Discussion » HALLA

This is a read-only copy. The forum ran on iamcal.com from 2000 until its database was lost in 2016, and this topic was rebuilt from copies saved by the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. Some replies may be missing, and its dates are approximate.
Posted by Victor Menendezz, around 14th May 2005:
 
What up, lesbians?
Posted by Grim..., around 14th May 2005:
 
Double ended vibrators?

Oh, right, a comma...
Posted by Brock, around 14th May 2005:
 
And that would be "Whack up Lesbians", Grim.

Obviously.

That's weird, a Vic post, and I didn't do it...

Mwuhahahahahahahaah

It was fun while it lasted.
Posted by ellipse, around 14th May 2005:
 
i thought of it first!
but cal said it would be a horrible evil mean thing to do.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
So Vic was you Brock, you grimy Bastard. ;)
Posted by ragnar, around 10th November 2005:
 
Grim...

Best response ever.
Posted by Brock, around 10th November 2005:
 
I was only Vic for a short time. Then he demanded his name back.

So I obliged.
Posted by WarHead, around 10th November 2005:
 
Seems like he took his name and went home.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
(pssst. i don't miss him)
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
You know what we need is a really good humdinger of an argument...any ideas?
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
So, population control via a sterilisation agent sewn into sportswear and any hooped earrings with a radius of more than 8mm. Good idea or bad idea heading dangerously toward eugenics?
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
Great idea, I can understand hooped earrings, but why sportswear?
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
Worn by chavs, innit.

Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
In that case, I agree wholeheartedly. (Geez, what a degenerate-looking bunch)
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
I think they are actors, not real chavs, but they have the expressions down.
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
Okay, so a number of Olympic athletes won't be able to reproduce either, but I think that's a small price to pay.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
What characteristics does one need to have in order to be considered a chav? And where does the word chav come from? Why chav?
Posted by Alfie_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
Chav has been used fairly recently to refer to Pikeys, Scallies, Neds and plenty of other names.

Characteristics:

Grotty, common, stupid, wears sportswear and big hoopy earrings, no respect for elders (or betters), unlikely to be able to speak properly. Likely to be preggers at 14/15 if female or have fathered more than one child by same age if male. If they do have kids they have suitably chavvy names and the parents invariably smoke near them.
list goes on.

There are websites devoted to them if you care to look. It's a media classification for a social underclass that has existed far longer than the last couple of years.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
It's interesting that all the wrong people seem to be breeding. You get the "double-income, no kids" bracket consisting of usually professional, well-paid people that could afford to have children but choose not to. Then you get the "chav-types" who turn them out like buns from the oven. No guesses where the human race is heading. (South)
Posted by Grim..., around 10th November 2005:
 
Chavs was originally the name for people who come from Chatham, where they dressed like what Alfie says.
Posted by Grim..., around 10th November 2005:
 
Good point, Syl. Only people with money should be allowed kids.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 10th November 2005:
 
That's not what I meant. You get people who have TOO MANY kids and the kids suffer because there's not enough money to go around.
Posted by Grim..., around 10th November 2005:
 
But they get child support (well, in the UK they do) so that all works out, because rich parents is all a kid needs.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 11th November 2005:
 
No, with all due respect, you are repeating yourself rather than adding to your argument. I did not say that 'all a kid needs is rich parents' but rather, a kid needs responsible and intelligent parents. Responsible and intelligent parents do not have more children than they can afford.
Posted by WarHead, around 11th November 2005:
 
I don't think he really meant it.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 11th November 2005:
 
He's just pulling my beard again, eh?
Posted by jlittle_DUPE1, around 11th November 2005:
 
responsible and intelligent parents?

Fuck - my two kids are screwed then.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 11th November 2005:
 
nonsense (I'll bet you're a great Dad)
Posted by Grim..., around 11th November 2005:
 
I only said it because you said you wanted an argument, Syl.
But, to be fair, you mention money in both of your 'who should be allowed children' posts, and don't mention 'responsible and intelligent' once.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 11th November 2005:
 
Yeah, fair enough, but it is implied. In fact that is one of the main reasons I have decided not to have children : I would never want to have to say, "I'm sorry, Kid, but I don't have enough money to send you to University. Go pack shelves for Pick 'n Pay." Money is not everything, but on some level it is important and financial intelligence especially important; without it you simply don't survive.
Posted by syl_DUPE1, around 11th November 2005:
 
(but anyway, thanks for the argument :)