OT: Status.

User Forum Topic
Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 23, 2012 - 9:59am

so lately I've been thinking about status, within groups, socially. Evidently, this is very important to human beings and primates too.

my kid was telling me about a film he saw in ap bio about baboons and status -- where the higher status baboons are actually healthier and have better developped genitalia as a result of their status.

Humans too are healthier if they have higher status. he mentioned a study among civil service workers that found that higher status civil servants were less sick and happier.

So, I look inward. What exactly is my status? Is it affecting me negatively? Am I trying to falsely display status in odd ways.

for instance...I think my interest in watches is all about perceived status. Kind of taken some of the fun out of it for me. Makes me feel like a baboon.

choice of profession--search for status--yes....not exclusively, but largely.

I suppose housing is also like that. Status displays. Kid says part of the social contract is we need to display our status, it's notenough just to have money or power. You have to let the others know you have the status.

We discussed whether being aware of this need for status wouldmake one's relative lack of status more bearable. We concluded no, that insight would not help make you feel any better about your crappy situation, status-wise.

I will admit, thinking about status, as we made the holdiay rounds, I was feeling like a fairly high status person among our friends and relatives.

And I admit, my feeling of status made me feel, well, kind of good. Relatively-speaking.

I am going to try to be more aware of how what I'm doing is influenced by my need to be perceived as having social status.

Submitted by moneymaker on November 23, 2012 - 11:46am.

Health care is more readily available to the "more statused" however I seem to recall quit a few well to do dying lately at relatively young ages, David Copley, Steve Jobs, pick anyone in Hollywood that has died young lately. So in my opinion being statused may actually make one more unhealthy due to obesity/drug use(yes even the legal kind) and bad habits such as drinking and smoking. Of course I could be wrong as I recall seeing a lot of obese people last time I was at Walmart.

Submitted by flyer on November 24, 2012 - 2:13am.

Interesting thoughts, squat.

We've talked a lot about this in our family also.

The short version of our discussions boil down to the fact that it seems most in our society mistakenly equate status with "perceived," not "real" wealth--regardless of one's profession, social standing etc.

Although I wasn't raised to discuss politics or money in polite company, and I know Dad wouldn't approve, it's still very interesting to casually ask someone about their net worth, or mention that the stats show only 5% of the US population have "investable assets" over $1M.

I've only done this a few times, yet, amazingly, the people with the "real" net worth were extremely open, the "fakers"--not so much. Extremely revealing.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 9:18am.

my 1989 honda civic was disturbing to others because it rejected cars as status indicators.

I wasn't playing along.

my new honda accord doesn't really indicate high status, but at least it's playing the game.

Submitted by ocrenter on November 24, 2012 - 9:54am.

moneymaker wrote:
Health care is more readily available to the "more statused" however I seem to recall quit a few well to do dying lately at relatively young ages, David Copley, Steve Jobs, pick anyone in Hollywood that has died young lately. So in my opinion being statused may actually make one more unhealthy due to obesity/drug use(yes even the legal kind) and bad habits such as drinking and smoking. Of course I could be wrong as I recall seeing a lot of obese people last time I was at Walmart.

Status and health are related, but access the health care plays a minor role.

Just as scaredy's kid learned in school with apes, it is ultimately access to resources.

The higher status apes have access to plenty of food and the best shelter. This improves their health. For us, it is the access to healthy food that set the upper class apart from the lower class. For the higher class, you have the jimbos and the sprouts and the trader joes where whole wheat bread and brown rice and low salt items and fresh lean meat are the rule. For the lower class you have 99cent stores with white bread and high salt processed meat items and high fat snacks that are filling, cheap, and more addictive.

The lower class usually do not have leasure time to exercise as many have 2 jobs or multiple part time job, while the upper class do have more ability to manage their own time and find time to exercise. To the working poor, exercise seems foolish after 16 hours of cleaning toilets and mopping the floor. Replenishing the caloric supply, actually over replenishing with a meal at over 2000 calories all at less than $5 seem like the logical thing to do.

The dietary differences and approach to exercise ultimately is the difference between the various status groups.

As for access to health care, please remember Steve Jobs managed to survive for 3 years AFTER the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, that itself is a feat related to access to health care. Your average Jose would be lucky to survive 3 months from the diagnosis if he was even diagnosed at all.

Submitted by Blogstar on November 24, 2012 - 10:05am.

I am going to squat 250 in a week or two and then my status will be secure. Actually, since I almost weight that much it won't be, so I'll buy a new watch. Of course, I can't afford much of a watch, so I'll get my kid to get better grades than your kid.

True, status seeking, or at least an attempt at pecking order status recognition is ubiquitous and probably instinctual. However, I like it when top dogs, like you squat250,manage to be pretty cool and interesting people despite all that.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 12:01pm.

among squatters, 250lbs affords literally zero status. it's almost zero. if I were hanging out wiht squatters, i would be redfaced at my incredible weakness.

my watch is too cheap and ordinary to give me any real status. I need more. I'd like a watch that signals extreme perfection.

This is that watch:

http://www.watchbuys.com/store/pc/Dornbl...

sure, it's $4,000, and nobody would really know it wasn't a $100 watch probably, but it just screams out to me that I am a superior status human.

i asked a friend about purse status. she says purses do indeed indicate status today. she says in the old days purses reflected personality, not status.

she says there is a website where you can rent purses to pretend to have status for an event. I would not be happy renting that watch. I have to possess it as mine.

my wife carries a hippie cloth purse witha peace sign on it. I think it's from guatemala. I asked my friend what that meant. she says it means she is refusing to play.

I think it's my kids that have been giving me the status feeling these holidays. I feel very reproductively successful.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 12:04pm.

http://365daysofsquatting.blogspot.com/

now here's a SQUATTER.

squatted every days for a year with heavy weight on the bar!

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 12:13pm.

http://www.archimede-watches.com/archime...

this is my plain little watch, in case you're interested.

occasionally I do have someone comment that i have a cool looking watch. I light up when i am praised for it.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 12:35pm.

Blogstar wrote:
I am going to squat 250 in a week or two and then my status will be secure. Actually, since I almost weight that much it won't be, so I'll buy a new watch. Of course, I can't afford much of a watch, so I'll get my kid to get better grades than your kid.

True, status seeking, or at least an attempt at pecking order status recognition is ubiquitous and probably instinctual. However, I like it when top dogs, like you squat250,manage to be pretty cool and interesting people despite all that.

well, thanks. I was sitting outide my inlaws in the yard with my brother in law, his son, and another newphew, and my kid. Me and my kid were squatting on the ground on a concrete ledge. apparent submissive positions, althought hey could have been resting perches.

The brother in law, who is pretty much the alpha out of all of us at the house, was standing in a central position. his son and the other nephew were off to the side. When my brother in law went back inside, instinctively, his son moved from where he was standing to the "power position" his dad had vacated.

My son pointed it out to me--I hadn't noticed. we were laughing about it after everyone had left for oh, about ten continuous minutes....

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 12:47pm.

on watch chat groups, there is much discussion about fake watches.

some fake watches are very high quality today and most observers wouldnt be able to tell you had a fake.

many, probably the vast majority, watch lovers are disdainful, even hateful of fakes--but also, interestingly, feel they would never wear one because it would harm the way they feel about their own status.

in other words, even if everyone else thought they were wearing, say, a rolex, but they themselvesknew they weren't wearing a rolex, they couldn't wear the fake, because it would lower their status internally. they would not feel comfortable or happy wearing it.

if on the other hand, they were unknowingly sold a fake, but believed they had a real rolex, and wore it, they would feel good.

thus, there ware many websites devoted to distinguishing fakes from genuine. But mot seem to end up saying, hey, you're probably not going to be able to definitely distinguish in the case of good copies, so take it to a jeweler or buy from a dealer....

http://www.bernardwatch.com/Fake-Rolex-C...

strikes me as interesting...

Submitted by outtamojo on November 24, 2012 - 1:14pm.

I was grocery shopping with my daughter the other day and at the checkout stand, they could not figure out the price for a small tub of cotton candy my daughter wanted. The checkout lady says "how about I just charge you 2 bucks for this?"
2 bucks seemed kinda high for me, seemed more like a 99 cent tub so I started negotiating with the lady. This geezer dude behind me then throws down 2 bucks and says very loudly " HERE,HERE'S 2 BUCKS". I say no and instruct the clerk to just add it to
my Amex and I leave without looking at or acknowledging the guy cause I was kinda afraid of what I might say or do in front of my sweet 7 year old daughter. Should I have not felt so angry when my daughter asked why is he paying and we didn't have to get the cotton candy if we didn't have enough money? Would this geezer have thought to throw down 2 bucks if I had worn a nice watch?

