Why Do JWs Only Preach In Poor/Middle Class Neighborhoods?

by Latin assassin from Manhattan 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • gcc2k

    I agree, territory cards were rotated in and out regularly.

    Personal preference dictates you would go preach where you would expect a good response (ie, poor areas). But personally I would rather not get shot going door to door in the ghetto, so I'd prefer to stick to the suburbs :)

  • run dont walk
    run dont walk

    because they are more vulnerable and more chance of being desperate. Good points Latin !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • maxwell

    In the area where I grew up, a rural county with mostly driving territory, we had a range from poor to upper middle class. But not very many in the upper middle class and very little or none who were super rich. I have to say that I did notice a tendency to work poorer neighborhoods more. However, we actually had two or three talks directed against this. People could request a specific territory if they wanted. Our service overseer had no particular instructions about rotations. Also a person could keep a territory for about as long as they wanted. Some people kep them for over a year. The stated reason for this was so people could have territories close to where they lived, since we lived in a spread out rural territory that would take an hour's drive to cross. So if a publisher lived on one end they could always have a territory close by. The stated goal was to work every territory every 6 months. This did not happen. Some of the territory that didn't get worked was territory on the fringes of our congregation territory and was not a particularly affluent area. There were a few areas that were more than 30 minutes drive from the hall and no one lived close to those areas. In fact, I think the closest families were probably 20 minutes from some of that territory. But then there were other territories that were not worked because of lack of interest in working the affluent areas. But as I mentioned we did have a few talks about this. They kind of suggested that people should try picking different territories some times. Also, I remember one talk about not prejudging people. For example, don't go up to a big house with the preconception that they will have no interest in the message just because of their affluence. Something along those lines. I don't think it worked very well. People continued to prefer their favorite territories which tended to be in less affluent areas.

    In the area I live in now, there are quite a few mid/high rise apartments with controlled access. Very few are truly luxury apartments and I haven't seen any with doormen like those in NYC, although I suppose there may be a few somewhere in DC. They and are supposed to be worked by telephone. I don't think those get worked very regularly either. While in theory everyone is supposed to get the message, I think in practice, yes, the less affluent get to hear it more at least in the area where I grew up. The reason as someone else suggested is that the poor are more likely to listen. One thing I noticed is that it seemed that renters rarely told us to leave, although a renter can use the trespassing laws just like a homeowner. Sure a few would call management but that was rare also. This was in the garden style apartments that we could still go to. Homeowners are much more likely to tell you to step. The sense of ownership and control is keen and they are likely to be more affluent and have access to more information.

  • PurpleV

    NYC Apostofest? I am so there!!

  • blondie

    So many affluent areas are gated or security locked. These areas are made into telephone or writing territory.

    Actually, many people in my area did not want to work the less affluent areas because the people were too dark, it was too dirty, and it was crime-ridden. I made one older couple squirm. They were in my car and I had territory in a "bad" neighborhood. They suddenly remembered an emergency that had to be taken care of.

    Blondie (middle class areas were prime choice though)

  • 95stormfront


    You must really love that man to endure sitting there listening to that nonsense whenever they get worked up.

    I never ask my wife anything WT related....she's well aware of how I feel about the Soceity. And when she's in one of her JW groups and try to put me on the spot it only takes a few well placed questions for them to give me that "deer in the headlights" look and change the subject.

  • Odrade

    There are way more lower income and middle class neighborhoods than affluent ones. Stands to reason the jws spend more time in poor areas than rich ones. Straight percentages.

    Also, I have seen street witnessing on a number of occasions in the financial districts in several cities, Manhattan, Seattle, San Francisco, etc. I don't think jws target poor neighborhoods. I do think the lack of opportunities/education in lower class areas may make those ones more susceptible to WTS indoctrination and misrepresentation. So return visit/bible study work in poor areas would likely be much higher and disproportionate.


  • OICU8it2

    the well-educated and affluent see the JWs as uneducated and ill-informed.... blah, blah, blah... They "was"

  • ozziepost

    After noticing this pattern, I compiled a list of all the neighborhoods in NYC where the JWs are very active, and I realized that most of these neighborhoods are populated by a high percentage of minorities (mainly Hispanic, Black, Asian, West Indian etc.), representative of low to middle income households. On any given day, you can expect to see squads of JWs on every other street corner and door bells being rung on the weekends. However, if you drive through the main streets in upper-middle to high income neighborhoods (Garden City and Oyster Bay in Long Island, Park Slope and Dyker Heights in Brooklyn), you will NEVER find street witnessing or preaching of any kind.

    Before we start celebrating, I think we should look at the quality of "research" claimed here. It seems to me that we drew a conclusion, then looked for 'evidence'to support it. Very "sus", as the mob downunder say. The evidence is anecdotal.

    Nevertheless, I can see that many of the R&F would be reluctant to work wealthy territory....but that's all.

    Cheers, Ozzie

  • Joker10

    I'll soon post a topic about their income and education.

Share this