King Pitcos Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Yeah, but totally supports that they're just scummy individuals who aren't a product of their environment line. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I'm pretty sure the technical term for someone who is unemployed and on benefits is "scrounger" anyway. Â Ha, the technical term. Even though many of them are in that situation through no fault of their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted August 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 10, 2011 Just written a piece looking at the dodgy stats behind the "omg everyone is buying riot gear off amazon" stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Also, the way some of you use images to suggest the argument has been 'won' is pretty frustrating seeing as others seem capable of forming constructive arguments. Especially when similar debates are going on throughout society at the moment. Just makes you look really narrow-minded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spurs 4 life Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 The reason why I challenge Mickey is because he is part of an organisation that promotes prejudice against religious groups. Â I question the use of the term 'scum' because I see it banded around regularly to describe unemployed people, 'chavs' etc. I just think that by using it in the context of the riots threatens to tar a large group of people with the same brush even if they have had no part in the riots. Although it is the rioters/looters that are the current hate figures of the public it is normally people who are uneducated/unemployed etc. Â And your right too but as i know from my friend who is in the EDL it's not quite as clear cut as them all being racist thugs. Â My friend honestly believes his there for the greater good and his a part of it despite pretty much all of our mutual friends being asian. Â I despise organisations like the EDL and if you join it then you deserve every stereotype you get. I was making the point that we all judge people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Just written a piece looking at the dodgy stats behind the "omg everyone is buying riot gear off amazon" stories. Did anyone read much into those Amazon pages anyway? It's very silly to try to protect your home from the imminent collapse of civilisation with something the postman's got to bring you in the middle of next week because it's cheaper than buying it in a shop today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) Did you even read what I said? I'm talking about the word 'scum' being used in general for unemployed people on benefits. When it is also used for rioters/looters, also some of whom unemployed and on benefits, there is a danger of tarring everyone in the same brush. Â There's only you that is confusing the use of the word, as far as I can see. This idea that people are going to start looking at unemployed middle-aged men in the job centre as scum in the wake of this is mental. Â You say you don't like the use of the word at all - what should we call the feral thugs rampaging through the city centres, then? I'm sorry, but this is too emotive an issue for a lot of people who've seen their communities destroyed to maintain detached liberal objectivity when talking about these vermin. I've called them scum, chavs, shit and just plain cunts over the past few days. As far as I'm concerned all of those descriptions fit them perfectly, and I don't think there's anyone else who'd imagine I was talking about some poor bloke who's been been made redundant when I'm using them. Edited August 10, 2011 by Magnum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Burchill's Buddy Posted August 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 10, 2011 There's only you that is confusing the use of the word, as far as I can see. This idea that people are going to start looking at unemployed middle-aged men in the job centre as scum in the wake of this is mental. You say you don't like the use of the word at all - what should we call the feral thugs rampaging through the city centres, then? I'm sorry, but this is too emotive an issue for a lot of people who've seen their communities destroyed to maintain detached liberal objectivity when talking about these vermin. I've called them scum, chavs, shit and just plain cunts over the past few days. As far as I'm concerned all of those descriptions fit them perfectly, and I don't think there's anyone else who'd imagine I was talking about some poor bloke who's been been made redundant when I'm using them. Spot on Magnum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 There's only you that is confusing the use of the word, as far as I can see. Aye, it's pretty amazing that for the first 130 pages of the thread, he thought everyone was just talking about people on the dole rather than people rioting. No wonder he was so upset. Fortunately, johnnyboy's done him a guide he can refer to to avoid further confusion: Â Poor people on benefits from Tottenham = Not Scum Looters = Scum Poor people on benefits from Tottenham who are Looters = Scum Graphics designers who are looting = Scum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted August 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 10, 2011 Did anyone read much into those Amazon pages anyway? It's very silly to try to protect your home from the imminent collapse of civilisation with something the postman's got to bring you in the middle of next week because it's cheaper than buying it in a shop today. Â You'd think that was obvious, but a ridiculous number of "proper" news sites worldwide have run it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Aye, it's pretty amazing that for the first 130 pages of the thread, he thought everyone was just talking about people on the dole rather than people rioting. No wonder he was so upset. Fortunately, johnnyboy's done him a guide he can refer to to avoid further confusion: Â And congratulations to you for adding absolutely nothing of any substance to this apart from desperately wanting to see my points defeated, without actually providing any counter points. I know you're not as stupid as you're making out, that's the annoying thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Of Swing Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Is it safe to assume that the worst is over now? Â I don't want to tempt fate so I right now I would just say there is a good chance that the worst is over. Â I may get some flak for this but I can't help but feel that parts of England were left more vunerable so Cameron and The Met could have a massive show of force in London. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Burchill's Buddy Posted August 10, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted August 10, 2011 I think people are just struggling to see what your point are now Whiskey.....you seem to be saying "let's not tar all poor people as scum" to which the forum, pretty unanimously has said. "we're not". There may be some people on your Facebook that are doing that, so probably best to go and educate them rather than get into pointless circular arguments on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I think you might be though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 And congratulations to you for adding absolutely nothing of any substance to this apart from desperately wanting to see my points defeated, without actually providing any counter points. I know you're not as stupid as you're making out, that's the annoying thing. I can only hope that you're not as stupid as you're making out. As Magnum pointed out in the post you've been too scared to respond to, you're the one who has confused (or tried to twist) what people meant by "scum" to try and fit your agenda. Burchill's Buddy has it summed up here: Â I think people are just struggling to see what your point are now Whiskey.....you seem to be saying "let's not tar all poor people as scum" to which the forum, pretty unanimously has said. "we're not". There may be some people on your Facebook that are doing that, so probably best to go and educate them rather than get into pointless circular arguments on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts