Why isn't classism taboo?

Cianos

Most people wouldn't consider themselves racist. Most people like to think of themselves as open minded and globally conscious, in that they would treat those from other backgrounds without prejudice.

In todays society it's very much frowned upon to make racist remarks or act differently towards somebody just because of their skin colour.

So, why is classism so accepted?

It's very normal to hear people talk in a derogatory fashion about people from other socioeconomic classes. People will make all kinds of presumptions, and outwardly so, about somebody just based on what they're wearing, their accent, or where they live.

It doesn't seem to be social taboo to display prejudice against people in this way. People who would be horrified at displays of racism confidently make all kinds of remarks about "knackers" and "scumbags" without having any information about those they talk about other than superficiality. This applies as well to those who remark about people from higher socioeconomic classes.

Thoughts?

Truley

Humans measure their own worth by comparing themselves to others. 'Classism' is an easy one, because unlike race or gender it's easy to believe that there is a degree of personal choice when it comes to wealth and achievement. Whether it's the unemployed poor guy who feels hard done by society, or the rich guy who likes to think success was achieved through superior talent and hard work, rather than a privledged upbringing. I think this is why classism has always been fair game.

prinz

Simple, as Truley mentioned it's the extent of personal involvement in your state.

Some of the biggest "scumbags" I know would be from what could be considered 'upper class' backgrounds, and vice versa. With some of the most decent people I know coming from places that would be considered low on the socio-economic scale. The thing is both sets of people behave themselves and take actions to either appear higher or lower on the socio-economic ladder.

First impressions go a long way. We all make presumptions day in, and day out, often subconciously based on people and often on appearance alone. Unfortunately many people conform to stereotype leading to the continuance of the type of 'classism' you mention.

irishh_bob

Cianos wrote: »

Most people wouldn't consider themselves racist. Most people like to think of themselves as open minded and globally conscious, in that they would treat those from other backgrounds without prejudice.

In todays society it's very much frowned upon to make racist remarks or act differently towards somebody just because of their skin colour.

So, why is classism so accepted?

It's very normal to hear people talk in a derogatory fashion about people from other socioeconomic classes. People will make all kinds of presumptions, and outwardly so, about somebody just based on what they're wearing, their accent, or where they live.

It doesn't seem to be social taboo to display prejudice against people in this way. People who would be horrified at displays of racism confidently make all kinds of remarks about "knackers" and "scumbags" without having any information about those they talk about other than superficiality. This applies as well to those who remark about people from higher socioeconomic classes.

Thoughts?

cuts both ways , those from middle class backround are often the target of jibes and jealousy , particulary in our left wing media ( vincent browne and the like ) who idolise the so called underpriveledged and see the coping class as nothing but a revenue stream for various community and wellfare projects

Dudess

It might be true that middle-class people can get sneered at, but nowhere near to the same extent as the kind of prejudice the OP is talking about - don't think you're comparing like with like.
As a middle-class person, I never experienced any prejudice whatsoever.

Crumble Froo

Have noticed this a lot actually and it bugs me no end. I don't think I tend to think of myself as being part of a 'class', but if it's based on income etc, then I'd definitely definitely be pretty close to the bottom of the scale. A lot of my friends and the people I see around quite regularly could be said to be part of an 'alternative' section of society, where having feck all money is common and it's very normal to hate 'yuppies' and members of the upper and middle classes. I think a lot of it is due to the lifestyle associated with those classes - the extravagance, excesses, materialism, conformity of them. I think it's something of a clash in values and beliefs, with probably a hint of ... I don't want to say jealousy, but I would say there is a feeling of inferiority, or implied inferiority, which fuels the 'classism' from this end. I think this is more aimed at the middle class. Hatred of the upper class comes from the feeling that many who have that money have had to fcuk over more than a few people to get there and aren't generally perceived as using their positions of wealth/influence to help the people who do have less.

I think that, simultaneously, generalisms you could make about the working class, including increased rates of crime, drugs, social problems, fashions, are quite alien and opposed to the general values of the middle and upper classes, who have quite different standards of social acceptability.

