She fetches something for Higgins as if she is his servant not his equal. And he doesn't thank her or acknowledge her.

Higgins does not allow her to answer and answers for her as if she cannot speak for herself. 

Doolittle thinks of himself as a different species of poor person; stating that there is more to society than an upper, middle and lower class, but rather, sub-classes within each group. Essentially, in the lower class, there is an upper class of people who are better than the lowest people, but are still lower than the middle class- ‘miss the mark’ if you will.

Eliza is exposed, as a person of the lower class, to experience what the upper classes have ready access to. However, she remarks how she wishes the upper class would experience her side of things, and perhaps come appreciate how her ‘clean’ is a lot harder to accomplish than that of the upper classes’.
This is an interesting parallel Shaw portrays in this work, as it allows the audience to recognise Eliza’s awe and bewilderment of these upper class advantages to, later in the play, becoming accustomed and expecting that standard as an every-day standard.

Doolittle equates wealth to laziness, as most upper class come from ‘old money’, and that hard work and self-made fortunes are scorned. 

Eliza’s own poverty has also instilled within her a sense of modesty many upper class persons could benefit greatly from, *cough* Higgins *cough*.

In this part, Higgins is explaining to his mum that he took Eliza off the streets. By this point, Eliza acts like a middle class lady, but because Higgins did pick her up off the streets, he will always see her as lesser. She will never be middle class to him. 

Here, Higgins is explaining to his mum that after he is done with his project (Eliza), she will be able to leave with the advantages that he’s given her. These advantages include: being well spoken, being the idealistic lady, dressing her nicely and making her look “pretty.” This shows that the Marxism cycle has affected her life after being given these advantages because she has now becoming a middle class woman kind of.

Here, Higgins and Pickering are making fun of Eliza behind her back. Because the two men are from the upper class, they know how to act accordingly. Eliza, however, has been brought up differently, and has had to be taught how to act like she isn’t from the gutter. She, of course, will never be able to shake off some of her habits, and the two men think the way she acts is absolutely hilarious because of it. All because she is in a lower class to them.

I find this quote so interesting. These two characters haven’t any money, yet are still classed as middle class. Why is this so? Is your class dictated about how much money you have or how you act? The words “genteel poverty” suggest that these two characters are stuck in an awkward position. They dont have money, yet are forced to stay in the middle class because they were born there. For Eliza however, this is completely different, she is brought into the middle class. But all three of these characters have behaviours that suggest they should be in the middle class, so they are classes as so. Interesting.....

The sarcasm and sass from Mrs. Higgins is real. She really does see that the men, Higgins and Pickering are just playing around and experimenting on Eliza. Which they shouldn’t be because she is a Human with feelings and thoughts just like them. If you think about it, back in those days, only the well off could afford to give thier children dolls to play with. You know the kind; the ones you see in antique stores and cheesy yet nightmare giving horror movies. Only the rich could play with the creepy dolls. Higgins and Pickering have the resources to ‘play’ with Eliza, thus showing Marxism.

Higgins yet again throws Eliza under the bus, exclaiming that he can’t function without her telling him his times or where he needs to be. He relies to much on her and does not value her as a person but as someone who can work for him instead.

Here we see that Pickering does not understand what he has done wrong, neither does Higgins. Pickering states that he believes that the police are not taking them seriously, and Mrs Higgins agrees with him. She is shocked to find that both of them are treating Eliza like an object or something. This is another example of Marxism, which not only Higgins is shown again, but Pickering too, which is a little shocking considering that he was always trying to keep Eliza feeling like she was worth something

Instantly Pickering has assumed that Mr Doolittle has spent all his money like some drunk man, but instead he finds Doolittle dressed as a gentleman. This goes to show that even if you are kinder than others, the mind never strays from the loop of upper class thinking. 

Here we find Mr Doolittle complaining about being brought up in class. He blames Pickering and Higgins for removing him from his freedom of the lower  class, stating that his happiness had been destroyed and he is all tied up with no freedom because he is trapped in middle class morality. This brings forth the idea that he preferred being in the lower class because he had freedom, but now, in a higher class he is trapped. It address the issue that everyone in higher classes are trapped within certain walls to which they have to stay inside unless they want to been seen as a lost dog on the streets.

Higgins refuses to think that some from the lowest class can move up a class, for he truly believes that whatever class you were born in, you must stay there or will always consciously been in that class. He calls Doolittle mad and drunk because he does not want to realise that not everyone stays in the same class.

Yet again he treats Eliza like an object and does not allow her to be her own person, have her own rights. To him, she is nothing more than a rag doll from off the streets that he can play with until he’s bored.

Higgins is assuming Eliza's class based on the way she talks. Because she doesn't speak proper English and pronounces most of her words differently, Higgins thinks that she didn't have enough money to afford a proper education.

Higgins is once again claiming that people of the upper class can receive better education and speak a more proper form of English because they have more money. He is saying that if Eliza had the proper education, she would be able to speak proper English quickly and pass off as someone of an upper class. He is once again referring to people of their classes and their language. If Higgins hears someone that doesn't have the ability to speak proper English, he will place them down in the lower class, whereas it would be the complete opposite with someone who speaks proper English.