Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
bobmid said:
Why do the Tories constantly tell us what labour are going to do, how much it will cost, their immigration numbers etc etc, yet they dont tell us what they are doing or costs etc. What a bizarre campaign. People with half a brain are already questioning this. The others are just simple twats
Click to expand...


Latest is that they appealing to the bloody foreigners brigade.. less immigration where as Labour are promising to sort out the gender pay gap... Gammonesque folk will be fuming on that one.


PS. Just because someone voted leave or vote Conservative this does not make people gammon, however if you are the type that gets riled up by equality and consider it's designed to persecute you, that middle aged, able bodied, hetrosexual white men are under attack you are definitely gammon of mark francois and piers morgan proportions
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobmid
Prit cant give numbers, savid cant give numbers, they can on other parties but not their own. Ever so slightly worrying! 20000 extra police! , let's please get it correct. 20000 police to restore the numbers that were cut and even still it will be less per person than 2010! Come.on tories, get your act together. Lest get brexit done !
 
  • Like
Reactions: QPR Oslo and Willhoops
bobmid said:
Prit cant give numbers, savid cant give numbers, they can on other parties but not their own. Ever so slightly worrying! 20000 extra police! , let's please get it correct. 20000 police to restore the numbers that were cut and even still it will be less per person than 2010! Come.on tories, get your act together. Lest get brexit done !
Click to expand...

Also Id be amazed if they are taking into account the natural shrinkage, so I'm kinda expecting if it was fully explored the figure will be significantly lower than the 20,000 'on top' as promised.


The slippery bastards
 
Willhoops said:
Latest is that they appealing to the bloody foreigners brigade.. less immigration where as Labour are promising to sort out the gender pay gap... Gammonesque folk will be fuming on that one.


PS. Just because someone voted leave or vote Conservative this does not make people gammon, however if you are the type that gets riled up by equality and consider it's designed to persecute you, that middle aged, able bodied, hetrosexual white men are under attack you are definitely gammon of mark francois and piers morgan proportions
Click to expand...

So is it ok, as I’ve said before, to refer to a black person who acts and talks like a white person....a coconut?

I don’t like it as my Mrs has been called it a few times (by black people funnily enough). But hey ho, maybe I’m being a bit too ‘snowflake’.
 
Staines R's said:
So is it ok, as I’ve said before, to refer to a black person who acts and talks like a white person....a coconut?

I don’t like it as my Mrs has been called it a few times (by black people funnily enough). But hey ho, maybe I’m being a bit too ‘snowflake’.
Click to expand...


You what mate? That has nothing to do with my post. Anyway the answer is no, it's not. However certain language really does hold historical context of oppression, the slave trade and literally getting beaten the **** out of for your ethnicity so I can understand why people get seriously pissed off when it's used.
 
Willhoops said:
You what mate? That has nothing to do with my post. Anyway the answer is no, it's not. However certain language really does hold historical context of oppression, the slave trade and literally getting beaten the **** out of for your ethnicity so I can understand why people get seriously pissed off when it's used.
Click to expand...

My point was mate that I find the insult ‘Gammon’ as offensive as the insult ‘coconut’......though the former seems to be widely used and accepted. Just find it a tad hypocritical when both are referring to someone’s colour and both are referring to the way that person acts but one is deemed ok for use and the other isn’t.
Wasn’t meant as having a go at you personally, just something that pisses me off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uber_Hoop
Staines R's said:
My point was mate that I find the insult ‘Gammon’ as offensive as the insult ‘coconut’......though the former seems to be widely used and accepted. Just find it a tad hypocritical when both are referring to someone’s colour and both are referring to the way that person acts but one is deemed ok for use and the other isn’t.
Wasn’t meant as having a go at you personally, just something that pisses me off.
Click to expand...
This discussion reminds me of another one, where if a white man dresses up as a black man this is racist (eg. Black and white minstrel show), but a man dressing as a woman (drag queen), is celebrated with TV shows like the RuPaul one. I find it hard to see the logic of both viewpoints. Why is one 'Blackface' but the other not 'Womanface'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wherever, kiwiqpr, Uber_Hoop and 1 other person
bc7 said:
This discussion reminds me of another one, where if a white man dresses up as a black man this is racist (eg. Black and white minstrel show), but a man dressing as a woman (drag queen), is celebrated with TV shows like the RuPaul one. I find it hard to see the logic of both viewpoints. Why is one 'Blackface' but the other not 'Womanface'.
Click to expand...

Men have dressed up as women in theatre for as far back as theatre existed. Look at pantomime. Men aren't offended. I've never heard of a woman being offended. I admit I've never met a transvestite to ask.
 
Staines R's said:
My point was mate that I find the insult ‘Gammon’ as offensive as the insult ‘coconut’......though the former seems to be widely used and accepted. Just find it a tad hypocritical when both are referring to someone’s colour and both are referring to the way that person acts but one is deemed ok for use and the other isn’t.
Wasn’t meant as having a go at you personally, just something that pisses me off.
Click to expand...