I'm pretty sure I've not explained that nearly as well as I understand it in my head, but it's getting late and I don't think I can do much better than that at the moment

silverharp

The main difference I'd see is that racism doesnt take into account the behaviour of the people concerned. A racist is going to "hate" everyone who is black from Nelson Mandela down. When talking about "classism" the tendancy will be towards particular kinds of behaviour. So yes I'll rolleyes at certian working class behaviour but I'll do the same against middle class or upper class foibles. However if there are situations where a working class person never gets accepted in the the local upmarket golf club say then the a**holes concerned deserve to be castigated for their behaviour. Either your open minded person and judge someone by the content of their character or your a "lesser" individual and you dont.

irishh_bob

silverharp wrote: »

The main difference I'd see is that racism doesnt take into account the behaviour of the people concerned. A racist is going to "hate" everyone who is black from Nelson Mandela down. When talking about "classism" the tendancy will be towards particular kinds of behaviour. So yes I'll rolleyes at certian working class behaviour but I'll do the same against middle class or upper class foibles. However if there are situations where a working class person never gets accepted in the the local upmarket golf club say then the a**holes concerned deserve to be castigated for their behaviour. Either your open minded person and judge someone by the content of their character or your a "lesser" individual and you dont.

ive little time for either the vicky pollards or the country club types

Dudess

Dudess wrote: »

It might be true that middle-class people can get sneered at, but nowhere near to the same extent as the kind of prejudice the OP is talking about - don't think you're comparing like with like.
As a middle-class person, I never experienced any prejudice whatsoever.

Ad as a "middle class" person, you're probably not that exposed to the other classes all that much. I spent a year living in a hostel in Brisbane. It was a year of being exposed to "types" of Irish people I never really had any dealings with before. Don't get me wrong. I grew up in a rough town and went to a rough school, but as an adult my contact with others was limited. And my understanding of what they thought about the rest of the world was also limited. Or rather I just didn't think about it. But a year of living & drinking with plumbers, coopers, builders, ranchers, slaughterhouse technicians, etc. brought home a lot of opinions.

The conversations were as bigoted, racist, sexist and ignorant of any I have heard in any middle class gathering. Towards everyone, including others in the same situation as themselves. I think the difference was the frequency of such conversations. For them it was something to highlight every night, whereas any conversations of the same vein, I heard elsewhere were infrequent/rare. I was the only one that worked in an office while I was there (and got a lot of crap fr it & being "properly" educated), and the only reason I was accepted was for my quantities of "hydro". Some really great people, but don't romanticize them. They're people all the same with their own class distinctions and hatreds.

TBH I never really encountered class distinctions until I spent time in that hostel. And it was the "lower" & the "upper" classes that showed it the most.

Personally I find it to be a load of horse-****e.. People are people. What brings them down is the manner of their actions. If you talk like an asshole, imo, you are an asshole. Regardless of your social background.

Cianos

silverharp wrote: »

So yes I'll rolleyes at certian working class behaviour but I'll do the same against middle class or upper class foibles.

What's the distinction between working class/middle class/upper class behavior?

silverharp

Cianos wrote: »

What's the distinction between working class/middle class/upper class behavior?

in many cases it might the same behaviour expressed differently , there may not be much difference between running to the money lender to pay for xmas on the one hand and running up large amounts consumer debt to "keep up with the jones" , but as per the post above , to the extent that people trying to do good in a working class area are kept down by their peers or family is a roll eyes for me and is not a kind of behaviour that one would come across in middle or upper class areas.

prinz

Dudess wrote: »

As a middle-class person, I never experienced any prejudice whatsoever.

I don't think that poster was referring to prejudice on an individual basis but at a national/social level and there it very much exists, and it's just as galling as being sneered at by somebody tbh.

Bottle_of_Smoke

To be honest I think racism is more accepted than classism in Ireland. Particularly against blacks.

Elle Collins

silverharp wrote: »

in many cases it might the same behaviour expressed differently , there may not be much difference between running to the money lender to pay for xmas on the one hand and running up large amounts consumer debt to "keep up with the jones"

I would say there is a very great deal of difference in those two scenarios and certainly they are not the same behaviour expressed differently.

Holybejaysus

Nothing wrong with calling someone a scumbag or a knacker if they genuinely deserve it. But I wouldn't judge someone because of where they were born or what class they belong to. You get judged by behaviour in my book.
As as few posters already pointed out, there are more than enough rugger bugger types who easily qualify as knackers.....

silverharp

Elle Collins wrote: »

I would say there is a very great deal of difference in those two scenarios and certainly they are not the same behaviour expressed differently.

why? in both situations the individuals are likely making sub-optimal decisions which will impact their families in a negetive way for some spurious short term benefit.

