Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5678 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 115

Thread: chav--explain to a confused expatriate please

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    700

    Default

    romanticizing being on the dole as a noble stand against capitalism?

    I have never encountered anybody doing that. In fact, all I ever hear when there's some talk regarding unemployment it's demonization of the actual people being unemployed. I give you that, Tea, this is coming from all sorts of people, working and middle class.

    As to who is most responsible for the fetishizing of work, john eden rightly idenitified the Protestant work ethics. It's kinda interesting that Catholicism always saw work as something undesirable and wealth as being something which actually gets you closer to damnation. Calvinism of course changed these views completely.

    One also has to say tho that Socialists probably fetishized work even more than the Calvinists.

    In Ancient Greek and Rome work was the sign of being UNfree and utterly undesirable - work was being done by slaves or people of the lower social ranks. Today's elites still pay hommage to this way of organising societies.
    Last edited by firefinga; 07-08-2017 at 10:10 AM.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john eden View Post
    Do you feel that anyone is doing that here?
    Well it sounded like you were getting pretty close with that stuff about rejecting the Protestant work ethic.

    To be clear, the entire way we relate to work is severely fucked up and I am by no means defending the status quo. The Tories have successfully made 'benefits' a dirty word to most of the country and the left needs a convincing counter-narrative to stand some chance of stopping the wholesale gutting of the welfare state. What form that could take, I don't know.

    Firefinga - I know I replied to your post but my comments were mainly aimed at JE, sorry for confusion.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,921

    Default

    Off topic, but:

    Quote Originally Posted by owengriffiths View Post
    We've been around for decades, hiding in plain sight, waiting for our time. Our day will come.
    Hi Owen, what's up. Can we PLEASE have more Danny Dyer? Pleeease?
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    North East London
    Posts
    5,370

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    Well it sounded like you were getting pretty close with that stuff about rejecting the Protestant work ethic.
    Ridiculous.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    'Chav' is only a synonym for 'poor' if you decide that it is. It's got much more to do with an attitude and a type of behaviour, in my view. When I was at high school they were called townies rather than chavs and plenty of them came from financially comfortable families (and then again, plenty of them didn't).
    No no and no

    Where is Rudewhy to shit all over this post

    Chavs are poor white people point blank. it's not some affectation you can pull off with a trakky and some workouts
    snmbsm
    @italkenoughshitonhere

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    769

    Default

    Chavs are still about but fortunately for whites everywhere we're back to pretending only black people are working class/live in estates

    Yes I know people from those brexit ends are even poorer then their London equivalents but no one cares.
    snmbsm
    @italkenoughshitonhere

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trilliam View Post
    No no and no

    Where is Rudewhy to shit all over this post

    Chavs are poor white people point blank. it's not some affectation you can pull off with a trakky and some workouts
    Can we take it as read that baboon is one of the more notably left-wing regular contributors here? At any rate a bit more left-wing than that awful reactionary old Mr. Tea? OK, good. He said:

    Quote Originally Posted by baboon2004 View Post
    I grew up in north Kent, and I'm pretty sure that 'chav' has been used on and off for a long time there. To me (and being blissfully unaware of the etymology), it was always used to designate aggressive and unpleasant people who used ignorance as a badge of honour, and I would never have applied the word to anyone who didn't fit that description.
    Most people, if asked to define the word, would probably say something more or less along those lines. So to say that it's simply synonymous with being poor, or being poor and white, is to equate being poor with being aggressive, unpleasant and ignorant.

    And if that's supposed to be the progressive stance to take on the word 'chav', then I really don't know what to say.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    Can we take it as read that baboon is one of the more notably left-wing regular contributors here? At any rate a bit more left-wing than that awful reactionary old Mr. Tea? OK, good. He said:



    Most people, if asked to define the word, would probably say something more or less along those lines. So to say that it's simply synonymous with being poor, or being poor and white, is to equate being poor with being aggressive, unpleasant and ignorant.

    And if that's supposed to be the progressive stance to take on the word 'chav', then I really don't know what to say.
    the description i gave was the media line at the time, and definitely what id imagine posh middle class people to think of chavs

    that description by mr tea sounds pretty airy fairy/not trying to say too much/liberal/out of touch, and tbh under the guise of appearing "humane" is exactly the kind of answer id expect a posh middle class person to give

    where's "north kent" ?

