Is "Chav" an offensive term?

[Joker]

There was a piece on the BBC's online magazine a few days ago about the word "chav", its origins, its implications and why it's controversial.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13626046

What do you think about the usage of the word? Is it just harmless fun, or is there something more sinister in it, a way for the middle classes to demonise the "feckless" working classes, with suggestions that their plight is all their own making, and not the result of socioeconomic factors beyond their control?

Of course the biggest example of "chav bashing" was in Little Britain. It does stick in the throat a bit that the two writers of the programme both went to private schools, and there is evidence that the term has been used to fulfil a wider political role, to take attention away from the significant economic inequalities that have actually increased in the last twenty years, and to claim that it's the working class who are to blame for their predicament, and it's their laziness that has resulted in their deprivation.

[The Wengerbabies]

Chav's not acceptable but toff is I presume?

[Joker]

Chav's not acceptable but toff is I presume?

In many ways no it shouldn't be, because people don't choose into what family they are born in, or the privileged circumstances of their upbringing. If they go to private school, it's because their parents sent them there, not because they chose to. So we should be criticising the system of private education rather than the people who have benefited from that system itself.

However, it's less offensive than a campaign to demonise the least well off in society IMO, because toff is aimed at the powerful, and while I wouldn't use the term, its usage is in some ways understandable at people angry at the entrenched inequalities that we see in this country.

[Chrissie]

In many ways no it shouldn't be, because people don't choose into what family they are born in, or the privileged circumstances of their upbringing. If they go to private school, it's because their parents sent them there, not because they chose to. So we should be criticising the system of private education rather than the people who have benefited from that system itself.

However, it's less offensive than a campaign to demonise the least well off in society IMO, because toff is aimed at the powerful, and while I wouldn't use the term, its usage is in some ways understandable at people angry at the entrenched inequalities that we see in this country.

Chav has no relation to upbringing in my opinion. It refers to the way a person chooses to conduct themselves. Everyone has choices.

[The Wengerbabies]

However, it's less offensive than a campaign to demonise the least well off in society IMO, because toff is aimed at the powerful, and while I wouldn't use the term, its usage is in some ways understandable at people angry at the entrenched inequalities that we see in this country.

What about people angry at the way chavs sponging off taxpayers?

Your double standards are laughable tbh.

But back on topic, I think there are more important things to worry about then whether a word upsets the hyper-sensitive.

[Joker]

What about people angry at the way chavs sponging off taxpayers?

Your double standards are laughable tbh.

But back on topic, I think there are more important things to worry about then whether a word upsets the hyper-sensitive.

The problem of benefit fraud (which is I'm assuming part of what you mean when you say "sponging") is nowhere near as big a problem as the right wing media make out. There are significant checks especially with respect to unemployment insurance or JSA, making sure that individuals are actively looking for a job before they receive payments. See this:

Perhaps Iain Duncan Smith and his DWP spinners would benefit from some context. The £1.1 billion cost of fraud (a modest 0.7% of the total benefits spend) averages out to £59 across 18.5 million claimants.* In contrast, MPs were ordered to pay back £1.2 million in the wake of Thomas Legg’s inquiry into expenses, an average of £1,858 for the 646 members of the Commons.

http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/0...benefit-fraud/

[Letters]

Chav has no relation to upbringing in my opinion. It refers to the way a person chooses to conduct themselves. Everyone has choices.

Innit.

[Chrissie]

Innit.

Lolz

[MissHandbag]

The problem of benefit fraud (which is I'm assuming part of what you mean when you say "sponging") is nowhere near as big a problem as the right wing media make out. There are significant checks especially with respect to unemployment insurance or JSA, making sure that individuals are actively looking for a job before they receive payments. See this:



http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/0...benefit-fraud/

Good point about the MP expenses but doesn't negate the fact there are a lot of 'Chav's sponging - I should know, I live on Chav street.

Recently whilst sitting on my patio (on a day off, not just chavving about) I over heard my next door neigbour bemoaning to another spongy neigbour how he had lost his job. Then listened to chavvy explain exactly how to claim benefits instead of working...then listened to his sister join in with tips. Their Mum is on benefits for supposedly being agaraphobic yet is the chair person of our housing co-op and travels at least once a year to a 2 day conference.

PS - yes I did poke my head over the garden fence and remind them how I'm paying to keep them in benefits - they didn't like it much.

[Nozza!]

Oi, mediocre Mods, I think it is offensive, so add it to the sweary filter. Please change "Chav" to "Burberry Ape"...