AngryBadger

It's funny but I don't believe that when most people are giving out about one group or another they're actually being racist/sexist/whatever. People love to **** on other people, it's a universal truth, I've encountered people who would swear bloody murder against members of certain groups, but it was all bluff and bluster. There was no substance to it, and if some kind of horrible discrimination was going on they'd usually be horrified.

It's very popular to try and categorise every impulse people have as though we're all machines whose behaviour can be compartmentalised and predicted.

Yes some people are racist, and utter bigots, but most people just love bitching and begrudging, it's not even something they think about, it's just something they do.

I realise there's the argument that "well it's still racist/sexist to say....etc.", but if we're honest; most of us bitch about other groups/demographics at different times, doesn't actually mean we have some deep-seated hatred for said groups.

And on the other hand there are always going to be members of different demographics who are bad examples of humanity and (IMO) fully deserving of our disdain.

Gary L

I see a big difference between racism and classism. There is no causal link between race and personality that I know of, but the material conditions of an individuals life massively affect consciousness. Its hard to completely refute a theory that has a nice bit of predictive power.

Mike 1972

The assumption that disdain/contempn for "scangers" = classism is an erroneous one.

"Working class" people have far more reason to despise scangers than "middle class" people do.

Cianos

Mike 1972 wrote: »

The assumption that disdain/contempn for "scangers" = classism is an erroneous one.

"Working class" people have far more reason to despise scangers than "middle class" people do.

Disdain and contempt for "scangers" doesn't have to equate to classism, but it nearly always does. More often occurring in the reverse way, where people from lower socioeconomic classes are looked down upon and labelled as "scangers", simply because "scangers" tend to be from under privileged areas. This also hides a more obtuse form of regular classism in terms of elitism etc, but that's a bit off topic.

The behaviour of "scangers" or "scumbags" (or, some young troublemakers) gives a strong label to themselves and also in turn to people who happen to dress in similar clothes or have a similar accent, to the point that people from a different background will make a lot of assumptions about someone with, say, a North Dublin accent who happens to be dressed in a tracksuit.

From the perspective of a middle class rugby playing Southsider, having a tight hair cut, wearing a tracksuit and being from Clondalkin can be enough to be labelled a scumbag. How many of your friends have openly thrown around such terms based on such little information? It's common and it's socially accepted.

My argument is that these presumptions are not dissimilar to racism. The process of thought leading to those assumptions are the same. Superficial information used to make a strong and derogatory assessment of someones character. Yet the correlation would be upsetting to people who think themselves as non-racist.

While it's probably true that most young troublemakers dress in tracksuits and have strong accents, that doesn't mean that all people with strong accents who dress in tracksuits are troublemakers. In certain parts of USA most young troublemakers are black, but that doesn't mean that all black youngsters are troublemakers. This is a logical process of thought that most people could agree with. However, it's taboo to be prejudice towards someone for being black, but somehow it's fine to be prejudice towards someone based upon their hair length, attire and accent?

It could be argued that it's peoples choice to dress in such a way, to wear the uniform of the "scumbag" and as such label themselves, and thus to pose the question "what is wrong with confirming their identity that they themselves are creating?". That would be fine if the distinction was so polarised. If things were so black and white, then of course it wouldn't be an issue of prejudice if the "uniform" was preserved for only those who fulfill their own stereotype. It would be quite convenient actually; the "scumbag" uniform would be as distinctive as the white hoods of the kkk. Then it wouldn't be prejudice to call someone wearing a tracksuit and having a strong accent a scumbag, as it wouldn't be derogatory to call a clan member wearing a white hood a racist.

However that's not quite the case. In many areas wearing a tracksuit is just the normal way to dress, and obviously talking in your local accent is just the normal way to talk. So being, in most respects, quite a normal person from your area will result in you being labelled a scumbag from the get go, by people who think themselves as superior.

I can't see how this is anything but prejudice and the worrying thing is that it probably highlights how little people actually think about bigotry, fascism and the causation and thought processes behind them. If someone can oppose racism yet defend stereotyping by class, it shows a contradiction in principal and within a different context could explain their prejudice towards race, religion or whatever else.

"I'm totally against anti semitism, but of course I've reason to dislike black people with their bad social habits and criminality"

"I'm totally against racism, but of course I've reason to dislike tracksuit wearing youngsters with their bad social habits and criminality".

albeit

I think it is taboo among more openminded, intellectual, modern people- say young journalists or photographers. That's my experience, at least with many of these kind of people. Mind you, not all of them.

