cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/44683036
Explanation:
::: spoiler spoiler Both twist something (staples of young white working class fashion, tracksuits, gold, caps, and trainers, a cute Australian animal) into something dangerous (chav/drop bear) and that caricature is wrongfully said to be it's own thing (a subculture/a carnivorous marsupial species - in reality, sociologists have confirmed there was no "chav" subculture, nobody or almost nobody identified as one, it was something made up by upper class tabloids to demonise the white British working class, like how zoologists have said there's no "drop bear" species, it was something to make people fearful of Koalas) in order to make people fearful (chav especially is riddled with classism, though.)
:::
10 Comments
blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 162d
You're a stuck record aren't ya?
Have you ever heard of the phrase:
"The lady doth protest too much, me thinks?"
phar@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 162d
But they all have Chlamydia
dgdft@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 162d
What makes this a recurring fixation for you, OP? Didn’t you post a bunch of old threads arguing that chav is a slur?
Just a weird hill, mate.
the_crotch@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 161d
Are you suggesting that OP is a chav?
TinyLittlePuni@lemmy.world · -4 pts · 162d
Lumidaub@feddit.org · 11 pts · 162d
What do sociologists say about people who repeat the same talking points over and over and over without actually engaging with anything anyone else says?
dgdft@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 162d
You’re quoting the political opinion piece of one lone sociologist, though. It’s objectively a hot take that the majority of the field would not agree with.
You can find plenty of physicists who will tell you aliens, bigfoot or alternative dimensions are real. The validity of that statement does not make aliens, bigfoot, or multiverses a physical reality.
TinyLittlePuni@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 162d
dgdft@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 162d
I’m totally on board with the idea that for academic anthropology, self-identity should be treated as the core determinant of cultural grouping: i.e., people are who they say they are.
But IMO, to take that academic lens outside a scholarly context and browbeat that there’s no utility in having a commonplace semiotic label for “common behavioral and stylistic trends of white, working-class British youth from the 90s and aughts” is a weird leap that misunderstands practical semantics.
Tmiwi@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 161d
Lumidaub@feddit.org · 2 pts · 162d
Them: Other scientists don't agree with this.
You: Okay, but other scientists agree with this.
Lumidaub@feddit.org · 4 pts · 162d
Ah, you found the correct community.
ekZepp@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 162d
Kowowow@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 162d
More scared of pete and bas