>Oi, u funny, lad! We got much in common just like me m8s at the council estate
>This here's me friend Bertha. U goin' anywhere tonight? We got us an extra spot at the pub for Skrewdriver
>Maybe later we could go back to me place? Got me some Bushmills, and later let's spin me Skullhead LPs and talk about Enoch Powell.
And then I walk away with the smug satisfaction of having crushed someone who was expecting a positive response. I should probably start watching myself for this as it's quite addictive.
>>414835 A piece of me always dies when I hear Americans trying to do a British accent. You can't even get angry at them for it because they genuinely think that doing it will put them up for some kind of comedy award.
God only knows how irritating it must be for Russians.
>>414842 Best I got from Americans was "Oh, I thought you'd sound more British" then them putting on some incredibly posh toff accent. Yeah good stuff lads.
>>414850 No you misunderstand. Thot is different, it's a reasonably recent bit of internet/cultural slang. An American pronounces and often spells "twat" as "twot".
Why do I know this useless information? Because I waste my life online.
I'm so out of the cultural loop that I don't even know what is supposed to be so overtly racist about the girls in the OP pic. One looks to be wearing a catholic school skirt and the other a t-shirt advertising CITV's Knightmare.
This was the counter-counterculture of the 80s and early 90s so you can be forgiven. They're skinheads. The tartan skirt is more punk than anything, but still seen a lot in oi and skin fashion. The t-shirt is a Skrewdriver album, Skrewdriver being a white supremacist band.
Granted skinhead girls and mod girls are visually interchangeable for the most part, I could probably shag someone who looks like that without talking about nazis.
>I could probably shag someone who looks like that without talking about nazis.
Maybe you could, but I'm going to explain the flaws in German strategic warfare whether she likes it or not. And that's not sexual harassment, it's just fucking boring.
>>414883 >I'm so out of the cultural loop that I don't even know what is supposed to be so overtly racist about the girls in the OP pic
No lad we're just showing our age. In the early 80's that is what skinhead (white supremacist) girls looked like. I don't know about counter-culture, but I agree with the rest of >>414884 analysis. It was quite mainstream chav/working class culture where I grew up - counter was punk and then would have been the New Romantics. Although I grew up around them (and like their DM shoes and white socks) I was no way hard enough to hang around anywhere near that lot.
> skinhead girls and mod girls are visually interchangeable for the most part
The media invented a distinction between the skins and mods that became self-perpetuating, but there never really was one back in the day. They went to the same parties, listened to the same music and wore many of the same clothes. Mod, suede and skin all existed on a continuous spectrum. It wasn't until the 80s revival that skinhead culture really emerged as a distinct scene, with the obvious ties to the far-right and the ensuing media panic. Mod and skinhead women were never stereotyped to the same extent as men, so their style didn't become fixed.
>>414894 If you're going to be that autistic about it I'm going to point out that they all have skin on their heads but their heads aren't made entirely out of skin.
Skinhead subculture started in Jamaica and the British West Indies with sugarcane harvesters and dock workers forming a youth movement around Reggae music originally called the Rude Boys. The music gained traction and slowly became identified with Trojan Records. The subculture was imported with immigrants from there to the UK in the '60s, reaching a fever pitch in what many nostalgic skinheads call the Spirit of '69. The Rude Boys, combined with the emerging working class Hard Mod culture, forged the classic skinhead. Although predominantly white, the original skinheads were racially integrated with more than a fair showing of blacks in the group.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syx5gF4Q3_E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3AbgBOcYHg
Then came Punk Rock. While many white skinheads enjoyed Punk, the scene was too closely associated with the middle and upper classes, so a new sound would emerge by working class Punks for working class Punks. Initially known as "Street Punk", that style of Skinhead Punk Rock would later be christened as "Oi!" thanks to a little magazine called The Sounds, edited by Garry Bushell. Mr. Bushell played an instrumental role marketing Punk Rock to skinheads through his magazine The Sounds almost equal in significance as Malcolm McLaren had with marketing The Sex Pistols to the globe. With bands like Angelic Upstarts and Sham 69 attracting throngs of dedicated fans, white skinheads started identifying with Punk subculture in greater numbers, gradually displacing Soul, Ska and Reggae.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6utdlMvuD74 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW5LEne0kP8
For those more dedicated to the roots of skinhead subculture (ie: the Spirit of 69), Soul, Ska and Reggae would soon be blended with Punk Rock to form a style called 2 Tone Ska. Bands like Madness and The Specials would bring back the spirit of yore with the sound of new.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46TJET37O_8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cntvEDbagAw
As this was all happening, Indians and laplanderstanis became a much stronger presence in UK. Contrary to the anti-racist narrative pitched by the image attached, xenophobia was prevalent among even black skinheads. Violence against South Asians, known as laplander bashing, became common. Add some Punk Rock nihilism with the decimation of the working class under Neoconservatism's growing influence in two of the major Anglo powers and you've got the perfect storm.
