Roxy Hearts Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 hour ago, jambomjm74 said: It’s human nature to be hypocritical, we all do it … so do you Scottish hypocrisy bad, British hypocrisy good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonesy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 hour ago, The Mighty Thor said: The puerility is the level of the discussion of the Hoose Jocks, so I'll keep using it. 1 hour ago, Alex Kintner said: Anyone who uses that term, and knows it’s origin, is a moron imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 3 hours ago, Dazo said: I love the irony of the rent free comments on this thread. 😂 I know . They are the same ones on the Tory threads who BJ appears to be living in rent free 1 hour ago, jonesy said: Sadly, it's a derogatory term used by some of the more ardent SNP/independence keyboard warriors. They are attempting to compare the issue of the 'more presentable and overly subservient' slaves kept in the Dixie States of the USA, known as 'House N******' with the people who have concerns about the viability and benefits of Scottish independence. It's cheap, it's offensive and it sums up modern popular political discourse. It is an offensive term . Started by the ardent Braveheart himself ! ( name to remain nameless ) but he wants to blow up Russia now 1 hour ago, jonesy said: If they are indeed living in your head, one can safely assume that some dodgy Russian money is paying any rent... 😜 One post among many re Sturgeon's dress, fair enough, but there are plenty on other threads that discuss BoJo the Clown's carefully constructed dishevelled appearance, so that kind of negates the claim. Sadly, physical appearance will always tend to come into it when discussing those in the public eye. And, re your last paragraph, I hope that's not an admission of trolling? 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 8 minutes ago, jonesy said: Delicious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 19 minutes ago, jonesy said: I stand by my comment. If TMT is aware of its origins, then it’s a moronic phrase to use. 👍🏻 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambomjm74 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 hour ago, Smithee said: I'd have more respect if you just held your hands up rather than changing what words mean so you were right all along. I’m not changing words; I don’t really need your respect as such. My view is that we have a one party state, albeit through a democratic vote driven by the ongoing neverendum…. You may say this doesn’t meet the unpalatable wording of a one party state…. Again I say I’m not using the phrase to say it’s unfair or it isn’t representing a democratic position. How ever, I really don’t see how we will move away from this entrenched position and back to the old two party state .. so for now it’s a one party state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coconut doug Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 35 minutes ago, Alex Kintner said: I’ve never used it and had always wondered where it came from. 👍🏻 Anyone who uses that term, and knows it’s origin, is a moron imo. I think it is a good phrase that encapsulates the thinking of many Scots. Similar notions of Jockholm syndrome and Scottish cringe or too wee, too poor, too stupid allude to similar patterns of thinking and behaviour in some of our Unionist population. I'm aware of the origin of the term and fail to see the offence. Quite the opposite as fas as i am concerned. I understand that people must look after their own interests but there is also a societal need for fairness and equality. We have come a long way since slavery but we have a lot further to go. Protections are in place for all sorts of minorities or discriminated groups but nobody i can see includes the poor. No windfall taxes for the huge profits being made by oil companies but higher taxes for the poor. The poor are on survival wages and imo comparisons with slavery are not always inappropriate. Freedom is a relative term and our citizens have the freedom to pay high rents to live in damp, mouldy flats. They have the freedom to send their children to underperforming and socially defining state schools. Their offspring face a future where you cannot afford to buy and live in your own house and where education, the traditional route out of poverty is too expensive to sustain. It goes on to all aspects of our lives and until the poor do what other groups have done which is to agitate and organise themselves they will not improve their lot. Advancement of the poor is becoming more and more difficult as any such attempts are often considered to be wrongthink. The poor need to be constanty reminded that they are undeserving, greedy and a threat to the consensus on inequality. House Jocks are right there with a particular focus on Scotland obviously. They may even be worse because in their minds Scots have even less right to equality simply because they are Scottish and not English. House Jocks are regularly on here to tell us how bad we are, totally disregarding any context or inaccuracy as they repeatedly tell us we are not worthy. I really can't see the offence you feel at the term. House Jock is a derogatory term but it has been reserved for those who fit the description. If you are not a House Jock then what is the problem? Nobody is promoting slavery, they are pointing out a subservient mentality that exacerbates the prejudice and exploitation in our society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithee Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, jambomjm74 said: I’m not changing words; I don’t really need your respect as such. My view is that we have a one party state, albeit through a democratic vote driven by the ongoing neverendum…. You may say this doesn’t meet the unpalatable wording of a one party state…. Again I say I’m not using the phrase to say it’s unfair or it isn’t representing a democratic position. How ever, I really don’t see how we will move away from this entrenched position and back to the old two party state .. so for now it’s a one party state. Your view is wrong, we don't have a one party state, that's not what it means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithee Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 4 minutes ago, Alex Kintner said: I stand by my comment. If TMT is aware of its origins, then it’s a moronic phrase to use. 👍🏻 I know its origin, can't say I'm arsed what people think of its use! Uncle Tams gonna Uncle Tam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 https://twitter.com/realstephenkerr/status/1501877120200581130?s=21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 4 minutes ago, Smithee said: I know its origin, can't say I'm arsed what people think of its use! Uncle Tams gonna Uncle Tam Where does Uncle Tam come from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambomjm74 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 3 minutes ago, Smithee said: Your view is wrong, we don't have a one party state, that's not what it means. So do you really see a point where SNP are not in power in the next 10 years.. so in power for 20 years+. With polls at best tied but support at never below 45% .. means we are entrenched in a neverendum and one party one policy rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithee Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, Alex Kintner said: Where does Uncle Tam come from? Renfrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Just now, Alex Kintner said: Where does Uncle Tam come from? Uncle toms. Surely you’ve heard of that? Just Tams to make sound Scottish. Another fave phrase of mine🥰 Hurts their tender wee bottoms so it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Just now, Smithee said: Renfrew 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 (edited) 13 minutes ago, coconut doug said: I think it is a good phrase that encapsulates the thinking of many Scots. Similar notions of Jockholm syndrome and Scottish cringe or too wee, too poor, too stupid allude to similar patterns of thinking and behaviour in some of our Unionist population. I'm aware of the origin of the term and fail to see the offence. Quite the opposite as fas as i am concerned. I understand that people must look after their own interests but there is also a societal need for fairness and equality. We have come a long way since slavery but we have a lot further to go. Protections are in place for all sorts of minorities or discriminated groups but nobody i can see includes the poor. No windfall taxes for the huge profits being made by oil companies but higher taxes for the poor. The poor are on survival wages and imo comparisons with slavery are not always inappropriate. Freedom is a relative term and our citizens have the freedom to pay high rents to live in damp, mouldy flats. They have the freedom to send their children to underperforming and socially defining state schools. Their offspring face a future where you cannot afford to buy and live in your own house and where education, the traditional route out of poverty is too expensive to sustain. It goes on to all aspects of our lives and until the poor do what other groups have done which is to agitate and organise themselves they will not improve their lot. Advancement of the poor is becoming more and more difficult as any such attempts are often considered to be wrongthink. The poor need to be constanty reminded that they are undeserving, greedy and a threat to the consensus on inequality. House Jocks are right there with a particular focus on Scotland obviously. They may even be worse because in their minds Scots have even less right to equality simply because they are Scottish and not English. House Jocks are regularly on here to tell us how bad we are, totally disregarding any context or inaccuracy as they repeatedly tell us we are not worthy. I really can't see the offence you feel at the term. House Jock is a derogatory term but it has been reserved for those who fit the description. If you are not a House Jock then what is the problem? Nobody is promoting slavery, they are pointing out a subservient mentality that exacerbates the prejudice and exploitation in our society. I just think it’s a poor analogy and it’s offensive to compare the two. Scottish people aren’t currently a persecuted minority in any way, shape or form that remotely compares to the persecution of black people. Edited March 10 by Alex Kintner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Montpelier Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, JamesM48 said: Without doubt this is all Westminsters fault . