Whatsapp group chat - SJW's strike again

[Freakbro]

Middle-class white people claiming oppression because society deems it in poor taste for them to be overtly racist is quite amusing.

Now that sums up all my thoughts on the subject in one succinct sentence

Well, frustrating really, but I prefer to look at life through a slightly 'absurdist' lens (helps prevent gammon symptoms) so I've got to laugh.

If it helps for perspective, I'm white, in my 30s and probably 'middle-class'.

And as I've said previously on one of the rare times I've bothered to comment in one of these righty v lefty GD threads (posted predominantly by the right), the only time that I read terms such as SJW, that snow term, lib-tard and virtue-signalling is in one of these threads. I am not subjected to any extreme left (or 'SJW') views except by the very people that proclaim them as pervasive and a threat. Some of you, the same minority that comment on all these threads, would do well to understand that your views are incredibly polarised and the only purpose these threads tend to serve is for you to angrily shake your fists in unison (perhaps with your face reddening - I wouldn't like to say) attacking the other pole, who are in fact also a minority.

Most of us, at neither pole, sit somewhere in the centre-ground and wonder what the hell is going on between the angry "oooohhhhh... why can't I just be overtly bigoted - there's no freedom of speech!?" people and the "hug-everybody-life-is-rainbows-and-unicorns" people. Both polarised, both nonsense. It's generally only the former that actually appear on these forums though, I am only subjected to the latter in articles that the former start threads about. That is what I hope to make you see. If it weren't for you, I wouldn't know about them.

You should post here more often

 

[Mynight]

No don't post more often it'll ruin you .

 

[dowie]

As a self-proclaimed non-polarised person (in these parts that means neither a 'gammon' (new term to me but I like it)

some people on the opposite side to you might well like calling Obama a monkey, it doesn't really make it ok...

Middle-class white people claiming oppression because society deems it in poor taste for them to be overtly racist is quite amusing. Well, frustrating really, but I prefer to look at life through a slightly 'absurdist' lens (helps prevent gammon symptoms) so I've got to laugh.

I'm not sure anyone is claiming oppression, you could perhaps use the quote facility... one poster has said something along those lines but clearly intended it as a joke

And as I've said previously on one of the rare times I've bothered to comment in one of these righty v lefty GD threads (posted predominantly by the right), the only time that I read terms such as SJW, that snow term, lib-tard and virtue-signalling is in one of these threads. I am not subjected to any extreme left (or 'SJW') views except by the very people that proclaim them as pervasive and a threat. Some of you, the same minority that comment on all these threads, would do well to understand that your views are incredibly polarised and the only purpose these threads tend to serve is for you to angrily shake your fists in unison (perhaps with your face reddening - I wouldn't like to say) attacking the other pole, who are in fact also a minority.

they're actually quite well used in various forms of media too tbh... perhaps you don't read a wide variety of news sources. I'm not sure the idea that people commenting on these sorts of threads are getting angry is a reasonable assumption though

Most of us, at neither pole, sit somewhere in the centre-ground and wonder what the hell is going on between the angry "oooohhhhh... why can't I just be overtly bigoted - there's no freedom of speech!?" people and the "hug-everybody-life-is-rainbows-and-unicorns" people. Both polarised, both nonsense. It's generally only the former that actually appear on these forums though, I am only subjected to the latter in articles that the former start threads about. That is what I hope to make you see. If it weren't for you, I wouldn't know about them.

I'd say I sit in the centre ground too, but I still think freedom of speech is worth protecting and I'm not a fan of identity politics.... I think it is rather silly/naive to paint freedom of speech as some polarised view held by one side, though given the way identity politics is going on the left expressing support for freedom of speech does seem to increasingly be seen as a right wing thing

I won't link to his videos/embed them directly as they're too sweary, but this guy is worth a watch so I'll link to his channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO79NsDE5FpMowUH1YcBFcA

I don't necessarily agree with all his views but his video in the wake of the Trump victory was pretty much spot on, ditto to the recent ones "Tory Idiocy", "the gender pay gap"

but the reason I link to him is his video "It's a JOKE" - it sums up that situation rather nicely and is worth a watch if you're a bit perplexed by people commenting on these SJW type stories or think it is just some right wing "gammons" who have an issue with them

 

[Daftbrown]

some people on the opposite side to you might well like calling Obama a monkey, it doesn't really make it ok...

It just isn't the same thing. Gammon refers to the reddening of the face as the result of an emotional reaction for one, being black is not the consequence of an emotional reaction.

I'm not sure anyone is claiming oppression, you could perhaps use the quote facility... one poster has said something along those lines but clearly intended it as a joke

You have suggested that there is a viewpoint that white people can't be the subject of racism. Well, I do not subscribe to that viewpoint, of course white people can also be victims of racism, though I would imagine this will often be due to their history as an oppressor and showing racist behaviour themselves.

Being offended by the term 'gammon' is something that I find amusing as once you put it in to perspective it is fairly ridiculous. Being compared to a ham put against slaughter, colonisation and slavery? I'd take the ham.