Submitted by outtamojo on November 24, 2012 - 1:17pm.

squat250 wrote:
Blogstar wrote:
I am going to squat 250 in a week or two and then my status will be secure. Actually, since I almost weight that much it won't be, so I'll buy a new watch. Of course, I can't afford much of a watch, so I'll get my kid to get better grades than your kid.

True, status seeking, or at least an attempt at pecking order status recognition is ubiquitous and probably instinctual. However, I like it when top dogs, like you squat250,manage to be pretty cool and interesting people despite all that.

well, thanks. I was sitting outide my inlaws in the yard with my brother in law, his son, and another newphew, and my kid. Me and my kid were squatting on the ground on a concrete ledge. apparent submissive positions, althought hey could have been resting perches.

The brother in law, who is pretty much the alpha out of all of us at the house, was standing in a central position. his son and the other nephew were off to the side. When my brother in law went back inside, instinctively, his son moved from where he was standing to the "power position" his dad had vacated.

My son pointed it out to me--I hadn't noticed. we were laughing about it after everyone had left for oh, about ten continuous minutes....

I have observed these scenes also- the Alpha types tend to like to stand near the food.

Submitted by bearishgurl on November 24, 2012 - 1:24pm.

ocrenter wrote:
moneymaker wrote:
Health care is more readily available to the "more statused" however I seem to recall quit a few well to do dying lately at relatively young ages, David Copley, Steve Jobs, pick anyone in Hollywood that has died young lately. So in my opinion being statused may actually make one more unhealthy due to obesity/drug use(yes even the legal kind) and bad habits such as drinking and smoking. Of course I could be wrong as I recall seeing a lot of obese people last time I was at Walmart.

Status and health are related, but access the health care plays a minor role.

Just as scaredy's kid learned in school with apes, it is ultimately access to resources.

The higher status apes have access to plenty of food and the best shelter. This improves their health. For us, it is the access to healthy food that set the upper class apart from the lower class. For the higher class, you have the jimbos and the sprouts and the trader joes where whole wheat bread and brown rice and low salt items and fresh lean meat are the rule. For the lower class you have 99cent stores with white bread and high salt processed meat items and high fat snacks that are filling, cheap, and more addictive.

The lower class usually do not have leasure time to exercise as many have 2 jobs or multiple part time job, while the upper class do have more ability to manage their own time and find time to exercise. To the working poor, exercise seems foolish after 16 hours of cleaning toilets and mopping the floor. Replenishing the caloric supply, actually over replenishing with a meal at over 2000 calories all at less than $5 seem like the logical thing to do.

The dietary differences and approach to exercise ultimately is the difference between the various status groups.

As for access to health care, please remember Steve Jobs managed to survive for 3 years AFTER the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, that itself is a feat related to access to health care. Your average Jose would be lucky to survive 3 months from the diagnosis if he was even diagnosed at all.

Excellent post, ocrenter. However, I think these subjects are a little "murkier" than your explanation so I'd like to add a few points to it.

Jobs had a slower growing pancreatic cancer than the typical patient (who lasts 0-10 months after diagnosis). He was first diagnosed in 2004 and died in 2011.

He lived 2+ additional years after his cancer metastasized and enveloped his liver because he obtained a liver transplant in 2009.

He did not "move to the top of any transplant lists" by making donations to hospitals or the donor registry (at least not while he was waiting for an available liver). He almost died waiting for a match and never would have gotten a liver in CA, due to the sheer amount of very sick patients on the waiting list for one.

http://gizmodo.com/5497696/steve-jobs-on...

National transplant rules make the organs available to the sickest patients who match the available organs. These patients must reside 4 or less hrs from the transplant center and be able to come to follow-up appts nearby for at least four months AFTER the transplant. Residing in Palo Alto, CA and owning a private jet, Jobs was able to travel to several US transplant centers to get a physical workup and get on each list. When there was a match in TN, he was immediately on his plane to Memphis and had his people secure him a property to stay there after he was released from the hospital:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-102715...

http://brokensecrets.com/2011/10/13/how-...

Some would argue that Jobs got a liver yet had cancer which was terminal and that was a "waste of an organ." His transplant "bought" him 27.5 months (with some of it a good quality of life) which he used to wrap up his affairs and introduce new products.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/busine...

Everything he did to "buy time" was perfectly legal but could only be done by someone with vast resources.

Of course, pancreatic cancer of any kind is extremely deadly and always wins in the end. It doesn't matter whether one has $6 or $6B in assets. A pancreatic cancer patient will eventually die, usually sooner than later. No amount of money can fix this.