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, jack D and coke said: Uncle toms. Surely you’ve heard of that? Just Tams to make sound Scottish. Another fave phrase of mine🥰 Hurts their tender wee bottoms so it does. Hadn’t heard of it but just googled it. Another phrase linked to black oppression. Really don’t get why any need is felt to pull out these terms and it only adds to the negative connotations that get thrown at nationalists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 3 minutes ago, Smithee said: Renfrew 😂 I asked for that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithee Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 3 minutes ago, jambomjm74 said: So do you really see a point where SNP are not in power in the next 10 years.. so in power for 20 years+. With polls at best tied but support at never below 45% .. means we are entrenched in a neverendum and one party one policy rule. That's not a conversation I was having, and there's a coalition in Holyrood. If you want out of that situation, vote independence, cos we're not going away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Montpelier Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 10 minutes ago, JamesM48 said: https://twitter.com/realstephenkerr/status/1501877120200581130?s=21 She is probably better sticking to making baby boxes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 6 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said: Without doubt this is all Westminsters fault . It is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 5 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said: She is probably better sticking to making baby boxes I wouldn’t even trust her with that 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smithee Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 11 minutes ago, Alex Kintner said: 😂 I asked for that! That goal wasn't happening without the assist, well played Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Montpelier Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 6 minutes ago, JamesM48 said: It is I suspect she's starting to think of herself in the current climate as a Joan of Arc / Boudicca type of leader. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Banterville in here today from the hoose jocks😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonesy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 29 minutes ago, coconut doug said: I think it is a good phrase that encapsulates the thinking of many Scots. Similar notions of Jockholm syndrome and Scottish cringe or too wee, too poor, too stupid allude to similar patterns of thinking and behaviour in some of our Unionist population. I'm aware of the origin of the term and fail to see the offence. Quite the opposite as fas as i am concerned. I understand that people must look after their own interests but there is also a societal need for fairness and equality. We have come a long way since slavery but we have a lot further to go. Protections are in place for all sorts of minorities or discriminated groups but nobody i can see includes the poor. No windfall taxes for the huge profits being made by oil companies but higher taxes for the poor. The poor are on survival wages and imo comparisons with slavery are not always inappropriate. Freedom is a relative term and our citizens have the freedom to pay high rents to live in damp, mouldy flats. They have the freedom to send their children to underperforming and socially defining state schools. Their offspring face a future where you cannot afford to buy and live in your own house and where education, the traditional route out of poverty is too expensive to sustain. It goes on to all aspects of our lives and until the poor do what other groups have done which is to agitate and organise themselves they will not improve their lot. Advancement of the poor is becoming more and more difficult as any such attempts are often considered to be wrongthink. The poor need to be constanty reminded that they are undeserving, greedy and a threat to the consensus on inequality. House Jocks are right there with a particular focus on Scotland obviously. They may even be worse because in their minds Scots have even less right to equality simply because they are Scottish and not English. House Jocks are regularly on here to tell us how bad we are, totally disregarding any context or inaccuracy as they repeatedly tell us we are not worthy. I really can't see the offence you feel at the term. House Jock is a derogatory term but it has been reserved for those who fit the description. If you are not a House Jock then what is the problem? Nobody is promoting slavery, they are pointing out a subservient mentality that exacerbates the prejudice and exploitation in our society. Whit an awfy lang-winded way ae sayin' yer a moron, Coco. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 4 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said: I suspect she's starting to think of herself in the current climate as a Joan of Arc / Boudicca type of leader. She’s off her rocker now . She better hope she isn’t like either of them . Both had very bad endings . 😎she’s more of a tartan Tory Thatcher really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Montpelier Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, JamesM48 said: She’s off her rocker now . She better hope she isn’t like either of them . Both had very bad endings . 😎she’s more of a tartan Tory Thatcher really I do see the Thatcher similarities in a two sides of the same coin sort of way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaliveits105 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 8 minutes ago, JamesM48 said: It is way out her depth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Just now, manaliveits105 said: way out her depth Honestly she made a real fool of herself with this comment . What’s even more worrying that it was not reported on either STV news at 6 or bbc either . It was quickly buried as she must have known it was a major faux pas . I thought we lived in an open transparent democracy ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Just now, JamesM48 said: I touched on this yesterday, she is well worth the minimum alcohol pricing and extra tax. More deflection incoming from the nationalists. Something about gammon, house jocks and Boris. 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Montpelier Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 4 minutes ago, JamesM48 said: She has a track record of massive under delivery. Apart from baby boxes, they were OK tbf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 20 minutes ago, Smithee said: That goal wasn't happening without the assist, well played 😂👍🏻 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 2 minutes ago, Dazo said: I touched on this yesterday, she is well worth the minimum alcohol pricing and extra tax. More deflection incoming from the nationalists. Something about gammon, house jocks and Boris. 😂 It’s. Westminsters fault we are nation of alkies and drug users ! I’d say it’s caused by lack of aspiration and sense of hopelessness some people have due to the various dependency culture policies and “ freebies” from her and the SG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudyJudyJudy Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 2 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said: She has a track record of massive under delivery. Apart from baby boxes, they were OK tbf Well perhaps they should have been means tested really ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manaliveits105 Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 slow ra day ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coconut doug Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 32 minutes ago, Alex Kintner said: I just think it’s a poor analogy and it’s offensive to compare the two. Scottish people aren’t currently a persecuted minority in any way, shape or form that remotely compares to the persecution of black people. You are claiming that Scottish people are not currently being persecuted in any compararable way to black people. Who is currently persecuting the blacks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 6 minutes ago, coconut doug said: You are claiming that Scottish people are not currently being persecuted in any compararable way to black people. Who is currently persecuting the blacks? He didn’t say currently so another swing and miss from coconut. 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coconut doug Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 3 minutes ago, Dazo said: He didn’t say currently so another swing and miss from coconut. 😂 Are you sure about that? Here's his quote - "I just think it’s a poor analogy and it’s offensive to compare the two. Scottish people aren’t currently a persecuted minority in any way, shape or form that remotely compares to the persecution of black people." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 Just now, coconut doug said: Are you sure about that? Here's his quote - "I just think it’s a poor analogy and it’s offensive to compare the two. Scottish people aren’t currently a persecuted minority in any way, shape or form that remotely compares to the persecution of black people." He didn’t say black people were currently being persecuted. It really shouldn’t need to be explained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffros Furios Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 11 minutes ago, coconut doug said: You are claiming that Scottish people are not currently being persecuted in any compararable way to black people. Who is currently persecuting the blacks? Your Russian mates are killing Ukranians . Or is only Nazi Ukianians? Happy with the last 14 days Doug ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coconut doug Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 minute ago, Dazo said: He didn’t say black people were currently being persecuted. It really shouldn’t need to be explained. O.k. So black people are not being persecuted currently and neither are Scots. What then is the point of his comment since it is easy enough to demonstrate that blacks and Scots have been persecuted in the past. Are you and he saying that we have no right to compare the two? I wonder if Alex thinks blacks are not being persecuted today because he certainly implied as much in his post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jack D and coke Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 43 minutes ago, Dazo said: I touched on this yesterday, she is well worth the minimum alcohol pricing and extra tax. More deflection incoming from the nationalists. Something about gammon, house jocks and Boris. 