Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Toff isn't nearly sneery enough when compared to the others - there are elements of compliment in it old-school-style "Cor, you're a toff guvnor and no mistake" as well as the accepted Alf Tupper "Grr those toffs from Ardsley AAC have swiped me vest!" which still sounds quaint.


The opposite of pleb appears to be aristocrat or patrician so maybe wristy prat (with accompanyng gesture)?

I do think the issue with toff, or any kind of reverse snobbery, is slightly different from calling someone a pleb.


It reminds me very much of the scene in Emma, when Knightley scolds Emma for taking the piss out of someone much, much worse off than herself, saying she warrants compassion, not contempt.


And while I think snobbery works both ways, and is not to be condoned, I think it reflects on those in positions of privilege very badly indeed that they use their elevated position to ridicule and belittle those whom fortune has favoured rather less. Without a doubt, reverse snobbery often encompasses a degree of envy, but I'd imagine there's quite an element of resentment at being looked down on at play too.

There is something wrong with being a bigot. So it's a description of a failing a person may have developed. If it's correct then so be it but it's an accusation nonetheless. I know one..


A toff or a pleb I think are not related to a person's consciousness but their upbringing and as that is not something they can change then it seems it's these two which are wrong and "classist" if there is such a thing.

"I do think the issue with toff, or any kind of reverse snobbery, is slightly different from calling someone a pleb."


Snobbery and reverse-snobbery may be slightly different where the reasons for each are considered, but they're just as bad as each other. I'll hazard a general observation and note that reverse-snobbery is common (no pun intended) and explicit on this forum, whereas snobbery is usually implicit or inferred by the reader.

Anyone who uses a 'reverse' argument is more a sophist than insightful: See 'reverse' racism and the new one 'heterophobia' . Even, the Church is claiming discrimination these days and taking cases to Europe. Why not the privileged?


Ignorance will have you supporting the oppressors and condemning the oppressed.

The error in the OP's question (if I may be so bold as to point this out) is to include the word bigot, which I pointed out above is a state of mind:


"Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot, defined by Merriam-Webster as "a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices;"


That's probably why most people's points are ignoring the word bigot and concentrating on comparing toff and pleb, each of which refer to people's background and not state of mind.

But what about the apparently irresistable rise in suspicion of any, and every, institution or individual in a position of power.


It appears that the working assumption is that if the organisation is big or powerful (BBC, Banking, Police, Parliament, Major manufacturers, Supermarkets, the press) or the individual is aristocratic, rich or through fame & celebrity in an "elevated" position (sportsmen & woment, pop stars, TV personalities, politicians) then they must be, de facto, abusing this position.


Now I recognise that just because we're paranoid it doesn't mean someone isn't following us - but I think this working assumption is lazy thinking and gnaws away at mutual respect, courtesy and the fabric of society as a whole.


Without trust and respect society fails and anarchy rules.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • You keep insisting that you're "just stating facts", but so far, most of what you've shared isn't fact - it's just your personal opinion, framed with hostility.  Foxes aren't classified as "vermin" in the UK. They're wild animals protected under the Animal Welfare Act & the Wildlife & Countryside Act . & Yes, they do play a vital role in controlling rodent population. The more you double down on insults & misinformation, the more you discredit your own argument. It's possible to be fed up & still informed. Take the information provided to you & do something about it. BTW culling doesn't even work.
    • It’s hardly likely you know that for a fact Sue
    • I know an instance where the foxes quickly learned how to avoid such devices. 
    • I did read the comments above It's not moaning, it's stating facts. Tell you what,  you can come and clear up the near daily fox crap and see how you like dealing with it, no didn't think that would appeal to you.  Do they control rodents?  Foxes are vermin.  It's an emotive topic for some, I realise that, however the facts are foxes are a pest.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...