J
johnny4612
Bronze
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2023
- Posts
- 446
- Reputation
- 221
Status is very relative to the place/time/people you impact.
So we can be a famous singer and have an impact on more people, or we can be a famous singer for the small town, and have celebrity status, but only in that small town.
This means that to have status, one must always take context into consideration.
It is one of the reasons why a person who holds a high role (for example CEO, manager, boss) is always seen as high status by people inside the organization, but is a mere nobody outside of that context.
Take David Gandy for example.
Let's say that the guy would have lived anonymously in France, in a city of 10 thousand inhabitants.
Gandy would certainly have been 1% in terms of beauty there, he may have held some high office, and he would still have lived a very good life.
Instead Gandy is a supermodel who impacts "millions of people" around the world, therefore, he has status over all things.
In this case he still lives a good life.
This is to make you understand that if a person has an "advantage" over others, or qualities that others do not have, he must find not only the right context, but also the right place and time to spend them, and to grow tall.
For example, an Italian friend of mine lived in his village in his parents' house. At 30, he got tired of his life with no friends and no girls who wanted him, and he went to Japan to a small town of 15,000 inhabitants.
There he became "the nicest Italian" and everyone thinks highly of him. Not even his parents or relatives have ever treated him so well. He is simply "Italian" and this is an advantage well spent.
It makes me think that those who don't have an advantage to spare, be it wealth or beauty, must absolutely research or get help to find their qualities, in order to understand which place in the world might be right for them.
This is why many testify that they "changed their lives" after they expatriated: they simply found the place that could give them a higher status than before.
So we can be a famous singer and have an impact on more people, or we can be a famous singer for the small town, and have celebrity status, but only in that small town.
This means that to have status, one must always take context into consideration.
It is one of the reasons why a person who holds a high role (for example CEO, manager, boss) is always seen as high status by people inside the organization, but is a mere nobody outside of that context.
Take David Gandy for example.
Let's say that the guy would have lived anonymously in France, in a city of 10 thousand inhabitants.
Gandy would certainly have been 1% in terms of beauty there, he may have held some high office, and he would still have lived a very good life.
Instead Gandy is a supermodel who impacts "millions of people" around the world, therefore, he has status over all things.
In this case he still lives a good life.
This is to make you understand that if a person has an "advantage" over others, or qualities that others do not have, he must find not only the right context, but also the right place and time to spend them, and to grow tall.
For example, an Italian friend of mine lived in his village in his parents' house. At 30, he got tired of his life with no friends and no girls who wanted him, and he went to Japan to a small town of 15,000 inhabitants.
There he became "the nicest Italian" and everyone thinks highly of him. Not even his parents or relatives have ever treated him so well. He is simply "Italian" and this is an advantage well spent.
It makes me think that those who don't have an advantage to spare, be it wealth or beauty, must absolutely research or get help to find their qualities, in order to understand which place in the world might be right for them.
This is why many testify that they "changed their lives" after they expatriated: they simply found the place that could give them a higher status than before.