So many of these threads are about people being offended at how offended people are by various things. There is a certain irony there but I suspect that escapes many that post here. You don't seem to be able to see it. You think the snowmen are the only ones being offended and need to toughen up. Well, you seem pretty upset with it too!

they're actually quite well used in various forms of media too tbh... perhaps you don't read a wide variety of news sources. I'm not sure the idea that people commenting on these sorts of threads are getting angry is a reasonable assumption though

I think I might have seen you post a Guardian opinion piece once. I forget the theme but in my view it was indeed ridiculous. If it indeed were you that posted it, we might have agreed on that one however most of the postings in GD from "news sources" are from the Daily Mail, which is a revoltingly hypocritical right-wing rag, designed to make its readers angry at certain sections of society, perhaps to distract them from directing their anger at people that are genuinely robbing them of their rights / earnings, and not just purportedly so.

I'd say I sit in the centre ground too, but I still think freedom of speech is worth protecting and I'm not a fan of identity politics.... I think it is rather silly/naive to paint freedom of speech as some polarised view held by one side, though given the way identity politics is going on the left expressing support for freedom of speech does seem to increasingly be seen as a right wing thing

Well, the political spectrum is subjective and not definite so I can't really comment there. I have in my previous post allowed the "centre-ground" to be defined as a vast area between two poles so, fine, I'll leave that there.

I won't link to his videos/embed them directly as they're too sweary, but this guy is worth a watch so I'll link to his channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCO79NsDE5FpMowUH1YcBFcA

I don't necessarily agree with all his views but his video in the wake of the Trump victory was pretty much spot on, ditto to the recent ones "Tory Idiocy", "the gender pay gap"

but the reason I link to him is his video "It's a JOKE" - it sums up that situation rather nicely and is worth a watch if you're a bit perplexed by people commenting on these SJW type stories or think it is just some right wing "gammons" who have an issue with them

I haven't had the opportunity to watch the videos mentioned that I am aware of Jonathan Pie as a satirist. I'm not sure on his position or slant on things though.

Perhaps I'll have a look later and return with comment.

Perplexed is definitely the word though!

 

[Daftbrown]

No don't post more often it'll ruin you .

I shan't. I consider it largely futile.

 

[dowie]

It just isn't the same thing. Gammon refers to the reddening of the face as the result of an emotional reaction for one, being black is not the consequence of an emotional reaction.

not really, plenty of the examples are simply reddening of the face with age... (see the link posted earlier by another poster) though it is a flawed argument regardless - see for example the expression "chimp out" in reference to BLM types kicking off - that combines skin colour and emotional reaction too

You have suggested that there is a viewpoint that white people can't be the subject of racism. Well, I do not subscribe to that viewpoint, of course white people can also be victims of racism, though I would imagine this will often be due to their history as an oppressor and showing racist behaviour themselves.

Being offended by the term 'gammon' is something that I find amusing as once you put it in to perspective it is fairly ridiculous. Being compared to a ham put against slaughter, colonisation and slavery? I'd take the ham.

So many of these threads are about people being offended at how offended people are by various things. There is a certain irony there but I suspect that escapes many that post here. You don't seem to be able to see it. You think the snowmen are the only ones being offended and need to toughen up. Well, you seem pretty upset with it too!

Colonisation and slavery have nothing to do with it, you are buying into the SJW narrative a bit there tbh... Who said I was "offended by it"? I don't have a red face, I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of momentum types adopting a phrase that is based on skin colour. There is also a certain amount of hypocrisy in the use of terms like "centrist dad" and "melt" too while getting upset over the use of "snow flakes" and "remoaners" but these don't have anything to do with skin colour.

Also re the thread I'm not sure they are, you're projecting a bit there and then from your projection concluding that it is ironic. Likewise I could say you seem pretty upset/offended at the very existence of the thread, but I don't know that to be true... it is pure conjecture.

I think I might have seen you post a Guardian opinion piece once. I forget the theme but in my view it was indeed ridiculous. If it indeed were you that posted it, we might have agreed on that one however most of the postings in GD from "news sources" are from the Daily Mail, which is a revoltingly hypocritical right-wing rag, designed to make its readers angry at certain sections of society, perhaps to distract them from directing their anger at people that are genuinely robbing them of their rights / earnings, and not just purportedly so.

it is hardly just the guardian where you could see these terms used, they've been referenced across many mainstream media sites and aren't just confined to "social media" such as Tumblr/Reddit etc..

 

[dowie]

I haven't had the opportunity to watch the videos mentioned that I am aware of Jonathan Pie as a satirist. I'm not sure on his position or slant on things though.

Perhaps I'll have a look later and return with comment.

Perplexed is definitely the word though!

Perhaps this might be better, I can link to this interview without worrying about the quantity of swearing that appears in his usual short clips:

 

[Skunkworks]

It just isn't the same thing. Gammon refers to the reddening of the face as the result of an emotional reaction for one, being black is not the consequence of an emotional reaction.

