Let’s not pretend that ANYONE has sought to elicit their views.
The whole point of these pejoratives is to tar everyone with the same brush or insinuate that a group of people will all act the same way.
Dunno what you’d call that, but I’d call it discriminatory, pre-judgemental and if it’s aimed at one race of people, it’s racist.
Sorry if you’re having trouble getting that shoe to fit on the other foot.
I like gammon.
Exactly. It has nothing to do with race. I have been called a “lefty” and a “snowflake” which is exactly the same thing. It has to do with certain viewpoints and nothing to do with race whatsoever. Elsewhere today I have also been labelled “woke” which I assume was used in a pejorative sense. I actually think that being “woke” is a good thing but according to those of a far right persuasion, it is an insult.
No it isn’t.
You can have brown lefties and snowflakes. There is no brown gammon.
I’m downgrading the potency of your use of the word exactly.
I don’t see it as racist but I also don’t see it as a particularly good way of making a case for progressing your own arguments, which is a shame as I can only imagine the satisfaction of calling someone a ‘gammony cuntface’, as it rolls so lyrically off the tongue.
Are you virtue signalling or just peckish?
But presumably you would see the flipped scenario I described as racist?
e.g. if there was a pejorative term invented solely for Remain voters from a specific ethnic minority background.
I see where you’re coming from, I guess I was looking at it from the perspective of me, a middle-aged white man calling another middle-aged white man a gammon faced cuntchops McGammonface, which I think would be rude but not racist.
I’m not answering the second bit because I don’t agree with your scenario as to how the term has originated.
Origination doesn’t matter. It’s usage. Here’s the inventor of the term and while he falls short of calling it racist, he regrets coining it.
It matters how the term is used now and since 2018. It has been used as a lazy short-hand by smug Remainers to denigrate a group of people they never wanted to understand.
I don’t find the terms “honky” or “cracker” particularly offensive. There is no doubt that they are racist applied now.
He wrote this in that article:
Now, I don’t think anyone genuinely believes “gammon” is racist. No one has ever found “Gammons Go Home” daubed across their front door. There were never segregated schools for gammon children. And the fact that many of the commentators claiming to be so offended by the term routinely call millennials “Generation Snowflake” is delicious. They’re also rather selective about which free speech they choose to defend. Likening right-wing men to pork products is beyond the pale, but shouting “Gas the Jews” at a pug is apparently of Magna Carta importance.
I thought it was an interesting piece of writing but I don’t agree with it.
The whole premise of the article is about inventing something that got away from him and became something else.
He doesn’t get to define what that something else is.
People use Sun readers, Daily Mail readers and Guardian readers as pejorative or descriptive terms. Are any of these actually racist? Describing someone as a “gammon” is no different to a Daily Mail reader in my book. The fact that they happen to be white isn’t the driving force here, it is their attitude. I can’t believe that the word “gammon” is an issue on Sotonians.
Your book needs re-writing.
None of those terms apply exclusively to a given race. Neither does lefty. Neither does “snowflake”.
You are pre-judging someone on the way they look or the way they voted. You’re also internally disenfranchising every person of colour that voted Leave. Gammon doesn’t cover them. Why not?
I have not mentioned Brexit. You did. It may well be lazy but I have no problem in using a collective noun for a bunch of xenophobes and racists.
And you know that how?
The term is indelibly linked with the Brexit vote, used by latter day Remainers since 2018 to describe that awful white leave contingent.
If you want to do that, be my guest. Just don’t ever expect any intellectual respect for it or for me to change my view on what it is. It’s lazy name calling based on race and if you were to attempt to coin a similar term for Remain voters of colour, you’d be fucking pilloried and rightly so.
“He doesn’t get to define what that something else is”.
And neither do you.
Don’t have to.
It’s already been defined by smug cunt Remainers who’ve decided they know best.
How is that working out for them? 
These are the same people that enabled an 80 seat majority for Tory third stringers.
Anyone using “Gammon”, “Snowflake” or whatever sweeping pejorative term they dream up or copy from twitter as an insult, is a lazy cunt. I used “Flag Shagger” once as i thought it was funny. But then I am a self confessed lazy cunt, so it suited. Cunts are available in all walks of life, be they gammony cunts, lefty cunts, snowflakey cunts, etc. Cunts are just cunts.
Anyway, the real story here, is just how has Johnson managed to shag a decent number of women? I’m perplexed. I can understand how “power” may be attractive to some women, but c’mon, he’s a right ugly twat and has never come across as anything other than a trampy-looking, shambolic old cunt. He’s certainly no Cary Grant. If he has to write a book after his dreadful tenure at No 10 i hope he devotes a chapter to it.
People with gammon coloured skin are not a race, ergo it is not racism. It’s as simple as that.
That doesn’t preclude it from being some other kind of -ism which some might find unacceptable. The problem is that there is an almost unlimited supply of ism’s people could get worked up about and It is of simply no practical value to say that all discrimination is wrong and expend effort arguing on each case. There needs to be some kind of hierarchy of discrimination and I’m afraid gammonism doesn’t make it anywhere near to the top of that list since the vast majority of those impacted are otherwise privelidged.
People get very worked up about ism’s often goaded to do so by proponents of identity politics as a deliberate means to trap people in a perpetual cycle of distraction.
Sexism and racism are pretty high up on the priority list but even those don’t deserve the effort expended on them. The biggest source of discrimination that causes the most suffering in the world is the discrimination between those who have excessive capital and those who do not, it is also the form of discrimination over which the most effort is expended on obfuscation.
If you are offended at being called a gammon feel free to say so, but don’t expect your issue to be taken seriously, because in the scheme of things it’s just not serious.