Gammon although usually will relate to a white person, for me it really isn't about race it's about attitude and rage towards certain subject matter and an undue sense of persecution which certainly isn't exclusive to whites. I respect what you have said and appreciate your comment by the way. The reason why I feel certain language is offensive does stem from history and how the words have been used over the years. A certain word beginning with N is strongly associated with the slave trade and widely used by people in the KKK and such group to describe someone as being 'lesser' due to their ethnicity and the ethnicity as a whole being inferior, this is not the case with 'gammon' it's not claiming that being of an ethnicity makes you any lesser a person because of a birthright, it's attacking a persons attitudes
 
bobmid said:
Prit cant give numbers, savid cant give numbers, they can on other parties but not their own. Ever so slightly worrying! 20000 extra police! , let's please get it correct. 20000 police to restore the numbers that were cut and even still it will be less per person than 2010! Come.on tories, get your act together. Lest get brexit done !
Click to expand...
You can add Cleverley to your list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobmid and Willhoops
And Kwarteng on Sophie Ridge claimed a huge (and denied number) for Labour spending plans, but had no numbers he could give for his own Tory party spend.
 
Willhoops said:
Gammon although usually will relate to a white person, for me it really isn't about race it's about attitude and rage towards certain subject matter and an undue sense of persecution which certainly isn't exclusive to whites. I respect what you have said and appreciate your comment by the way. The reason why I feel certain language is offensive does stem from history and how the words have been used over the years. A certain word beginning with N is strongly associated with the slave trade and widely used by people in the KKK and such group to describe someone as being 'lesser' due to their ethnicity and the ethnicity as a whole being inferior, this is not the case with 'gammon' it's not claiming that being of an ethnicity makes you any lesser a person because of a birthright, it's attacking a persons attitudes
Click to expand...

So taking your argument, that would assume ‘coconut’ isn’t offensive either.
That’s inferring that a black person is black on the outside and white on the inside, referring to the way that talk and act......nothing about them being ‘lesser’ or ‘inferior’.
So again, is there a difference as you’ve already said you reckon the usage of ‘coconut’ isn’t ok, but have no problem with ‘gammon’.

Honestly mate, again, not against you personally just I don’t get the hypocrisy in its usage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Uber_Hoop
Staines R's said:
So taking your argument, that would assume ‘coconut’ isn’t offensive either.
That’s inferring that a black person is black on the outside and white on the inside, referring to the way that talk and act......nothing about them being ‘lesser’ or ‘inferior’.
So again, is there a difference as you’ve already said you reckon the usage of ‘coconut’ isn’t ok, but have no problem with ‘gammon’.

Honestly mate, again, not against you personally just I don’t get the hypocrisy in its usage.
Click to expand...

Coconut directly refers to ethnicity and the way in which you should act due to your ethnicity, gammon is a criticism of opinion and attitude, which has no correlation to ethnicity, a birth right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frome-Ranger
Willhoops said:
Gammon although usually will relate to a white person, for me it really isn't about race it's about attitude and rage towards certain subject matter and an undue sense of persecution which certainly isn't exclusive to whites. I respect what you have said and appreciate your comment by the way. The reason why I feel certain language is offensive does stem from history and how the words have been used over the years. A certain word beginning with N is strongly associated with the slave trade and widely used by people in the KKK and such group to describe someone as being 'lesser' due to their ethnicity and the ethnicity as a whole being inferior, this is not the case with 'gammon' it's not claiming that being of an ethnicity makes you any lesser a person because of a birthright, it's attacking a persons attitudes
Click to expand...

I don't care about the use of gammon and think it's pretty funny but wasn't it originally for white middle aged men who went pink hence gammon. I just find it ironic that people of the left don't like racism but think this is acceptable tbh.

If its all about historically connotations then calling a black person inky or Nightrider shouldn't be racist but i bet it is. Likewise saying a Blackman has a big cock is also racist nowadays even though these have never been used historically
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwiqpr, Uber_Hoop and Staines R's
Staines R's said:
Both refer to someone’s colour, both refer to the way someone acts. Both can be deemed to be offensive.
Click to expand...

For me, as I've mentioned if I were to call someone 'gammon' it wouldn't matter which ethnicity they were, I'd happily call James Cleverly as gammon when he gets in a tizz.

However it's also to do with history and privilege, whites, especially the British have made this Nation 'great' by ****ting all over over nations, killing them, enslaving and nicking their resources. The Brits have invaded in some way invaded all but 22 countries worldwide!! Been responsible for some of the worst atrocities in human history, should modern Brits, especially whites be blamed for that? Of course not, bit like modern Germans shouldn't have the **** thrown at them. However we should acknowledge that the reason we are as wealthy as we are and certain other nations are poor is in a large part because of these actions. Yet there are a shed load of people who consider they are under attack, being oppressed which is simply not the case, people are just wanting equality and acceptance. So yeah it's mostly whites who think like this because they are in a position to feel like this, because other ethnicities generally haven't had this opportunity. The gammonesque behaviour is held by people who seem to think new ideas shouldn't be put out there, different ways to their own aren't just as valuable, seen this with Morgan especially with vegans, gender neutral, etc.. And seemingly don't accept change that they think might put them out slightly, usually this isn't the case however.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back