😂 What about the fuss people made when this minimum pricing was introduced? People demanding their £3 bottles of party juice to get wasted on? Even Tory politicians complained about it then they have a go at nobody tackling the issue of Scotland and booze?! Look at the fuss about boozers during lockdown? Scotlands problem with booze is tattoed into our psyche. I’m a binge drinker myself and it’s been bred into me that I needed to learn to bevvy. Uncles, cousins, mates etc etc. It’s going to take an enormous shift in thinking and policy before it even moves a single iota on the dial. Anything else is just blindly refusing to look facts in the face. We’re not in the same ballpark as we were in 1971 either when the current drug policy was introduced. Quite how you tackle these things I have no idea but it’s going to take decades to change. As usual though asking for devolved drug policy is seen as blaming WM. Lack of aspiration and handouts from the troll there well that’s just horseshit and he knows it You have to ask why they won’t let certain areas of the country wiggle room to use different ideas and policy to attempt change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Kintner Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 2 minutes ago, coconut doug said: O.k. So black people are not being persecuted currently and neither are Scots. What then is the point of his comment since it is easy enough to demonstrate that blacks and Scots have been persecuted in the past. Are you and he saying that we have no right to compare the two? I wonder if Alex thinks blacks are not being persecuted today because he certainly implied as much in his post. It’s really quite straightforward. It was a phrase used to describe certain black people at a time when black people were being persecuted. It’s now being used to describe certain Scottish people at a time when Scottish people aren’t being persecuted. 🤷🏻♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boab Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 1 hour ago, jambomjm74 said: So do you really see a point where SNP are not in power in the next 10 years.. so in power for 20 years+. With polls at best tied but support at never below 45% .. means we are entrenched in a neverendum and one party one policy rule. I do think there could come a point in the next ten years, depending on how the UK is run, where, after another ref defeat, which is very possible, the balance of power would be such as to have a more broad based coalition. The obvious stumbling block would be, out of the three bigger parties, only one would have Indy as a major policy. It begs the question, how would the Nats proceed with their major policy after two defeats in refs, if that's what transpires ? Would they ever concede it ain't happening ? I very much doubt that, which means, possibly, a bigger swing to Labour and the Tories. Now, the potential shitshow of the Nats with, say 40 seats, Labour with 30 and the Tories with 30, with the rest going to the greens and Lib Dems, would create havoc. The only scenario I could see would be the Lib Dems joining with the Greens to form a government with the Nats. OR, they keeping winning Elections and going for referendums in perpetuity ! 😂 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 19 minutes ago, jack D and coke said: What about the fuss people made when this minimum pricing was introduced? People demanding their £3 bottles of party juice to get wasted on? Even Tory politicians complained about it then they have a go at nobody tackling the issue of Scotland and booze?! Look at the fuss about boozers during lockdown? Scotlands problem with booze is tattoed into our psyche. I’m a binge drinker myself and it’s been bred into me that I needed to learn to bevvy. Uncles, cousins, mates etc etc. It’s going to take an enormous shift in thinking and policy before it even moves a single iota on the dial. Anything else is just blindly refusing to look facts in the face. We’re not in the same ballpark as we were in 1971 either when the current drug policy was introduced. Quite how you tackle these things I have no idea but it’s going to take decades to change. As usual though asking for devolved drug policy is seen as blaming WM. Lack of aspiration and handouts from the troll there well that’s just horseshit and he knows it You have to ask why they won’t let certain areas of the country wiggle room to use different ideas and policy to attempt change. You have confidence a devolved drug policy would make a difference ? What are you basing that on giving the SNP’s record on just about everything ? 😂 Minimum pricing and extra tax has appeared to make not a single thing better for Scotland. If they are going to be so bad at running the country I’d rather my tax and alcohol purchases where slightly cheaper thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coconut doug Posted March 10 Share Posted March 10 20 minutes ago, Alex Kintner said: It’s really quite straightforward. It was a phrase used to describe certain black people at a time when black people were being persecuted. It’s now being used to describe certain Scottish people at a time when Scottish people aren’t being persecuted. 🤷🏻♂️ I see, so in order to use the term House Jock it is imperative that Scottish people are being persecuted. You don't think the term relates to an attitude of mind that belittles our potential emancipation. I always thought that the original term expressed just such a sentiment with black slaves, am i wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.