Piers Clashes With Trans Supporter Over JK Rowling's Controversial New Book | Good Morning Britain

submitted by [deleted] from youtube.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]anonymale 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Also, mate, as you know "gammons" is an ageist, sexist and racist slur meant to belittle, demonize and slag off an entire chunk of the British population. Not cool.

Are you serious? Come on. It's an insult invented by white people to mock [edit: white] people with different politics, not people perceived as racially different. The fact that they tend to respond with exactly the outrage they gleefully deride 'snowflakes' for just makes it all the funnier.

[–]MarkTwainiac 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Huh? Gammon, as everyone knows, is a type of ham, a meat that comes from pigs. You linked to the Urban Dictionary definition which says that the slur gammon is a

Collective noun for white, middle-aged, furious-faced men who are heavily concentrated in the vast reaches of England's Brexit heartlands.

The white skin of these "furious-faced men" is often said to be red-tinged, pink, florid like ham coz of their race/ethnicity, their (over)weight and health conditions (HBP).

There's tons of appearance-based racial prejudice within different races and ethnicities. This is amply shown by the problems of "colorism" and "featurism" amongst people of African heritage; the popularity of skin whitening creams in much of Asia, and the growing practice of "corrective" eye surgeries amongst East Asians; and the sky high rates of nose jobs and other facial surgeries amongst people of Middle Eastern heritage, be they Jews, Arabs or Persians. There are Irish people who look down on other Irish people for having freckles and skin that's "too pale" and "too pink" and for generally looking "too Irish" just as there are black people who look down on other black people for having skin that's "too dark," and noses and lips that are "too big." If you're unaware of this, you need to explore more.

https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/07/misconceptions-about-being-black-in-america/492305/

I have no problem condemning and making fun people for their ideas, and I have no problem with teasing that occurs amongst loved ones that pokes fun at looks (I've personally been called "chicken lips," "big nose," "crazy hair," "fat ass," and so on). But I think disagreeing with the ideas of whole groups of people (whom we don't personally know) doesn't give us license to lump them all together in a stereotyped mass and mock them for their racial and ethnic characteristics, their age, the place/part of the world or country they reside in or come from, or their appearance, weight and health conditions.

But hey, you do you.

[–]anonymale 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's tons of appearance-based racial prejudice within different races and ethnicities...If you're unaware of this, you need to explore more.

Fucking hell, why not just tell me to check my privilege: it would have been easier to type. I'm one of those people who caught shit for looking Irish and regularly got assaulted for it into my twenties. A close relative has a large facial disfigurement. We both knew plenty about appearance-based prejudice before we left primary school.

In contrast, gammons got their name because of their behaviour, not because of something they're unable to change. It's because they so easily lose their shit about things which are not a threat to them. There are plenty of affluent middle-aged white men who are not thought of as gammons because they discuss their similarly abhorrent opinions calmly. For example Jacob Rees-Mogg affably shifting blame for Grenfell fire victims' deaths on a talk radio station. Any gammon who doesn't like the label can simply learn to discuss politics without ranting.

This is beside my main point anyway, which is that tv discussions like the one this thread is about are just means for tv companies to sell audiences to advertisers. They are not meant to inform.