Extermination through sterilisation - the solution to "skangerism"

steddyeddy

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

They don't think working class people are skangers. They think people with a certain accent and a certain dress style are skangers. The collins dictionary definition also seems to back up their understanding of the term.

Like you say, working class people who fall outside those characteristics are not considered skangers.

Oh the Collins dictionary? Well feck me if a dictionary says some people are skangers then they must be!

humbert

steddyeddy wrote: »

Oh the Collins dictionary? Well feck me if a dictionary says some people are skangers then they must be!

Casual sports clothes. Presumably the non-skanger working-class wear formal sports clothes to set themselves apart.

Miss Lockhart

steddyeddy wrote: »

Oh the Collins dictionary? Well feck me if a dictionary says some people are skangers then they must be!

My point is there are many, the dictionary included, who use the word to describe a strong accent and a certain dress style (wearing tracksuits, heavy gold jewellery, precariously balanced baseball caps etc) that they find distasteful and think of as "common", and nothing more. It is not being used to describe these people as antisocial or as scumbags. People here are saying the word is synonymous with scumbags. I'm saying that in my world it us most definitely not.

steddyeddy

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

My point is there are many, the dictionary included, who use the word to describe a strong accent and a certain dress style (wearing tracksuits, heavy gold jewellery, precariously balanced baseball caps etc) that they find distasteful and think of as "common", and nothing more. It is not being used to describe these people as antisocial or as scumbags. People here are saying the word is synonymous with scumbags. I'm saying that in my world it us most definitely not.

And so what if they think it? Many people think people of different color skin to them are inferior to them. Some people are just not very clever and that's the discrimination and labels are the end result of that.

Miss Lockhart

steddyeddy wrote: »

And so what if they think it? Many people think people of different color skin to them are inferior to them. Some people are just not very clever and that's the discrimination and labels are the end result of that.

There is no so what. I'm merely pointing out that the term, which is being used to label those the OP thinks are worthy of forced sterilisation, is not synonymous with scumbags - in my experience and according to the dictionary.

steddyeddy

wexie wrote: »

I see what you're getting at, what's the solution though? You can hardly deprive those parents that want to give their kids the best start they can, and any available advantage, the right to do so?

You could argue there shouldn't be a need for private schools and you'd be right. However there will always be a market for private schools, with the best teachers available, the best teaching aids etc. etc. This won't change as long as there are people that do see the value in education, or even just people (lets be honest) that don't want their kids mingling with the plebs.

Essentially what we're getting to is that life isn't fair, which it isn't and it will never be. That does not however, give anyone the right to display any of the behaviours so widely discussed in this thread and so widely observed in this country.

Do I think the choice of a minority of parents should defeat the purpose of a standardized test? No I don't. Life isn't fair if you don't fix the things that make it unfair. Finland removed private schools and the gaps between the rich and poor in terms of education shrank.

At the moment we have a system where the dumb can get extra support and get in because they come from a better off family than a poorer family that may have a more intelligent kid.

Here's a mental idea. How about get rid of private schools like Finland did and if one kid shows promise give him a scholarship. Let the kid earn it rather than get an educational advantage of the back of others.

steddyeddy

Miss Lockhart wrote: »

There is no so what. I'm merely pointing out that the term, which is being used to label those the OP thinks are worthy of forced sterilisation, is not synonymous with scumbags - in my experience and according to the dictionary.

Well in fairness Miss-Lockhart as someone who comes from a family where some members have strong Dublin accents I would find the term skanger offensive.

sock puppet

Not sure if it's been brought up before but I was on that Pearse to Maynooth train and a lot of the kids drinking and fighting weren't what you'd typically describe as knackers/scumbags.

Perhaps a reasonable solution might be to ban groups of more than say 4 unsupervised minors from the beach. Probably be difficult to enforce in practice though as by drinking on the beach they're already breaking multiple laws.

Miss Lockhart

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well in fairness Miss-Lockhart as someone who comes from a family where some members have strong Dublin accents I would find the term skanger offensive.

And in fairness steddyeddy, as someone who comes from a family who fulfil all the stereotypes of a skanger including accent, dress and lack of work ethic, I would also find it offensive. But that's wholly irrelevant to my point that the term is not considered synonymous with the term scumbag by the vast majority of the people I hear using it, including the OP whose list of defining skanger characteristics would encompass many ordinary working class people.

alphabeat

the kettle agrees

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9ntPQVroaQ

The King of Moo

I don't see the logic behind this. Who's going to benefit? There'd justifiably be riots over enforced sterilisation, and the logistics of identifying targets and implementing the programme would be a nightmare. It'd also probably hard to ensure that wealthy, influential scumbags get sterilised. And it'd have to be a costly, ongoing process if the roots of anti-social behaviour such as unemployment and social exclusion aren't tackled?

