If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Marx would likely consider them to be Lumpenproletariat as opposed to the normal Proletariat, even Socialists like Marx and Trotsky were not above calling people 'social scum'.
There comes a point where you cannot blame society or upbringing for a persons behaviour. When do these people take responsibility for their own actions? I mean, why are the poor and unemployed spending all their money on gold sovereigns and body kits for clapped out Vauxhall Novas?
How do you dress? It's your opinion that trackies and hoodies look "retarded", personally I find them not only comfortable but also stylish.
He's "chosen" to act like that? Do you know every single "chav" in the world? Do you know what goes on behind closed doors? No, so stop speaking on their behalf.
The only people I've seen with greasy unwashed hair, facial hair where people can't be bothered to shave and just look like they don't look after themselves is at a rock gig, then again I don't think there's wrong with people like that. You do unfortunately.
Great you're proving my point. There's a lack of opportunity poorer areas. Likelihood is is that if you were born poor, then you'll stay poor.
So where does a "scally" end and a "chav" begin?
Marx didn't believe the Lumpenproletariat were 'social scum', I suggest you re-read his works.
Material inequalities of course. Buying material goods to compensate for other inequalities. If you think we're all born as blank canvases and are totally immune to the environment we're born in then you're an idiot.
"The "dangerous class", the social scum, that passively rotting mass thrown off by the lowest layers of the old society, may, here and there, be swept into the movement by a proletarian revolution; its conditions of life, however, prepare it far more for the part of a bribed tool of reactionary intrigue."
Maybe someone else should do a bit of re-reading, eh? That's from his most famous work; The Communist Manifesto.
Buying material goods to compensate for equalities is what idiots do, hence why people have no respect for them.
If you think that everyone in the world is entirely a product of their environment and are incapable of applying pragmatism, logic or any form of reason to their situation in an attempt to better it then you're the idiot.
I've read The Communist Manifesto plenty of times thank you and Marx is merely describing the social conditions that that class find themselves in.
What's this about applying pragmatism, logic or reason?
I'm not saying either way. People do have to take responsibility of their own actions, that's why if a poor person breaks into someone's house, murders them and robs them then I think they should serve a long time in prison, still doesn't stop me questioning why they done their actions, finding out how we can stop future instances happening.
You on the other hand, see a group of people wearing trackies in a housing estate and assume they're all scrounging on benefits, the girls have 3 kids by the time they're 20, are antisocial drug users and don't deserve the time of day. It's class snobbery.
Was about to make a post but this ^^ basically. You can define a chav as whatever, but people call people chavs all over based on appearance. And you can't make an in depth judgement about someone based on their appearance. And you shouldn't prejudice against someone based on their appearance either.
I don't give a shit what goes on behind closed doors, the discussion is about them as they are in public. When I see them spitting on street corners shouting "alright love" at me and then laughing, with that awful chav accent that sounds like nobody taught them to speak properly, at 3 in the afternoon, outside a shop with a can of beer in their hand, what am I suppopsed to think other than that they're a complete moron with nothing better to do with their lives? There is nothing whatsoever to give me any other impression and so I mentally refer to them as chav. If they don't like it they can sort themselves out.
Come to Portsmouth, then. Seriously.
I'm sorry but I don't care how poor they are, it is NO excuse for the kind of behaviour I just described. And as Illuminatus pointed out, if they're so poor, maybe they should spoend money on things more important than sovereigns.
I've never even heard the word scally before, nobody down south uses that word as far as I know. They're all just chavs.
It's starting to irritate me how naive people are. Do you honestly think that the only information you gain when you see a stranger is about what they're wearing? You pick up a LOT about them in seconds. You're probably not aware of it but you're registering everything from the way they look at you to the way they're standing, their body langauge, what they're doing, who they're with, what they sound like. When someone calls someone else a chav it's a judgement based on all of that and more, not just their physical appearance. Chavs generally give a negative impression within seconds of meeting them through more than just their appearance alone. If you don't believe me, get out of the house and have a look for yourself.
Chav is still just slang. It's been adopted by the Daily Hate Mail and other middle class institutions as term for those that they percieve to be tacky and of the underclass.
