Chavtastic!
19 07 08 - 08:15 There is a concerted effort to condemn the word "Chav" as being as socially unacceptable as the "n" word. CHAV stands for Council House Adult Vermin, although a recent daytime TV discussion on how vile the term is, prefered to water this down to "Council House And Violent".Chavs are well known for wearing shell suits and Burbery. They idolise Posh and Becks. They like the latest pop music, but have no preference for other genres such as metal or classical music unless it is in a TV ad or the theme for a football tournament. Football is the chav religion. They are uncultured - except in Chav culture itself - and perhaps we should accept Chav culture as actually being a new culture, indeed a newly evolving branch of humanity.
Only whites can be Chavs, although often the women have the brown children resultant from a teenaged one-night-stand behind the kebab house, in tow. Banning the term is not so much a strike to contain class war as it is preventing discrimination against the "white negro". The upper class has long since had a contemptuous word for the working class, "oik" and there has never been such an outcry suggesting that was unacceptable.
Usually chavs are also NEETs - which is a term a government department thought up and could be just as offensive. NEET = Not currently engaged in Employment, Education or Training. It is likely that if people feel intimidated to use the term "Chav" then they would just use "Neet" in the same context.
The term Chav is a part of our language that few consider offensive at all. Chavs are not offended. Indeed they buy T-shirts with slogans saying "Chavtastic" and seem to enjoy their identity. The veteran newspaper journalist, Julie Burchill made a memorable television documentary defiantly insisting that she considers herself a Chav and proud of it.
To some, saying "Chav" is racist against Whites. As Burchill(who is proudly British working class albeit Jewish) points out: "the white indigenous English working-class is now the one group you can insult without feeling the breath of the Commission for Racial Equality on your neck". In future that could certainly change.
Yet the term "chav" cannot be racist, because it is a term almost exclusively used by whites describing other whites, many of whom are fully aware that they don't have the same freedom to label or criticise non-white groups. What it shows is that when some whites do want to criticise an out-group it is not necessarily "racism" at all, because they have at least as much propensity to consider their own group distinct from another group of whites whom they would never choose to mix socially with.
This discrimination is what those who wish to stop the use of the word "Chav" are concerned about. They fear the idea that groups will become more exclusive and insular, withdrawing from the social plan that would see everyone reversing the natural tendency of living creatures to diverge and differentiate, eventually forming new species. This is a threat to the egalitarian totalitarianism that demands people not to think in terms of "them" and "us".
It is not a Chav that is leading the call to ban the word, but high ranking members of the Fabian Society, a longstanding think tank which laid the foundations of the Labour Party. Attempts to suppress the use of the word "Chav" will backfire. The likely result will be that people just think all the other taboos on names for groups are silly and will be more, not less, inclined to use them.
one comment