relative tell me multiple times that I should reconsider retiring. This relative had only just started working again (financially unnecessary) after spending about three decades not employed and now thinks work is the best thing ever because it structures your day and gives you something to do, or whatever.

Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance. Also said they have no spare income to invest. And some of their sector mutual funds (in the same sector as their career) have actually somehow lost money despite how well the stock market has done as a whole... Oh yeah, and somehow they are also buying their kids cars too.

[MgoSam]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

[Zamboni]

Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist (but you probably already know this.) Does your relative not understand that the income of both parents is used to calculate the estimated family contribution on financial aid forms? Even if the parents are divorced and one parent is completely estranged from the child, it is very hard to get institutions to not count both parents' incomes in financial aid calculations.

[MgoSam]

Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist

Yeah that's my first impression of the comments. Also Ole Miss is a fine university, that's fine if anyone wants to send their kids to private schools as that is their right, I just find it funny when they complain as to their costs when there are fine institutions nearby that offer a similar education at a lower cost.

[ixtap]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.

[BDWW]

Another relative complained about the cost of sending their kids to private university and how it was unfair that minorities and divorced couples were getting more financial assistance.

Neither part of this claim about "minorities" and "divorced couples" is true, and the first part of it is additionally just plain racist (but you probably already know this.) Does your relative not understand that the income of both parents is used to calculate the estimated family contribution on financial aid forms? Even if the parents are divorced and one parent is completely estranged from the child, it is very hard to get institutions to not count both parents' incomes in financial aid calculations.

Except they are both true. FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.

[zolotiyeruki]

Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

[ixtap]

Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

https://privilegegrant.com

[Paul der Krake]

Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

https://privilegegrant.com

For those who may not be aware: the person behind this is a notorious troll who loves to piss off people on the left. This is one of his better ones.

[ixtap]

Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

https://privilegegrant.com

For those who may not be aware: the person behind this is a notorious troll who loves to piss off people on the left. This is one of his better ones.

True, but it is real and not the only one.

[Zamboni]

I'm going to ignore the troll and address the other comments.

Also worth pointing out that I've never heard of a scholarship specific to white males.  Females, sure.  Hispanic, black, native American, etc, sure.

Warning: thread tangent follows, is college financial aid fair?
tldr: white students still receive a disproportionate share of the aid money even now that whites are only about half of the overall college-aged population.

This is an awesome rebuttal. You do realize that, for most of modern history (until say the last 50 years, maximum), all college scholarships/assistantships/grants were specifically for white males? They didn't have to say that because, duh, everyone knew that only white males were suitable candidates. Maybe that's why you never heard of it? My own alma mater didn't even admit women until after I was born . . . it's a huge place, you've heard of it, and I'm not that old.

But, but, everything has changed! Now white students just can't get ahead?
Don't kid yourself: wealthy whites still get the majority of scholarships . . . I would place bet on this. This includes athletic and "merit" scholarships (the latter being given predominantly to students who had the privilege of attending "good schools," and don't pretend you don't know what that is code for. Wink wink people know what that means when they are shopping for a home.)

Now I know some of all y'all are going to fight me on the athletic scholarships thing. So, I did a little research, courtesy of the NCAA's own database. Would you believe they have it all set up so you can break it down by year and demographics? I did not exclude HBCU's (that was a choice in their query system for some reason . . . although they didn't give me a chance to exclude PWI's or other types of schools, but I digress.)

Anyway, whites make up just over half of the college-aged population. In 2016/17 (wow, recent data!), 65% of NCAA athletes are white. I can discuss why this is at length, but don't want to do a total thread highjack. 56% overall are male, just in case you were wondering. Not all of the athletes have "full rides" by any stretch of the imagine (well, except in the D1 "head count" sports), but athletic departments find a way to get "aid" to the athletes in the form of grants, even if it isn't formally an athletic scholarship . . . .

FAFSA only requires income from custodial parents (ie who ever had custody or whoever you lived with for more than half the year).

Additionally some grant money is given preference to minorities. ie if two candidates apply/qualify, the minority gets it.

Yes, but the individual schools will follow up and find out information for both parents if they have any way to get that information. This recently gave one of my friends fits, as her ex-husband provides no contribution at all, but the big universities were not buying it.

I don't even know what to say about that last statement . . . white fragility and the myth of reverse discrimination continues to amaze me.

[shelivesthedream]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

My favourite period of history is between the two world wars and you still read about women of independent means then.

[Playing with Fire UK]

In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.

[former player]

In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.

Closely related to "remittance man": an unsatisfactory male relative paid an allowance to go live in the colonies and not come back.

[shelivesthedream]

In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.

Closely related to "remittance man": an unsatisfactory male relative paid an allowance to go live in the colonies and not come back.

I have not heard that one before, but think it's fascinating. Thanks!

[BJacks]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.

The reason the girls couldn't inherit in Pride and Prejudice was because of an entail on the property, not because they were female. Anne DeBurg was the heir to Rosings Park which was a much larger and more valuable property and no one ever questioned her right despite her being described as sickly. Usually women were given money at their marriage (Georgiana had a 30,000 pound dowrey) rather than inheriting upon death. Harder to find people back then when they moved with their husbands etc.

[Pioneerw2b]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

That's a designation I applaud! Any idea what time era that term was used? I remember reading about women legally not be allowing to inherit wealth (part of the plot of "Pride and Prejudice" revolves around this), and I'm not sure when the law was finally changed.

That is untrue. There are women of independent means even in Pride and Prejudice, even Mrs. Bennett has a not inconsiderable sum, that just  won't mean much split between five daughters. However, estates were often entailed to male heirs, leaving gentlemen who did not manage to build wealth beyond the estate no means to provide anyone except the designated heir. They were basically custodians, obligated to pass the estate through a predetermined line.

Years ago, I watched a movie called The Buccaneers (British Drama). It shows the result of entailed estates when the heir basically has no more income. The male heir has a beautiful home and estate but cannot touch anything in it.... meaning he cannot sell furniture because it is not his.... SO in the movie, they look to American girls whose daddy's have made it big in railroads, oil, etc... and pursue them to marry so they can have their wife's money to live on..

[pachnik]

In my circle, "Gentleman of Leisure" isn't without a self-aggrandising or derogatory tone. It has connotations of being a playboy (not used as a compliment) or being the one paid off to not partake in the family business. Again, mostly used for fun or gentle mocking.

Closely related to "remittance man": an unsatisfactory male relative paid an allowance to go live in the colonies and not come back.

I have not heard that one before, but think it's fascinating. Thanks!

I live in a part of the world that had its share of remittance men.  Apparently, there were a lot of them in Duncan, B.C.  This is on Vancouver Island.  There were some also in the BC Interior and in Calgary, Alberta.   

They were pensioned off by wealth family members and sent to the colonies.  From what I've read, when WW1 broke out, they returned to Britain to fight in the war.

[Inaya]

I'm not English so I don't mean to speak to your country's culture. I'm not a fan of the term "lady who lunches," because I feel like it could severely diminish that lady's stature. Let's say the lady in question was an activist for underprivileged kids. If a newspaper were to interview her and address her as a "lady who lunches," her influence would likely decline. Then again perhaps I am overthinking this.

No no, I totally get that! But I just don't think anyone ever actually refers to anyone else as a lady who lunches any more. Like, ever. If they did, it would absolutely be belittling, but it's just not used, so people can use it of themselves as a joke.

Along with the gentleman of leisure was the woman of independent means.  She wasn't dependent on her husband/father/brother, she had her own money.

I may just have to put Woman of Independent Means on my business cards when I FIRE.