Pancreatic cancer is primarily caused from damage to DNA (mutuations). It is inherited.

http://pathology.jhu.edu/pc/BasicCauses.php

Jobs was a strict vegan most of his life and was never anywhere close to being "obese." Nor did he smoke. Contrary to what MM posted earlier, not EVERYONE who gets a deadly cancer ("celebrities" incl) "did it to themselves." Most are simply unlucky.

***********************************

Re: shopping habits of "poor people," I took a neighbor whose car was broken down to a large 99 cent store in National City this week. I had not been there since it was a "Food Basket" (decades ago). It was very LARGE inside and had a LOT of good-quality produce for .99 (incl large Boston bibb or butter lettuce that would have cost ~$5 at Vons). It also had fresh med eggs and fresh 1/2 gal milk for .99. There was plenty of whole grain cereals and bread and it had brown rice, also. Most of the clientele were senior citizens and very few were anywhere close to being "obese." It is located on the bus line so some patrons had their own rolling grocery carts which they could take on the bus (and some probably walked home). And I don't see all these people going home and consuming 2500 calories in one sitting.

I was impressed with the variety of goods and quality of the available fresh items there. I saw nothing wrong with anything there and even bought a dozen eggs (which I've already used) and, of course, no one knew the difference between .99 dozen eggs and more expensive eggs.

I think people from all walks of life are just trying to get by .... or spend less on food so they can provide gifts for grandchildren at b-days and x-mas or make some repairs to their home. Even if one can afford it, why pay MORE if the same or similar item is cheaper in a store that is easy to get to?

I don't think we can "pigeonhole" all people who shop in certain establishments (ie 99 cent store, Walmart) as being "poor, ignorant or in bad health." In many smaller towns in those dreaded "flyover states," Walmart "supercenter" (with food) is often the only place residents from a 30+ mile radius have to shop for food! This doesn't make them all "ignorant," in "poor health" or "obese."

If anything, "poor people" walk more and often have to run (to catch a bus or trolley which is early) than people who back their bimmers out of their garages to go to the corner store. And remember that "rural people" (even if "poor") don't have a fast food joint and/or Starbucks on every corner to choose from like city-dwellers do.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 2:05pm.

outtamojo wrote:
I was grocery shopping with my daughter the other day and at the checkout stand, they could not figure out the price for a small tub of cotton candy my daughter wanted. The checkout lady says "how about I just charge you 2 bucks for this?"
2 bucks seemed kinda high for me, seemed more like a 99 cent tub so I started negotiating with the lady. This geezer dude behind me then throws down 2 bucks and says very loudly " HERE,HERE'S 2 BUCKS". I say no and instruct the clerk to just add it to
my Amex and I leave without looking at or acknowledging the guy cause I was kinda afraid of what I might say or do in front of my sweet 7 year old daughter. Should I have not felt so angry when my daughter asked why is he paying and we didn't have to get the cotton candy if we didn't have enough money? Would this geezer have thought to throw down 2 bucks if I had worn a nice watch?

i think i would have taken the $2.00.

However, I recently gave a slightly poorish looking rock climber a ride with my son to a climb. he offered $7.00 for gas. I turned it down.

i felt sort of good about not taking the climber's $7.00 though I thanked him for offering.

The impatient geezer I would have felt fine relieving him of his 2 bucks.

Submitted by no_such_reality on November 24, 2012 - 2:15pm.

Actually, Squat's kid missed it.

It's not access to resources. It's stress.

The research continued the investigation and concluded that it's actually the chronic stress of being low in the pecking order, that shortened the life spans.

Submitted by Aecetia on November 24, 2012 - 2:19pm.

Bearish,

I think the .99 store has some pretty good buys in food and cleaning supplies. I also like that the canned food that is a brand name. It might be a smaller size, but sometimes smaller is better for me. Some of the stores are kind of cramped and in the corner of the shopping centers, but I think it is worth saving money for other things, especially with the increasing price of many other items. Target food is also worth checking out.

Submitted by spdrun on November 24, 2012 - 2:41pm.

Cause/effect?

Perhaps the apes are able to climb higher BECAUSE of their large genitals and excellent health.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 2:58pm.

i think they controlled for that. lower status guys improve dramatically when they get status

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 3:00pm.

no_such_reality wrote:
Actually, Squat's kid missed it.

It's not access to resources. It's stress.