HavingCrack

The only 'insults' I've ever experienced was playing football matches out in Tallaght/Clondalkin/Crumlin etc, just working class areas really. The other teams constantly called us 'bleeeedin poshies' all the time and told us to go back torugby and 'Sorcha called and said Wezz is ****te'. Anyway, mostly it was just the usual carry ons that happen in football and we gave as good as we got but there were two or three times were it got pretty bitter. A few of them seemed to really, really hate us for being from a middle class area. What a stupid thing to hate someone about.

Bottle_of_Smoke

silverharp wrote: »

The main difference I'd see is that racism doesnt take into account the behaviour of the people concerned. A racist is going to "hate" everyone who is black from Nelson Mandela down. When talking about "classism" the tendancy will be towards particular kinds of behaviour. So yes I'll rolleyes at certian working class behaviour but I'll do the same against middle class or upper class foibles. However if there are situations where a working class person never gets accepted in the the local upmarket golf club say then the a**holes concerned deserve to be castigated for their behaviour. Either your open minded person and judge someone by the content of their character or your a "lesser" individual and you dont.

not quite. I actually think 90% of people described as racists are actually just classists.

Explains why people with no ill feeling toward Africans loathe Roma gypsies. Or why people who don't like them nigerians have no problems with Paul McGrath or Phil Lynott.

irishh_bob

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

not quite. I actually think 90% of people described as racists are actually just classists.

Explains why people with no ill feeling toward Africans loathe Roma gypsies. Or why people who don't like them nigerians have no problems with Paul McGrath or Phil Lynott.

most people have a problem with the criminal classes like roma gypsys or tinkers in ireland , nothing to do with race

TheHatter

So, why are people so keen to avoid racism, but ooze endless hatred of the poor?

Great, great question.

Ive chosen not to read most responses as Im sure many people on the boards would identify as Fascist, some of them proudly.

What I will say is that both the Lisbon Treaty and the Irish Constitution make no protections against Classism, which may well be deliberate. Neither does it seem that discrimination against poor men is protected when it comes to baring entry. This is a serious deficiency that, of course, needs to be healed.

The United Kingdom has for many decades been perhaps the worst example of Classism in the world, and since 9/11, its laws have made it more so. Institutionalised Feminism has certainly had a negative impact on poor males too, and oddly, I made a perculiar discovery about the very word "Classism":

It would seem that unless you consult the most enormous dictionary, the word "Classism" doesnt exist. You can try it yourself in a bookshop.

In every single British dictionary, Classism isnt a word. The same brands all acknowledge its existence in their largest publications, but all major ones omit that type of discrimination from every other issue, be it Oxford, Collins or Cambridge.

That is certainly concerning. Great and crucial topic!

prinz

TheHatter wrote: »

Ive chosen not to read most responses as Im sure many people on the boards would identify as Fascist, some of them proudly.

Great start on a discussion forum.

TheHatter wrote: »

What I will say is that both the Lisbon Treaty and the Irish Constitution make no protections against Classism, which may well be deliberate.

For simple reason. It's too subjective.

TheHatter

Subjectivity is a good point, it is true that on a continuum of affluence, some may have different cut-off points. However, likewise, there is no "black" or "white". Color is a continuum. In that case, is there no racism?

Rather, those who do identify people as rich or poor, whatever their explanation may be, are Classist. It is the scale on which they base their judgement.

In fact, BSing about subjectivity is, itself, dangerous. It takes the focus away from the issue.

The issue is Classism.

It exists. Some seem to be making excuses for it. Whether against beggars or prisoners, genuine refugees or the unemployed, it is wrong, and should be eradicated.

FlutterinBantam

Cianos wrote: »

While it's probably true that most young troublemakers dress in tracksuits and have strong accents, that doesn't mean that all people with strong accents who dress in tracksuits are troublemakers. In certain parts of USA most young troublemakers are black, but that doesn't mean that all black youngsters are troublemakers. This is a logical process of thought that most people could agree with. However, it's taboo to be prejudice towards someone for being black, but somehow it's fine to be prejudice towards someone based upon their hair length, attire and accent?

It could be argued that it's peoples choice to dress in such a way, to wear the uniform of the "scumbag" and as such label themselves, and thus to pose the question "what is wrong with confirming their identity that they themselves are creating?". That would be fine if the distinction was so polarised. If things were so black and white, then of course it wouldn't be an issue of prejudice if the "uniform" was preserved for only those who fulfill their own stereotype. It would be quite convenient actually; the "scumbag" uniform would be as distinctive as the white hoods of the kkk. Then it wouldn't be prejudice to call someone wearing a tracksuit and having a strong accent a scumbag, as it wouldn't be derogatory to call a clan member wearing a white hood a racist.