Chav comes from the Roamny word Chavi. It is clear to those that know the word for the original term. I've seen it develop. As a kid in primary school cahv was a commen term, but it was never meant in a derogatory manner.
As 'Gypsy' turned into the derogatory 'Gypo', 'Chavi' turnerd into the derogatory 'Chav'.
And pikey is a racist term. A term used all to frequently by those that love to use the word 'Chav'.
It's either ignorant or it's hateful. Either way it's offensive and stupid.
People are people.
People tht assume that all people that dress liek 'Chav' are criminals are as small minded and stupid as those that consider all 'Emos' to be self harmers.
It's bollocks.
It's not their fault for conforming to sterotype, it's your stupidity in creating and believing in the steryotype.
Sterotypes are used most often by the small minded ignorant cunts who look for reassurance that they're better than others.
This website is proof sterotypes are bollocks. Here we have goths, chavsl, emos - whatever stupid lable you can think of. All talking to each other judged on there thoughts and opinions. You're here talkign to people you wouldn't ordinarily give the time o day beacause you brsuh them asside as chavs or whatever. It's a very sad attitude to have, and say alot about you.
Turnpike traveller. It's a racist term as offensive to Romany Gypsies as Nigger is to blacks.
No he isn't.
http://original.britannica.com/eb/article-9049344/Lumpenproletariat
Also:
"In the many translations, including those by Engels, the German 'lumpenproletariat' is variously rendered as 'social scum', 'dangerous classes', 'mob', 'swell-mob', "ragamuffin', 'ragged-proletariat'. And Marx and Engels often use other terms in place of 'lumpenproletariat' (particularly 'la bohème' and 'lazzaroni' but also German versions of the above English translations)" - http://libcom.org/library/deleuze-marx-politics-nicholas-thoburn-3
Pragmatism refers to behavior which temporarily sets aside one ideal to pursue a greater ideal. Logic is a way of thinking where the aim is to get a valid inference from a set of premises. Reason could be considered superset of logic involving analysis and synthesis of ideas.
It could be argued that someone who buys and wears alot of gold sovereign rings could be doing so as a display of wealth, a means of setting themselves 'socially higher' than their peers; realisation of an ideal. Instead of buying gold sovereigns maybe it would be better for them to spend their money buying a suit and tie and looking for a decent job, or spending that money to go to college. Maybe someone holds the ideal that they don't care how their judged for how they dress, yet still people judge them because of it and it's detrimental to themselves. Pragmatically, they should put aside that ideal and dress in a manner that gets them respect in order to get a good job and better themselves; that being a greater ideal. Regardless of whether it's right to judge someone on appearance people still do and have done for since the dawn of civilization, this is how it has always been and it will never change. To actively ignore this aspect to the detriment of your own wellbeing is a stupid choice, regardless of wealth or class.
Theft can be justified on some instances, even murder. However, those instances are few and far between. But when you're stealing because it's easier than getting a job, or cars for joyriding etc. then you're simply scum.
Don't put words in my mouth, I've never said said and I've already replied to a similar comment so I'll just cut and paste my last response:
"Nice straw man argument.
Did I say it's right to treat everyone that way? No, I said 9 times out of 10 that the generalization is correct in the behaviour sense of the word. I also said in an earlier post that 'chav' has a meaning that goes far beyond a persons class. I did not say that people should be prejudged because they're from a council estate and wear trackies because I've been pretty clear that it wouldn't make them a chav, but in most cases they turn out to be when you've got a real basis for judgment."
Also, how can it be class snobbery when I'm working class myself?
Oh please. Is what you're wearing now an accident? No. You chose it, you bought it, you decided to put it on this morning. When a 15 year old boy dyes his hair black and gets that daft fringe and starts wearing black, eyeliner, DELIBERATELY copying his new idol, what's-his-face from my chemical romance, who he loves because he sings all those very 'EMOtional' songs, I'm not allowed to call him an emo or assume he's an attention seeking self harmer because that's judgemental? He's gone out of his way to get himself that label by conforming to the stereotype, and whether you're prepared to admit it or not, he's done it all for attention.