The watershed moment was an incident at a concert for The 4-Skins, The Business and The Last Resort (all unaffiliated with right-wing politics) in Southall during July of 1981. Two years earlier, police had killed Anti-Nazi League activist Blair Peach in a riot instigated by the demonstrators. Racial tensions were running at a fever pitch. Accounts conflict as to what happened (ie: who instigated it). The bands conceded the skinheads and South Asians weren't getting along, but maintain the the response was greatly out of proportion with the trouble the skinheads were causing them. On the other side, the South Asian locals claimed some of the skinhead concert goers assaulted women and elderly people, engaged in property destruction / vandalism / graffiti and daubed National Front logos and slogans on shop windows. In either case, the locals protested the gig on (wrongful) suspicion the bands were far-right and subsequently rioted, burning down the venue in the process. Following that incident, The 4-Skins recorded a song "One Law for Them":
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APMlPJH_OGI
Before Skrewdriver rose prominence, bands like Ovaltinees, Peter & the Wolf and Die Hards already gained traction as vehicles for the National Front's message. One year later, Ovaltinees would release what can be considered RAC's first publicly released recording, an EP called "British Justice." The "British Justice" EP predates all political releases by Skrewdriver, making it the first RAC record of all time. It must be the only thing ever that’s dedicated to both Adolf Hitler and Splodgenessabounds (alongside ‘all groupies’ and ‘Nigger & Chris’).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76uhUwC7Hmk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dyCzt_Brhe0
Here's a fascinating article about the Tilbury Trojan Skinheads, a group known for their affiliation with the band Angela Rippon's Bum as well as the staunchly xenophobic Anti-laplander League. Believe it or not, the Anti-laplander League had no formal ties to the National Front or British Movement. It was entirely grassroots xenophobia. Anyone who can tell me the original skinheads were anti-racist is lying. They may not have been Nazis, but they far from racially tolerant, especially to Indians/laplanderstanis:
http://archive.li/rprzN
>>414898 The thread tagging system allows me to post more youtube embeds. Allows for a much better way to give others a frame of reference, especially for those who can't be bothered to google all the individual bands.
As interesting as this is, sadly, it's riddled with spelling mistakes which kind of take away from its supposed authenticity.
Sorry, being an insufferable cunt again, I know.
Myself, I grew up around the late peak of Thatcherism in the late 80s. And in a suburban white upper middle class neighbourhood with two cars in the driveway. We didn't really have much to rebel against, so we didn't. I was a little too young to go to acid house parties, but my older siblings were all about them in those days. And so the kind of music I grew up listening to was along those lines as well, and I also dressed like my older siblings.
Looking at all the mediocre stuff that came after it in the 90s and noughties, I think the late 80s were a good age to grow up in, music and pop culture wise. We had it good. And going into the 90s, we had just survived the Cold War and nuclear armageddon that never came. So why not be happy about that in those days. A realisation that was missing from mid to late 90s pop culture, which was hedonistic, but it had also completely forgotten what it was being hedonistic about. I guess too much ecstasy will do that to you.
I've spent my entire life crawling around sub cultures and my view of the values you talk of and history you weave is people like you make it up, it is just a myth you put in your newsletters read by no one as it is just a small group of pretentious anarchists that actually care.
Most of the people you claim to speak for are superficial teenagers who just like pretty clothes. And the sub divisions you claim are there are near indistinguishable in practice because people don't care, apart from the other small group of pretentious anarchists obviously.
I can't speak for this particular example as I'm a little too young, but the distinction between a historic account of a subculture and the musings of one who was in it or understood it are both valuable.