However that's not quite the case. In many areas wearing a tracksuit is just the normal way to dress, and obviously talking in your local accent is just the normal way to talk. So being, in most respects, quite a normal person from your area will result in you being labelled a scumbag from the get go, by people who think themselves as superior.

I can't see how this is anything but prejudice and the worrying thing is that it probably highlights how little people actually think about bigotry, fascism and the causation and thought processes behind them. If someone can oppose racism yet defend stereotyping by class, it shows a contradiction in principal and within a different context could explain their prejudice towards race, religion or whatever else.

"I'm totally against anti semitism, but of course I've reason to dislike black people with their bad social habits and criminality"

"I'm totally against racism, but of course I've reason to dislike tracksuit wearing youngsters with their bad social habits and criminality".

Don't know what your point is but I think you are leaving out an obvious element 'human nature'

If one waits around any suburban courthouse,one finds that most of the accused have the typical strong accent and the trakkie and hoodie is 'de rigeur'

Therefore why would one wonder, or blame people who might assume that all those clad similarly and of the same spoken disposition wouldn't fall into the same cultural and potentially criminal coterie?

You will not always be right, but human nature being what it is the chances are heavily weighted that you will be right.

Let's stop beating around the bush here.

Cianos

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Don't know what your point is but I think you are leaving out an obvious element 'human nature'

If one waits around any suburban courthouse,one finds that most of the accused have the typical strong accent and the trakkie and hoodie is 'de rigeur'

Therefore why would one wonder, or blame people who might assume that all those clad similarly and of the same spoken disposition wouldn't fall into the same cultural and potentially criminal coterie?

You will not always be right, but human nature being what it is the chances are heavily weighted that you will be right.

Let's stop beating around the bush here.

I understand what you mean, but as I said, that is the exact same argument that people use to excuse racism.

While it's probably true that most criminals dress a particular way, that doesn't mean that all people who dress that way are criminals.

If the majority of people who dress this way were criminals, fair enough. But what if it's 10%, 5%, 1%? At what point would you consider it unreasonable to presume that any random person from North Dublin wearing a tracksuit is a criminal?

I absolutely get the human nature element - it's based out of the defensive instinct to categorise and label potential threats. That doesn't mean it's correct or even accurate though.

FlutterinBantam

Cianos wrote: »

I understand what you mean, but as I said, that is the exact same argument that people use to excuse racism.

While it's probably true that most criminals dress a particular way, that doesn't mean that all people who dress that way are criminals.

If the majority of people who dress this way were criminals, fair enough. But what if it's 10%, 5%, 1%? At what point would you consider it unreasonable to presume that any random person from North Dublin wearing a tracksuit is a criminal?

I absolutely get the human nature element - it's based out of the defensive instinct to categorise and label potential threats. That doesn't mean it's correct or even accurate though.

I wouldn't quite accept that.

Racism in my book is a totally irrational hatred of a race purely based on colour-nothing else. Nothing else at all.

Now I think it's unreasonable to drill this stuff down to the 'at what point' stage.

I think people make reasonable assumptions, that's how it works.

If people experience a negative and aggressive attitude from a certain group, and that group dress and speak in similar fashion, you can't blame the person for assuming that based of dress ,speech, and attitude, the person who dress and acts similarly is of the same mindset?

Of course they won't always be right, but I would opine, they will be right 90% of the time.

Like the stuff going on in Smithfield.

krd

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I wouldn't quite accept that.

Racism in my book is a totally irrational hatred of a race purely based on colour-nothing else. Nothing else at all.

So if can construct a rationale everything is cool and groovy. Ask an American racist why they're racist and they'll tell you black people are poor and steal ****. There's a tautology to it - the flaw in the character of the people with black skin is the colour of their skin - they're denied economic opportunities so they end up poor, and eventually stealing ****. Middle-class people cheat and steal all the time. They seldom get thrown in jail for it.

Now I think it's unreasonable to drill this stuff down to the 'at what point' stage.

I think people make reasonable assumptions, that's how it works.

If people experience a negative and aggressive attitude from a certain group, and that group dress and speak in similar fashion, you can't blame the person for assuming that based of dress ,speech, and attitude, the person who dress and acts similarly is of the same mindset?

Of course they won't always be right, but I would opine, they will be right 90% of the time.