OP, did you think this through at all?

I'd genuinely love to see the world from some of you people's perspectives for a day. I'd love to experience that combination of impotent fear and rage when you see someone with a Celtic jersey, and the later combination of shame, frustration and hatred when you mash your paws against your keyboards, as you try to mask your fear behind exaggerated accounts of imagined barbarity.

To be honest, I'd be most curious about how some of you manage to stumble out of bed in the morning and figure out how to put your trousers on correctly.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Ironically enough, it's usually the people who defend them who apply the term to working class people. In fact, assuming that a thread about scumbags refers to working class folk betrays more about your own prejudices than about anyone elses!

I don't think that's entirely true. While some people do acknowledge that thuggery isn't solely the preserve of the lower classes, plenty of people also reveal their prejudices in the form of snide little "jokes" about Dutch Gold and accents and Celtic jerseys (see below), and nonsensical drivel about food stamps and so on, without really mentioning anti-social behaviour.
The fact is that some people just can't stand the poor. I think for many of them it's because they're disturbed by the knowledge that we're products of our environments to a large extent, and that they could have ended up in similar circumstances if their lives had been different.

Cienciano wrote: »

We could do a questionaire to weed them out.
Do you drink Dutch Gold
Do you own a sovereign ring?
Do you own a celtic jersey?
Do you have a celtic tattoo?
Do you have one of those knacker haircuts with the greasy brushed down fringe?
Do you say "staaarrryy bud" to greet people?
For men: When it's warm, do you walk around in public with no top on?
For women: Do you have a tattoo on your lower back?

humbert

Would I be interpreting Miss Lockhart correctly if I said skangers look and sound like working class scumbags (as opposed to wealthy scumbags or simply working class. In general I'd say the working classes look just as respectable as anyone else you might pass on the street) but may not act like scumbags?

humbert

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'd genuinely love to see the world from some of you people's perspectives for a day. I'd love to experience that combination of impotent fear and rage when you see someone with a Celtic jersey, and the later combination of shame, frustration and hatred when you mash your paws against your keyboards, as you try to mask your fear behind exaggerated accounts of imagined barbarity.

Why do you assume there is fear? I can follow the impotence, any law abiding citizen would feel that, and I'd say rage might be too strong a word but I'll accept it, the fear I don't understand.

kraggy

How about proper, long sentences so they can't reproduce. Or cause havoc.

And proper confinement so they can't mingle with other prisoners only to stir more **** on the outside, from the inside.

Kichote

I keep seeing a "final" in the thread title that isn't there

The King of Moo

humbert wrote: »

Why do you assume there is fear? I can follow the impotence, any law abiding citizen would feel that, and I'd say rage might be too strong a word but I'll accept it, the fear I don't understand.

It just seems the most logical reason for the absurd posturing of some posters. It's like when you see drunk guys "fighting" who don't really want to fight. The guy making the most noise, saying "Hold me back lads, I don't want to kill him!" is only doing so as a poor attempt to mask his fear of being beaten up.
Likewise, it seems logical that the bizarrely excessive fantasies of sterilisation and violence also stem from such a fear.

Scruffles

sterilizing is a preventative method which works for crims such as sexual abusers and paedophiles who want to help themselves,however all beings are born a blank slate, the anti social/chav attitude and behavior comes through environment,a hatred of authority,who they hang around with,parents who werent the mothering/fathering type and never gave them proper boundaries or attention-those are things sterilizing doesnt stop- tougher laws on housing-no sht taken for anti social behavior legaly have them thrown out and moved to special 'half way' hostels which coud rehabilitate them in many different ways;eg-attitude,their treatment and respect of other people, jobs,education etc.

its simply not right to blame a being for the shtty behavior of their parents which is what sterilizing chavs woud be doing.

pennypocket

is it time to just acknowledge
that there is a strata of society that will never be reformed

Brett Fast Neurology wrote: »

This part is bollocks...

FYI OP, stratum. There is a stratum.

space_man

funny a friend of mine from Sweden has exactly the same 'er solution to their recent riots. I said it might be less expensive to not let them in to start with. Too late for that it seems.

This might catch on yet .........?:D

PopePalpatine

Why not put them in all in the Hunger Games or a Battle Royale? :rolleyes:

AlekSmart

pennypocket wrote: »

is it time to just acknowledge
that there is a strata of society that will never be reformed



FYI OP, stratum. There is a stratum.

And whilst you're about it,could you adjudicate upon Bollox vs Bollocks

KyussBishop

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'd genuinely love to see the world from some of you people's perspectives for a day.

Heh, yes same; reminds me of a quote I favoured from another forum, which I think is especially applicable to this thread:
"Tbh I'd love to see things from your point of view, but I can't get my head that far up my arse."

