Is being a chav genetic or social?

Not all chavs are bad people. I don't have a problem with them except for the inconsiderate ones (ie: neds) who want to make other peoples' lives hell.

IMO it's a bit of both. Some people are just a product of their environment and perhaps don't have the opportunities or capability (mental or otherwise) to do much better. Even in "chav" areas there are good communities of decent people who will happily help each other out and just try to get on with life. Just a shame there are some selfish scumbags who want to ruin it for everyone else.

Source: Plenty of experience growing up in/around council estates and pulling myself out of it. Still have some "chav" mates. :p
 
There's also the fact that a delinquent will only hurt themselves and those unfortunate enough to cross their path. The upper echelon equivalents - whom callously destroyed the empire with their overconfident idiocy - hurt everyone with their banditry, as they have the desire and means to satiate whatever gratification they wish.

The former needs support into a better life or at least their children, the latter needs erasure.

Ultimately both exist because the public want's them to, one to look down on and one to aspire to foolishly.
 
Last edited:
Both are problems in their own way - one problem family can make an entire road, close etc.. a living nightmare for everyone else. Not to mention general effect on the wider local are in general from having lots of them about - high crime rate, influence on other kids, gangs etc.. etc..

Rich chavs whether rogue landlords or perhaps wealthy businessmen acting out of self interest, screwing society while dodging tax etc.. are still constrained by the law to some extent and are much bigger target for the authorities.

I guess yeah individually the wealthy tax dodger damages far more people, has a bigger impact on the treasury from tax dodging than some chav sponging benefits.

Though it's not just financial implications - at a local level the effect of a chav family living nearby or the effect of a local business owner trying to make a go at running his shop while smack heads can destroy a day's profit within a minute of robbing the place... (I guess also the hard working small business owner has a higher chance of being an immigrant and the smack head has a higher chance of being a white brit)
 
reckon it's mostly social.

if your formative years are spent in an environment devoid of role models or any impetus to succeed then it should be no surprise you end up following that same track.

you see the same thing on the other end of the scale, with second/third generation millionaires squandering their fortunes as they become more distanced from the role models that built it in the first place.
 
dowie said:
Both are problems in their own way - one problem family can make an entire road, close etc.. a living nightmare for everyone else. Not to mention general effect on the wider local are in general from having lots of them about - high crime rate, influence on other kids, gangs etc.. etc..

Rich chavs whether rogue landlords or perhaps wealthy businessmen acting out of self interest, screwing society while dodging tax etc.. are still constrained by the law to some extent and are much bigger target for the authorities.

I guess yeah individually the wealthy tax dodger damages far more people, has a bigger impact on the treasury from tax dodging than some chav sponging benefits.

Though it's not just financial implications - at a local level the effect of a chav family living nearby or the effect of a local business owner trying to make a go at running his shop while smack heads can destroy a day's profit within a minute of robbing the place... (I guess also the hard working small business owner has a higher chance of being an immigrant and the smack head has a higher chance of being a white brit)
Click to expand...

I suppose, but I believe it's a cycle as well, the poor outcomes of the former provide incentive for the latter to commit abuse in the name of personal gain, providing further poor outcomes to everyone (not just the two groups) and ergo creating more 'chavs' on both ends of this imagined spectrum.

I'm sure there's more gradation in social structures than what i'm plopping down here, but I think it fits for the discussion. Obviously you can't reasonably get rid of all poor outcomes or get rid of all those beholden to damaging inherited traits or some such without wrecking society in the process. I don't expect there's an easy option to reducing the world of idiots regardless of how they came to be the way they are. Giving up seems to be the easiest option unfortunately.
 
I'd say a lot of it is to do with their upbringing.

I've been watching a former prison officer (UK) being interviewed recently. He said most of the people in prison have been abused physically, mentally or sexually.

I'm not sure if anyone as noticed but most adults act like big kids these days. It's like they haven't grown up. So how can these people properly enforce parenting rules on their children?

I think a good sign to tell if someone is an idiot is if someone says to them "What must your parents think of your behaviour?". If the person gets angry then they are an idiot. If the person feels some shame and embarrassment then they are a normal human being.

A friend used to go out with this woman from a rough estate. I think she had 3 kids, a couple of them were on tag. She had no control over her kids. She was mentally immature, even though I think she was around 40 years old. So the chance of her son/daughter actually making something of themselves is really low.
 
Clearly the vast majority of it is social / upbringing. I guess there may be a small genetic factor i.e. a child might potentially be less intelligent if born to parents with below average intellect but that is far outweighed by social factors.

The point about people stopping to think "I'm a tool" is an interesting one because it is IMO heavily influenced by what we perceive as normal. It's easy for someone from another social group to point fingers and say "they must know this is wrong" but that is because their own personal upbringing has built their map of what is right and wrong. If you are born into a world where hitting people and swearing and looking after #1 via whatever means is normal, then you naturally learn that and subconsciously normalise it. I'm sure if you took people from a completely different culture and got them to observe 'civilised western culture' they would pick up on some things and remark on how rude certain things seem to them whereas it wouldn't even cross our mind that it could be considered rude. If you take it to extremes, there will cults that brainwash people, or even those sick cases you read about where children are brought up in terrible conditions but they don't leave because they don't know any different.

A good exercise if you have young children is to observe what they pick up on and copy. I was once walking in town with my son, when he was about four(?) I think, and he picked up a cigarette butt and held it to his mouth. My MIL used to smoke and obviously he'll see other people do it when out and about. I was quite shocked because my wife and I never smoke or have even talked about it with him (I'd assumed it was a conversation we might have a lot later in life).
 
