cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/44683036
Explanation:
spoiler
Both twist something (staples of young white working class fashion, tracksuits, gold, caps, and trainers, a cute Australian animal) into something dangerous (chav/drop bear) and that caricature is wrongfully said to be it's own thing (a subculture/a carnivorous marsupial species - in reality, sociologists have confirmed there was no "chav" subculture, nobody or almost nobody identified as one, it was something made up by upper class tabloids to demonise the white British working class, like how zoologists have said there's no "drop bear" species, it was something to make people fearful of Koalas) in order to make people fearful (chav especially is riddled with classism, though.)
Okay but other sociologists agree that chav was never an actual subculture. Nobody identified as one (or very few people did, ironically) it was just something the newspapers made up to demonise white working class people. The fashion, the tracksuits, gold, caps, and trainers, are all staples of young white working class fashion that predate the chav myth by decades.