How easy it is to mental backflip yourself into still being the moral one. Who else has the term been used on other than Caucasians?

You have suggested that there is a viewpoint that white people can't be the subject of racism. Well, I do not subscribe to that viewpoint, of course white people can also be victims of racism, though I would imagine this will often be due to their history as an oppressor and showing racist behaviour themselves.

Sins of the father?

I’ve noticed a pattern of switching from denial to mitigation when it comes to discussions like this. It starts with the standard “nothing to see here”, but as more evidence is produced and the position becomes untenable, it slowly morphs into “white people/UK/West (delete as applicable) are terrible and deserve it”.

I’d like some official stats to see if whitey is a net emitter or receiver of interracial crime.

 

[Daftbrown]

How easy it is to mental backflip yourself into still being the moral one. Who else has the term been used on other than Caucasians?

I'm not invested enough to have to perform any mental gymnastics. I feel like a spectator that's dipped a toe in to commenting on what he sees. I can dip right back out - I don't comment often as I don't see that I'll change anyone's views that differ so much from my own - I'd just get pulled in and wear my keyboard out. I've got other things on.

"Gammon" is a slur, no doubt. I find it difficult to believe however that Caucasians genuinely feel that it is abusive in a purely racial sense. I think it's just being used by some to claim hypocrisy from those that tell them they shouldn't use terms more widely accepted as racist.

I've got red hair. Sure, I can get annoyed if people think that simply calling me "Ginge" is the epitome of wit but I don't get that offended. If they're clever with it I'll laugh with them.

As far as I am aware, only Caucasians can have naturally red hair. Is calling me "Ginge" racist? The question is rhetorical though a curious little devil part of me would like to know what some think about that - I am still quite amused by this debate, though I find it absurd. Probably as a result of that in fact.

Sins of the father?

I’ve noticed a pattern of switching from denial to mitigation when it comes to discussions like this. It starts with the standard “nothing to see here”, but as more evidence is produced and the position becomes untenable, it slowly morphs into “white people/UK/West (delete as applicable) are terrible and deserve it”.

I’d like some official stats to see if whitey is a net emitter or receiver of interracial crime.

Hardly quantifiable, but as a start it would have to be determined what was deemed to be a 'receipt' of interracial crime. I'd be interested to know if "being called a gammon" would feature!

 

[Tefal]

Isn't that cliche dead yet?

We don't even really have basements in this country.

Well weight fighting the good fight from Starbucks with a grande grapple latte mocha supreme (I dont know much about coffee)

 

[dowie]

I'm not invested enough to have to perform any mental gymnastics. I feel like a spectator that's dipped a toe in to commenting on what he sees. I can dip right back out - I don't comment often as I don't see that I'll change anyone's views that differ so much from my own - I'd just get pulled in and wear my keyboard out. I've got other things on.

you're as invested as anyone else who has taken the time to comment

"Gammon" is a slur, no doubt. I find it difficult to believe however that Caucasians genuinely feel that it is abusive in a purely racial sense. I think it's just being used by some to claim hypocrisy from those that tell them they shouldn't use terms more widely accepted as racist.

if that is the case the quote the posts... there is an alternative, like perhaps people who might object to insults in political discourse based on race in general!

It clearly is hypocrisy when it is used by prominent labour supporters on twitter it doesn't serve to help them (see the Johnathan Pie Trump victory/Brexit video as it sums this up quite nicely...). I don't think it is a good idea to use a racially charged term as an insult in political discourse in general so your supposition in my case is way off the mark.

Of course it is being used in the way they like to use "centrist Dad"* (self explanatory)and "Melt" **(labour moderates who don't fully support Corbyn) and in the same way the right like to use "snow flake"... but the added racial angle doesn't do them any favours and becomes a bit of an own goal. In order to defend that then you have to jump to the current SJW narrative about hierarchies of oppression and start citing "colonialism" etc.. which you have already done in this thread.

As far as I am aware, only Caucasians can have naturally red hair. Is calling me "Ginge" racist? The question is rhetorical though a curious little devil part of me would like to know what some think about that - I am still quite amused by this debate, though I find it absurd. Probably as a result of that in fact.

I don't think it is completely unique to say white European people, some Arabs and Persians have ginger hair for example (and blonde hair).

Though again context matters.. if you've got some friends who joke about you being ginger (provided it is equal and not turning into bullying i.e. you're free to joke about them in the same manner) then that is something different entirely... in fact it is more akin to the crass humour displayed by the people in the subject of the thread (albeit less controversial).

On the other hand if it is used as say an insult in political discourse - some prominent politician is attacked using the fact he/she has red hair or it is used to deny someone a job etc.. then that is an entirely different matter and is pretty close to racism.

(I've included some references as your previous post stated that you only hear about these terms from OCUK threads)
*http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41413937

**https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...-how-corbynism-created-new-political-language