The research continued the investigation and concluded that it's actually the chronic stress of being low in the pecking order, that shortened the life spans.

it is stressful constantly getting the crap kicked out of you and never getting laid.

Submitted by flyer on November 24, 2012 - 5:21pm.

Very interesting "status" stories.

Sure, it's fun to drive the Porsche, and, in my wife's case carry the LV, but, IMO, those things really mean very little in and of themselves.

For example, we shop and dine around the DM, CV, RSF area often. Talk about the epitome of status conscious--BUT, something we've noticed over the many years we've lived in the area, is how most of the people we see out and about seem to perpetually remain in the 30-45 age range--it's like a revolving door.

We've rarely seen a large population of the 50+ crowd--even when we were in our 30's--20+ years ago. Since it's a pretty great area in which to live, we find it odd.

I realize many of them probably have to relocate for jobs, but, it also tells me many of them don't "last" because they can't sustain the lifestyle.

IMHO, "perceived" or "real" "status" is meaningless, unless you have the net worth to sustain it over your lifetime.

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 24, 2012 - 5:44pm.

210 on the squat rack today.

my self-perceived status is very high.

Submitted by flyer on November 24, 2012 - 6:50pm.

Fantastic--and I admit defeat in that department!

Submitted by ltsdd on November 25, 2012 - 12:03am.

squat250 wrote:
my kid was telling me about a film he saw in ap bio about baboons and status -- where the higher status baboons are actually healthier and have better developped genitalia as a result of their status.

Could it really be the better "hung" baboons got more inherent strength to be on top (pun intended).

squat250 wrote:

Humans too are healthier if they have higher status

Better access to better health services will do wonder to one's health

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 25, 2012 - 8:44am.

flyer wrote:
Fantastic--and I admit defeat in that department!

only 40 more lbs by may 9th 2013 and i don't have to eat the can of alpo i bought as part of a bet.

40 measly pounds. focus!

flyer, start with the bar ---and add a little bit every time!

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 25, 2012 - 8:55am.

we all need to squat. this is how we poop. So squat work is important if you want to keep pooping as you have been. And not just collapse on the toilet and hope for the best.

even just unweighted squats are a good idea. practice sitting on a toilet with no handsone hundred times per day, just out of doors. deep knee bends, i think we used to call them. I would like to always be able to hover effortlessly above a dirty toilet to poop. that's going to take consistent work, dammit.

here's a recent time magazine summary on the baboons...

http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/22/ba...

Submitted by flyer on November 25, 2012 - 4:20pm.

squat250 wrote:
flyer wrote:
Fantastic--and I admit defeat in that department!

only 40 more lbs by may 9th 2013 and i don't have to eat the can of alpo i bought as part of a bet.

40 measly pounds. focus!

flyer, start with the bar ---and add a little bit every time!

Thanks, squat. I'm 6'3," 200 lbs., active, and in good health, so I'll keep working on it. Good luck with that May 2013 goal!

Submitted by scaredyclassic on November 25, 2012 - 4:36pm.

the book that has brought things into focus for me is POWER TO THE PEOPLE! by pavel tsatsouline.

what's in your head matters.

Submitted by Blogstar on November 25, 2012 - 5:22pm.

I agree the squats are very good movements with free weights. Great for cross training. I have heard the knocks on machines but never took them too seriously. Started doing the leg press recently and realized it could really hurt someone either quickly by a slipped disk in the back, or slowly by the fact that it creates giant strength imbalances in the different parts of the legs.(no one sits on a toilet in the same fashion that a leg press machine is used). With this perspective, I now blame the meniscus injury sustained many years ago playing basketball on the leg press.

Moved straight over to the squat rack(for reps only no feats of strength).

Not all machines are bad... most are probably fine.

Submitted by Diego Mamani on November 26, 2012 - 1:01pm.

squat250 wrote:
here's a recent time magazine summary on the baboons...

http://healthland.time.com/2012/05/22/baboon-study-shows-why-high-social-status-boosts-health/

"The top animals also tend to get more social support. In baboons, this involves being groomed by others, which not only removes parasites, but more importantly, also calms the stress system and lowers the animal’s levels of glucocorticoids."

Perhaps I should get a haircut every three weeks rather than four... And wouldn't legalizing prostitution lower my glucocorticoid (a stress hormone) levels?

Submitted by CA renter on November 27, 2012 - 12:55am.

Yes. And I'm sure Mrs. Mamani would prefer to have a nice, calm, relaxed husband instead of a stressed, glucocorticoided-out freak. Sell her on it. ;)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.