If you choose to dress like that, it's because you want to be an emo, and therefore you deal with whatever judgements people will make about you. If you don't want people to call you an emo, don't try so hard to look exactly like one. It's exactly the same for chavs. To say that stereotyping is an unfair judgement is to say that people don't have responsibility for their own actions when it comes to dressing themselves.
Who the hell mentioned a job inteview?
Hence lies the problem. I do care.
So if was a bunch of men in suits would they still be chavs in your eyes?
So all chavs wear soveriegn rings? Where did soveriegn rings and job interviews come from?
Chavs just one of the words for a social phenomenon that's got various equivalents all over the country. For example they call them 'neds' in Scotland, where I live we used to call them 'townies'. Chav doesn't mean small romany boy anymore, semantics have drifted. In the north-east the term 'charva' ment prostitute, the meaning of that changed too to mean 'chav' today.
Meanings change, words change.
Of course it's judgemental.
He's not the one linking self harm to dressin like an 'Emo' YOU ARE.
It's not rocket science.
Of course they change.
Chav has now replaced gypo - also an offensive, lazy and ignorant term.
Simply put, you're aguing that it's fair to make judgements about people on the way the look and then label them with a derogatory term. You're arguing that it's their fault because they choose to dress like that, rather than fit some the idea you have of what a respecatable person looks like. It's STUPID.
You're creating the sterotype, you're creating the devision.
Yeah, you're right, that IS the problem. We're talking about stereotyping and generalizing. These are based on initial contact with someone and aren't even relevent to the person's home situation or actual personality. It's about all the things I've already stated like body language, behaviour and general hygeine.
What a stupid question. What if they were elephants? What if they had no heads? Please, don't bring up hypothetical scenarios which would never happen and are therefore irrelevant.
No. Not every chav has a sovereign. I never even suggested they did. Again, it was an EXAMPLE, used to try to make a point, which you yet again completely missed.
No it hasn't, gypo refers to criminal travellers.
It's common societal practice and has existed since the dawn of civilization. If it's so stupid, turn up to a job or job interview dress however you please and see how far that goes. It's nice to sit on the internet with your lofty ideals but I dare you to put them into practice.
You like everyone judges people based on their appearance every day, if you say otherwise you are a liar.
I can't create stereotypes, I don't control peoples dress or behaviour. I merely observe them and recognise trends.
You didn't say it was an example, you just brought it up out of the blue.
Really so you can tell if someone is a dole scrounger or a girl who's expecting her third kid by the time she's 13 from just walking past a few people? Fucking idiot. :rolleyes:
No it's not a stupid question, are they chavs or not?
And some judgmental pricks like to consider other beneath them depite not having a clue about them - and simply judgeing them on the way they look or where they come from. Fact of life prooved by yourself and unfortunately far too many others.
I'm above you, as I do not stoop to personal insults.
Regardless, not everyone is equal. Do you consider yourself equal to a child molester or murderer? A wifebeater?
Firstly, can we try and keep this at least reasonably mature, I've managed to avoid resorting to just calling you an idiot, maybe you should try it too. It's a discussion, not a school playground.
You seem to be forgetting that the way a stereotype works is that you have your ideas about that category, for example, they don't work, they're baby factories, they're stupid. Then you have the characteristics you think indicate this, such as the way they dress, they way they act in public. It's called a generalization because you can't possibly KNOW for sure if any of it's true.
No they are not chavs, I still wouldn't respond to them and I wouldn't have any respect for them but my assumptions about them and their background would obviously be different. It doesn't happen though, and there's a reason for that.
He stooped to calling me an idiot earlier, makes you think....
Gypos has for years been used to describe people who would now under you criteria be described as chavs. Very popular amongst immature secondary school kids.
That's justification then. Because it's common and it's been done for thousands of years does not make it clever.
Where has job interviews come itno it. Your talkgin about judging people on the appearance thoughout any walk of life, not just job interviews.
I do. I'll admit I didn't used to but I liek to think I've wised up, and certainly grown up.
Oh yes you have to. But I don't write people off as scum based on apearance. I make judgements on waht I have to judge, but I recognise there's plently more to jusge somebosy on than appearance.
Of course you do. Sterotypes are created by the poeple makign pre judgements, not those that are bneing pre judged.
... that they must be running out of arguments because if they had more to say, they wouldn't need to stoop so low.