Are you suggesting that OP is a chav?
Comment on Chavs are the British version of the Australian Drop Bear
dgdft@lemmy.world 1 day ago
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 17 hours ago
TinyLittlePuni@lemmy.world 1 day ago
You say that as if sociologists haven’t said the same thing.
Lumidaub@feddit.org 1 day ago
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 1 day ago
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 day ago
Okay but other sociologists agree that chav was never an actual subculture. Nobody identified as one (or very few people did, ironically) it was just something the newspapers made up to demonise white working class people. The fashion, the tracksuits, gold, caps, and trainers, are all staples of young white working class fashion that predate the chav myth by decades.
dgdft@lemmy.world 1 day ago
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 point 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.
Lumidaub@feddit.org 1 day ago
Them: Other scientists don’t agree with this.
You: Okay, but other scientists agree with this.