"Culture is ordinary"

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Unadulterated ressentiment. Beautiful. The sub-human elevated to the status of a god: the chav-master, with a truly aristocratic contempt for education. The middle classes a new category of slave (overeducated, underpaid).

The post that was quoted here has been removed

"In the UK TV series Doctor Who, the character Rose Tyler is referred to as a chav. When her consciousness is taken over by another character, she looks in a mirror and remarks "Oh my God, I'm a chav!" and later says upon re-entering her body "Oh great, chav-tastic again". This is apparently a reference to the character's attire rather than behaviour." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav

Tee-hee.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Now you're just taking the p;ss, you've completely failed to address the main issue concerning the equivocation of the word 'chav'. Her arguement is meaningless because it picks out one set of people and then assigns them a completely different set of characteristics.

Honestly, you're just trying to wind me up, aren't you?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

😕

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Except that the proletariat is not in control. In fact, it seems that taking control of your life (responsibility) is increasingly held in contempt.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

If you can't see that your definition of terms is the pivot of your argument then I can't say anything to you about it.

If not all working classes are chavs you cannot apply the argument that is targetted at chavs and apply it to the working classes as a whole.

I dont know about Wayne Rooney being a chav, he may be from a chav background and share characteristics with chavs, but the fact that he has a job, talent and a secure future indicates he may have risen beyond his initial group. That I still find him a morally reprehensible simpleton is beside the point 🙂

And no, I don't agree that the term chav is used as a generic label for those from poorer, working class backgrounds (or at least I don't use it that way and don't think others should either). All chavs may be working class, but not all working class people are chavs.

The misdirection which Burchill applies is key. Chavs are a scum-sucking group of society, the working classes are not. That one resides in the other is what Burchill is playing on. Chav 'culture' and the existence of chavs are not one and the same. That chavs exist may be the fault of the Mail reading public, maybe not, but that chav culture is abhorrent, crime-ridden and base is not. Not all people that have been oppressed by the Mail readers turn out to be cr@ppy people. When I see a Burberry clad fool, I consider him through his behaviour, not through his position on the ladder.

Originally posted by Starrman

The misdirection which Burchill applies is key. Chavs are a scum-sucking group of society, the working classes are not. That one resides in the other is what Burchill is playing on. Chav 'culture' and the existence of chavs are not one and the same. That chavs exist may be the fault of the Mail reading public, maybe not, but that chav culture is abhor ...[text shortened]... berry clad fool, I consider him through his behaviour, not through his position on the ladder.

But did Thatcher play the Frankenstein to this mass of monsters? That seems to be CFT's main point.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I guess that makes Michael Moorcock a chav too. Which seems a bit off. I tend to agree with Starrman: chav doesn't mean 'working class'; it's a class of its own. Perhaps the old top-down class model needs revising. It's a bit creaky and industrial.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I guess that makes Michael Moorcock a chav too. Which seems a bit off. I tend to agree with Starrman: chav doesn't mean 'working class'; it's a class of its own. Perhaps the old top-down class model needs revising. It's a bit creaky and industrial.

And anyone who worked at NME is a moron anyway.