You're just like the ignorant hillbilly racist in the way you've constructed your rationale.

I would say there's a deeper and more materialistic rationale to your bigotry. You're middle-class and you see snobbery as working in your favour. It probably has? Has it? Have you gained economic opportunities because of your class privileged.

Like the stuff going on in Smithfield.

Or like the stuff going on outside of Anabelles a few years back. Where scummers kicked Brian Murphy to death as he lay helpless and unconscious on the ground. Irish slime bags - with their rugby and heino.

omen80

We need classes. Otherwise we would be one step away from communism.

krd

omen80 wrote: »

We need classes. Otherwise we would be one step away from communism.

What's wrong with communism, comrade?

I'm being a little facetious. I do know quite a bit about communism.

Most people would be very surprised to learn, that under communism the same class distinctions and inequalities were quickly assumed after the revolutions. In Cuba, if you're related to a well connected family there are all kinds of material rewards and privileges. It's an even more unequal society than what we have here. The same in Soviet Russia.

But we do have communism in Ireland: Communism for the rich and brutal free enterprise for everyone else.

FlutterinBantam

krd wrote: »

What's wrong with communism, comrade?

I'm being a little facetious. I do know quite a bit about communism.

Most people would be very surprised to learn, that under communism the same class distinctions and inequalities were quickly assumed after the revolutions. In Cuba, if you're related to a well connected family there are all kinds of material rewards and privileges. It's an even more unequal society than what we have here. The same in Soviet Russia.

But we do have communism in Ireland: Communism for the rich and brutal free enterprise for everyone else.

So, let's evaluate your rationale.

As I perceive it you want a classless society where everyone ,regardless of ambition or enterprise is equal?

As I see it everyone has free education up to second level. Right?

if you don't partake in that advantage and drop out, surely you can't expect those who work hard and persevere to support you. Right?

krd

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

So, let's evaluate your rationale.

As I perceive it you want a classless society where everyone ,regardless of ambition or enterprise is equal?

As I see it everyone has free education up to second level. Right?

if you don't partake in that advantage and drop out, surely you can't expect those who work hard and persevere to support you. Right?

No, I don't believe the world is an equal place - some people work hard and should be rewarded for their hard work. In the world we live in, an individuals economic reward is not always proportional to their effort or economic contribution. I've had my gut busted working, where I was rewarded sweet FA. Being managed by well connected dimwits - many of who were intellectually disadvantaged but socially very well advantaged.

Most economic choices and relationships are Hobson choices - take it or leave it. There is no choice. Fonr many people working they may as well be working under a totalitarianism dictatorship. In fact the Soviet union attempted to model their society on American capitalist enterprises like Ford.

I would like a fair society. A society where people, regardless of their social origins, are rewarded for their hard work. And where the weak, the poor and the old are protected - civilized society. Not a no holds barred, winner or cheat takes all one. People should be respected and rewarded for who they are and what they do - not for the vagina they plop out of.

Cianos

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I wouldn't quite accept that.

Racism in my book is a totally irrational hatred of a race purely based on colour-nothing else. Nothing else at all.

True, but people justify it in all types of ways - intelligence, anti social behaviour, crime rates etc.

Now I think it's unreasonable to drill this stuff down to the 'at what point' stage.

Fair enough, I was just illustrating the point in that way.

I think people make reasonable assumptions, that's how it works.

If people experience a negative and aggressive attitude from a certain group, and that group dress and speak in similar fashion, you can't blame the person for assuming that based of dress ,speech, and attitude, the person who dress and acts similarly is of the same mindset?

I wouldn't blame them, again it's from creating patterns for defensive reasons. But that doesn't mean it's in any way accurate.

I think people make a lot of unreasonable assumptions - which is okay, they should just be able to admit that it's unreasonable.

If I'm walking down a dark street and there's someone approaching me wearing a tracksuit, a safe thing to do is assume something is going to happen, to be prepared. If the person approaching is wearing a suit, I'll be less on guard.

Logically, it's highly unlikely that either are going to do anything. I've walked past hundreds of people wearing tracksuits and nothing has happened...yet I'll still be more assuming of the first person than the second person. So I'm making assumptions about the first guy the same way I made assumptions about all the hundreds of other tracksuit wearers I've walked by in the past. Logic would say that an assumption that has been proven wrong hundreds of times is unreasonable.

krd

Cianos, you have to ask yourself what kind of society we live in. We're firmly part of the Anglo Saxon world. People from the Scandinavian countries come to countries like Ireland and England and are horrified by the way we live and our social tensions.