More to the point, almost everything 'teenager' based is focused on music, and the phenomena of the rebellious teen latching on to new or foreign music. It's the reason that the trends of forty years ago largely started in port towns, the first places to get foreign imported records.
If you follow the musical trail of any youth subculture you can find the roots pretty reliably, and filter out any of the "we was the best generation" talk.
>>414894 Look closely lad - the skinhead lasses didn't actually shave their heads, they clipped them very short all over (number 3/4) and left the fringes a bit mad like in the OP. It was the fellas who had the skinny heads.
>>414919 Secondary sexual characteristics are far more significant in determining sexual orientation than genitalia, and using the expression 'end of' makes you an utter teenlad anyway.
I think we're probably in the last generation that will even think to ask if something is gay - in the future we just won't care. Joking aside that seems like a really good thing.
>>414924 >I think we're probably in the last generation that will even think to ask if something is gay
As fruity as the next generation is shaping up I think even they see sucking another guys dick as pretty gay. I mean the feminine and masculine forms (while having some overlap on such a large pool) hardly match up.
You'd be more likely to see the future go the other way and we start trying to address gender dysphoria rather than brushing over the symptoms with massive amounts of surgery and a lifetime spent taking a cocktail of drugs.
I didn't say they'd stop seeing something as gay, they'd just stop asking the question - as in, nobody will care if they or anyone else is gay or not. It won't be a minor life crisis to realise you fancy ladyboys, it'll be as mentally taxing as realising you prefer apples over oranges.
>You'd be more likely to see the future go the other way and we start trying to address gender dysphoria rather than brushing over the symptoms with massive amounts of surgery and a lifetime spent taking a cocktail of drugs.
That'd be nice too, and I think that's how the current 'non-binary' movement might end up.
There always seemed to me a fundemental philosophical contradiction in saying gender is meaningless you can label yourself what ever you want the physical doesn't matter, and having physical alterations so that you look like the gender you want to be should look.
Agreed. It'd be healthy for everyone to just get over it a bit and call a bloke in a dress she/her if that's what they want, and also for nobody to get offended if someone gets it wrong by accident.
But in a world where a man is going to prison for telling his dog to gas the jews, we may never reach such a point.
Our current attitudes to trans* people are very much based in a gender binary, but that's starting to change. Women have a lot more leeway in this respect - there's nothing particularly unusual about a woman with a short haircut, no makeup and masculine clothes. Women can pick any point on the spectrum of gender expression without really causing a stir, but for men there's a much more narrow window of acceptable expression. "Transvestite" is a label that only really applies to men. It's not really about accepting the idea of a spectrum of gender expression, but accepting a spectrum of cis male gender expression.
As with most social issues, I think it's mostly just a matter of waiting for the bigots to die.
>>414928 Gender is complicated, I don't fully understand it myself, but I believe the flaw in your supposed contradiction is that
>gender is meaningless you can label yourself what ever you want
is the underlying theory and ideal, and
>look like the gender you want to be should look
is the practical necessity of living comfortably under the gender norms imposed by Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.
I know plenty of trans women, for example, who say that their penis is just as much a part of their womanly body as any other. But society doesn't see it that way, unfortunately.
>>414944 >underlying theory and ideal
This is part of my issue, the underlying theories and ideals that don't work in practice, and therefore should be viewed with the same level of contempt as other theories and ideals that don't work in practice. There is an attempt to paint these ideas as self-evident universal truths and they aren't, they are a political ideology.
>>414944 >I know plenty of trans women, for example, who say that their penis is just as much a part of their womanly body as any other. But society doesn't see it that way, unfortunately.
>>414947 What do you mean by fantasy? I don't see how gender as an authoritarian, preconceived set of rules inconsistently applied by society-at-large is any more fantastical than gender as self-identifiable.
>>414946 I'll save you a load of back and forth and tell you I subscribe to the view point put forward In "Higher Superstition" by Gross and Levitt read it if you want, since they make the point better than I could.
I don't feel like taking my time to research and present an argment you might very well just dismiss off hand anyway that I've had on this site plenty of times before on IQ of all places.
Penises aren't masculine, and vaginas aren't feminine. I mean what the fuck, when has anyone said 'Wow, you know what I love, a really feminine vagina!'. Masculine has nothing to do with the presence of a dick, and everything to do with ascribing to references about 'men'.