    /

    what is a "progressive" stance on chavs, do we need one?, is that actually a thing?

    chav was a word used to mock/demonise white working classes aka poor white people, we've since decided they're exempt from this kind of treatment unlike other minorities who inhabit the same space in society as them so the word fell out of favour, whats this revisionism about

    you're seeking a progressive stance on chavs stinks of white privilege to me bro
    snmbsm
    @italkenoughshitonhere

  9. #99
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trilliam View Post
    the description i gave was the media line at the time, and definitely what id imagine posh middle class people to think of chavs
    Posh middle class people live in attractive Victorian houses on pleasant, clean streets where antisocial behaviour is not a common problem. They may be the sort who read Katie Hopkins books and who think "All working class people are 'chavs" (i.e. unemployed hooligans), or they may be the sort who read Owen Jones books and think "'Chav' is just a nasty snobbish term for working-class people" (i.e. the stance you and others here are taking). In either case, working-class people are reduced to an Other, an undifferentiated mass with a character determined entirely by their socioeconomic status.

    The glaring irony here is that the people who are actually affected by the ASB, low-level crime and general aggro from those who, for the purposes of this thread, may be called 'chavs', are themselves mostly working class. They live on the estates and streets where this goes on because they can't afford to live anywhere else. I left London a few years but I've spent many years living in areas just like that, and I know many people who still do. Your assumption that you're in a position to lecture me about 'privilege' and being 'out of touch', when I'm talking from personal lived experience and not something I've read in the Guardian and taken for gospel truth, is fucking hilarious. "Bro."

    Quote Originally Posted by trilliam View Post
    where's "north kent" ?
    Oh I dunno really, though I would take a wild guess that it's the northern part of the English county of Kent.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  10. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    Off topic, but:



    Hi Owen, what's up. Can we PLEASE have more Danny Dyer? Pleeease?
    In an ideal world the last two episodes will come out Christmas time. The last episode is particularly long, violent and epic, so it's possible I might blow that deadline.

  11. #101
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    14,921

    Default

    I think it's worth talking for a moment about "the media", which has come up a lot here. First off, without wishing to downplay the obvious effect it has on public opinion, if you think "the media" is an accurate representation of what everyone thinks about everything, then seriously, come on. If you believed everything the papers said you'd think millions of young people spent 2010 snorting "meow-meow", when no-one who isn't a journalist or reporter has ever called mephedrone that, unless they were taking the piss. And in the previous decade, lifestyle supplements decided young, urban, working-class and lower middle-class men spending money on clothes and taking care of their appearance was a brand new phenomenon, and so "metrosexuals" were invented. (Because no-one had ever done that in the '80s, or the '60s, or the '20s, of course.) Second, what even is "the media"? Are we meant to suppose that the Telegraph, the Mirror, the Sun, Guardian, Express, New Statesman, Daily Star and Morning Star can all be lumped in together on any given issue? Ridiculous.

    Anyway, let's look at the proposition that "The Media" - and therefore lots of people - think 'chav' is a synonym for 'poor'. If you know even the first thing about the press in this country, you'll know that even the most reactionary of the right-wing papers, in fact especially those papers, have always distinguished between the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor. Now 'chavs' are stereotypically unemployed - quite possibly claiming benefits fraudulently, in fact - whereas the great majority of poor people either work for a living, are dependent on someone with a paid job or claim a pension (which is never the benefit anyone is thinking of when they're talking about people who are 'on benefits'). So even in the most bigoted and stupid definition of the word - which, admittedly, some people hold - a 'chav' is synonymous with an unemployed person, but not with the majority of the poor, who work for a living.

    And if you look at this from the POV of social class rather than income level and employment status, the proposition that 'chav' just means 'working class' is blown to pieces when you consider that it would be pretty damn weird for the Sun, a paper with an exclusively working-class readership, to slander the very people who buy it every day as 'chavs' - wouldn't it? And this is the paper that spends more ink than any other banging on about "yobs" and "benefits cheats". Or at least vies for that with the Daily Mail, whose readership straddles the working class and the less educated part of the lower middle class. It's certainly not read by many "posh middle class people", who are more likely to read the Guardian.