To quote a Finish friend: "We give money to the poor in Finland to buy clothes - but we tell them, don't spend it on tracksuits"

Get off a plane from anywhere in the world to any city in the UK or Ireland you think you've landed in some kind of Olympic village or that there's some massive athletics convention in train.

FlutterinBantam

Cianos wrote: »

True, but people justify it in all types of ways - intelligence, anti social behaviour, crime rates etc.



Fair enough, I was just illustrating the point in that way.



I wouldn't blame them, again it's from creating patterns for defensive reasons. But that doesn't mean it's in any way accurate.

I think people make a lot of unreasonable assumptions - which is okay, they should just be able to admit that it's unreasonable.

If I'm walking down a dark street and there's someone approaching me wearing a tracksuit, a safe thing to do is assume something is going to happen, to be prepared. If the person approaching is wearing a suit, I'll be less on guard.

Logically, it's highly unlikely that either are going to do anything. I've walked past hundreds of people wearing tracksuits and nothing has happened...yet I'll still be more assuming of the first person than the second person. So I'm making assumptions about the first guy the same way I made assumptions about all the hundreds of other tracksuit wearers I've walked by in the past. Logic would say that an assumption that has been proven wrong hundreds of times is unreasonable.

Yours and my personal experience may be that,however others may not have been so lucky, therefore we take their actual factual experiences into account and fashion our views accordingly.

I haven't seen a great deal of court reports of suited gents attacking randomers whereas on the other hand I have seen plenty of track-suited furrowed brow ,finger sticking individuals, photographed outside courthouses.

So I wouldn't be beating myself up about being too unreasonable.

prinz

TheHatter wrote: »

Rather, those who do identify people as rich or poor, whatever their explanation may be, are Classist. It is the scale on which they base their judgement.
It exists. Some seem to be making excuses for it. Whether against beggars or prisoners, genuine refugees or the unemployed, it is wrong, and should be eradicated.

Right so what do we know call someone who is unemployed? Or in prison? Got new catchy terms that we all must learn?

Cianos

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Yours and my personal experience may be that,however others may not have been so lucky, therefore we take their actual factual experiences into account and fashion our views accordingly.

I haven't seen a great deal of court reports of suited gents attacking randomers whereas on the other hand I have seen plenty of track-suited furrowed brow ,finger sticking individuals, photographed outside courthouses.

So I wouldn't be beating myself up about being too unreasonable.

Yes, most criminals certainly seem to dress in tracksuits etc - so a cautionary reaction when being approached by someone dressed similarly is a natural defensive reaction.

But you have to see the parallel between this and, say, some cities in the states where most crimes are committed by African Americans - a cautionary reaction when being approached by an African American on a dark street is also a natural defensive reaction. Making assumptions about a possible threat is based upon the awareness that "most crimes are committed by African Americans" (rather than "most African Americans commit crimes") - he's in a compromised situation; alone, dark street and the person down the road fits the particular profile, so it's natural to be worried in the moment.

As you and I have passed hundreds of tracksuit wearers and nothing has happened, our state-side friend has passed hundreds of black people and nothing has happened. He probably knows people who have gotten in to trouble by people who fit the profile, as most people know someone who has suffered from criminality.

But for him to resolutely and outwardly make assumptions and statements about black people in general would be deemed racist - which is a social taboo - meaning far more people think it than say it. Whereas here, the steps getting to those assumptions are the same as regards tracksuit wearers, yet outwardly making classist remarks directed at people who appear to fit the profile is totally acceptable.

TheHatter

"Tracksuitism" is fine with me.

Exactly what you wear is a personal choice. If you wear tracksuits because others do, thats not begging me to confer respect.

Basically, given that the style (if not the specific brands) that you wear are at your discretion, I think judging people who wear tracksuits, if they do so as a group... its ok with me.

This discussion is about Classism though. No?

krd

FlutterinBantam, trust me. Any weekend night you'll find heino crazed rugger buggers bashing strangers heads in. There's a rugby pub around the corner from me - if I walk past it any weekend night I usually get abuse shouted at me in posh accents. I never respond to the abuse - as I know the braying animals would descend on me mob handed and kick me to death on the ground. Of course they will be no arrests or prosecutions for my murder. Remember the murder of Brian Murphy outside Anabel's in 2006. They fitted up the one working class person who happened to be stupid enough to fall in with such low lifes. And the rest of the killers walked away scot free. They probably waltzed into jobs in banking and screwing us over at this very moment in time.