A key problem that I found was people conflating all trans people together. For some, looking like a particular (or opposite) gender is an important part of the issue, while for others it's not particularly important, with some acting more like a 3rd gender, outside of the male/female binary. If we look at men; we have crossdressing, ladyboys, Pre-op, Post-op, etc.
But, a lot of very reactionary people seem to interpret that as a conceptual flaw.
Those people in the past must have been right idiots thinking they were identifying people by the role they played during procreation and were relevant to the continued existence of the species. If only someone was there to tell them that the labels they assign to those properties had no basis in objectivity and were just a social construct.
No he just said hedging bullshit that doesn't mean anything instead.
You are more than welcome to take yourself out of the gene pool in fact I encourage you to do so, but propagation of the species is still the most important factor in the continued existence of humanity. And acting like it isn't relevant is farcical.
I'd actually argue nearly all other things humanity does are actually more trivial.
Your point was that binary gender based on sex organs is the only way to see gender, because of how procreation works.
My point is that we are far, far beyond JUST existing to procreate. We're overpopulated as it is, not everyone wants children, we require a far, far lower number of births to sustain our society than any other point in human history. Not to mention that transgender men or women could still contribute to the propagation of society if they retain their sex organs.
To believe that every human should be popping out at least one kid or they're not contributing to society is dangerously wrong. We're fast reaching a point where the birth rate is just too much. Japan is already there.
No my point was the concept of gender is not a social construct. It has an important biological communication and to co-opt it and act like that point isn't important is a myth. (even if it isn't is as important to an individual it is certainly highly important to humanity as a whole, slippery slope fallacies about this point only make you look like a philosophical charlatan). It is intellectually dishonest to pretend it isn't. Gender isn't the social construct even beasts and the fishes of the sea have a concept of it.
The divorcing labels from the very clear classes they describe by letting the tail wag the dog (I can see you now crying "but what about the exception of those obscure corner cases!") They are exceptions, exceptions do not destroy a trend. We don't stop teaching things fall down because balloons float. We don't make everyone else acknowledge that YHWH is the one true god and miracles and angels are real because otherwise it will hurt the feelings of believers.
>>414966 >Your point was that binary gender based on sex organs is the only way to see gender, because of how procreation works.
Look, we get it that a bloke can sometimes wear a dress and you might think from a distance 'yeah I'd fuck that' but it's asinine to think that anyone but a tiny minority thinks that said bloke in a dress is the same as a woman. We're hardwired to find a certain form attractive for a reason and while you might (wrongly) claim that creating life is no longer important for our species it's not going to change the fact that a bloke in a dress is never going to do it for me.
I mean to look at it another way if sexuality is all bullshit then you don't need to put a dress on or have your cock hacked penis off to feel secure in who you are.
>To believe that every human should be popping out at least one kid or they're not contributing to society is dangerously wrong. We're fast reaching a point where the birth rate is just too much. Japan is already there.
I am concerned about unfit parents forcing their children into whatever gender they please. In America, they start pumping hormone blockers into the wee ones, and I'm sure it will start happening here soon.
Overpopulation is a problem until someone finds out how to cope with it, like any inevitable side effect of humanity's progress. Obvious sex education could be a whole lot better in a whole lot of places, but an increasing amount of people bring up overpopulation with *wink wink* "let's just kill all of them". Fortunately it's just fringe figures at the moment, like Spectator opinionist Toby Young.
The last stats I saw said that the population of the earth is leveling out. And will taper off at 8 billion something. This due to industrialized nations having less children and the world becoming more industrialized.
>>414978 Not really no and I don't even know what point you're trying to make about Japan whose population is collapsing.
At any rate, this anti-natalist argument seems to ignore how important having a family is to people and how we in Britain already have a below replacement (and falling) birthrate with the associated long-term collapse of the British welfare state. Is it somehow immoral for me to have a family because the third world demographic slowdown hasn't matched the predictions? Do these species wide discussions impact how I don't want to spend the rest of my life doing anal and sucking a cock?
I'll save you the bother and answer that no it bloody doesn't. Most people, even if they never intend to have kids, are still attracted to the opposite sex.
>we are far, far beyond JUST existing to procreate
This was the right line of argument to go down.
>Do you not think the earth is overpopulated?
This was not.