Last edited:
Wow! I never expected to get so many responses to this thread!!

And by the way I never meant to cause offence when I said jobless! There is jobless and then there is career jobless!
 
DereksDontRun said:
It's predominantly nurture, through family and piers
Click to expand...

Hastings_Pier_geograph-5972693-by-N-Chadwick.jpg


??????
 
~>Dg<~ said:
society. back in the day you did something wrong you got a clip round the ear or a good hiding :p you cant discipline people anymore. its like fairy land. everything is against someones rights the worlds covered in cotton wool. so with no fear of reprisal people wonder why more act like ***** . :p
Click to expand...

I was given plenty of smacks! A beating doesn't really work! If I did something that I knew was wrong I'd weigh up weather it was worth the beating
 
norm said:
I think like most people you adopt a persona depending on your underlying values and emotions.

With chavs, I think their dissatisfaction with their lives, environment, irregular shaped sofas, plays a large role in their behaviour. They're angry. Angry about the fact the cant call anything of worth their own, angry they have to rely on the state for handouts, angry about the fact they had so many kids and it didn't really improve their lives for the better.

Now whilst this anger is masked on the surface, I'm sure it sits there deep down and all this loud brash nature with their desire to show off with tattoos, possessions, loud music it's all masquerading how they feel inside with their inadequacies.

At least that's my interpretation of it.
Click to expand...

Agree
 
adolf hamster said:
reckon it's mostly social.

if your formative years are spent in an environment devoid of role models or any impetus to succeed then it should be no surprise you end up following that same track.


you see the same thing on the other end of the scale, with second/third generation millionaires squandering their fortunes as they become more distanced from the role models that built it in the first place.
Click to expand...

Agree
 
norm said:
I think like most people you adopt a persona depending on your underlying values and emotions.

With chavs, I think their dissatisfaction with their lives, environment, irregular shaped sofas, plays a large role in their behaviour. They're angry. Angry about the fact the cant call anything of worth their own, angry they have to rely on the state for handouts, angry about the fact they had so many kids and it didn't really improve their lives for the better.

Now whilst this anger is masked on the surface, I'm sure it sits there deep down and all this loud brash nature with their desire to show off with tattoos, possessions, loud music it's all masquerading how they feel inside with their inadequacies.

At least that's my interpretation of it.
Click to expand...

How do you explain wallet Barry's? I've just moved from an area where average income is quite high, particularly for the north east. Most houses comfortably had over £100k of cars sat on their driveway for example (always white range rovers, mercs and audis). However the people were just out and out chavs. Every woman looked like a Geordie Shore reject and the blokes were all fat towie extras. A lot of them smashed every weekend, some weekdays too, loud, complete lack of consideration for anyone else, etc.
 
Dis86 said:
How do you explain wallet Barry's? I've just moved from an area where average income is quite high, particularly for the north east. Most houses comfortably had over £100k of cars sat on their driveway for example (always white range rovers, mercs and audis). However the people were just out and out chavs. Every woman looked like a Geordie Shore reject and the blokes were all fat towie extras. A lot of them smashed every weekend, some weekdays too, loud, complete lack of consideration for anyone else, etc.
Click to expand...

Money doesn't buy what most people would consider to be a good value structure. I'd guess it's mainly combination of cheap credit, inheritance, a lack of aspiration beyond simply appearing affluent, and the fact that living expenses outside of cars is really quite low in certain areas. I think I obviously have an incomplete/I'll informed viewpoint of it, but when I see driveways like that in front of houses worth less than the collective fleet, I just see it as bling, much like the Gucci Belt effect. That probably makes me a judgemental ****, but I think we all find it hard to not apply our own value systems to others. I suppose that's what this conversation really comes down to, what sets the way you value things in the world? In my opinion, it's overwhelmingly obvious that it's a combination of genetic and social factors. Intelligence and conscientiousness (work ethic) are influenced greatly by genetics, and are also the two biggest predictors of success. If you're born in to a system which values things you don't have, it's no wonder you find yourself more likely to be at odds with it.
 
Zefan said:
I'd guess it's a combination of cheap credit, inheritance, a lack of aspiration beyond simply appearing affluent, and the fact that living expenses outside of cars is really quite low in certain areas. I think I obviously have an incomplete/I'll informed viewpoint of it, but when I see driveways like that in front of houses worth less than the collective fleet, I just see it as bling, much like the Gucci Belt effect. That probably makes me a judgemental ****, but I think we all find it hard to not apply our own value systems to others.
Click to expand...

Oh, you've hit some of the points there. Don't get me wrong in this instance the houses in this case were generally worth more - house prices were between 200k for a small 3 bed semi and 350k for a 4 bed detached but there is a guy who lives nearby who has 2 brand new full fat range rovers outside his 120k 2 bed semi.
 
I doubt there's much of a difference between the two types beyond inherited wealth, one has none and the other does.

This is such a simplification though, i'm sure it's more of a spectrum than distinct groups. I sort of wonder if the psychological profile is similar though regardless of wealth or ability to earn, and if you merely gave the former money that they'd in essence be able to act like the latter.

I think it comes down to a failed education ultimately, leaving people to value shallow existences through peer pressure and media addiction, which culminates in rot as people pump out children to the same infantile society. Possibly time to get rid of the comprehensive school system and go back to grammars.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom