(no subject)
Jun. 20th, 2009 06:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blahflowersFor ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
friend_of_tofu I think it was...
A chain of gyms has been investigated by advertising watchdogs after it promoted classes in how to beat up "chavs". Gymbox, which runs three fitness centres in London, offers courses called "Chav Fighting" to train men and women how to defend themselves from street attacks. The firm advertised the sessions through a leaflet bearing the heading: "Martial arts with Burberry belts and a fist full of sovereign rings. CHAV FIGHTING One of 100 different classes every week."
...Complainants also claimed that the leaflet encouraged attacks on women by plugging another class called "Bitch Boxing". In response, Gymbox said it had named the class "Chav Fighting" to draw attention to the courses in "witty manner".
friend_of_tofu I think it was...A chain of gyms has been investigated by advertising watchdogs after it promoted classes in how to beat up "chavs". Gymbox, which runs three fitness centres in London, offers courses called "Chav Fighting" to train men and women how to defend themselves from street attacks. The firm advertised the sessions through a leaflet bearing the heading: "Martial arts with Burberry belts and a fist full of sovereign rings. CHAV FIGHTING One of 100 different classes every week."
...Complainants also claimed that the leaflet encouraged attacks on women by plugging another class called "Bitch Boxing". In response, Gymbox said it had named the class "Chav Fighting" to draw attention to the courses in "witty manner".
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-06-20 11:38 am (UTC)I'm boggled by the idea that it can't be promoting violence because "nobody would admit to being a chav", after they quote the Wikipedia definition to describe them! Does discrimination always have to require that the person being discriminated against defines themself as a member of that group?? That would mean that calling a straight man "fag" wasn't homophobic, and that's just nonsense.
Thanks for posting this!