Dubstepforum.com

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Yeah, coz that's exactly what i'm saying
All Chavs are not 'Wiggers'. All 'Wiggers' are not Chavs.

Laszlo wrote:

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Yeah, coz that's exactly what i'm saying
All Chavs are not 'Wiggers'. All 'Wiggers' are not Chavs.

Indeed, but they're very associated... and you can't deny that Chav is a pretty much white-only stereotype, can you?

How come society wouldn't label an urban black teenager wearing a tracksuit and hanging out on the corner a "chav", but would a white one if it's not racist?

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Thinking isnt for losers, over thinking is pointless.

JBoy wrote:

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Thinking isnt for losers, over thinking is pointless.

Over-thinking is rather subjective... I could assert just as reliably that you aren't thinking enough. Either way, it'd achieve very little without actually backing it with a counter-argument. That's pointless behaviour.

If you think I'm overthinking, ignore me and carry on bashing the chavs. Your conscience is all that matters.

magma wrote: it implies that it's ok for blacks to dress/act a certain way, but it's not ok for whites... this can only be because blacks are a lower form of human than whites... they have no choice about being unrefined, unintelligent and violent, but the whites do

I don't really know where to start with this.

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Yeah, coz that's exactly what i'm saying
All Chavs are not 'Wiggers'. All 'Wiggers' are not Chavs.

Indeed, but they're very associated...

Could you explain that please?

magma wrote:and you can't deny that Chav is a pretty much white-only stereotype, can you?

I can absolutely deny that, and not just for the sake of argument (this is costing you £5, btw). Perhaps you're right in saying that it doesn't apply to black youths in tracksuits, but I have seen it applied to asian youths as well as oriental youths, and so I disregard the term 'Chav' as being anything to do colour.

Laszlo wrote:asian youths as well as oriental youths

both asian... big continent

magma wrote:

JBoy wrote:

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Thinking isnt for losers, over thinking is pointless.

Over-thinking is rather subjective... I could assert just as reliably that you aren't thinking enough. Either way, it'd achieve very little without actually backing it with a counter-argument. That's pointless behaviour.

If you think I'm overthinking, ignore me and carry on bashing the chavs. Your conscience is all that matters.

Im not bashing chavs and why would any of this play on my conscience? I cant actually tell if all this over the top liberalism is serious or not.

JBoy wrote:I cant actually tell if all this over the top liberalism is serious or not.

Same.
You're one of my favourite posters, Magma, but sometimes, just sometimes.....

JBoy wrote:

magma wrote:

JBoy wrote:

magma wrote:

Laszlo wrote:^Over thought.

You're right, we shouldn't think about this.. we should ignore it until the next riot. Thinking is for losers.

Thinking isnt for losers, over thinking is pointless.

Over-thinking is rather subjective... I could assert just as reliably that you aren't thinking enough. Either way, it'd achieve very little without actually backing it with a counter-argument. That's pointless behaviour.

If you think I'm overthinking, ignore me and carry on bashing the chavs. Your conscience is all that matters.

Im not bashing chavs and why would any of this play on my conscience? I cant actually tell if all this over the top liberalism is serious or not.

I've heard Chav-bashing is taking off in the gay communities.

^+1 for witty comeback.

magma wrote:ignore me and carry on bashing the chavs.

jalon, mushdee chav....

as if chavs give a shit about name calling!

Laszlo wrote:

magma wrote: it implies that it's ok for blacks to dress/act a certain way, but it's not ok for whites... this can only be because blacks are a lower form of human than whites... they have no choice about being unrefined, unintelligent and violent, but the whites do

I don't really know where to start with this.

Howso? The logic seems pretty clear... blacks were enslaved because society at the time held the opinion that they were a lower form of human. Fast-forward ~200 years and whites are seen as "stupid" if they act "black". i.e. People still think that blacks are less intelligent/different... they're to be pitied like the disadvantaged kid in school that's trying his best, whites who act like them are to be despised like the clever kid who ignored his teachers and chose a life of crime.

Indeed, but they're very associated...

Could you explain that please?

http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q= ... gger&meta=

A quick Google is a good way to see if society is asking the same questions as you. This is a common enough thought. The first notable Chav charicature was Ali G... half the country couldn't work out if he was supposed to be black or not, but no makeup was involved... it was a just Jewish man wearing "black" clothes and talking in an urban accent. That's all it takes to make people start thinking about race.

magma wrote:and you can't deny that Chav is a pretty much white-only stereotype, can you?

I can absolutely deny that, and not just for the sake of argument (this is costing you £5, btw). Perhaps you're right in saying that it doesn't apply to black youths in tracksuits, but I have seen it applied to asian youths as well as oriental youths, and so I disregard the term 'Chav' as being anything to do colour.

Seeing as the cultural stereotypes for urban fashion, crime and behaviour don't generally extend to Asian communities, it's not really as relevant - wigger is directed at people trying to be "Black", rather than anything else. Tracksuits/trainers/baseball caps as fashion items came from Hip Hop culture... if you're going to bash a white kid for dressing like Dame Dash, but not Dame Dash, well... it really is hard to say it's not racism. How come it's ok for the black guy to dress a certain way but not the white?

Semi-related: When Eugenicists used to "rank" the races, they tended to put Asians above Whites in terms of intelligence and work ethic (possibly as a way of making their results seem more acceptable - if we're not top, we can't be racist!) and so I can imagine that the same attitudes towards "acting black" could well be applicable. I've never seen it happen, but I don't see why it wouldn't.



OTT Liberalism? Again, all rather subjective, but oh well, if you say so... I was labouring under the impression that's what rave culture was supposed to be all about. Is it really OTT to suggest that demonising large sections of a society is bad for that society? I think it seems fairly logical, but I am a bit of a hippy deep down... it's a major reason I fell in love with ravers so heavily.

magma wrote: There are equally as many rapscallions in the middle classes as the lower - why is the abuse so heavily directed towards the poor ones? Why is it ok to charicature poor people's clothes/accents, but not rich?

Sorry to all if this has already been resolved, but this is the only thing I think you're wrong on Magma. Plenty of people take the piss out of rich people. I live in an area where there are some fairly poor families, and (as I'm on the doorstep to Solihull), some incredibly rich ones and associate with both lots. The poorer people take the piss out of the rich peoples clothes and call them posh twats (when many of them are rich, but not necessarily posh nor show-y) and write off people who live in a certain area as such (My girlfriend's family live in one of these areas, and they're constantly scraping pennies together just to try and get by) and some of the richer people cringe at the thought of living where I live, in your standard suburb on the edge of the city with a low crime rate and some fairly expensive houses.

It comes down to a perceived them-vs-us situation. Some people from poorer backgrounds see everyone that has money for whatever reason as posh twats, and some people from well off backgrounds see all poorer people as lowlife criminals. I definitely think it's perceived as OK in their own circles.

Funny when some of my mates that live in Solihull accidentally slag the area I live in when my house is huge compared to theirs (especially including garden space) and there's a lower crime rate

Magma you are off youre head, in a good way though. Its nice to think that someone is as passionate as you, but its all a tad naive.

@Magma - we disagree on what a 'Chav' is and where it first came from.
Semantics is the only reason I get into arguments on here. Yay the English language

/argument

(£5 please)

magma wrote:Tracksuits/trainers/baseball caps as fashion items came from Hip Hop culture...

Funny, I could have sworn they all came from sports

particle-jim wrote:

magma wrote:Tracksuits/trainers/baseball caps as fashion items came from Hip Hop culture...

Funny, I could have sworn they all came from sports

we call em 'scallies' in manchester cos of the word 'scallywag' and fuck off i live in wythenshawe i know a fuckin scally when i see/hear one

its a way of behaving and an attitude that you dont lose by swapping trackies for designer gear or by rediscovering 'th' instead of 'ver'

i have an inner-scally, but i keep him in check, bless him...

Townies.

JBoy wrote:Magma you are off youre head, in a good way though. Its nice to think that someone is as passionate as you, but its all a tad naive.

So far you've said I think too much and that I'm naive (think too little), which is rather confusing. You haven't given a reason for either... I'd suggest starting with outlining why you think I'm wrong, rather than just saying "you're wrong"... that's how conversation works.

particle-jim wrote:

magma wrote:Tracksuits/trainers/baseball caps as fashion items came from Hip Hop culture...

Funny, I could have sworn they all came from sports

As clothes they came from sports, them as fashion items came from Hip Hop. Nobody was rocking their Dunlops to Ronnie Scotts in the 60s...

Laszlo wrote:@Magma - we disagree on what a 'Chav' is and where it first came from.
Semantics is the only reason I get into arguments on here. Yay the English language

/argument

(£5 please)

I imagine it is semantics... as always, text only discussions end up seeming more serious than they really are. I'm certainly not trying to accuse anyone here of racism - I just think the trend for the whole of society being comfortable with the use of words like Chav is a signal that we've not properly dealt with our issues yet... and I'd rather we talked about them than ignored them until the next riot. We need to get a handle on economic and social inequality somehow. Obviously, it's an immensely emotive subject... so props for not resorting to flaming the shit out of me on here. You're a very good man.

Remind me to buy you a pint if you're at System.