Weathering

Let them eat cake

mariaalice

Nobody has any choice about where they are born or who their parents are so anyone could be a skanger/scoby/scallie/chav or whatever depending on where you are born and the milieu you were brought up in, scumbag behaviour is however a choice.

We could change society somewhat if we choose different social policies and I would be a great supporter of that but we will never totally change thing, for example if you look at the foundation of the state of Israel and the kibbutz's, they attempted to have a society that did not have a hierarchy but despite this a hierarchy did emerge, it must be something to do with human nature.

I know someone who works with drug addicts and he would tell you how they say to the staff why do work, "a bit of dealing and I would earn more in a day they you earn in a month" the point he was making was that they don't share the " normal" values of society the idea of something being criminal ceases to have any meaning for them.

Hatred of the poor has a long history in society, but you also have ( on after hours ) hatred of D4 type, Culchies, amoung many others, people are suspicious of different and feel more comfortable with their own tribe.

Davidth88

space_man wrote: »

funny a friend of mine from Sweden has exactly the same 'er solution to their recent riots. I said it might be less expensive to not let them in to start with. Too late for that it seems.

This might catch on yet .........?:D

Not so funny considering Sweden's history of eugenics .

Grand Moff Tarkin

returnNull wrote: »

and while they are in getting sterilized we could always harvest them for body parts,may as well make some money off the toe-rags.It would have to be the teenagers though,the older they get their livers would be fukked from drinking dutch gold and all the gear the they're smoking/injecting

Fantastic idea.

laoch na mona

no just no

VinLieger

Seriously we need to turn spike island into some epic battle royale

Wibbs

Scruffles wrote: »

however all beings are born a blank slate.

I dunno if I'd agree with you there S. I've known right evil gits come from good family environments and really sound and valuable members of society come from really bad family environments. Yes environment is a huge factor, but there will always be a minority who will be utter scumbags regardless of their environment. They're just born "wrong".

Seachmall

Scruffles wrote: »

sterilizing is a preventative method which works for crims such as sexual abusers and paedophiles who want to help themselves,however all beings are born a blank slate, the anti social/chav attitude and behavior comes through environment,a hatred of authority,who they hang around with,parents who werent the mothering/fathering type and never gave them proper boundaries or attention-those are things sterilizing doesnt stop- tougher laws on housing-no sht taken for anti social behavior legaly have them thrown out and moved to special 'half way' hostels which coud rehabilitate them in many different ways;eg-attitude,their treatment and respect of other people, jobs,education etc.

its simply not right to blame a being for the shtty behavior of their parents which is what sterilizing chavs woud be doing.

It's widely agreed that psychopathy may have a genetic factor, and that the environment of the person may merely decide to what degree those psychopathic traits are exhibited.

Interestingly it's also entirely possible that given the right environment the (theoretical) psychopathic gene may be a good thing (as in a person may lack the ability to feel emotions as most do but may also lack the selfishness that people typically associate with psychopaths, this review compares such people to James Bond).

So it's likely both genetics and environment need to be addressed when deciding someone's risk factor. No all people are born equal, but that doesn't mean we can't sculpt them.

pennypocket

AlekSmart wrote: »

And whilst you're about it,could you adjudicate upon Bollox vs Bollocks

I would lean towards bollocks but whatever floats your boat.

FTA69

I agree with Lockhart to be honest. The term "skanger" is often used as a catch-all term for the working-class in general by some people from wealthier backgrounds. I've often heard people describe those from a particular estate or of a certain look as "skangers" or to refer to a given place as a "knacker-hole" etc. In a similar vein, in Britain some people refer to any white working-class person as a "chav".

Unfortunately terms like "knacker" and "skanger" are increasingly being used as definitions of poorer people in general as opposed to being limited to those who act the b*llocks.

jasonbourne.cs

regardless of what you want to call these groups the situation remains the same we have a bunch of people who are leeching off the rest of the population .

passing Killiney beech yesterday on the train home for work , place was jammed with "skangers" with dutch gold . i dont begrudge anyone a bit of downtime but when the rest of us are shoved into the cattle carts supplied by Irish rail and earning a living its a bit hard to stomach :mad:

laoch na mona

jasonbourne.cs wrote: »

regardless of what you want to call these groups the situation remains the same we have a bunch of people who are leeching off the rest of the population .

passing Killiney beech yesterday on the train home for work , place was jammed with "skangers" with dutch gold . i dont begrudge anyone a bit of downtime but when the rest of us are shoved into the cattle carts supplied by Irish rail and earning a living its a bit hard to stomach :mad:

so they took a day off what harm

jasonbourne.cs

all of them ... simultaneously ... and it just happened to be beech weather

right :rolleyes:

laoch na mona

jasonbourne.cs wrote: »

all of them ... simultaneously ... and it just happened to be beech weather

right

not everyone has full time work plenty people struggling on part time wage or no work so many may not have had any work that day. you should feel lucky that you have a job many of us are not that lucky

Terry1985

The govt could automatically add contraceptives to the water supply via the new water meters for all those on social welfare.

laoch na mona

Terry1985 wrote: »

The govt could automatically add contraceptives to the water supply via the new water meters for all those on social welfare.

Zeich Heil

kravmaga

wesf wrote: »

Actually one night while having a few drinks with friends we were talking about this subject.
I came up with an amazing idea, here it is:
Choose a county nobody likes, lets say Roscommon, fence it off Jurassic Park style, take all the normal people and move them elsewhere while leaving the scumbags there.
Round up all the other scumbags around the country and throw them in also.
Here comes the best bit, charge people, stag do's etc, to enter the park on a hunting weekend, you get to hunt down and kill scumbags, while generating money for the country also, win win for everyone!!

Haha, you beat me to it.
Could be called "The Game of Skangers"

Duggys Housemate

mariaalice wrote: »

I know someone who works with drug addicts and he would tell you how they say to the staff why do work, "a bit of dealing and I would earn more in a day they you earn in a month" the point he was making was that they don't share the " normal" values of society the idea of something being criminal ceases to have any meaning for them.

This is why modern theories of "poverty causing crime" are misguided and disingenuous. Its always been the case that there are rich criminals, or why would people bother? There is a scene in GoodFellas when two wise guys are chasing someone at peak travel time on a train. On seeing the crowd they wonder "Do these people really live like this".

mariaalice wrote: »

Hatred of the poor has a long history in society, but you also have ( on after hours ) hatred of D4 type, Culchies, amoung many others, people are suspicious of different and feel more comfortable with their own tribe.

You haven't noticed this but this claim - the "poor" - is directly contradicted by your previous statement. Is a dealer "poor" or not? In general people don't hate the "poor" - who hates a cleaning lady, or a part time worker in a call centre ( how would we know?). People hate anti-social behavior. In fact the people who hate it most are the poor paid workers, who know that the "oppressed" anti-social brigade could work, but don't ( think of the boom), or prefer to deal, or are "wise guys".

All sociological discussions on this are cant.

old hippy

thiarfearr wrote: »

What good does it do to bring children into the world when one or both parents are serial criminals, who are in and out of court more often than not?

Who the hell is anyone to dictate whether someone can have kids or not?

Seachmall

old hippy wrote: »

Who the hell is anyone to dictate whether someone can have kids or not?

Why is there an assumed absolute right to have kids?

Hoop66

old hippy wrote: »

Who the hell is anyone to dictate whether someone can have kids or not?

Yes, it's wrong to dictate to anyone whether they should have children or not.

But surely, if a child is going to be brought into a chaotic, dysdunctional environment with no love, support or moral foundation it is better that they don't have children? So, is it possible to educate people that it is unwise of them to bring a child into the life they are currently living?

It's easy to say that social/economic factors are responsible, and they are to a point. The unpleasant fact is, for liberals like myself, that in many cases people just do not care about their own lives, those of their children or those of those around them, and attempts to make life better for them are rebuffed or abused.

WinnyThePoo

Battle Royal on achill island.

Terry1985

old hippy wrote: »

Who the hell is anyone to dictate whether someone can have kids or not?

Are you psychic channeling Jimmy Savile?

Terry1985

laoch na mona wrote: »

Zeich Heil

I believe the correct phrase is 'Sieg heil'.

old hippy

Terry1985 wrote: »

Are you psychic channeling Jimmy Savile?

Calling someone a nonce isn't a helpful contribution.

old hippy

Seachmall wrote: »

Why is there an assumed absolute right to have kids?

Are we living in China now?

Duggys Housemate

old hippy wrote: »

Are we living in China now?

The Irish state routinely seizes kids if the parents are not able to mind them. This is the state saying - you can't care for kids.

old hippy

Hoop66 wrote: »

Yes, it's wrong to dictate to anyone whether they should have children or not.

But surely, if a child is going to be brought into a chaotic, dysdunctional environment with no love, support or moral foundation it is better that they don't have children? So, is it possible to educate people that it is unwise of them to bring a child into the life they are currently living?

It's easy to say that social/economic factors are responsible, and they are to a point. The unpleasant fact is, for liberals like myself, that in many cases people just do not care about their own lives, those of their children or those of those around them, and attempts to make life better for them are rebuffed or abused.

I think you must be the first poster here to mention education. A commendable suggestion. Is it possible? I guess it is. Education and equal opportunities are a must for any functioning society.