Are East Coasters 'tougher' than West Coasters? (home, live)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure my friend who grew up in Alpine, NJ and now works for Morgan Stanley as an I-Banker is in general, way tougher than my friend who grew up in the projects on Filmore Street in Pacoima and was orphaned at the age of 10.
Do people judge people this way in real life? I'm really wondering that. I grew up on the West Coast for the most part, yet the last words people describe me with are "passive aggressive".
Maybe there is a cultural thing about being more brash and assertive/borderline confrontational, but that has nothing to do with being tough. I'm willing to admit that a quiet girl that constantly avoids unnecessary fights but who's faced abuse from a stepfather her pre-adult life yet ended up becoming a doctor is way tougher than me.
No way. Being rude and upfront has nothing to do with toughness. Being "tough" means that you are more resilient and can handle a lot. Which has nothing to do with the area you live in.
Maybe people who grew up back in the day or who grew up in the rougher areas of East Coast inner cities are slightly "tougher" or come as being tougher. But in general it's seems to be that people are just more used to being in a more crowded and fast place environment in some places and sort of adapt to that--sometimes people are just a little more up front in dealing with people and sometimes people just learn to ignore people.
At the same time though there's a reputation for being tough from some regions that people try to play up to--and sometimes it falls a little flat. For example, going to college in the West Coast, I met a bunch of people from the East Coast who came west to go to school. They tried to play up the fact that they were from Jersey or another suburb of New York or everyone from New England tried to play up like they were from Boston. They just sort of assumed that they were so much more urban and tougher than us West Coast "hicks" and we wouldn't know the difference. The funny part was that when I went out east and visited the suburbs that a couple of these Jersey kids came from--despite all their tough talking "Yo, I'm from Jersey" attitude--they were raised in extremely comfortable fairly wealthy suburbs--way more posh than where I grew up on the California coast--and no gangs or that sort of thing either. The kids who acted like they were from Boston, were from the countryish town of Laconia, New Hampshire or fairly middle-class Boston suburbs. Sure they were just kids messing around, but they acted as if they had some sort of rep to live up to. And it wasn't just those kids as I remember plenty of people from the Bay Area or LA at that age trying to act like they were tough.
Though in reality the people I've met who actually grew up in tough areas on either coast or in the Midwest or South--will really play it down--they're usually fairly laid back and cool... I've known some pretty friendly people who came from some incredibly rough backgrounds but managed to grow past that and ended up as cool and humble adults...
Maybe people who grew up back in the day or who grew up in the rougher areas of East Coast inner cities are slightly "tougher" or come as being tougher. But in general it's seems to be that people are just more used to being in a more crowded and fast place environment in some places and sort of adapt to that--sometimes people are just a little more up front in dealing with people and sometimes people just learn to ignore people.
At the same time though there's a reputation for being tough from some regions that people try to play up to--and sometimes it falls a little flat. For example, going to college in the West Coast, I met a bunch of people from the East Coast who came west to go to school. They tried to play up the fact that they were from Jersey or another suburb of New York or everyone from New England tried to play up like they were from Boston. They just sort of assumed that they were so much more urban and tougher than us West Coast "hicks" and we wouldn't know the difference. The funny part was that when I went out east and visited the suburbs that a couple of these Jersey kids came from--despite all their tough talking "Yo, I'm from Jersey" attitude--they were raised in extremely comfortable fairly wealthy suburbs--way more posh than where I grew up on the California coast--and no gangs or that sort of thing either. The kids who acted like they were from Boston, were from the countryish town of Laconia, New Hampshire or fairly middle-class Boston suburbs. Sure they were just kids messing around, but they acted as if they had some sort of rep to live up to. And it wasn't just those kids as I remember plenty of people from the Bay Area or LA at that age trying to act like they were tough.
Though in reality the people I've met who actually grew up in tough areas on either coast or in the Midwest or South--will really play it down--they're usually fairly laid back and cool... I've known some pretty friendly people who came from some incredibly rough backgrounds but managed to grow past that and ended up as cool and humble adults...
This is true and is something I've experienced as well. But then the question is, why do people on The East Coast tend to project "toughness" even if they did not grow up in a tough environment? Why is it that "being tough" seems to be such an important quality for Eastcoasters as opposed to The West Coast or Midwest or South?
No way. Being rude and upfront has nothing to do with toughness. Being "tough" means that you are more resilient and can handle a lot. Which has nothing to do with the area you live in.
I beg to differ. New York bounced back very well after 9/11 and Hurricane Sandy. By your definition that makes NY tough. Now you also said it has nothing to do with location....I don't think if something to the scale of the aforementioned happened in say LA or Houston or Atlanta, it wouldn't bounce back as quickly. Hell Atlanta downtown got hit by a tornado in 08 and buildings downtown just recovered beginning of 2012.
I beg to differ. New York bounced back very well after 9/11 and Hurricane Sandy. By your definition that makes NY tough. Now you also said it has nothing to do with location....I don't think if something to the scale of the aforementioned happened in say LA or Houston or Atlanta, it wouldn't bounce back as quickly. Hell Atlanta downtown got hit by a tornado in 08 and buildings downtown just recovered beginning of 2012.
Doesn't that have more to do with resources devoted to re-construction than any measure of "toughness?"
I beg to differ. New York bounced back very well after 9/11 and Hurricane Sandy. By your definition that makes NY tough. Now you also said it has nothing to do with location....I don't think if something to the scale of the aforementioned happened in say LA or Houston or Atlanta, it wouldn't bounce back as quickly. Hell Atlanta downtown got hit by a tornado in 08 and buildings downtown just recovered beginning of 2012.
I think Chicago could handle it also
L.A. has bounced back from Riots in 1992 and two Earthquakes in 1994. The Bay Area bounced back from a major Earthquake that collapsed the Bay Bridge in 1989. And people in the rural South, Midwest, and rural areas of the West can't be underestimated. If there was every a catastrophe that knocked out power nationwide for an extended period of time the people in those areas would be much better off. The "hick" in West Virginia can survive off the land a lot more effectively than the guy in the big Northeastern city. To me, that's real toughness.
I beg to differ. New York bounced back very well after 9/11 and Hurricane Sandy. By your definition that makes NY tough. Now you also said it has nothing to do with location....I don't think if something to the scale of the aforementioned happened in say LA or Houston or Atlanta, it wouldn't bounce back as quickly. Hell Atlanta downtown got hit by a tornado in 08 and buildings downtown just recovered beginning of 2012.
I think Chicago could handle it also
Plenty of bad things happened out west and they recovered fine. I'm not sure what buildings just now recovering in Atlanta have to do with toughness.
What part of the west are you talking about? Get out into cowboy country and the men are rawhide tough, and are also extremely polite and soft spoken.
In the East, if there is a natural disaster, the people get themselves on TV and whine that nobody is helping them. In the west, it just gets cleared up and life goes on. The TV news stations don't even bother to appear and FEMA is nowhere to be seen.
But if by the West, you mean San Francisco, that's different.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
