<p>Today, I personally am wearing a Yale sweatshirt (QMP), a University of Cambridge cap (me, grad school), an Oxford scarf (H, grad school), Stanford sweatpants (sabbaticals), MIT socks (gray and red socks look great with the red sweatpants; me, post-doc), and a Harvard bumper sticker (across the back of the Yale sweatshirt; H, post-doc), just so that everyone will know how special I am! Furthermore, I believe that I am extremely attractive! Despite any evidence to the contrary!</p>
<p>I wear my vintage William and Mary sweat shirt because it has a picture of the Indian mascot, complete with feathers. I know what that says about me. Are you listening NCAA?</p>
<p>QuantMech, I hate you for rubbing your attractiveness in the faces of the ugly. Your outfit sounds awesome by the way.</p>
<p>Oh, and I have an umbrella with a Princeton logo on it (QMP was accepted, didn’t go). Do you think if I opened the umbrella in my office, that would bring bad luck? Otherwise, I’d like to do that, to add to the impression of being truly special.</p>
<p>When my daughter was eight years old I bought a Harvard sweatshirt for her at a garage sale. The only statement I was trying to make was “Look, I only spent $2.00 for this perfectly good sweatshirt.”</p>
<p>So I completed my master’s degree at the University of Kansas in 1988–one of the years that the Jayhawks were national basketball champs. I had moved to Florida and was wearing my Kansas sweatshirt in the grocery store. A guy walked past me and said, “Oh, yeah, now you wear the sweatshirt.” Sllightly off topic, but somewhat related.</p>
<p>Did I get this right? “Good looking” people wear outward symbols of “elitism” less frequently because they have less to prove? WOW!!!</p>
<p>Let’s see–a traditionally beautiful woman is less likely to wear very expensive status clothes/shoes/handbags/jewelry than her “ugly duckling” sister? On what planet?</p>
<p>Male “hunks” drive Hondas rather than Maseratis (by choice) because of their own personal “superior” physical looks? Calling P Diddy!</p>
<p>Out here in the fly over states, you would make a better impression with a shirt from one of the big ten schools. Princeton? A lot of people out here wouldn’t even know or care where or what it is. But have a winning football team, now you are talking! And by the way, I never think that someone went to a school just because they are wearing a shirt with a certain name on it.</p>
<p>And talk about elitism, I am glad you think you are good looking but what do other people think? Oh, that’s right, they can tell by what you are wearing.</p>
<p>Hmm, I must be REALLY good looking … I’m wearing a nondescript $6 hoodie off the bargain rack.</p>
<p>I’m only talking about HYP apparel guys, not other material goods.</p>
<p>and NewHope, that’s illogical. Just because the condition is Ugly people wear “elite” garment doesn’t mean if somebody is wearing “non-elite” garment, he is automatically good-looking.</p>
<p>What do you have against Stanford?</p>
<p>
**Pizzagirl, I don’t care what their motives are. If they’re wearing it just because, then whatever. But if they’re doing it to DERIVE HAPPINESS from it, then that’s just sad in my opinion. But like I said in my previous post to you, it’s THEIR choice and I ultimately don’t care.</p>
<p>I’m not talking about other material goods, only HYP apparel here folks. The idea is YOU SHOULDN’T DETERMINE YOUR WORTH BASED ON A SCHOOL AND FLAUNTING THAT SCHOOL TO OTHERS. I hope that’s clear–whew, a lot of your have seriously misread some of the things said here.**</p>
<p>^^^^^ In DW’s home town (which is located in one of those fly-over states), animal-themed tees big … you know, Deere and CAT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hmm? Nothing, HYP can include S and M and Caltech too…but HYP is simply the so-called “holy trinity” with a lot of tradition, hence the historical connotation of “elite” and “prestige” going with those schools. BUT S,M, and C are certainly elite as well. You are paranoid.</p>
<p>OP–is it really your observation at Princeton that thinking he or she is “good looking” makes the student less prone to wear the Princeton apparel?</p>
<p>I’d be interested in hearing your standard for assessing “good looking.” Should you determine your “worth” on the basis of your assessment of your looks?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Go ahead and do that. In my wealthy suburb, you would be seen as having something to prove.</p>
<p>07Dad, it’s simple. Good-looking people derive their sense of worth from other things other than their wealth and the school they went to. Those things are certainly important, but they are overshadowed by (1) the strength of their friendships and relationships (2) their sense of satisfaction from what they do for a living, and (3) their looks (and let’s be honest, sex is something guys think about ALL the time and that means they care about how attractive they are to others and how attractive other girls are).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Like I said before, on campus, no obviously. It’s in public that that’s the case.</p>
<p>Go ahead and do that. In my wealthy suburb, you would be seen as having something to prove.</p>
<p>Interesting that you were compelled to qualify " suburb" with * wealthy*.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>OP–since you have self assessed yourself as “good looking” why did you find it necessary to “drop” the fact that you are in a wealthy suburb in your last post.</p>
<p>“Less attractive” people derive less self-worth from (1) the strength of their friendships and relationships and (2) their sense of satisfaction from what they do for a living than “the beautiful people?” LOL–think Tommy Lee Jones!</p>
<p>WOW–just wait until your tenth year reunion! There are going to be some seriously disappointed and addicted (former) “beautiful people” in that room (assuming they aren’t too ashamed to show up).</p>