Leisure activities are largely defined by class. Individuals with different incomes and lifestyles have different choices in their selection of leisure activities. But, there are other factors that affect the role income has on leisure preferences, two of which are occupation prestige and education. A high level of income by itself does provide or promote high class leisure activities. "Income level, on the contrary, makes no independent contribution toward explanation of variance when the other two measures of social stratification[education and occupational prestige] is kept constant."(Cheek&Burch,55) Lifestyles are learned through personal experience in a given niche in a given class. What this means is that lifestyle cannot be bought. In winning the state lottery, the lower working class individual does not suddenly become a high class citizen with high class ideas about leisure.

Education appears to provide lower class individuals with the access to leisure activities often relegated middle to upper-middle class. These activities are "self -improvement" activities which are "more characteristic of high-prestige respondents, while activities such as working on an automobile, playing poker, and spending time in a tavern" are "significantly associated with respondents in the lower-prestige levels."(51) Research done by Mueller and Gurin(1962) found that different outdoor leisure activities of different occupational groups is often minimized when education is not a variable. Apparently, education opens the door for "'appreciative-symbolic activities'(that is, for example, the enjoyment of wild nature for itself rather then for some utilitarian gain, such as fish or game)."(51) It is evident, though, that this relationship is unidirectional. Education is not a means by which upper class individuals may be directed at lower class leisure activities.

The leisure activities most divided by social class and prestige, not surprisingly, are often the most expensive. These include activities such as yachting, powerboating, playing games of sports and swimming--the kind done in private clubs. Sightseeing is also an activity largely associated with the upper class, because while the sights themselves are free of cost, getting to where the sights are is usually not.

There are, however, leisure activities that have a somewhat neutral relationship with income. Hunting and fishing, for example are done by individuals(mostly men) spanning both ends of the income bracket. Walking for pleasure was also found to be a leisure activity selection not categorized by class.(p. 44,see table 16)

Viewing class independently of gender and culture is impossible since by and large, the two are integral aspects of what comprises class. Therefore, the search for information on my selected piece of this project was often frustrating. There was a myriad of journal articles and studies done on gender and culture, but writings on social class by itself were scarce. The book I obtained the majority of information from was dated(published in 1976 with longitudinal studies dating from 1960), which very ikely has something to do with its not addressing issues of gender and culture. Hopefully, superimposing the issues of gender and culture over the information above will be helpful in giving an accurate picture of the division of leisure.