    So no, 'chav' is not synonymous either with 'poor' or with 'working class' in the minds of any significant number of people.
    Last edited by Mr. Tea; 14-08-2017 at 07:12 PM.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  12. #102
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    Posh middle class people live in attractive Victorian houses on pleasant, clean streets where antisocial behaviour is not a common problem. They may be the sort who read Katie Hopkins books and who think "All working class people are 'chavs" (i.e. unemployed hooligans), or they may be the sort who read Owen Jones books and think "'Chav' is just a nasty snobbish term for working-class people" (i.e. the stance you and others here are taking). In either case, working-class people are reduced to an Other, an undifferentiated mass with a character determined entirely by their socioeconomic status.

    The glaring irony here is that the people who are actually affected by the ASB, low-level crime and general aggro from those who, for the purposes of this thread, may be called 'chavs', are themselves mostly working class. They live on the estates and streets where this goes on because they can't afford to live anywhere else. I left London a few years but I've spent many years living in areas just like that, and I know many people who still do. Your assumption that you're in a position to lecture me about 'privilege' and being 'out of touch', when I'm talking from personal lived experience and not something I've read in the Guardian and taken for gospel truth, is fucking hilarious. "Bro."

    Oh I dunno really, though I would take a wild guess that it's the northern part of the English county of Kent.

    if i was white i definitely would've been called a chav at one stage of my life, maybe even now if it was still in vogue. recently got a flat in an area thats being heavily gentrified after being on the housing register for five years

    so with that being said if giving the correct definition of chav is "reducing working-class people into an undifferentiated mass with a character determined entirely by their socioeconomic status" then fair enough but thats what it is, with the background youre coming from i dont know why you disagree with it

    what u gotta realise is that "liberals" (?) dont have to know the intricacies of something to be right in their general (informed) assessment, they probably got glaring prejudices elsewhere. anyway why dont u wanna call a spade a spade ?

    /

    I asked about North Kent because I went to secondary school in Bexleyheath, I know Blackfen, Welling, Sidcup etc kinda well first saturday job was in Bluewater etc. Anyway I don't know what area of Kent these places are in.

    "I grew up in north Kent, and I'm pretty sure that 'chav' has been used on and off for a long time there. To me (and being blissfully unaware of the etymology), it was always used to designate aggressive and unpleasant people who used ignorance as a badge of honour, and I would never have applied the word to anyone who didn't fit that description."

    So with that in mind to me this description sounds kinda mad. Some people from the areas I mentioned might prescribe to that kinda airy thinking but some/most definitely don't. areas are middling to affluent, there's worse places and better in Kent but assuming the worst in that "North Kent" is a super snobby area, why is your qualified view point in line with someone from there?
    snmbsm
    @italkenoughshitonhere

  13. #103
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    769

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    I think it's worth talking for a moment about "the media", which has come up a lot here. First off, without wishing to downplay the obvious effect it has on public opinion, if you think "the media" is an accurate representation of what everyone thinks about everything, then seriously, come on. If you believed everything the papers said you'd think millions of young people spent 2010 snorting "meow-meow", when no-one who isn't a journalist or reporter has ever called mephedrone that, unless they were taking the piss. And in the previous decade, lifestyle supplements decided young, urban, working-class and lower middle-class men spending money on clothes and taking care of their appearance was a brand new phenomenon, and so "metrosexuals" were invented. (Because no-one had ever done that in the '80s, or the '60s, or the '20s, of course.) Second, what even is "the media"? Are we meant to suppose that the Telegraph, the Mirror, the Sun, Guardian, Express, New Statesman, Daily Star and Morning Star can all be lumped in together on any given issue? Ridiculous.

    I'm talking specifically about the Mail, Sun, and papers of that ilk, you could say those kind of outlets are controlled by "the poshos" and explicitly insult while simultaneously being marketed to and loved by the working class who love it. It'd be wrong of you to think intelligent middle class people who read The Guardian or whatever don't prescribe to some of the baser sentiments being echoed in the papers they don't read


    Anyway, let's look at the proposition that "The Media" - and therefore lots of people - think 'chav' is a synonym for 'poor'. If you know even the first thing about the press in this country, you'll know that even the most reactionary of the right-wing papers, in fact especially those papers, have always distinguished between the 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor. Now 'chavs' are stereotypically unemployed - quite possibly claiming benefits fraudulently, in fact - whereas the great majority of poor people either work for a living, are dependent on someone with a paid job or claim a pension (which is never the benefit anyone is thinking of when they're talking about people who are 'on benefits'). So even in the most bigoted and stupid definition of the word - which, admittedly, some people hold - a 'chav' is synonymous with an unemployed person, but not with the majority of the poor, who work for a living.