On Sunday morning I was walking around the city centre. Spooky. There are so many homeless people on the streets if you're out early the place looks like there's a camping jamboree on. Anyway. I was walking past one of the wretches, and he asked me the time - in a Ross Carroll O'kelly accent. So, there are people from the guided classes on the streets too. (Though, he could be one of those working class people who've learned to fake the accent of the better classes - there's quite a few of them about; par venus and interlopers - keep a close eye out. )

FlutterinBantam

krd wrote: »

FlutterinBantam, trust me. Any weekend night you'll find heino crazed rugger buggers bashing strangers heads in. There's a rugby pub around the corner from me - if I walk past it any weekend night I usually get abuse shouted at me in posh accents. I never respond to the abuse - as I know the braying animals would descend on me mob handed and kick me to death on the ground. Of course they will be no arrests or prosecutions for my murder. Remember the murder of Brian Murphy outside Anabel's in 2006. They fitted up the one working class person who happened to be stupid enough to fall in with such low lifes. And the rest of the killers walked away scot free. They probably waltzed into jobs in banking and screwing us over at this very moment in time.

On Sunday morning I was walking around the city centre. Spooky. There are so many homeless people on the streets if you're out early the place looks like there's a camping jamboree on. Anyway. I was walking past one of the wretches, and he asked me the time - in a Ross Carroll O'kelly accent. So, there are people from the guided classes on the streets too. (Though, he could be one of those working class people who've learned to fake the accent of the better classes - there's quite a few of them about; par venus and interlopers - keep a close eye out. )

I think perhaps you are over reacting.."surely kick you to death on the ground":eek: A bit of an exaggeration surely.

You also seem a bit obsessed by the Annabel's incident, while not minimising it, it was a relatively isolated incident.

I don't go about my daily life worrying too much about class and status 'cause eventually it will just eat you up and and turn you into a blinkered and bitter individual and make life very tedious indeed.

krd

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I think perhaps you are over reacting.."surely kick you to death on the ground":eek: A bit of an exaggeration surely.

You also seem a bit obsessed by the Annabel's incident, while not minimising it, it was a relatively isolated incident.

The Annabel's incident was not a once off. Remember years ago we used have later hours for licenses. These hours had to be curtailed due to a whole rake of incidents just like Annabel's. If I remember correctly, about 7 deaths in a short time frame. All connected with Planet Murphy's Camden street.

I don't go about my daily life worrying too much about class and status 'cause eventually it will just eat you up and and turn you into a blinkered and bitter individual and make life very tedious indeed.

If it effects your economic opportunities in life, it effects every moment of your life. And it's more than just economic opportunities. I have been sneered at, humiliated, and treated with contempt by people who presume themselves to be of a higher social status then myself. Knackery Irish people with a little a cash, a scutty little house in a socially exclusive area. I believe everyone, regardless of social background is entitled to dignity and respect. I believe anyone who holds the opposite view does not even deserve to be treated as human.

It's easy not to be bitter, when you've got the nicest slice of the cake. You might want everyone else to shut up so you can enjoy it in peace, without any feelings of guilt. Or the fear that someone is going try stop you from gobbling it all down.

FlutterinBantam

krd wrote: »

The Annabel's incident was not a once off. Remember years ago we used have later hours for licenses. These hours had to be curtailed due to a whole rake of incidents just like Annabel's. If I remember correctly, about 7 deaths in a short time frame. All connected with Planet Murphy's Camden street.


If it effects your economic opportunities in life, it effects every moment of your life. And it's more than just economic opportunities. I have been sneered at, humiliated, and treated with contempt by people who presume themselves to be of a higher social status then myself. Knackery Irish people with a little a cash, a scutty little house in a socially exclusive area. I believe everyone, regardless of social background is entitled to dignity and respect. I believe anyone who holds the opposite view does not even deserve to be treated as human.

It's easy not to be bitter, when you've got the nicest slice of the cake. You might want everyone else to shut up so you can enjoy it in peace, without any feelings of guilt. Or the fear that someone is going try stop you from gobbling it all down.

There's where we differ.

I believe respect has to be earned.

Usually those with a social chip on their shoulder use this argument to justify their stance.

eg "
You don't like me because I am working class" When the real reason they are not liked is they are running a car repair business from their home and the focking place is clogged up with cars and noise.

Let's deal with the real world here, no just surmisations and popular myths.