    we could go into the exact definition of a chav but lets be honest does it really matter? like you yourself said chav was used as a blanket term that could insult the benefit cheats and as well as the nine to five worker who lives next door to them? if the most bigoted stupid definition of the word is what is being applied then its being applied liberally whether its factual or not

    And if you look at this from the POV of social class rather than income level and employment status, the proposition that 'chav' just means 'working class' is blown to pieces when you consider that it would be pretty damn weird for the Sun, a paper with an exclusively working-class readership, to slander the very people who buy it every day as 'chavs' - wouldn't it? And this is the paper that spends more ink than any other banging on about "yobs" and "benefits cheats". Or at least vies for that with the Daily Mail, whose readership straddles the working class and the less educated part of the lower middle class. It's certainly not read by many "posh middle class people", who are more likely to read the Guardian.

    So no, 'chav' is not synonymous either with 'poor' or with 'working class' in the minds of any significant number of people.

    i think i touched on the points you're making here in my above paragraphs so lets just leave it at you're educated enough to know the truth but too scared of not appearing educated to say it
    to summarise^
    snmbsm
    @italkenoughshitonhere

  14. #104
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    8,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Tea View Post
    Can we take it as read that baboon is one of the more notably left-wing regular contributors here? At any rate a bit more left-wing than that awful reactionary old Mr. Tea? OK, good. He said:

    Most people, if asked to define the word, would probably say something more or less along those lines. So to say that it's simply synonymous with being poor, or being poor and white, is to equate being poor with being aggressive, unpleasant and ignorant.

    And if that's supposed to be the progressive stance to take on the word 'chav', then I really don't know what to say.
    To clarify, I was talking about how the word was used in 90s Kent, not how it started to be used across the UK in the 2000s. My point was that it was bizarre to see a word that was not often used when I was young, suddenly have a 'second life' as a word routinely used to bash working class people who acted in a way middle class people deemed vulgar.

  15. #105
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    8,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trilliam View Post
    I asked about North Kent because I went to secondary school in Bexleyheath, I know Blackfen, Welling, Sidcup etc kinda well first saturday job was in Bluewater etc. Anyway I don't know what area of Kent these places are in.

    "I grew up in north Kent, and I'm pretty sure that 'chav' has been used on and off for a long time there. To me (and being blissfully unaware of the etymology), it was always used to designate aggressive and unpleasant people who used ignorance as a badge of honour, and I would never have applied the word to anyone who didn't fit that description."

    So with that in mind to me this description sounds kinda mad. Some people from the areas I mentioned might prescribe to that kinda airy thinking but some/most definitely don't. areas are middling to affluent, there's worse places and better in Kent but assuming the worst in that "North Kent" is a super snobby area, why is your qualified view point in line with someone from there?
    As the author of that comment...in 2005, so I'm not exactly tied to it... I guess if you want to understand what someone is saying, then read the original context. I was talking about the 90s, and I'm guessing your youth came a bit later than that?

    I only mentioned north Kent because there was a long-time story that the word 'chav' originated from Chatham, which is in north Kent (so yeah, not really that super snobby)...may well not be true, but it's a pretty widespread story, and I never heard anyone else from any other parts of the country use it until much later (tho I'm sure someone will contradict me on that)...

    Slothrop's comment from 2006 convinces me I'm not entirely mad and not entirely misremembering:

    "I'm originally from east kent. Looking back, 'chav' has always had a bit of a dual meaning depending on the context and, I suppose, on the chav in question - partly it's a youth tribe seen from a neutral point of view as being another set of fashions and styles, and partly a youth tribe as seen from the rather partisan point of view of a member of a different youth tribe somewhat further down the food chain as being some violently conformist tendancies. The parts of chavviness that you objected to weren't the trainers and trackies so much as the tendancy to heave bricks at you in the park.

    It was never entirely a class thing, either - a lot of the chavs I knew at school were from very nice middle class families. I get almost as bothered by the Burchillesque argument that ignorance and stupidity are exclusively working class qualities so objecting to ignorance and stupidity is class prejudice as I do by all the media people who've just discovered that 'the chav phenomenon' gives them the chance to exhibit their prejudices and be thought clever for it."


    To be clear, I'm saying that the usage changed when the word 're-emerged' in the 2000s and spread like wildfire because of the internet.
    Last edited by baboon2004; 15-08-2017 at 12:47 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •