# A Girl Called Jack... time for action?



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

(Note to mods... this thread is as political as you can get... please do not feel tempted to move it somewhere lifestyley)

http://agirlcalledjack.com/

Well, could you do it? Could you choose to follow her recipes for a month to see where it would leave you and yours... not just financially but in terms of taking action for yourself, feeling empowered, throwing off the shackles of deeply-conditioned consumerism?

I reckon it's a matter of mindset.

If you chose to think of each mouthful as swallowing your pride as well as food; as a reflection of your dire financial circumstances; as an infliction the bastard tories have forced upon you; then I'd imagine you would struggle to last two days. You'd be so busy producing excess bile and froth that you'd hardly be able to digest the food. With that mindset, every mouthful would stick to your teeth and stick in your craw.

Now if the plan is to fan the embers of anger and produce enough venom to go and wreck your local conservative club/Sainsbury's/tories head then you would be on a winner, But rage is as non-substainable (is that a word) as it is unproductive.

If, however, you chose to think of it as political action of the most liberating kind; as a chance to reverse so many years of societal conditioning; to free yourself and your family from the sugar-induced coma of inertia.... then every mouthful becomes, in and of itself, a subversive act, a step on the path to personal freedom.

I'm not saying it would be easy, especially with kids, but most things worth having don't come easy.it would be worth a go, no?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

I'd be interested in compiling a list of compelling reasons to give it a lash. Of course, you can also feel free to 

a)   take the piss (for example… King Biscuit's post on the Jamie Cuntiver thread s one of the funniest things I have read on Urban) 


King Biscuit Time said:


> Oi! Povvs! What are you eating that crap for. It's simple to eat healthily like my mate the Sicilian street sweeper. Just make a few common sense changes to the recipe and you're laughing. Spaghetti may be the cheap energy rich staple carb of choice in Italy, but in the UK that job is served by chipped potatoes. A nice savoury tang of umami may be provided by 25 cooked mussels, but seeing as Rotherham is about 70 miles from the sea, perhaps you could use a British speciality that travels better and lasts longer, say a sprinkling of Cheddar cheese. - It's hard to get tomatoes to grow and ripen in Rotherham in the winter, but to get around this, people often preserved the flavour of tomatoes in a special chutney-like sweet preserve called Tomato Ketchup, add a dollop of that and you're away. - I call it Jamie's British spaghetti, Mussels and tomato sauce. Now settle down and enjoy your meal, and while you eat it, why not catch up with one of my shows on your television.




b)   poke some welcome holes in the position outlined above
c)   Start a hilarious range of threads making puns of this thread title or
d)   froth and rage


as an alternative


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 29, 2013)

I don't think that's quite what she intended when she wrote her blog. the point is that people shouldn't really have to live like that ...


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> the point is that people *shouldn't really have to* live like that ...


 

I know. Circumstances forced her hand. She went through exactly the mindset thing outlined in the OP... but chose to make it a positive/liberating experience and then made it a deeply political one with her blog.

I think my main point here is that taking personal responsibility for fundamental change; taking massive decisive action; getting a result; does not have to turn anyone into a 'I pulled myself up by my bootstraps'/ 'anyone can do it if they want to and work hard'/ self-made (wo)man/ Tory whingebag (a la Jamie Oliver).

And anybody who does it and remembers where they came from, like Jack (or mebbe JK Rowling) should be celebrated.

I _know_ people 'shouldn't really have to live like that' but the fact is that many of us do. The questions for me are 1. How do you empower people to take action for themsleves instead of falling into the traps of social isolation, self-pity and victimhood... and 2. defending people's 'entitlement' to eat sugary/salty shite is exactly what those manipulating us want... and yet we readily walk into the trap time after time.

What if 'living like that' is not actually a bad thing at all. What if 'living like that' is something we can choose, for ourselves?


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 29, 2013)

isn't the point that a lot of people have no choice? and that people like Jamie Oliver etc are just normalising it?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> isn't the point that a lot of people have no choice?


 
True and false I think.

A lot of people certainly _feel_ like they have no choices, especially when they are on the breadline. Jack's action shows we do _always_ have choices. Not of our circumstances, but of how we perceive them and act on them. This kind of turning adversity into victory is the type of thing the Right love and claim as their own. We should not let them.



frogwoman said:


> and that people like Jamie Oliver etc are just normalising it?


Yes. These attitudes seem widespread.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'm not saying it would be easy, especially with kids, but most things worth having don't come easy.it would be worth a go, no?


 Good god no.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

Why?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

Because it sounds about as worthwhile and politically useful as volunteering for a pay-cut or redundancy just to prove (to who for gods sake?) that you can do it. Your OP is nonsense frankly liam. You seem to have neglected to explain why you think this would be a good thing for people to do.


----------



## alsoknownas (Aug 29, 2013)

Slummy Mummy, lol. (her phrase not mine)


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 29, 2013)

If I suggested this to my better half I would get a smack in the mouth and a lecture about how she grew up eating basic/poverty/rubbish food and so doesn't want to go back there as part of some hare-brained social experiment.

I like A Girl Called Jack, but her contribution is much better as:

a) Demonstrating how hard life is on benefits - and putting a human face on it.
b) Providing practical advice to people in the same situation as her.

I am up for this though:



LiamO said:


> The questions for me are 1. How do you empower people to take action for themsleves instead of falling into the traps of social isolation, self-pity and victimhood...


 
I don't think you achieve that by following her recipes?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Because it sounds about as worthwhile and politically useful as volunteering for a pay-cut or redundancy just to prove (to who for gods sake?) that you can do it.


 
To who? To yourself. To your kids. To your cats. We are a continent of sugar/salt addicts eating far more than we need to. We do this mostly because we have been manipulated since birth to do so. To be good consumers. The fact is that westerners diets are fucked up. The poorest are also the fattest. And yet here we are demanding that those who can least afford it have the right to eat poison too.

Can tell me a _more_ politically useful thing than enabling and empowering some of the most marginalised, disenfranchised and disaffected people in society? 




butchersapron said:


> Your OP is nonsense frankly liam. You seem to have neglected to explain why you think this would be a good thing for people to do.


 
I believe I did in the OP.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

I'm a bit puzzled by this, too. So you're saying that we should eat better, healthier diets. Good idea. What more is there to this?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> If I suggested this to my better half I would get a smack in the mouth and a lecture about how she grew up eating basic/poverty/rubbish food and so doesn't want to go back there as part of some hare-brained social experiment.


 

This.

This is _exactly_ my initial response to anything like this - particularly when it is presented by a dick like J O or a mumsy posho.

However, that is also _exactly_ the response we have been conditioned to have. To demand our rights to fill ourselves with calories we don't need. So we do exactly what the corporations want. 

Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 29, 2013)

OK then, blimey.

_I think people should eat better food. _

I think I probably do OK, personally - I'm eating a banana right now .

But I might check out some of her recipes anyway.

None of this will change the situation for disenfranchised people in this country.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Aug 29, 2013)

Food can be cheap *and* delicious.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.


Sorry, no. Why shouldn't food be delicious? You're sounding like a puritan now. No thanks. No thanks at all. It's fantastic that we can enjoy food, that it isn't just fuel.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

Could I feed myself and my kids on £10 a week? I fucking wish I could! I might be able to manage it without two very hungry growing kids, who also happen to be fussy about what they eat, yes. 

I just had a look through her recipes and some of them sound really nice tbf. The problem is though that when you are shopping for a family you need to get them three meals they like every day....so a meal she says costs  35p...the actual cost to buy all of the ingredients costs £7.50 and some will spoil in a few days if not used. And if you are only spending ten quid a week...well it looks like we are having carrot, cumin and kidney beans burgers in buns for every meal for a few days kids, sorry! Oh and now we have run out after two days...shit. *rings rich parents for help.

And as if to prove my point, my daughter just wandered in to tell me she is hungry, even though half an hour ago she had cereal and 3/4 of an hour before that toast and an apple.


----------



## Santino (Aug 29, 2013)

People wanting to enjoy things. What a shower of cunts.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm a bit puzzled by this, too. So you're saying that we should eat better, healthier diets. Good idea. What more is there to this?


 

I'm suggesting that eating better, eating cheaper and indeed eating less is
1. (in and of itself) a deeply political and subversive act.
2. an opportunity for even those with the least money to take back some control of their own lives (instead of begrudgingly eating 'poverty food' and dreaming of payday/Giro day feasts)


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> This.
> 
> This is _exactly_ my initial response to anything like this - particularly when it is presented by a dick like J O or a mumsy posho.
> 
> ...


 
I do not need to make most of my meals out of tinned kidney beans because I can afford to make my meals out of more expensive and healthier ingredients.

Food doesn't _need_ to be delicious in the same way that people don't need an inside flush toilet or heating. But life is objectively better if you have those things. Unless you get pleasure out of living like a monk.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 29, 2013)

Santino said:


> People wanting to enjoy things. What a shower of cunts.


 

Well done on entirely missing the point. No change there.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'm suggesting that eating better, eating cheaper and indeed eating less is
> 1. (in and of itself) a deeply political and subversive act


No it's not. Or at least it is only in a straightlaced, vegan policeman kind of a way. Should we be giving up drugs and alcohol too, for the sake of politics?

I'm not with you on this one at all, Liam.


----------



## Santino (Aug 29, 2013)

I've heard that David Cameron has called an emergency meeting of COBRA after an outbreak of subversive behaviour across the UK caused by people being thrifty and taking less pleasure in things. The chief sugar baron, Lord Sugar, has asked for hourly updates.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.


 
That sounds like some 1940s Soviet polemic - "Onwards through our bland gruel to the workers' victory!". Food is a vital part of the human social and cultural experience. To be denied access to decent sustaining tasty food is an insult, and it's dreadful that so many are so desperate to feed themselves properly.

Can't food be both healthy fuel and delicious? To paraphrase, isn't the point to change society, not to accept its inequalities as a austere badge of misplaced pride?

And aren't you missing other vital points about access to leisure and sports activities, good food shops, time to cook and ability to eat out regularly at non fast food places that enable the rich to eat well and remain at a healthy weight. How many people do you know have subsidised work restaurants or lunch expenses? That's standard for lawyers, accountants, the City, MPs...then they lecture us about popping out to Greggs.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'm suggesting that eating better, eating cheaper and indeed eating less is
> 1. (in and of itself) a deeply political and subversive act.
> 2. an opportunity for even those with the least money to take back some control of their own lives (instead of begrudgingly eating 'poverty food' and dreaming of payday/Giro day feasts)


 
Just out on interest, what do you consider poverty food?


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> Could I feed myself and my kids on £10 a week? I fucking wish I could! I might be able to manage it without two very hungry growing kids, who also happen to be fussy about what they eat, yes.
> 
> I just had a look through her recipes and some of them sound really nice tbf. The problem is though that when you are shopping for a family you need to get them three meals they like every day....so a meal she says costs 35p...the actual cost to buy all of the ingredients costs £7.50 and some will spoil in a few days if not used. And if you are only spending ten quid a week...well it looks like we are having carrot, cumin and kidney beans burgers in buns for every meal for a few days kids, sorry! Oh and now we have run out after two days...shit. *rings rich parents for help.
> 
> And as if to prove my point, my daughter just wandered in to tell me she is hungry, even though half an hour ago she had cereal and 3/4 of an hour before that toast and an apple.


She's only feeding herself and a toddler though - I could probably manage food for me and my toddler on £10 a week because he has very cheap tastes, eats next to nothing and would be ecstatic to only have to eat beans on toast, cheesy pasta and apples for the rest of his life.  It'd be grim for me though.

I'm sure I read a George Orwell(?) quote recently about miners spending all their money on sugar, white bread and corned beef when they would be better off and healthier spending it on wholemeal bread, oranges and milk for the children, and eating carrots raw to save gas.  But concludes that given the choice any normal person would rather have corned beef and sugar than carrots.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> She's only feeding herself and a toddler though - I could probably manage food for me and my toddler on £10 a week because he has very cheap tastes, eats next to nothing and would be ecstatic to only have to eat beans on toast, cheesy pasta and apples for the rest of his life. It'd be grim for me though.
> 
> I'm sure I read a George Orwell(?) quote recently about miners spending all their money on sugar, white bread and corned beef when they would be better off and healthier spending it on wholemeal bread, oranges and milk for the children, and eating carrots raw to save gas. But concludes that given the choice any normal person would rather have corned beef and sugar than carrots.


Orwell also made the point in Road to Wigan Pier that it was as well that those on welfare were rather wasteful as their welfare payments were supposed to be the absolute minimum needed to survive. This kind of stuff can be used as an excuse to cut benefits even more.


----------



## captain acab (Aug 29, 2013)

shitty asceticism isn't a worthwhile political action imo, sorry.


----------



## treelover (Aug 29, 2013)

I've got a very unpleasant feeling that Jacks work and ideas could go horribly wrong and be used by the neo-Victorians to argue you can live on less.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

Yeah it's possible to get creative and eat cheaply when there is just one person (or one and a non fussy toddler, sure) When I first left home and moved into a shared house with my friends, my mate took it really far and would only buy oats, 3p tins of beans, the cheapest pasta and pasta sauces. She did this because she wanted to save all her money to go out drinking  I spent more on my food but still not that much by buying fresh fruit and veg and milk and cheese and slowly collecting herbs and spices until I could make any meal taste fantastic. My mate with the beans and pasta used to constantly steal my leftover curry and pinch my milk for her porridge and cheese for her beans and pasta heh


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'm suggesting that eating better, eating cheaper and indeed eating less is
> 1. (in and of itself) a deeply political and subversive act.
> 2. an opportunity for even those with the least money to take back some control of their own lives (instead of begrudgingly eating 'poverty food' and dreaming of payday/Giro day feasts)


 
What's deeply subversive is people coming together to discuss their shared experiences, coming to an understanding of how they have happened and why and then going onto organise ad act to to change those conditions. What's deeply reactionary is those same people coming together and then endorsing and seeking to maintain those conditions. The class really really doesn't need some political mr motivator shouting nonsense about making the best of their conditions. And more to the point, the sort of class autonomy that you are hinting at here will only come through the desire for _more consumption_ not with making do.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> The questions for me are 1. How do you empower people to take action for themsleves instead of falling into the traps of social isolation, self-pity and victimhood... and 2. defending people's 'entitlement' to eat sugary/salty shite is exactly what those manipulating us want... and yet we readily walk into the trap time after time.


 
I think my main issue with the OP is that it's quite individualistic.

Tackling isolation has to be done collectively. Can we agree that things like the IWCA's running club in Oxford would be a good way forward? Or neighbours sharing produce from gardens/allotments, even.


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> Yeah it's possible to get creative and eat cheaply when there is just one person (or one and a non fussy toddler, sure) When I first left home and moved into a shared house with my friends, my mate took it really far and would only buy oats, 3p tins of beans, the cheapest pasta and pasta sauces. She did this because she wanted to save all her money to go out drinking  I spent more on my food but still not that much by buying fresh fruit and veg and milk and cheese and slowly collecting herbs and spices until I could make any meal taste fantastic. My mate with the beans and pasta used to constantly steal my leftover curry and pinch my milk for her porridge and cheese for her beans and pasta heh


The most depressing thing when your budget is tight is not getting anything fresh - about the only fresh things I would buy regularly is milk and apples, everything else frozen and tinned.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> The most depressing thing when your budget is tight is not getting anything fresh - about the only fresh things I would buy regularly is milk and apples, everything else frozen and tinned.


Yeah. Also, there's tight and tight. £10 per week for two people is disgustingly tight. We should be fighting so that nobody is in that position. A budget for £20 per week would look very different and could include far more fresh veg. And £20 per week is still bloody tight.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think my main issue with the OP is that it's quite individualistic.
> 
> Tackling isolation has to be done collectively. Can we agree that things like the IWCA's running club in Oxford would be a good way forward? Or neighbours sharing produce from gardens/allotments, even.


I think you can argue that this kind of thing is political, while simply deciding for yourself to change your consumption habits isn't. Changing what you buy from the shops may affect what shops decide to sell, but it's not going to have any effect on the processes that have put you in your position. You can't be political on your own, basically. It doesn't work like that.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

> I think my main issue with the OP is that it's quite individualistic.


 
Thats hit the nail on the head as far as i'm concerned


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> The most depressing thing when your budget is tight is not getting anything fresh - about the only fresh things I would buy regularly is milk and apples, everything else frozen and tinned.


 
Yep, I must admit that I hardly ever eat fruit now I have kids cos I save it for them. Things are especially tight this month, summer hols are expensive anyway but what with the kids uniforms and bags, shoes, pencil cases costing £170 I have been seriously considering going to a food bank. But I keep talking myself out of it cos I think there must be people who need it more. I am quite up for raiding the supermarket bins as some of my mates do though


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah. Also, there's tight and tight. £10 per week for two people is disgustingly tight. We should be fighting so that nobody is in that position. A budget for £20 per week would look very different and could include far more fresh veg. And £20 per week is still bloody tight.


Even at £20, fresh veg is really expensive and easily wasted.  Frozen and tinned are much more economical.  Yesterday I bought 2 peppers in the local Tesco and it was £1.50 - a 500g bag of frozen peppers are £1.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> Even at £20, fresh veg is really expensive and easily wasted. Frozen and tinned are much more economical. Yesterday I bought 2 peppers in the local Tesco and it was £1.50 - a 500g bag of frozen peppers are £1.


Yeah, they're bloody expensive in the supermarket. So other factors are there - if you have access to cheaper markets, you can get fresh veg for less than half that price. If you don't, you can't.


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, they're bloody expensive in the supermarket. So other factors are there - if you have access to cheaper markets, you can get fresh veg for less than half that price. If you don't, you can't.


I mentioned this on the other Jamie Oliver thread, but where I live there is nowhere within walking distance that isn't a Tesco Express or a Costcutter (or chip shop).


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

I know nothin about this jack woman,could someone give us a run down of who she is...i've watched the clip in a guardian article posted on the other thread,but she just seems like another media type slumming it to me,am i way of the mark here?


----------



## Thimble Queen (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> Even at £20, fresh veg is really expensive and easily wasted.  Frozen and tinned are much more economical.  Yesterday I bought 2 peppers in the local Tesco and it was £1.50 - a 500g bag of frozen peppers are £1.



Tesco is stupid expensive. We are really lucky to have Brixton market on our doorstep. 3 big peppers are a quid.


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I know nothin about this jack woman,could someone give us a run down of who she is...i've watched the clip in a guardian article posted on the other thread,but she just seems like another media type slumming it to me,am i way of the mark here?


She's a single mum who wrote a blog about cheap meals she made to feed herself and her son on £10 a week.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

After being referred to a food bank.


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

MrsDarlingsKiss said:


> Tesco is stupid expensive. We are really lucky to have Brixton market on our doorstep. 3 big peppers are a quid.


Yep it's a Tesco Express as well so everything costs 1/3 more than it does at a big Tesco


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> She's a single mum who wrote a blog about cheap meals she made to feed herself and her son on £10 a week.


As a lifestyle choice or from necessity,i'm veeery cynical about this sort of stuff

edit:didn't catch your post above butchers...


----------



## treelover (Aug 29, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah. Also, there's tight and tight. £10 per week for two people is disgustingly tight. We should be fighting so that nobody is in that position. A budget for £20 per week would look very different and could include far more fresh veg. And £20 per week is still bloody tight.


 

yes, I think jack should reorient her budget for meals, etc.


----------



## treelover (Aug 29, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> *Yep, I must admit that I hardly ever eat fruit* now I have kids cos I save it for them. Things are especially tight this month, summer hols are expensive anyway but what with the kids uniforms and bags, shoes, pencil cases costing £170 I have been seriously considering going to a food bank. But I keep talking myself out of it cos I think there must be people who need it more. I am quite up for raiding the supermarket bins as some of my mates do though


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> As a lifestyle choice or from necessity,i'm veeery cynical about this sort of stuff


 
Necessity.


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> As a lifestyle choice or from necessity,i'm veeery cynical about this sort of stuff


I don't think many people choose to be single mothers on benefits are a lifestyle choice tbh.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> I don't think many people choose to be single mothers on benefits are a lifestyle choice tbh.


That's not what i meant thora,thanks for helpin to fill me in on jack


----------



## likesfish (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> As a lifestyle choice or from necessity,i'm veeery cynical about this sort of stuff
> 
> edit:didn't catch your post above butchers...



No pretty genuine ex partner fucked off when she was pregnant on her own just a bit more articulate than a lot of people in that situation


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

On a slight tangent, a friend of mine tried to get Healthy Start vouchers recently (£4 a week to be spent on milk and fresh fruit/veg for young children) and was told to get a doctor's letter to support her application - doctor wanted to charge her £30 for it!  Needless to say she didn't get her vouchers.


----------



## Thimble Queen (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> On a slight tangent, a friend of mine tried to get Healthy Start vouchers recently (£4 a week to be spent on milk and fresh fruit/veg for young children) and was told to get a doctor's letter to support her application - doctor wanted to charge her £30 for it!  Needless to say she didn't get her vouchers.



Angry and sad


----------



## treelover (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> On a slight tangent, a friend of mine tried to get Healthy Start vouchers recently (£4 a week to be spent on milk and fresh fruit/veg for young children) and was told to get a doctor's letter to support her application - doctor wanted to charge her £30 for it! Needless to say she didn't get her vouchers.


 
what a disgrace, couldn't make it up..


----------



## treelover (Aug 29, 2013)

http://www.healthystart.nhs.uk/healthy-start-vouchers/do-i-qualify/

Just looked at the site, no mention of support letter required.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> On a slight tangent, a friend of mine tried to get Healthy Start vouchers recently (£4 a week to be spent on milk and fresh fruit/veg for young children) and was told to get a doctor's letter to support her application - doctor wanted to charge her £30 for it! Needless to say she didn't get her vouchers.


That's a fuckin disgrace,where some sort of collective picket/action on  the surgery or publicising the doctors behaviour could work,treat the fucker like the private enterprise they are


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> That's a fuckin disgrace,where some sort of collective picket/action on the surgery or publicising the doctors behaviour could work,treat the fucker like the private enterprise they are


I don't think any GPs do that kind of thing for free anymore - won't write letters or support ESA applications.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> I don't think any GPs do that kind of thing for free anymore - won't write letters or support ESA applications.


They can ,no ones forcing them to charge,let alone charge extortionate prices when it's plain obvious the letter is to help with financial hardship


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> On a slight tangent, a friend of mine tried to get Healthy Start vouchers recently (£4 a week to be spent on milk and fresh fruit/veg for young children) and was told to get a doctor's letter to support her application - doctor wanted to charge her £30 for it! Needless to say she didn't get her vouchers.


 
Was this in bristol?


----------



## Thora (Aug 29, 2013)

Yes.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> Yes.


 
Interesting. We (i.e some people, not a political group) are thinking of doing a sort of bottom up 'health audit' (i.e looking at how local doctors meet/don't meet class needs). That's exactly the sort of stuff we want to look at.


----------



## xenon (Aug 29, 2013)

Lunch, it's a political hot potato.<checks wallet>

Nope,I'll give it a miss this week if it's all the same. 

"The standard amount is the minimum amount of money the Government says a person needs..."


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Just been talking to a mate who says she was charged £15 by her doctor for a letter to the housing to back up her application,doctor said they had to charge because it was beyond their remit.Funny how a thread about an individual response to a collective experience can get two individuals talking about something that may not of come up otherwise...I bet there's a name for that


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 29, 2013)

yes. its called "conversation"


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> yes. its called "conversation"


Fuck off


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 29, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think my main issue with the OP is that it's quite individualistic.
> 
> Tackling isolation has to be done collectively. Can we agree that things like the IWCA's running club in Oxford would be a good way forward? Or neighbours sharing produce from gardens/allotments, even.


 

Communal allotments would be a good way for like minded folk to grow their own produce maybe even have chickens too.
Sadly there is at the moment a nationwide waiting list of nearly 200,000 applicants for allotments.
There is an idea to nationalise all unused landholdings over fifty acres and give them to such communal organisations.
Sting and Jay Kaye would be over the moon I am sure to put some of their hard earned possessions to such a good use as a thank you to all who help them maintain their affluent lifestyle. Yeah, that will happen.
Yet it is criminal that in these times of austerity that all these old industrial sites that cannot have housing built on cannot be utilised for growing food for those who need the help. No it won't happen because landlords will rather sit on a idle site than let it out for a good community enterprise.


----------



## treelover (Aug 29, 2013)

> Yet it is criminal that in these times of austerity that all these old industrial sites that cannot have housing built on cannot be utilised for growing food for those who need the help. No it won't happen because landlords will rather sit on a idle site than let it out for a good community enterprise.


 

Starting to happen in De-industrialised Detroit


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.


 
That's because for most of the history of mankind eating has been a shared pleasurable social experience whenever possible, so the kind of _cilice_-wearing "it's only fuel" attitude rather flies in the face of all that shared social experience, and in the face of people deriving some sort of pleasure from their mortal existence.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

On a lighter note  me and my daughter were laughing at the idea of making her an austerity school folder out of a pizza box. We then turned it into an austerity fan and couture hat


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 29, 2013)

captain acab said:


> shitty asceticism isn't a worthwhile political action imo, sorry.


 
It does give some people the horn, though.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 29, 2013)

Thora said:


> The most depressing thing when your budget is tight is not getting anything fresh - about the only fresh things I would buy regularly is milk and apples, everything else frozen and tinned.


I learned to cook as a child, and I've always been fortunate enough to live near markets, so even when utterly boracic, I've never gone entirely without fresh food. If you're *not* that fortunate though, it's really easy to get into a processed rut, especially if your "cooking facilities" are a microwave and your chilled/frozen storage facilities are a shelf of the fridge and a third of the icebox.
That said, I'm one of those Orwell would have quantified as mis-spending, because one thing I've never skimped on, even when skint, was decent leaf tea.  Not bags, and not the cheapest leaf "sweepings", but good quality Assam or Ceylon.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 29, 2013)

LiamO said:


> This.
> 
> This is _exactly_ my initial response to anything like this - particularly when it is presented by a dick like J O or a mumsy posho.
> 
> ...


 
Fuckin right you invite scorn and ridicule ya joyless twat. Food isn't "just" or even mainly fuel, food's proper stuff that brings people together and that - What pleasure is greater than that when people like your slop? I think you're an ok guy Liam, but fuck knows where you're coming from here.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Just been talking to a mate who says she was charged £15 by her doctor for a letter to the housing to back up her application,doctor said they had to charge because it was beyond their remit.Funny how a thread about an individual response to a collective experience can get two individuals talking about something that may not of come up otherwise...I bet there's a name for that


 
My first GP when I moved to where I'm currently living once explained to me his criteria for writing support letters, which boiled down to him doing anything his patients asked, that fitted with their medical history and prognosis, free.  What he did, however, was "soak" any external enterprise that asked him to do medical examinations (he was on the books of several pension funds including the Civil Service ones) for medical retirement cases. 
It seems that the current system (commissioning groups etc) eats up a lot of the "spare time" doctors used to write those letters in, so *some* doctors/surgeries have made a policy of charging *everyone*.  Unfortunately for the likes of me, those surgeries tend to be the ones with the heaviest flow of requests, precisely because they're located in areas with high concentrations of poor people.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2013)

I would do loads of things differently with the same food on the same budget but then I was born with 'fussy eater' stamped on my forehead. Guardian was propmoting her vids the other day and I took immediate hump, before checking out her website and getting the impression that she is ok, angry and practical with it. Wouldn't feed her grub to my dog though.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 29, 2013)

We are often on austerity eating atm (unless my mum brings us shopping which thankfully is reasonably frequent) and I have to say, if people started doing this when they didn't need to, I would find it fucking offensive and patronising.
Not to mention that it reaffirms the bad message to the powers that be, that people are _fine_ eating on such a tight budget.
People sitting at home making themselves suffer is not going to do anything positive at all.
No one is going to be interested in Liam sitting at home just consuming limited "fuel" apart from him, for a pious sense of self worth.


----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2013)

treelover said:


> Starting to happen in De-industrialised Detroit


 
It's happening closer to home than that (depending on where your home is, obvs)

Lots of housing estates in Hackney, for instance, now have small allotments set up and run by TRAs and other residents.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 29, 2013)

> *Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs*


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 29, 2013)

I usually love your posts Liam but you don't half come out with some bollocks at times


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Fuck off



Good comeback, bananaman.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 29, 2013)

I have just started cutting out myself a new pair of pants and a bra from sacking. 
Why does underwear need to be comfortable, it's only there to hold you up/protect your clothes. 
I found the sacking by the side of the road too so it's free. Take that you tory scum!


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2013)

cooking is a joy- yes sometimes a chore- but a joy. Getting all knotty browed and banging about the place with the radio on and that.

obviously its not the same when you are doing yourself beans on toast

weird thing is after sweating over the stove and getting it all just right, I sometimes just don't want it. Everyone else yams it down, but I have to wait an hour then nuke it and eat. WTF is that about.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

I'm sort of with liam on the food as fuel angle,i think there's other far more contentious stuff in the op.Here's the thing,essentially i also see food as fuel,aye i like it to taste nice but as long as there's food i'm usually happy enough.I reckon the food as a bonding,social human activity is cultural as opposed to universal,as a matter of fact thinkin about it i'd say definitely...When i was a chile we rarely ate out,weddings funerals that sort of thing,we hardly ever had carryouts.
A food treat for us was sittin in front of the telly with jafas ,apples and those stringy bags of mixed nuts.To this day i don't really like eating out,which is just as fuckin well really given our finances.
I went to a catholic boys school where ye ate what ye got quick or some older prick'd take it off ye.In our family it was a matter of gettin it down ye and gettin back to the important stuff like playing,going out,drinking whatever age you were etc.That was the culture of our ones and lots of other families i knew.Both my parents came from huge families with not a lot of money so maybe it comes from there.
My girlfriend is more into food and cooking than i am,but we're both of the opinion that if it takes more than 20 mins 1/2 hr it's a waste of time.
I know in some religious cultures food is a big deal,but i reckon there's a lot of coercion going on there as well,but essentially i'm sayin a lot of the food as fuel thing depends on the way you were reared.For what it's worth i've always been suss of "foodies",which i've always seen as a middle class affectation,loaded with snobbery and sneering,but i know this is not universal either...Anyways culture wether religious,geographical,familial,class is the driving force behind food as fuel imo,which is an interesting discussion in itself...


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> Good comeback, bananaman.


Thanks for the compliment my girlfriend will be pleased


----------



## kittyP (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm sort of with liam on the food as fuel angle,i think there's other far more contentious stuff in the op.Here's the thing,essentially i also see food as fuel,aye i like it to taste nice but as long as there's food i'm usually happy enough.I reckon the food as a bonding,social human activity is cultural as opposed to universal,as a matter of fact thinkin about it i'd say definitely...When i was a chile we rarely ate out,weddings funerals that sort of thing,we hardly ever had carryouts.
> A food treat for us was sittin in front of the telly with jafas ,apples and those stringy bags of mixed nuts.To this day i don't really like eating out,which is just as fuckin well really given our finances.
> .


 

It is perfectly fine for someone to think of food as fuel for themselves, but saying it doesn't need to be delicious or enjoyed is ridiculous (I am not saying you said this). It is very sensory, the smell, the look, the feel, the taste, what is not to be enjoyed by good food. 

Also, I personally think it is cultural and universal. 
You don't have to eat out to enjoy food as a social experience, I love having a friend/friends over for food or even just cooking for badgers and me, but it's still socially bonding. 

I am struggling to think of a culture that doesn't use food for bringing people together or as part of a social function.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

nazis


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 29, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> nazis


 

The Nazis made it a requirement to make at least two meals a week using left overs!
Anyone else notice the way this topic is going, Gulp (not a yummy gulp either)


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 29, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> nazis


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2013)

they made the trains run on thyme


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 29, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> they made the trains run on thyme


 

You have spent too long on the Nan film thread methinks.


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

I have a certain poster on ignore. I am pretty sure when someone says FUCK OFF...it's to him.
*waves


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> nazis


Godwins


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

Godwin's nazis. The worst sort of nazi.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Godwin's nazis. The worst sort of nazi.


Your just bein lazy butchers


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

kittyP said:


> It is perfectly fine for someone to think of food as fuel for themselves, but saying it doesn't need to be delicious or enjoyed is ridiculous (I am not saying you said this). It is very sensory, the smell, the look, the feel, the taste, what is not to be enjoyed by good food.
> 
> Also, I personally think it is cultural and universal.
> You don't have to eat out to enjoy food as a social experience, I love having a friend/friends over for food or even just cooking for badgers and me, but it's still socially bonding.
> ...


 
See,like mine i think that's a very personal viewpoint not a universal one.My point was liam made a personal statement and tried to use it as a coherent political stand point,but people lit on him for his personal view as opposed to him presenting it as some sort of way forward,which i agree is bollocks.At the risk of being slated for it, i'd say irish working class culture doesn't use food that much as a social gel,but of course there's historical etc reasons for that imo


----------



## kittyP (Aug 29, 2013)

bamalama said:


> See,like mine i think that's a very personal viewpoint not a universal one.My point was liam made a personal statement and tried to use it as a coherent political stand point,but people lit on him for his personal view as opposed to him presenting it as some sort of way forward,which i agree is bollocks.At the risk of being slated for it, i'd say irish working class culture doesn't use food that much as a social gel,but of course there's historical etc reasons for that imo


 

It seemed to me like he was saying that food didn't need to be delicious for everyone not just personally for him, which was why I picked up on it. 

I would reckon even in Irish working class culture there are still people that use/used food as a social gel, just maybe less than some other places. 
My family come from Irish working class culture and my nans always had people round the dinner table having a chat, even if it was just over tea and bread and jam. Admittedly that was in England but I don't think that had changed much for a long time.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

kittyP said:


> It seemed to me like he was saying that food didn't need to be delicious for everyone not just personally for him, which was why I picked up on it.
> 
> I would reckon even in Irish working class culture there are still people that use/used food as a social gel, just maybe less than some other places.
> My family come from Irish working class culture and my nans always had people round the dinner table having a chat, even if it was just over tea and bread and jam. Admittedly that was in England but I don't think that had changed much for a long time.


 
Aye, i agree with you here,but ,and i know it sounds nit picky but cups of tea is hospitality,you expect that.not a big sit down long cooked meal where everyone talks about their day,life etc we tend to do that in the pub,at work,or  around the kitchen(not the dinner)table.
I think it has more to do with class and resources tbh,the only people who have ever sneered at me,and i mean proper sneering,for my attitude to food have been real middle class types,or wannabes.I'm not sayin that's what's goin on here but there is an element of multi millionaire jamie olivers attitude about it,when it happens in real life.I like food,i don't like to be starving although i've no objection to being a wee bit hungry,personally i'm used to it,i think it's a healthy way to be.Would i recommend it as a political action/stand,nope,would i see it as an effective way of challenging/fighting whats goin on with food poverty at the minute,fuck that...but it works for me.
Not my kids though who are growing and deserve better than we can always financially supply


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

"I met someone recently who had never seen an avocado, can you believe it?" *horsey laugh. Someone I know called Camilla said that. Figures.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> "I met someone recently who had never seen an avocado, can you believe it?" *horsey laugh. Someone I know called Camilla said that. Figures.


 

The first time I took the bus back from oxford I had an incredibly shithouse girl behind me braying about who had gone to what Uni and how the provincial ones are worthless etc. I was mentally cocking a shotgun for the entire journey. Saw her get off the bus and the cow was tidy as well, which just angered me more. Why do some people get to be rich AND pretty? I only get to be witty.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2013)

When?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 29, 2013)

I'll pencil you in


----------



## bamalama (Aug 29, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> "I met someone recently who had never seen an avocado, can you believe it?" *horsey laugh. Someone I know called Camilla said that. Figures.


That's almost exactly the sort of shit i was talkin about


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 29, 2013)

The stupid thing is I bet Camilla has never had a pot noodle sandwich in her life


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 29, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I have just started cutting out myself a new pair of pants and a bra from sacking.
> Why does underwear need to be comfortable, it's only there to hold you up/protect your clothes.
> I found the sacking by the side of the road too so it's free. Take that you tory scum!


 
Is anyone else mildly aroused by this post?


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 29, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Is anyone else mildly aroused by this post?


 

Have you been looking at the Victoria's sackrets catalogue?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

I

did

not

write

"Why does food need to be delicious?"

Which somewhat renders the pages of fanciful extrapolation and misrepresentative drivel that followed my post redundant.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 30, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> The stupid thing is I bet Camilla has never had a pot noodle sandwich in her life


 

It is called a Po Nooday and arrives in it's own hand crafted vessel.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

does that mean you win the thread? I got some ready-sliced pink lady apple slices for 5p so I an winning. Not sure what


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry, no. Why shouldn't food be delicious? You're sounding like a puritan now. No thanks. No thanks at all. It's fantastic that we can enjoy food, that it isn't just fuel.


 

You remember 'treats' from when you were little? They were called treats to distinguish them from all the other day-to-day stuff that was a bit boring and did not merit being called a treat.

That was in the olden days before we were nearly all fat sugar-holics consuming far more calories than we need.

Puritan me bollix. Why should self-sovereignty be a puritanical concept?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> You remember 'treats' from when you were little? They were called treats to distinguish them from all the other day-to-day stuff that was a bit boring and did not merit being called a treat.
> 
> That was in the olden days before we were nearly all fat sugar-holics consuming far more calories than we need.
> 
> Puritan me bollix. Why should self-sovereignty be a puritanical concept?


I do.

I was a kid. I thought olives were foul. I had a very unsophisticated palate.

If you're saying that many people eat too much of the wrong thing, I'm with you. But that's so far away from denying the glorious, sensuous pleasure that good food can give you.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Food isn't "just" or even mainly fuel, food's proper stuff that brings people together and that - What pleasure is greater than that when people like your slop? I think you're an ok guy Liam, but fuck knows where you're coming from here.


 
I don't even know where to start with the quantum leap you have made here, Frances dear boy.

Where have I said people should not enjoy food? Where have I indicated or even hinted that I think consuming food should be a solitary, souless experience.

Everything in our house revolves around the kitchen table - eating, conversing, having the craic, drinking, playing music. The breaking of bread with friends - and the kids friends - is a huge part of our lives.

That does not alter the fact that the vast majority of food consumed _is_ just day-to-day grub... fuel basically.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I do.
> 
> I was a kid. I thought olives were foul. I had a very unsophisticated palate.
> 
> If you're saying that many people eat too much of the wrong thing, I'm with you. But that's so far away from denying the glorious, sensuous pleasure that good food can give you.


 

would it be such a glorious sensuous pleasure if you had it for every meal?

And it's not that I am saying 'people eat too much of the wrong thing'... that is more than a bit preachy (which is exactly what some posters have accused me of).

I am saying (I think) as I outlined in the OP that the mindset we currently have towards food is problematic... that we might explore other ones... and that choosing to change your diet (which is empowering)... as opposed to feeling you are having dietary changes foisted upon you (which is disempowering and indeed humiliating for many)... are two very different things.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> would it be such a glorious sensuous pleasure if you had it for every meal?


I'm willing to give it a go. 

Seriously though, with fresh ingredients, really quite simple food can be a glorious sensuous pleasure. I'm not with Oliver at all, but it is true that people in Sicily generally eat very good food every day. Give me some of that, please. Why the fuck not?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I don't even know where to start with the quantum leap you have made here, Frances dear boy.
> 
> Where have I said people should not enjoy food? Where have I indicated or even hinted that I think consuming food should be a solitary, souless experience.
> 
> ...


 
Banging. Nice one. That's as it should be.

But you are forgetting the bit where you said food shouldn't have to be delicious/nice or whatever c'mon, it fuckin _does_. Horrible scran, where's the need?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> Just out on interest, what do you consider poverty food?


 

You will note the '...' around the words 'poverty food' in my post, yes?

In this context I would consider 'poverty food' to be any food that when you eat it is because you have no food you would prefer to eat instead. 

That may be 3 days of tinned ravioli or of porridge for some and being down to the last pot of pate foie gras for others. Either way, it is a very subjective thing based on a) our emotional relationship with food and b) how subjectively (and childishly) oppressed we feel when we can't get the food we want.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Seriously though, with fresh ingredients, really quite simple food can be a glorious sensuous pleasure.


 
Yes they can... but not for a sugar-holic.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> delicious/nice


 

really?  You can put _those_ two words together in this context?

_(I'll get back to you on your substantive point . Just waiting for a gobshite to come along first. There will be one along soon.)_


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> Yes they can... but not for a sugar-holic.



So your saying we should stop eating sugar? 

I'm really confused about what your point actually was in the op now


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> LiamO said:
> 
> 
> > You will note the '...' around the words 'poverty food' in my post, yes?
> ...


 
HI 

So tell me LiamO, what do _you _consider to be poverty food?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Have another read Kitty. and post 2.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> really?  You can put _those_ two words together in this context?
> 
> _(I'll get back to you on your substantive point . *Just waiting for a gobshite to come along first.* There will be one along soon.)_


 
Arm wrestle then . Nah, messin, it has to happen though.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> HI
> 
> So tell me LiamO, what do _you _consider to be poverty food?


 

this..


LiamO said:


> _(I'll get back to you on your substantive point . Just waiting for a gobshite to come along first. There will be one along soon.)_


 
was not referring to you or your post.

However, in honest answer to your question, I would have to go with...



LiamO said:


> I would consider 'poverty food' to be any food that when you eat it is because you have no food you would prefer to eat instead.


 
to be more specific I would currently say porridge. But if I was after a feed of drink I would say anything short of a doner kebab. Like I said it is a _very_ subjective and emotive subject.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Arm wrestle then . Nah, messin, it has to happen though.


 

what does?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Fair enough, I was being  a dick there.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

I wasn't having a go, Frances. I like you and your wit. I just didn' know what you meant. Night night.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 30, 2013)

Why do clothes need colour or fitting? After all they're only there to keep us warm and dry right?


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> Have another read Kitty. and post 2.



Ok I have had another read. 
I am a bit slow sometimes, so please help me, but could you please explain more clearly what it is you are proposing people try and do?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Why do clothes need colour or fitting? After all they're only there to keep us warm and dry right?


 

indeed, otherwise my balls would be small and wizened


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Why do clothes need colour or fitting? After all they're only there to keep us warm and dry right?


 

blah.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> indeed, otherwise my balls would be small and wizened


 

they are


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.



So this is what you said. 
But saying that seems to be heavily implying that food does not need to be delicious, rather than just casually inquiring as to people's thoughts as to why it needs to be.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> Ok I have had another read.
> I am a bit slow sometimes, so please help me, but could you please explain more clearly what it is you are proposing people try and do?


 

I'll get back to you tomorrow Kitty. i'm in the middle of something


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'll get back to you tomorrow Kitty. i'm in the middle of something


There's two or three threads running through you discussion here liam,are you being deliberately obscure by any chance?


----------



## TruXta (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> blah.


Yeah, that is about the extent of your so-called argument.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What's deeply subversive is people coming together to discuss their shared experiences, coming to an understanding of how they have happened and why and then going onto organise ad act to to change those conditions. What's deeply reactionary is those same people coming together and then endorsing and seeking to maintain those conditions. The class really really doesn't need some political mr motivator shouting nonsense about making the best of their conditions. And more to the point, the sort of class autonomy that you are hinting at here will only come through the desire for _more consumption_ not with making do.


 
In order to change big things,  we must first change small things.

This thread came about cos I read two things on the J O thread. Firstly, _you_ (I think) mentioned Jack, secondly Wee Piper's post about her workmate...



weepiper said:


> So I had a conversation with one of my colleagues today where he told us that he's got nothing to eat except a couple of tins of ravioli and bread and butter for the next few days. I mean literally nothing. No lunch. He's no money to buy anything else before payday. This is a single guy in his 40s who works full-time in a shop. Minimum wage is so _pathetically_ far behind the cost of living that a single bloke working full-time can't afford to eat properly at the end of the month. And before anyone judges him, he doesn't smoke, uses a bike to get around, he said he can't remember the last time he had a night out or new clothes, I saw him trying to fix the sole of his shoe with superglue the other week because he couldn't afford to buy new ones. He earns_ just_ too much to qualify for tax credits or housing benefit (I sat with him at lunchtime today and went through the calculations on entitledto.co.uk on his phone to see if we could get him any help) and rent and bills is eating all his wages. I suppose he should just magic a bag of fucking salad from somewhere? I bet Jamie Oliver thinks he's lazy too.


 
There's two people in dire financial circumstances and social isolation. One (from what I read) feels helpless, the other felt equally helpless then took action for herself. Which of these two people do _you_ think will be better able, more inclined towards and more likely to _take_ political action?

(BTW I am not judging Wee Piper's colleague by any means, I have been financially fucked and feeling helpless myself, many times. What struck me most though was how socially isolated this guy must be. I don't know his history but he certainly seems tragically isolated.)





butchersapron said:


> And more to the point, the sort of class autonomy that you are hinting at here will only come through the desire for _more consumption_ not with making do.


 
can you expand on this please?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> There's two or three threads running through you discussion here liam,are you being deliberately obscure by any chance?


 

No. I was in the middle of typing the lengthy post I just posted - and I also went for a dump and a vape. Now I'm off to bed. Oiche mhaith.

e2a are you referring to my response to Kitty? or failure to respond to your posts?

e2a actually that post wasn't that lengthy but it was at one stage. Once I'd stripped out the sarcasm there were not that many words left.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> No. I was in the middle of typing the lengthy post I just posted - and I also went for a dump and a vape. Now I'm off to bed. Oiche mhaith.
> 
> e2a are you referring to my response to Kitty? or failure to respond to your posts?
> 
> e2a actually that post wasn't that lengthy but it was at one stage. Once I'd stripped out the sarcasm there were not that many words left.


No, i just responded to the last post you made cos it was handy.The longish post makes your view a wee bit clearer,and i would go along with your point re social isolation,it's a dangerous fuckin thing and i've come across a lot of it ,in my own life and others.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Thanks for the compliment my girlfriend will be pleased



She might get that it was just a joke if she has a good sense of humour... but, to be fair, she must do.. she is your  girlfriend after all...


Now if I was being mean I'd have said "That would make a nice change for her...."


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> I hope she has a good sense of humour... but, to be fair, she must do.. she is your girlfriend after all...


Go away you weak wee man,the adults are talkin


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> e2a are you referring to my response to Kitty? or failure to respond to your posts?



No I was responding to this post 




			
				LiamO said:
			
		

> I
> 
> did
> 
> ...



When you clearly had here




			
				LiamO said:
			
		

> Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.[/QUOTE


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Go away you weak wee man,the adults are talkin



Where?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> She might get that it was just a joke if she has a good sense of humour... but, to be fair, she must do.. she is your girlfriend after all...
> 
> 
> Now if I was being mean I'd have said "That would make a nice change for her...."


Your edit didn't make it any less unfunny,come back in about 12 hours when ye've got a come back.Now,go away


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:
			
		

> No, i just responded to the last post you made cos it was handy.The longish post makes your view a wee bit clearer,and i would go along with your point re social isolation,it's a dangerous fuckin thing and i've come across a lot of it ,in my own life and others.



I don't think anyone would argue that social isolation and feeling helpless is a dangerous thing. 
I also agree that the person in the better position was the one getting angry and making a stand. 
But I'm still failing to see what it has to to with what was being presented in the op. 

If LiamO is saying that we should be eating less processed food and therefore as a result stop lining the pockets of multi national corporations, then again I agree but I am not sure that is what he is saying, and if it is what he's saying, why didn't he just spell it out straight.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> they are


 

I totally left myself wide for that one


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Your edit didn't make it any less unfunny,come back in about 12 hours when ye've got a come back.Now,go away



Is less unfunny the same as more funny? Your lack of cohesive thought makes it difficult to tell.

Jeez, man, lighten up a little. You can barely string a sentence together without swearwords or nonsense you are the last person who show be shouting the odds.

Twice I've told you that it was just a little joke.. but you seem to want to make a big deal out of it. Who are you trying to impress here with your Billy big bollocks nonsense?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I don't think anyone would argue that social isolation and feeling helpless is a dangerous thing.
> I also agree that the person in the better position was the one getting angry and making a stand.
> But I'm still failing to see what it has to to with what was being presented in the op.
> 
> If LiamO is saying that we should be eating less processed food and therefore as a result stop lining the pockets of multi national corporations, then again I agree but I am not sure that is what he is saying, and if it is what he's saying, why didn't he just spell it out straight.


I'm not sure really,i'm workin it out slowly(and i'm kernackered),but i think he's makin a couple of different points and tying them together into one large one about the basis,nature and effectiveness of politics...i think it's about self empowerment or something


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

He's saying that this person has reclaimed the principles of eating as cheaply as possible as a way of life in much the same way as gay people reclaim the word "queer". And he is suggesting that this is a deeply political and subversive act.

At least I think that's what he is saying.


----------



## N_igma (Aug 30, 2013)

It would be near impossible here because food is so damn expensive. I seen a small box of raspberries the other day for 8 dollars. 8 fucking dollars for a few raspberries. Although you get paid way more too so it all evens out I guess.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

N_igma said:


> It would be near impossible here because food is so damn expensive. I seen a small box of raspberries the other day for 8 dollars. 8 fucking dollars for a few raspberries. Although you get paid way more too so it all evens out I guess.


 
you still in the convict colony? have you got voting rights yet? vote those cunts out and establish an aboriginal parliament. Come on, it is your duty


----------



## N_igma (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> you still in the convict colony? have you got voting rights yet? vote those cunts out and establish an aboriginal parliament. Come on, it is your duty


 
Yes still here but no voting rights I'm afraid. Ha it's actually a shame how marginalised aboriginal people still are here. They get such a rough ride from whitey it's unreal.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> He's saying that this person has reclaimed the principles of eating as cheaply as possible as a way of life in much the same way as gay people reclaim the word "queer". And he is suggesting that this is a deeply political and subversive act.
> 
> At least I think that's what he is saying.



Also, I've just noticed that, viewed in conjunction with the Jamie Oliver thread, it puts an interesting question to opinions like this:



> we live in a society where rich freaks think that people should have to feed themselves and their families on fuck all. Where this is normalised rather than being seen as being an outrageous barbarism predicated on the privilege of these people who are offering their _advice_.



Which is "what about when the advice comes from a poor person?"

Is it still "predicated on their privilege"

Of course it isn't. Which makes it suddenly an issue of not whether the advice itself is good or not but about the person giving the advice.

Liam has made a trap for hypocrites. I don't know if he planned to do this or it is just a "happy" accident.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

you used to be alright, now every word you type drips with slime. I feel fucking ill reading you.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I totally left myself wide for that one


 

that's how I spotted them


----------



## barney_pig (Aug 30, 2013)

I clicked across to look at the link. The recipes looked immediately familiar, though the names and precise details are different these are the sort of meals my family have been living on for decades, when times have been tight.
 Whether it is tuna surprise (tin of value tuna, tin of value tomatoes, onion, value pasta) or paupers pie (potato and cheese wrapped in pastry) or simply infinite variations of beans on toast/ pitta etc. this is the food we have been forced to eat.
 And you know what, as soon as we get that little bit better off, we stop eating it, and buy something better.
 This food is the stuff you eat when you have no other fucking choice, to do so by choice is to indulge in a little poverty tourism, and nobody likes a tourist.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:
			
		

> Also, I've just noticed that, viewed in conjunction with the Jamie Oliver thread, it puts an interesting question to opinions like this:
> 
> Which is "what about when the advice comes from a poor person?"
> 
> ...



Imho, it's got nowt to do with hypocrisy. 
Things may mean different things when they come from different people. 
If a rich person says X it may have a different background, reasoning, ideology, ethics etc than when a poor person says it. 

So, in example, if a rich person says, "eat less, eat less processed food, cook with left overs etc all on 10 a week for a family" it comes from a position of privilege and maybe therefore and lack of realistic understanding and empathy. 
If a poor person says the same thing, it may be coming from a puritanical position. 
Just because you disagree with one doesn't mean you have to agree with the other, and vice versa.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 30, 2013)

N_igma said:


> Yes still here but no voting rights I'm afraid. Ha it's actually a shame how marginalised aboriginal people still are here. They get such a rough ride from whitey it's unreal.


Another U75 Aussie immigrant , bloody loads of us these days.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> you used to be alright, now every word you type drips with slime. I feel fucking ill reading you.



And you used to be a smart kid with bags of potential and desire to actually do something about the shit you complain about.

Not just sit around most of every day finding increasingly graphic ways to complain about everything and everybody who does something about it.

I used to be ok to you because you used to be ok. Its you who has changed. Its the company you okeep.

Slag me off as much as you like.. you know that I will only see that as a defence mechanism. In the end ask yourself this... is what you are now what you wanted to be 5 years ago?

I tend not to speak to you anymore... except when you slag me off... and that's because I actually like you and still think you have bags of potential... but it pains me to see how you use it.

Ignore this and call me a cunt or take it on board. Its up to you. Either is fine by me. But lets not disrupt this thread with this anymore.


----------



## killer b (Aug 30, 2013)

home truths. best take 'em onboard dotty.


----------



## N_igma (Aug 30, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> Another U75 Aussie immigrant , bloody loads of us these days.



Where are you dude?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 30, 2013)

N_igma said:


> Where are you dude?


Moved to Geelong from Perth at the beginning of the year.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

.

Edit. Nah, not worth it.


----------



## killer b (Aug 30, 2013)

razor sharp. ouch.


----------



## N_igma (Aug 30, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> Moved to Geelong from Perth at the beginning of the year.



Ah right I'm in Perth now it's where it's at these days. Probably head East at some stage though.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> Imho, it's got nowt to do with hypocrisy.
> Things may mean different things when they come from different people.
> If a rich person says X it may have a different background, reasoning, ideology, ethics etc than when a poor person says it.
> 
> ...



If its the same advice... good or bad... how does it make a difference who said it?

What if you didn't know who said it... does that change the advice? No, of course not. So therefore it doesn't and shouldn't matter who says it.

In football they have a saying "play the ball, not the man". This is so no-one gets hurt and the game can flow. Its much the same in debate, I think.


----------



## Santino (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> And you used to be a smart kid with bags of potential and desire to actually do something about the shit you complain about.
> 
> Not just sit around most of every day finding increasingly graphic ways to complain about everything and everybody who does something about it.
> 
> ...


He finds your politics and your attitude to others distasteful, and you respond with personal abuse.


----------



## Santino (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> In football they have a saying "play the ball, not the man".


 
Too... much... irony...


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 30, 2013)

N_igma said:


> Ah right I'm in Perth now it's where it's at these days. Probably head East at some stage though.


Melbourne's a great city, especially if you like art/films/music etc. Sydney I'm not quite so keen on but the Opera House is amazing. Despite the fact that you see it all the time on TV/photos etc seeing it in person is something totally different. Not made it up to Qld yet. Adelaide has a beautiful cricket ground and is good for a long weekend holiday. 

EDIT: The other place I love in Sydney is the observatory, you get a brilliant view of the city from there.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet's dad's a virgin.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> If its the same advice... good or bad... how does it make a difference who said it?
> 
> What if you didn't know who said it... does that change the advice? No, of course not. So therefore it doesn't and shouldn't matter who says it.
> 
> In football they have a saying "play the ball, not the man". This is so no-one gets hurt and the game can flow. Its much the same in debate, I think.


 

But this isn't bloody football or any game that flows, this is peoples lives.

It does matter (imo) who said it for the reasons I outlined above.

If you don't know who said it, then you don't know, but that doesn't change the effect of what it means when you do know.

ETA: And you use the word "advice", what can seem like advice from one person can seem like judgement or demanding from others.


----------



## N_igma (Aug 30, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> Melbourne's a great city, especially if you like art/films/music etc. Sydney I'm not quite so keen on but the Opera House is amazing. Despite the fact that you see it all the time on TV/photos etc seeing it in person is something totally different. Not made it up to Qld yet.



Yeh heading to Sydney next month for a holiday if I ever head East it'll be to Melbourne voted worlds most liveable city again


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> If its the same advice... good or bad... how does it make a difference who said it?
> 
> What if you didn't know who said it... does that change the advice? No, of course not. So therefore it doesn't and shouldn't matter who says it.
> 
> In football they have a saying "play the ball, not the man". This is so no-one gets hurt and the game can flow. Its much the same in debate, I think.


 
Debate's bullshit anyway - Someone's right and someone's wrong, whoever presents the best argument is of no relevance.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Debate's bullshit anyway - Someone's right and someone's wrong, whoever presents the best argument is of no relevance.


 

Or they are both wrong as is often the case


----------



## 5t3IIa (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> In football they have a saying "play the ball, not the man". This is so no-one gets hurt and the game can flow. Its much the same in debate, I think.


 

The saying is _precisely the opposite_. It refers to knowing your man and playing his strengths and weaknesses, fuck the actual ball. As Santino says;


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

Santino said:


> He finds your politics and your attitude to others distasteful, and you respond with personal abuse.



The only people I dislike are the ones who jump into arguments uninvited to "stand up for their mates" but really only to have a dig of their own.

And ooh look. That's you that is.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

5t3IIa said:


> The saying is _precisely the opposite_. It refers to knowing your man and playing his strengths and weaknesses, fuck the actual ball. As Santino says;








And that's why this happens.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

5t3IIa said:


> The saying is _precisely the opposite_. It refers to knowing your man and playing his strengths and weaknesses, fuck the actual ball. As Santino says;


 

I don't get the picture reference...


----------



## 5t3IIa (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I don't get the picture reference...


 

Irony/ironing  Sorry


----------



## killer b (Aug 30, 2013)

delicious ironing.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

5t3IIa said:


> Irony/ironing  Sorry


 

No, twas me being thick


----------



## Santino (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> The only people I dislike are the ones who jump into arguments uninvited to "stand up for their mates" but really only to have a dig of their own.
> 
> And ooh look. That's you that is.


I'm not standing up for anyone, I just think you're a cunt.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Kizmet's dad's a virgin.


 
He thinks his mum is too.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

Santino said:


> I'm not standing up for anyone, I just think you're a cunt.



And you will follow me round the boards jumping on any opportunity to say so. 

Which, in reality, is the behaviour of a cunt*.

So yes, you are free to think I am a cunt... but it is you who is behaving like one.

Anyone impartial can see that. Which is why I don't really care what you think.

*your word.


----------



## Santino (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> And you will follow me round the boards jumping on any opportunity to say so.
> 
> Which, in reality, is the behaviour of a cunt*.
> 
> ...


Have you received any PMs of support yet?


----------



## killer b (Aug 30, 2013)

One does wonder where all these impartial people are. They must all be scared of speaking out against the clique I guess.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

killer b said:


> One does wonder where all these impartial people are. They must all be scared of speaking out against the clique I guess.



Now that* is delicious ironing.

Because that's exactly how it works.


----------



## andysays (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> And you will follow me round the boards jumping on any opportunity to say so...


 
This "following me round the boards" stuff which I notice you repeatedly and tediously come out with (does that mean I'm following you too, BTW?) really doesn't help your case.

Do you think it might just be a result of you coming out with similar shit, and getting called on it, on multiple threads? No, of course you don't, that would require a level of self-awareness way beyond you...


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> And you used to be a smart kid with bags of potential and desire to actually do something about the shit you complain about.
> 
> Not just sit around most of every day finding increasingly graphic ways to complain about everything and everybody who does something about it.
> 
> ...


----------



## killer b (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> Now that* is delicious ironing.
> 
> Because that's exactly how it works.


and yet, on any other topic other than your arseholery, many people seem able to do so.

i wonder why?


----------



## 5t3IIa (Aug 30, 2013)

I was impartial but then I decided.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 30, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> The stupid thing is I bet Camilla has never had a pot noodle sandwich in her life


 
Or mashed spud topped with grated cheese.

On toast.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

andysays said:


> This "following me round the boards" stuff which I notice you repeatedly and tediously come out with (does that mean I'm following you too, BTW?) really doesn't help your case.
> 
> Do you think it might just be a result of you coming out with similar shit, and getting called on it, on multiple threads? No, of course you don't, that would require a level of self-awareness way beyond you...



Lets put it this way..

if I were to answer you like I have had to answer others then I would be accused of further disrupting this thread when in actual fact all I did was explain what I thought Liam's thread was about.

So by answering so many of you the impression is cemented that I am the disruption.... ignoring the 7 or 8 other people calling me out.

So, really there's not much a person can do under those circumstances except stick to their principles.

I will forever hate the hypocritical ganging up mentality and the more I see it the more I'll call it. Even if that means every gang hates me.

Ultimately that will probably lead to a ban as enough people get pissed off at the disruption to make it happen... as has happened many many times in the past to other good people. That's just how it goes, I guess. Nothing good lasts forever.


----------



## Santino (Aug 30, 2013)




----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 30, 2013)




----------



## killer b (Aug 30, 2013)

Santino said:


>


surely


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

I know this may come as a surprise to you... but there are people in the world who have principles.

You should try it, sometime.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


>



I can play guitar. And I can sing too.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

> So, really there's not much a person can do under those circumstances


 
A person could just go away


----------



## Santino (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> A person could just go away


That would be unprincipled.


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

Exactly. Its brilliant when sarcasm is also the truth.


----------



## andysays (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> A person could just go away


 
The person doesn't even have to do that, but he could at least leave it with the "following me round the boards" shit.

Maybe that too would be against his principles


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> Exactly. Its brilliant when sarcasm is also the truth.


This had the makings of an interestin thread before you stuck your tedious beak in,and your still incapable of taking the hint...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> And you will follow me round the boards jumping on any opportunity to say so.


 
You believe you can predict his actions, because you expect them to conform to a set of "rules" that you yourself have laid down for how you measure behaviour.
Ask any psychology graduate what that indicates. 



> Which, in reality, is the behaviour of a cunt*.
> 
> So yes, you are free to think I am a cunt... but it is you who is behaving like one.
> 
> ...


 
There's no such thing as "impartial" in human behaviour, there are only shades of partiality. This is why anyone who claims to be impartial is either lacking in self-awareness, a liar or a judge.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 30, 2013)




----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> Now that* is delicious ironing.
> 
> Because that's exactly how it works.


 
Only when viewed through the lens of your animus against anyone who dares contradict you.  Look at your reaction to Santino.  Your  Urban spectacles distort your vision so badly that you believe you can predict his behaviour.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 30, 2013)

> ="ViolentPanda, post: 12514976, member: 2660"]You believe you can predict his actions, because you expect them to conform to a set of "rules" that you yourself have laid down for how you measure behaviour.
> Ask any psychology graduate what that indicates.
> 
> Which, in reality, is the behaviour of a cunt*.
> ...


 
There's no such thing as "impartial" in human behaviour, there are only shades of partiality. This is why anyone who claims to be impartial is either lacking in self-awareness, a liar or a judge.[/quote]

I never had the Latin for the judging.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 30, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


>


 
I see that your bout of gifilis is active again.  You need stronger antibiotics!


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Only when viewed through the lens of your animus against anyone who dares contradict you.  Look at your reaction to Santino.  Your  Urban spectacles distort your vision so badly that you believe you can predict his behaviour.



Anyone can predict the predictable.



Kizmet said:


> I would be accused of further disrupting this thread when in actual fact all I did was explain what I thought Liam's thread was about.
> 
> So by answering so many of you the impression is cemented that I am the disruption.... ignoring the 7 or 8 other people calling me out.






bamalama said:


> This had the makings of an interestin thread before you stuck your tedious beak in,and your still incapable of taking the hint...


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmyarse .You seem to believe that whatever imaginary gallery it is that you think you're playin to, is incapable of going back a few pages and following your shit behaviour.As for following you around threads i"ve never come across ye before in a way that would remember you to me,i've just got a nose for pricks like yourself.Go away


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 30, 2013)

So it should be very easy to go back and point out such shit behaviour.

Do it, then. Show me something unfair I said without being provoked.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> So it should be very easy to go back and point out such shit behaviour.
> 
> Do it, then. Show me something unfair I said without being provoked.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 30, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I see that your bout of gifilis is active again. You need stronger antibiotics!









Kizmet - maybe you should take a step back and consider if maybe you should change your approach?


----------



## Clair De Lune (Aug 30, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Or mashed spud topped with grated cheese.
> 
> On toast.


 
Mmmm I love that


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

sugar on toast is where its at. With butter as well. Or whatever variant of 'it probably isn't but you can't taste the difference so fuck you'


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 30, 2013)

I like mashed potato and gravy sandwiches


----------



## TruXta (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> sugar on toast is where its at. With butter as well. Or whatever variant of 'it probably isn't but you can't taste the difference so fuck you'


Butter, sour cream and then sugar. Spread of my childhood. Also, butter and syrup. God knows how I still have most of the teeth left.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Marmalade is a thing of the past. 

Anyway, all you need for toast is butter and marmite. Why look any further?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Butter, sour cream and then sugar. Spread of my childhood. Also, butter and syrup. God knows how I still have most of the teeth left.


 

sour cream as well? my good god you animal


----------



## TruXta (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> sour cream as well? my good god you animal


Try it before you knock it.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

in a few years time sugar sandwiches will be a delicacy for the bubble crowd


----------



## steeplejack (Aug 30, 2013)

Fastidiousness, Self Denial And Thrift Are The Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Gears of the Revolutionary Motor. Forward to Full Communism At Maximum Revolutions (per minute)!

The Demand For "Tasty" Food Is a Fatal Fissure In The Revolutionary Consciousness...Death To Bourgeois Narcissism and Bonapartism!


----------



## TruXta (Aug 30, 2013)

steeplejack said:


> Fastidiousness, Self Denial And Thrift Are The Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Gears of the Revolutionary Motor. Forward to Full Communism At Maximum Revolutions (per minute)!
> 
> The Demand For "Tasty" Food Is a Fatal Fissure In The Revolutionary Consciousness...Death To Bourgeois Narcissism and Bonapartism!


I hope you do this for a living.


----------



## xenon (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Marmalade is a thing of the past.
> 
> Anyway, all you need for toast is butter and marmite. Why look any further?



Fish paste sandwhich and a bag of those 10p cheesy puff things only seen in corner hsops.

e2a

In danger of entering white dog turd teratry here...


----------



## smokedout (Aug 30, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> After being referred to a food bank.


 
but she did go to private school, is close friends with several local labour councillors and had an audience with ed milliband "his right hand mans business card as a point of contact" way back in 2012


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

xenon said:


> Fish paste sandwhich and a bag of those 10p cheesy puff things only seen in corner hsops.


Ah, you've just reminded me of sandwich spread. That came in jars so small you could barely get the knife into them.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ah, you've just reminded me of sandwich spread. That came in jars so small you could barely get the knife into them.


 
Not to mention your cock.


----------



## steeplejack (Aug 30, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I hope you do this for a living.


 
I have been out of work since November 1989, comrade.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but she did go to private school, is close friends with several local labour councillors and had an audience with ed milliband "his right hand mans business card as a point of contact" way back in 2012


None of that surprises me...mirrored kitchen tiles


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Sandwich spread. Salad cream. Back in the day, food told you what to do with it in its title. It did not, however, give you much of a clue what was actually in it.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

sandwich spread was mingin


----------



## steeplejack (Aug 30, 2013)

whatever else was in sandwich spread and salad cream, there was far too much vinegar. and e numbers.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry, no. Why shouldn't food be delicious? You're sounding like a puritan now.


I never said food shouldn't be delicious.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I never said food shouldn't be delicious.


No worries, Liam. I don't want to argue with you over that. After all, I've been reminiscing fondly about sandwich spread.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

In fairness you were not the only one who said this. Can't be arsed hoking around for the others, but IMO it was fairly lazing reading and quantum leap extrapolation. Welcome to Urban.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> This.
> 
> This is _exactly_ my initial response to anything like this - particularly when it is presented by a dick like J O or a mumsy posho.
> 
> ...


 
Ah now come on - You did say that Liam.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> sandwich spread was mingin


 
Toast toppers was nice though.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Kizmet said:


> Also, I've just noticed that, viewed in conjunction with the Jamie Oliver thread, it puts an interesting question to opinions like this:
> 
> _"we live in a society where rich freaks think that people should have to feed themselves and their families on fuck all. Where this is normalised rather than being seen as being an outrageous barbarism predicated on the privilege of these people who are offering their advice."_
> 
> ...


 
I wasn't laying any trap. I posted this on the JO thread...



LiamO said:


> So... other than the fact that so many of you dismiss everything Oliver says out of hand .... cos 'he's a cunt'.... or even a 'rich cunt'.... is there anything specific about what he says..... _this_ statement for example...
> 
> “The fascinating thing for me is that seven times out of 10, the poorest families in this country choose the most expensive way to hydrate and feed their families. The ready meals, the convenience foods.”
> 
> ...


 
and got this from butchersapron (and similar from others) in return...



butchersapron said:


> Oh god, shut up with the shop-worn _we need to __dialogue_ head teacher shit.
> 
> This is a thread about a cunt being a cunt. Not a useful social intervention predicated on PEOPLE SHUTTING DEBATE DOWN and people just wanting to so their social duty. When did you become so fucking boring liam?


 
Basically the consensus seemed to be that because JO was talking from a privileged, reactionary and judgemental position and was a cunt's cunt that there could be no rational discussion. it wasn't about what he said but how he said it, where he said it from etc.

So yes. You could say this thread has more than a little of 'what if somebody sound said it' (Jack, not me).

Also I am_ genuinely_ impressed with her actions and her behaviour, attitude and actions since. Beats frothing at the mouth any day in my book.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Basically the consensus seemed to be that because JO was talking from a privileged, reactionary and judgemental position and was a cunt's cunt that there could be no rational discussion. it wasn't about what he said but how he said it, where he said it from etc.


But it wasn't.  There was and is consistent criticism of what he said because of what it was that he said.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Ah now come on - You did say that Liam.


 

No. I really didn't Frances.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Practical advice on how to survive on far less than you should ever have to survive on. That's fine-ish. Problem is that, even with Jack, there will be things she has access to that others don't. And there is also the 'fuck it' factor. It is reasonable to say fuck it and eat chips sometimes. It is human to do so.

Also, by definition because she is someone who got it together to blog and be an activist on this, she didn't hit rock-bottom. The other factor is motivation, and that isn't always something that can come just from within - it is something that comes far more readily when you have external reinforcement.


----------



## xenon (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I never said food shouldn't be delicious.




You did ask why food should be delicious. Which is to imply, deliciousness is perhaps a surpless requirement. 

Food should at least be reasonably pleasant tasting and not noxious. These are the high standards I aspire to in most of my cooking.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> But it wasn't.  There was and is consistent criticism of what he said because of what it was that he said.


 

You must have been reading a different thread. You certainly did not respond to my post at the time or since. Anyway I don't want this thread further fucked up by a bunfight over a thread that people can easily fuck off and read for themselves.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

xenon said:


> You did ask why food should be delicious.


 

No. I did not. Show me where I asked that.

I asked a far more nuanced question.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> No. I really didn't Frances.


 
Well TBF, you didn't say food shouldn't have to be delicious, but you did say "why does food need to be delicious?" To me, that's a bit of a tenuous thing to split hairs over.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Well TBF, you didn't say food shouldn't have to be delicious, but you did say "why does food need to be delicious?" To me, that's a bit of a tenuous thing to split hairs over.


 
No I didn't. Look again


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Thing is, you're wrong about food being 'basically fuel'. With social animals like humans it is far more than that - it is one of the central means we have of cementing our relations with each other. It is far more than basically fuel, and in our relations with each other, food's deliciousness becomes a massive factor. Cooking a good meal for others is one of the greatest of pleasures - and that's no accident: we have evolved for this to be so.


----------



## xenon (Aug 30, 2013)

"
Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule."

Was that not you Liam?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

"Why does food need to be 'delicious' It's basically fuel ffs" Is what I've got you quoted as saying when I quoted you in post 235 of this thread - I don't want to be a prick though and just argue for the sake of it about the wording and that. What did you mean? Coz obviously we're at cross purposes here.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

I guess his point is he didn't say delicious, he said 'delicious'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

One vervet monkey is sat grooming another.

'Ow,' says the one being groomed, 'you're not doing this very gently.'

'It's ok, says the other, 'I got that flea.'

'Alright.' The monkey being groomed sidles away as quickly as she can. 'Not going to her again,' she thinks, as she looks around for someone to groom.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> One vervet monkey is sat grooming another.
> 
> 'Ow,' says the one being groomed, 'you're not doing this very gently.'
> 
> ...


 
You had a lob on typing that. Don't try to lie.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

I think that the whole tenet of jack has been completely undermined by who/what she is.She's another public school type with the right contacts/social capital to make a bit of a name for herself off the back of the current situation...a fine media career beckons.If anyone believes that the media accepts anything less than this type they're wrong.
They're a shower of nepotic fuckers who've spotted a gap in the market,monetising their "poverty".How many blogs are there out there by people in genuine schtoock that we never hear about.It's a game for her ffs.No better than multi millionaire jamie oliver imo.
Of course she hasn't become socially isolated or hit rock bottom.And she won't


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

I was about to write that i have a very fine grooming technique. But that sounds all wrong.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> It's a game for her ffs.No better than multi millionaire jamie oliver imo.
> Of course she hasn't become socially isolated or hit rock bottom.


Er, I don't think this is actually true.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think that the whole tenet of jack has been completely undermined by who/what she is.She's another public school type with the right contacts/social capital to make a bit of a name for herself off the back of the current situation...a fine media career beckons.If anyone believes that the media accepts anything less than this type they're wrong.
> They're a shower of nepotic fuckers who've spotted a gap in the market,monetising their "poverty".How many blogs are there out there by people in genuine schtoock that we never hear about.It's a game for her ffs.No better than multi millionaire jamie oliver imo.
> Of course she hasn't become socially isolated or hit rock bottom.


 
Too right. And you'll not see any blogs from people who can't even afford an internet connection. Fucking bloggers, I despises them the lot of em, me.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Er, I don't think this is actually true.


Sorry i edited a bit in after,butwhy don't you think this is true.I think this is fairly important in terms of the point LiamO is tryin to make

edit:sound i can tag people


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:
			
		

> sandwich spread was mingin



I love it on toast


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Er, I don't think this is actually true.


 
What bit's not true? If she'd hit rock bottom she'd have sold her puter. And her twat. Trumpets like that don't know what rock bottom is.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> I never said food shouldn't be delicious.



Did you see my quotes? 
Yesterday you were saying "I didn't say why should food be delicious" when you obviously did, as I quoted.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Of course she hasn't become socially isolated or hit rock bottom.And she won't


 
I wouldn't want to make too many assumptions about her. That she didn't hit rock bottom is clear from what she's done since. But the harsh truth that we don't hear from those who do hit rock bottom doesn't make what she's doing invalid. That would be particularly the case if she herself stressed this. I dont' know enough about her to say.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I love it on toast


 
Toast Toppers FTW.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I love it on toast


Peasant


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> You must have been reading a different thread. You certainly did not respond to my post at the time or since. Anyway I don't want this thread further fucked up by a bunfight over a thread that people can easily fuck off and read for themselves.



I did respond at the time and you have ignored it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Sorry i edited a bit in after,butwhy don't you think this is true.I think this is fairly important in terms of the point LiamO is tryin to make
> 
> edit:sound i can tag people


I don't see what would make you think any of it was true. Well, the "no better" part is opinion, but I have no idea why you would say it was a game for her, and that she was never socially isolated or hit rock bottom.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> What bit's not true? If she'd hit rock bottom she'd have sold her puter. And her twat. Trumpets like that don't know what rock bottom is.


And her big telly?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I wouldn't want to make too many assumptions about her. That she didn't hit rock bottom is clear from what she's done since. But the harsh truth that we don't hear from those who do hit rock bottom doesn't make what she's doing invalid. That would be particularly the case if she herself stressed this. I dont' know enough about her to say.


I'm not prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt...convince us lbj.Essentially I see no difference between her and say laurie wotsherface.Also i think it's important with regards the op


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think that the whole tenet of jack has been completely undermined by who/what she is.She's another public school type with the right contacts/social capital to make a bit of a name for herself off the back of the current situation...a fine media career beckons.If anyone believes that the media accepts anything less than this type they're wrong.
> They're a shower of nepotic fuckers who've spotted a gap in the market,monetising their "poverty".How many blogs are there out there by people in genuine schtoock that we never hear about.It's a game for her ffs.No better than multi millionaire jamie oliver imo.
> Of course she hasn't become socially isolated or hit rock bottom.And she won't


 
Are you sure?

i thought she was from a working class background?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> I guess his point is he didn't say delicious, he said 'delicious'.


 

This. the '...' were because 'delicious' is 

a) a loaded, deeply subjective word - for example just look at the emotionally-laden reminiscences of childhood comfort foods above (mosyt of which would get a resounding yeeuch from kids of today.

b) a moveable feast - what was 'delicious' 30 years ago might be considered staid now

c) a superlative - I never said food shouldn't be tasty, did I? 

d) by it's nature 'delicious' needs to be occasional... otherwise the word loses it's use as a superlative

Perhaps saying " Why should _all_ food be 'delicious'?" might have been a wiser choice of words. But nobody asked for clarification, did they? They just leapt right on in calling me a 'joyless fucker', 'puritan', 'stalinist' etc etc.  Frankly I could not be arsed 'defending' a position some people had chosen to ascribe to me, for reasons best known to themselves...  when I had said no such thing. Eg the nonsense about underpants? WTF? That was just too ridiulous IMO


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> And her big telly?


 
Not where I'm coming from at all. And my telly's probably bigger than hers. Stroll on though, nice diversion.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> Did you see my quotes?
> Yesterday you were saying "I didn't say why should food be delicious" when you obviously did, as I quoted.


 

oh ffs. No I did not.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> And her twat.


Oh and that's fucking hilarious, well done.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> Are you sure?
> 
> i thought she was from a working class background?


 

NO. SHE'S A POSH CUNT

Now shuddup and put the kettle on


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

my old housemate once said that she didn't like foods with strong flavours, about the only thing she would eat was cheese and tomato pizza, plain pasta and tomato soup and if she was feeling adventurous the odd apple lol


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I don't see what would make you think any of it was true. Well, the "no better" part is opinion, but I have no idea why you would say it was a game for her, and that she was never socially isolated or hit rock bottom.


This is all tied in with the op and the juxtaposition of her situation with a mate of @ weepiper from the multi millionaire jamie oliver thread,which LiamO said inspired this thread.I think we both might have different ideas of what social isolation and rock bottom means


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

A quick google and it seems that Jack Monroe is from Southend, went to a grammar school, worked in a call centre.  That doesn't sound like public school elite to me?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> This. the '...' were because 'delicious' is
> 
> a) a loaded, deeply subjective word - for example just look at the emotionally-laden reminiscences of childhood comfort foods above (mosyt of which would get a resounding yeeuch from kids of today.
> 
> ...


 
Nice one for explaining. I can more see where you're at now.

Talk of underpants is never nonsense though.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm not prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt...convince us lbj.Essentially I see no difference between her and say laurie wotsherface.Also i think it's important with regards the op


 

Fair play to you Bama. 

I'll let someone else answer your post. But this is a brilliant example of how determined we can all be to keep such a firm grasp of our manacles. You're doing _exactly_ what happened on the last thread (and every fucking thread on Urban)... just scouring things looking for something, anything, that we can magnify to angrily dismiss the messenger. 

I say this as someone who has spent most of my life doing likewise. But I'm tired of it now.

It's mostly about perception AFAICS as I saiod in the Op ... which seems to have registered with very few.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm not prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt...convince us lbj.Essentially I see no difference between her and say laurie wotsherface.Also i think it's important with regards the op


ok. I see no reason to doubt that she was in that position, with her benefits fucked and nowhere to turn. It does seem that this was her position and she is writing about what she did in that position. I don't know how long it lasted or what other options were available to her.

I can speak about my own position years ago when I was rather fucked. I had the option of going to my parents for help. They would have helped me - I could simply have turned up at their door and they would have taken me in, but for me at that time, taking that option would have meant failure. The fact that I had that option meant I hadn't in any sense hit rock-bottom, though, as there was an escape there for me if I wanted it, however much I didn't want to use it at the time. I don't know if her position was similar - one of pride stopping her from asking for help from those she knew that could give it.

But even if it was only pride stopping her from seeking help where that help existed, she still went through this. I have no problem with her writing about it, and I don't know to what extent she acknowledges that others don't have the options that she had to get herself out of that position.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> A quick google and it seems that Jack Monroe is from Southend, went to a grammar school, worked in a call centre.  That doesn't sound like public school elite to me?


And apparently had to sell off all her stuff to pay bills. (But was apparently part of the media elite even then, getting a story in the Essex Enquirer!)


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Oh and that's fucking hilarious, well done.


 
I wasn't trying to be funny. Rock bottom (AFAIC) is having to sell yourself. No joke at all. Obviously you've never been there and you don't know anyone who has. Honest to god though, the last thing I was trying to do was take the piss.  I was just saying, Jack clearly hasn't hit the rocky bottom. Or even come anywhere near.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> A quick google and it seems that Jack Monroe is from Southend, went to a grammar school, worked in a call centre. That doesn't sound like public school elite to me?


She's called jack,has suspiciously expensive and tasteless,hipsteryish tattoo sleeves,she's well dictioned ,has nice big teeth,a nice kitchen with mirrored tiles,and i immediately thought networked media type soon as i saw her ...that's good enough for me


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> This is all tied in with the op and the juxtaposition of her situation with a mate of @ weepipers from the multi millionaire jamie oliver thread,which LiamO said inspired this thread.I think we both might have different ideas of what social isolation and rock bottom means


 
'Social isolation' and 'rock bottom' are themselves completely subjective experiences. 

Victor Frankl used to say 'misery has it's own level'. He meant that someone struggling to survive one more day in Auschwitz and a posh teenager who thinks she is 'fat' cos she gained two pound can have an equal (and very real) sense of misery. And Frankl had tha history to be able to say these things with a little authority.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

So what are we saying? Unless you're toothless, illiterate and prostituting yourself your opinions on poverty don't count?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> So what are we saying? Unless you're toothless, illiterate and prostituting yourself your opinions on poverty don't count?


It does get a bit silly. As long as what she writes is as honest an account as she can give of what she went through, that's good enough for me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

I'm reminded of Primo Levi. Sorry to go all Godwin's, but those who saw the worst of Auschwitz never came back to tell their story. That doesn't invalidate Levi's story, though.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

i dont think her and LP are in the same league at all.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> So what are we saying? Unless you're toothless, illiterate and prostituting yourself your opinions on poverty don't count?


I think it's just all gone stupid tbh.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> 'Social isolation' and 'rock bottom' are themselves completely subjective experiences.
> 
> Victor Frankl used to say 'misery has it's own level'. He meant that someone struggling to survive one more day in Auschwitz and a posh teenager who thinks she is 'fat' cos she gained two pound can have an equal (and very real) sense of misery. And Frankl had tha history to be able to say these things with a little authority.


 
and people can end up killing themselves because they think they're fat and starving themselves to death.

im a bit uncomfortable trying to "compare" the two things tho.


----------



## fuck seals (Aug 30, 2013)

it's bizarre.  none of us can comment with our privileged access to u75/ internet.  and our mice.  and our keyboards.  and our teeth.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i dont think her and LP are in the same league at all.


I don't think so either.  She was in a position lots of people find themselves in (yes, some single mothers on benefits went to school!  Some even went to university!), she wrote a blog, and now she has had some minor success - I don't begrudge her that.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Fair play to you Bama.
> 
> I'll let someone else answer your post. But this is a brilliant example of how determined we can all be to keep such a firm grasp of our manacles. You're doing _exactly_ what happened on the last thread (and every fucking thread on Urban)... just scouring things looking for something, anything, that we can magnify to angrily dismiss the messenger.
> 
> ...


I'm not dismissing the messenger liam i'm calling her a fraud,and a message from a fraud is going to be totally ignored by the target audience.Maybe i've got this wrong ,but you seem to be saying that this womans attitude offers us an example of the way forward.Well that's dead on if you're her,not if your wee pipers workmate or the millions of other people who don't have her contacts/education/social capital.But more importantly than all these ,access to money to give her the breathin space to ponce about preaching to people who want,need more,not the ability to live on less,it's not a fuckin game for some of us,it's a way of life


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

fuck seals said:


> it's bizarre. none of us can comment with our privileged access to u75/ internet. and our mice. and our keyboards. and our teeth.


Yep. Comparing Jack to Oliver is ridiculous.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

i think what people are saying is that she didn't have that tho ...


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm not dismissing the messenger liam i'm calling her a fraud,and a message from a fraud is going to be totally ignored by the target audience.Maybe i've got this wrong ,but you seem to be saying that this womans attitude offers us an example of the way forward.Well that's dead on if you're her,not if your wee pipers workmate or the millions of other people who don't have her contacts/education/social capital.But more importantly than all these ,access to money to give her the breathin space to ponce about preaching to people who want,need more,not the ability to live on less,it's not a fuckin game for some of us,it's a way of life


In what way a fraud?  Has she presented herself as something she is not?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i think what people are saying is that she didn't have that tho ...


She's not some poverty tourist from what I can gather. She experienced the nightmare that is housing benefit gone wrong, which is something I can relate to, and even with last resort options to go to, that's bloody horrible.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> So what are we saying? Unless you're toothless, illiterate and prostituting yourself your opinions on poverty don't count?


 
No. Or maybe yeah, thinking about it - Though I dunno where the toothless came from. But yeah, I would take someone's opinion of poverty who's lived on the streets & had to do things they'd rather not do just to get by a bit more seriously than some dickhead recipe blogger. All I was saying originally though, is that Jack hasn't come close to rock B. Which she hasn't. Is anyone going to seriously state the case that she has?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 30, 2013)

fuck seals said:


> it's bizarre. none of us can comment with our privileged access to u75/ internet. and our mice. and our keyboards. and our teeth.


 
Check your internet privilege!


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

By the way for the slow learners the stuff about tats and teeth was a joke...y'see?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm reminded of Primo Levi. Sorry to go all Godwin's, but those who saw the worst of Auschwitz never came back to tell their story. That doesn't invalidate Levi's story, though.


 

Really?

That is possibly the biggest load of shite you have ever posted - which is saying something. You can't really comment with autority on Auschwitz unless you were actually murdered there? Fuck me, The Life of Brian would not get a look in.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No. Or maybe yeah, thinking about it - Though I dunno where the toothless came from. But yeah, I would take someone's opinion of poverty who's lived on the streets & had to do things they'd rather not do just to get by a bit more seriously than some dickhead recipe blogger. All I was saying originally though, is that Jack hasn't come close to rock B. Which she hasn't. Is anyone going to seriously state the case that she has?


I agree with you that she hasn't. But that doesn't mean that what she has to say about the place she did sink to is invalid or not worth saying.

My only proviso is to say 'as long as she acknowledges this', but from what I've read, she kind of does. She is trying to steer the debate away from Oliver's moralising.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No. Or maybe yeah, thinking about it - Though I dunno where the toothless came from. But yeah, I would take someone's opinion of poverty who's lived on the streets & had to do things they'd rather not do just to get by a bit more seriously than some dickhead recipe blogger. All I was saying originally though, is that Jack hasn't come close to rock B. Which she hasn't. Is anyone going to seriously state the case that she has?


Has anyone said she has?  I mean, she probably had a pretty shit time with benefit fuck-ups and having to go to a food bank and feeding her son for a tenner a week, a worse time than a lot of people have experienced, but because she wasn't on the streets and she blogged about recipes her opinions are invalid?


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> oh ffs. No I did not.



I made the appropriate quotes yesterday, all in one post.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> No. Or maybe yeah, thinking about it - Though I dunno where the toothless came from. But yeah, I would take someone's opinion of poverty who's lived on the streets & had to do things they'd rather not do just to get by a bit more seriously than some dickhead recipe blogger. All I was saying originally though, is that Jack hasn't come close to rock B. Which she hasn't. Is anyone going to seriously state the case that she has?


 
Like I said it's all _very_ subjective


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

ian kershaw needs to check his privilege.if he wasn't personally killed by nazis it doesn't count

not sure where all the ww2 stuff is coming from though


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Really?
> 
> That is possibly the biggest load of shite you have ever posted - which is saying something. You can't really comment with autority on Auschwitz unless you were actually murdered there. Fuck me, The Life of Brian would not get a look in.


It is what Levi himself said. And wrestled with for his whole life. Survivor guilt - the best of us are dead.  I was explicitly saying that it isn't the case, that Levi's story is valid.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> Has anyone said she has? I mean, she probably had a pretty shit time with benefit fuck-ups and having to go to a food bank and feeding her son for a tenner a week, a worse time than a lot of people have experienced, but because she wasn't on the streets and she blogged about recipes her opinions are invalid?


 
shes probably had a lot worse time than a lot of people posting here

(thats not to invalidate any of the criticisms of what her stuff may be used for/and is)


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Look i think some are missing the point here...she doesn't have to do it,she won't starve, she won't be made homeless, she won't lose her kids,because she has social capital and access to resources,mates in the upper echelons of the labour party and the guardian.The stuff about relativity of rock bottom blah blah is irrelevant in my opinion,this is not philosophy,the situation we're in now is real for millions of people and it's gonna get worse...but not for the bould jack


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> shes probably had a lot worse time than a lot of people posting here


Yep. Being stuck in a benefits fuck-up nightmare with a kid. 

And that she has turned this into something positive with her blog. Well that's admirable, surely.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i dont think her and LP are in the same league at all.


Playin the same game though


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Look i think some are missing the point here...she doesn't have to do it,she won't starve, she won't be made homeless, she won't lose her kids,because has social capital and access to resources,mates in the upper echelons of the labour party and the guardian.The stuff about relativity of rock bottom blah blah is irrelevant in my opinion,this is not philosophy,the situation we're in now is real for millions of people and it's gonna get worse...but not for the bould jack


She has a job and media exposure and connections _now_.

Are you Jamie Oliver?


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Look i think some are missing the point here...she doesn't have to do it,she won't starve, she won't be made homeless, she won't lose her kids,because has social capital and access to resources,mates in the upper echelons of the labour party and the guardian.The stuff about relativity of rock bottom blah blah is irrelevant in my opinion,this is not philosophy,the situation we're in now is real for millions of people and it's gonna get worse...but not for the bould jack


When she started her blog, she wasn't known to anyone though?  So at the point where she was actually living on a tenner a week, she did have to.

Now, due to the success of her blog she has a job and a book deal and probably isn't worrying so much about money.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> Has anyone said she has? I mean, she probably had a pretty shit time with benefit fuck-ups and having to go to a food bank and feeding her son for a tenner a week, a worse time than a lot of people have experienced, but because she wasn't on the streets and she blogged about recipes *her opinions are invalid?*


 
Her opinions are invalid if her experience of what she reckons is poverty is being presented as how it actually is.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm not dismissing the messenger liam i'm calling her a fraud,and a message from a fraud is going to be totally ignored by the target audience.Maybe i've got this wrong ,but you seem to be saying that this womans attitude offers us an example of the way forward.Well that's dead on if you're her,not if your wee pipers workmate or the millions of other people who don't have her contacts/education/social capital.But more importantly than all these ,access to money to give her the breathin space to ponce about preaching to people who want,need more,not the ability to live on less,it's not a fuckin game for some of us,it's a way of life


 

On what evidence are you calling her a fraud? None bar your (understandable) prejudice and posh radar.

Seems it was a way of life for her too.

OK. I'll give you an example closer to home. I could not count on one hand the number of ex-blanketmen I have spoken too (and I haven't spoken to that many altogether) who referred to their time on the blanket as the best days of their lives. Because despite the depravation, cruelty, torture beatings and general inhumanity they had a sense of purpose, a bond of kinship that no screw or govt could break. Lots of them thrived in those extreme conditions... but many struggled to adjust when they got out... and lived in relative luxury compared to a half-starved existence in a maggotty, shit-filled cell... but no longer had that sense of purpose/bond.

It's all relative, all _very_ subjective.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Her opinions are invalid if her experience of what she reckons is poverty is being presented as how it actually is.


I don't understand this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Playin the same game though


Not necessarily. Even if she had some kind of social capital that made this possible, so what? We shouldn't use that contact we happen to have to get ourselves heard when we think what we have to say is worth saying?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Playin the same game though


In what way?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> ian kershaw needs to check his privilege.if he wasn't personally killed by nazis it doesn't count
> 
> not sure where all the ww2 stuff is coming from though


 

I started it by quoting Frankl. I figured nobody would call him a dilletante.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is what Levi himself said. And wrestled with for his whole life. Survivor guilt - the best of us are dead. I was explicitly saying that it isn't the case, that Levi's story is valid.


 

In that case I apologise unreservedly for misreading your (easily misread) post


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> I don't understand this.


 
I mean she knows nowt - She's not experienced poverty and if wankers who read her blog think that's how it is then they're getting a false picture. Which, IMO, makes Jack part of the problem. She does _not_ know how it is.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 30, 2013)

Just passing through tonight and not read the stuff since yesterday, just the last few posts - i'll get back to the others directed at me tmw. I wonder how much social capital going to state school and leaving at 16 then working in a fish and chip shop then a call centre gets you? Mad load of posts on here from some tonight.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> Did you see my quotes?
> Yesterday you were saying "I didn't say why should food be delicious" when you obviously did, as I quoted.


 

no. I didn't.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I mean she knows nowt - She's not experienced poverty and if wankers who read her blog think that's how it is then they're getting a false picture. Which, IMO, makes Jack part of the problem. She does _not_ know how it is.


I would describe surviving on benefits as poverty tbh.  They are set at subsistence level, if that.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I made the appropriate quotes yesterday, all in one post.


 

read my post again


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Just passing through tonight and not read the stuff since yesterday, just the last few posts - i'll get back to the others directed at me tmw. I wonder how much capital going to state school and leaving at 16 then working in a fish and chip shop then a call centre gets you? Mad load of posts on here from some tonight.


But it was a grammar school!  The posh cow.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> On what evidence are you calling her a fraud? None bar your (understandable) prejudice and posh radar.
> 
> Seems it was a way of life for her too.
> 
> ...


You have'nt told me anything i don't already know here liam and this is a huge fuckin stretch mate,huge,but i really don't have the time typing skills to go into why i almost find this offensive with regards to this subject.Why should we follow the example of someone who comes from her background with regards to this?that's what i'm interested in,how can weepipers workmate replicate this as a way of surviving the onslaught on their living standards,and why should they?No hippy shit now...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> In that case I apologise unreservedly for misreading your (easily misread) post


It's alright. Looking back, the post contains assumptions from me that you have read what I have read by Levi. It is very sad. His final book, The Drowned and the Saved, goes into it in more detail than any of his previous books did. His previous books had all attempted to maintain a positive attitude towards being alive, even if you've been in Aushwitz. His final book is different. It presents the contradictions that Levi had never been able to resolve. He imagines a discussion with Jean Amery, but in that imagined discussion, he appears more persuaded by Amery's arguments than his own.  

/Godwin's derail. As you were.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I did respond at the time and you have ignored it.


 

The post you quoted was at FridgeMagnet.

I know. I answered them generally (and as much as I intend to) earlier this evening


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You have'nt told me anything i don't already know here liam and this is a huge fuckin stretch mate,huge,but i really don't have the time typing skills to go into why i almost find this offensive with regards to this subject.Why should we follow the example of someone who comes from her background with regards to this?that's what i'm interested in,how can weepipers workmate replicate this as a way of surviving the onslaught on their living standards,and why should they?No hippy shit now...


Her grammar school/chip shop/call centre background?


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You have'nt told me anything i don't already know here liam and this is a huge fuckin stretch mate,huge,but i really don't have the time typing skills to go into why i almost find this offensive with regards to this subject.Why should we follow the example of someone who comes from her background with regards to this?that's what i'm interested in,how can weepipers workmate replicate this as a way of surviving the onslaught on their living standards,and why should they?No hippy shit now...


What about her background do you object to so much?

I don't think even she is saying anyone *should* have to survive on pennies per meal.


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:
			
		

> no. I didn't.



Why don't you tell us what you did say, rather than repeatedly saying what you didn't? 

I'm up for this conversation but I (and admittedly it's probably my fault) am confused about the OP and what is happening re what you did or didn't say.

Eta: I've just looked back, I didn't quote FM. I can't see the post number as I'm on my phone. 

Can someone find my post (last page dated 29th I think) where I quoted what Liam said he didn't say and what he did?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You have'nt told me anything i don't already know here liam and this is a huge fuckin stretch mate,huge,but i really don't have the time typing skills to go into why i almost find this offensive with regards to this subject.Why should we follow the example of someone who comes from her background with regards to this?that's what i'm interested in,how can weepipers workmate replicate this as a way of surviving the onslaught on their living standards,and why should they?No hippy shit now...


 
I'm off to cuddle the kids.  Let's discuss this another time in a less emotionally charged atmosphere. And you can't use 'No hippy shit now' where Frankl is concerned


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Her grammar school/chip shop/call centre background?


You're bein a bit defensive here fridge ,i've laid my case out ,albeit in a rush...she a mate of yours?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> What about her background do you object to so much?
> 
> I don't think even she is saying anyone *should* have to survive on pennies per meal.


 

Indeed. She ever specifically _isn't_ saying anything of the kind.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're bein a bit defensive here fridge ,i've laid my case out ,albeit in a rush...she a mate of yours?


You keep talking about her background and social capital, but you haven't expanded on what you think is the problem with it?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'm off to cuddle the kids. Let's discuss this another time in a less emotionally charged atmosphere. And you can't use 'No hippy shit now' where Frankl is concerned


Thats you bein a cheeky cunt then


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're bein a bit defensive here fridge ,i've laid my case out ,albeit in a rush...she a mate of yours?


What is her background according to you?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

kittyP said:


> Why don't you tell us what you did say, rather than repeatedly saying what you didn't?
> 
> I'm up for this conversation but I (and admittedly it's probably my fault) am confused about the OP and what is happening re what you did or didn't say.


 

tomorrow will have to do. Sorry Kitty.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> What is her background according to you?


Have you read the thread,if not please do so...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're bein a bit defensive here fridge ,i've laid my case out ,albeit in a rush...she a mate of yours?


I think you overstated your case, though. My cack-handed reference to Primo Levi was intended to illustrate that. If what she says is sincere, and I have no reason to doubt that it is, then what else is there to say? She went through what she says she went through.

That's really as far from Jamie Oliver as you can get.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> I would describe surviving on benefits as poverty tbh. They are set at subsistence level, if that.


 
Living on benefits as a short(ish) term thing though and you've got parents to help you etc, is a lot different from living on benefits when your parents are also on benefits & just getting full payments without loans & fines etc being taken out is a thing to aspire to/dream about. In other words having no safety net whatsoever - That's being poor, when much as she'd like to, your mams in no position to help you, so you really have got no one to depend on except yourself. Like if that was Jack's gig she'd piss about doing a recipe blog. Don't think so.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think you overstated your case, though. My cack-handed reference to Primo Levi was intended to illustrate that. If what she says is sincere, and I have no reason to doubt that it is, then what else is there to say? She went through what she says she went through.
> 
> That's really as far from Jamie Oliver as you can get.


You're missing the point lbj


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Have you read the thread,if not please do so...


So you're saying that somebody who went to grammar school, did some low-paid jobs and had to sell her stuff (because that's what's on the thread) can't say anything here.

Don't you think that's an _odd_ thing to say?


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Living on benefits as a short(ish) term thing though and you've got parents to help you etc, is a lot different from living on benefits when your parents are also on benefits & just getting full payments without loans & fines etc being taken out is a thing to aspire to/dream about. In other words having no safety net whatsoever - That's being poor, when much as she'd like to, your mams in no position to help you, so you really have got no one to depend on except yourself. Like if that was Jack's gig she'd piss about doing a recipe blog. Don't think so.


So the very fact that she is writing a blog means she isn't genuinely poor?  I guess there are no genuinely poor people posting on urban either then, or involved in any kind of community/political activism?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Living on benefits as a short(ish) term thing though and you've got parents to help you etc, is a lot different from living on benefits when your parents are also on benefits & just getting full payments without loans & fines etc being taken out is a thing to aspire to/dream about. In other words having no safety net whatsoever - That's being poor, when much as she'd like to, your mams in no position to help you, so you really have got no one to depend on except yourself. Like if that was Jack's gig she'd piss about doing a recipe blog. Don't think so.


 
Oi dow beeloive thad oi am conseeeederabblaaayy pooo-rah than yooow


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Living on benefits as a short(ish) term thing though and you've got parents to help you etc, is a lot different from living on benefits when your parents are also on benefits & just getting full payments without loans & fines etc being taken out is a thing to aspire to/dream about.


This is very true. And that's why I'm possibly sceptical about the 'fuck it' factor. If you see no possible future except a continuation of what you have now, that does change your motivation.

But where has she said otherwise? I don't know - I'd have to read her blog more thoroughly.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> So the very fact that she is writing a blog means she isn't genuinely poor? I guess there are no genuinely poor people posting on urban either then, or involved in any kind of community/political activism?


How many do you know in her position,and why is she in it?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> So the very fact that she is writing a blog means she isn't genuinely poor? * I guess there are no genuinely poor people posting on urban either then*, or involved in any kind of community/political activism?


 
Why guess that, I never said it anyway.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're missing the point lbj


How? I acknowledge that she didn't reach the point of hopelessness. But it's a caution of despair to say that if you haven't hit the point of hopelessness you can't talk about these things.

The only person with literally no social capital is the drunk on a park bench who can't remember who he is.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> So you're saying that somebody who went to grammar school, did some low-paid jobs and had to sell her stuff (because that's what's on the thread) can't say anything here.
> 
> Don't you think that's an _odd_ thing to say?


I don't think i've said anything "odd" i do think you're refusing to engage properly with what i am sayin and i've explained it a couple of times.Specifically what is it you don't understand?
edit:fwiw i went to a grammar school in the six counties


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Oi dow beeloive thad oi am conseeeederabblaaayy pooo-rah than yooow


 
Nah chief, I'm richer than you - I wear all nice claires and that. You'd be ashamed to be in my company.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Why guess that, I never said it anyway.


You said she's not genuinely poor, because she blogs.  I assume you would count posting on a message board as a sign someone isn't genuinely poor too?  If not, please explain which activities genuinely poor people do not engage in.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I don't think i've said anything "odd" i do think you're refusing to engage properly with what i am sayin and i've explained it a couple of times.Specifically what is it you don't understand?


What is her background according to you?


----------



## fuck seals (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Living on benefits as a short(ish) term thing though and you've got parents to help you etc, is a lot different from living on benefits when your parents are also on benefits & just getting full payments without loans & fines etc being taken out is a thing to aspire to/dream about. In other words having no safety net whatsoever - That's being poor, when much as she'd like to, your mams in no position to help you, so you really have got no one to depend on except yourself. Like if that was Jack's gig she'd piss about doing a recipe blog. Don't think so.


 


the world is held up by a turtle.  & it's turtles all the way down.  & only the turtle at the bottom can comment on what it's like to have a turtle on it's back.

this reductio ad absurdum position silences the majority of valid opinions, and is not worthy of your usually insightful posts.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> How many do you know in her position,and why is she in it?


You want me to tell you how many single mums currently or formerly on benefits I know, and why they are on benefits?  Or single?  Or both?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> What is her background according to you?


Still refusing to engage,still beating the same drum...i cant deal with wilful obstruction...foul


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> You want me to tell you how many single mums currently or formerly on benefits I know, and why they are on benefits? Or single? Or both?


 
Her position as a public representative of that demographic in the media


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Still refusing to engage,still beating the same drum...i cant deal with wilful obstruction...foul


Ok, different tack. If what she says happened to her in that period of her life is genuine, and that she felt forced to feed herself and her child on a tenner a week, and sell her stuff and the rest of it, what about her blog is not genuine or worthwhile?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> You said she's not genuinely poor, because she blogs. I assume you would count posting on a message board as a sign someone isn't genuinely poor too? If not, please explain which activities genuinely poor people do not engage in.


You're missing the point thora


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Her position as a public representative of that demographic in the media


I don't know any single mums on benefits who wrote a successful blog, no.  In fact I don't know anyone who wrote a successful blog.

Do you know something about this woman that the rest of us don't?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ok, different tack. If what she says happened to her in that period of her life is genuine, and that she felt forced to feed herself and her child on a tenner a week, and sell her stuff and the rest of it, what about her blog is not genuine or worthwhile?


You're missing the point lbj


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Strange how no one seems to know what your point is?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Still refusing to engage,still beating the same drum...i cant deal with wilful obstruction...foul


What is her background?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How? I acknowledge that she didn't reach the point of hopelessness. *But it's a caution of despair to say that if you haven't hit the point of hopelessness you can't talk about these things.*
> 
> The only person with literally no social capital is the drunk on a park bench who can't remember who he is.


 
Nah, I'm not saying it's not alright for her to talk about these things - But don't talk about them _as though you know them,_ Jack. That's what I'm trying (probably not very articulately) to say - This daft blog of hers is not what poverty looks like in the UK in the 21st century. That's what I'm saying.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Nah, I'm not saying it's not alright for her to talk about these things - But don't talk about them _as though you know them,_ Jack. That's what I'm trying (probably not very articulately) to say - This daft blog of hers is not what poverty looks like in the UK in the 21st century. That's what I'm saying.


But what makes you say that?  You're assuming that her parents are supporting her, and that blogging somehow means she isn't really poor, but I'm not sure what you're basing that on?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're missing the point lbj


Ok. Hypothetical. She was in the position she was in, but had access to a mate's computer, which she used while her mate babysat for her to give her a break. She used that time to start a blog, and that blog got noticed - as can happen with blogs - and she was contacted by a newspaper for an interview. She says yes, and everything that's happened since is a result of that.

If something like that happened, then yes, clearly she had the social capital of a friend with a computer who was prepared to babysit for her. It's not the most dramatic social capital in the world. It doesn't invalidate what she has to say.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> What is her background?


Ban bang


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> But what makes you say that? You're assuming that her parents are supporting her, and that blogging somehow means she isn't really poor, but I'm not sure what you're basing that on?


Why are you assuming they're not?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Why are you assuming they're not?


 
Because they aren't - which is all over the stories and interviews that she has done. Unless you're accusing her of straight up lying?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ok. Hypothetical. She was in the position she was in, but had access to a mate's computer, which she used while her mate babysat for her to give her a break. She used that time to start a blog, and that blog got noticed - as can happen with blogs - and she was contacted by a newspaper for an interview. She says yes, and everything that's happened since is a result of that.
> 
> If something like that happened, then yes, clearly she had the social capital of a friend with a computer who was prepared to babysit for her. It's not the most dramatic social capital in the world. It doesn't invalidate what she has to say.


You're still missing the point...what is social capital,where does it come from,how does it replicate itself,how is it used...


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

It's just annoying when people get like this.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> But what makes you say that? You're assuming that her parents are supporting her, and that *blogging somehow means she isn't really poor,* but I'm not sure what you're basing that on?


 
Well, when I was struggling, the last thing I'd have thought of doing was write a blog about it. She's a dick, it's obvious from every word she types, she just is.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Because they aren't - which is all over the stories and interviews that she has done. Unless you're accusing her of straight up lying?


Not yet...i've been tied up here for a wee while,i should probably go and do some sniffin around...


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Why are you assuming they're not?


I have no idea if they are or not.  They obviously aren't providing loads of support if she was buying £10 a week of food, had rent arrears and had to sell her stuff.  Even if they are giving her support - what does that prove?  Poor families support each other too.  I live in an area where a high percentage of people are on benefits, and I see lots of grandparents babysitting, people moving back in with their parents, bringing shopping round to their nan.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's just annoying when people get like this.


Bang bang


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's just annoying when people get like this.


 
No argument _again._


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're still missing the point...what is social capital,where does it come from,how does it replicate itself,how is it used...


Social capital can range from the old school tie getting you a job in the city to having a network of support that gives you a few hours relief from looking after your child every week.

At every level it reproduces itself because without it, you're less likely (often hugely unlikely) to achieve the things you can achieve with it.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think that the whole tenet of jack has been completely undermined by who/what she is.She's another public school type with the right contacts/social capital to make a bit of a name for herself off the back of the current situation...a fine media career beckons.If anyone believes that the media accepts anything less than this type they're wrong.
> They're a shower of nepotic fuckers who've spotted a gap in the market,monetising their "poverty".How many blogs are there out there by people in genuine schtoock that we never hear about.It's a game for her ffs.No better than multi millionaire jamie oliver imo.
> Of course she hasn't become socially isolated or hit rock bottom.And she won't


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Well, when I was struggling, the last thing I'd have thought of doing was write a blog about it. She's a dick, it's obvious from every word she types, she just is.


You didn't think of something, so since she did she's a dick?

She blogged about cooking.  Lots of people blog about cooking.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but she did go to private school, is close friends with several local labour councillors and had an audience with ed milliband "his right hand mans business card as a point of contact" way back in 2012


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> You didn't think of something, so since she did she's a dick?
> 
> She blogged about cooking. Lots of people blog about cooking.


 
Aw that's not it - _At all_. It's not about what I thought of or what she thought of, she's a dick coz she blogs about poverty whilst clearly having no idea.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Well, when I was struggling, the last thing I'd have thought of doing was write a blog about it. She's a dick, it's obvious from every word she types, she just is.


 
Maybe the blog is what keeps her going? Maybe she was so angry/upset/fed up she had to articulate it? And a blog is a good way of doing it.

It wasn't what you would do, it might not be what I would do but that's personal preference, it doesn't mean she is in the wrong


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but she did go to private school, is close friends with several local labour councillors and had an audience with ed milliband "his right hand mans business card as a point of contact" way back in 2012


 
im not saying this isn't true but is there a link?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Maybe the blog is what keeps her going? Maybe she was so angry/upset/fed up she had to articulate it? And a blog is a good way of doing it.
> 
> It wasn't what you would do, it might not be what I would do but that's personal preference, it doesn't mean she is in the wrong


Exactly. She got an idea into her head and followed through with it. That takes motivation, which I agree is not something that comes in isolation, but it's silly to make too many assumptions about her just because she was motivated.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Maybe the blog is what keeps her going? Maybe she was so angry/upset/fed up she had to articulate it? And a blog is a good way of doing it.
> 
> It wasn't what you would do, it might not be what I would do but that's personal preference, it doesn't mean she is in the wrong


 
I'm not saying she's in the wrong for doing her blog - I'm saying the content of her blog shows that she knows a resounding fuck all about what it is to be poor in the UK in 2013.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Aw that's not it - _At all_. It's not about what I thought of or what she thought of, she's a dick coz she blogs about poverty whilst clearly having no idea.


You keep saying she has no idea, but I can't work out why you think that.  Maybe you are defining poverty in a more extreme way than most people would, as something experienced by only a very few people in extreme circumstances.  A lot of people are living in poverty - as many as 1:6 children do.  Not only people on benefits, but also people in low paid work.  Many of those people might blog or be involved in activism or art etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 30, 2013)

She went to grammar school and left at 16 with no desire to stay in education due to being bullied as the schools token pov.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

are you saying you can only be poor if you're not working? i think that's bollocks tbh.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Exactly. She got an idea into her head and followed through with it. That takes motivation, which I agree is not something that comes in isolation, but it's silly to make too many assumptions about her just because she was motivated.


 
Not what I'm going with at all - Where did I even come close to slagging her off for being "motivated"?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> are you saying you can only be poor if you're on benefits? i think that's bollocks tbh.


 
No.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> You keep saying she has no idea, but I can't work out why you think that. *Maybe you are defining poverty in a more extreme way than most people would, as something experienced by only a very few people in extreme circumstances.* A lot of people are living in poverty - as many as 1:6 children do. Not only people on benefits, but also people in low paid work. Many of those people might blog or be involved in activism or art etc.


 
I'm not.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I'm not.


I'm not sure how you are defining it then, if low paid work and benefits isn't poverty enough?


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I'm not saying she's in the wrong for doing her blog - I'm saying the content of her blog shows that she knows a resounding fuck all about what it is to be poor in the UK in 2013.


 
I think, as Thora said, your definition of poverty may be at variance to what other people would consider to be poverty/on the breadline.

From what I've read she has experienced poverty, maybe not as extreme as your definition, but certainly something that a lot of people might recognise and empathise with.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

Look for those who missed it,i couldn't give a flying about jack and her wee project i hope her career works out for her.What is contentious for me and what a lot of people, who are breaking their necks to defend this class warrior, have ignored is the comparison between her and weepiper workmate,in terms of how she has pulled herself up by the bootstraps with positivity,and pipers mate is floundering in poverty because they are reacting to their situation negatively.I think it's got fuck all to do with positive/negative crap,but everything to do with their material/social position,and access to resources...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

If she makes no claims to be writing about anything other than what she went through, that's that, no?


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

i sspect we're not going to agree on this - after having checked out her blog i dont think she's a LP type at all. its just that seemed to be what you were saying. 

there are loads of people who have fuck all money who post on here, who do blogs, do music etc

i think she's genuine - that doesnt invalidate any criticisms of this sort of thing normalising poverty and making it into some sort of glamorous thing but that's what others havve done not her as far as I can see


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Look for those who missed it,i couldn't give a flying about jack and her wee project i hope her career works out for her.What is contentious for me and what a lot of people, who are breaking their necks to defend this class warrior, have ignored is the comparison between her and weepiper workmate,in terms of how she has pulled herself up by the bootstraps with positivity,and pipers mate is floundering in poverty because they are reacting to their situation negatively.I think it's got fuck all to do with positive/negative crap,but everything to do with their material/social position,and access to resources...


 
i don't think anyone did make that claim tho (that i can see, i havent read the whole thing) ... and how do you know what weepipers workmate does in his spare time?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Look for those who missed it,i couldn't give a flying about jack and her wee project i hope her career works out for her.What is contentious for me and what a lot of people, who are breaking their necks to defend this class warrior, have ignored is the comparison between her and weepiper workmate,*in terms of how she has pulled herself up by the bootstraps with positivity*,and pipers mate is floundering in poverty because they are reacting to their situation negatively.I think it's got fuck all to do with positive/negative crap,but everything to do with their material/social position,and access to resources...


If that is her message, then yes, I agree with you.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If that is her message, then yes, I agree with you.


It isn't. eta: she makes it very clear that it isn't, too.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

i didn't think it was her message though


----------



## ice-is-forming (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Aw that's not it - _At all_. It's not about what I thought of or what she thought of, she's a dick coz she blogs about poverty whilst clearly having no idea.


 

Its a Maslow thing. until you know where your next meal, safe nights sleep, shelter from the cold etc..is coming from then it's ,ime, unusual for people to have the ability/inclination/motivation/head space to write about it. writing comes from a very different part of the brain than the default survival instincts of the rock bottom poor. Unless you are setting out as a poverty tourist who is able to keep the frontal cortex working because the hind /survival brain instincts know that, deep down, its only a game. This is ,imo, particuarly more intense with a dependent child.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i didn't think it was her message though


Neither did I. From what I've read, that's exactly the criticism she's levelling at Oliver.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If she makes no claims to be writing about anything other than what she went through, that's that, no?


You're still missing the point lbj...it's worrying frankly


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

ice-is-forming said:


> Its a Maslow thing. until you know where your next meal, safe nights sleep, shelter from the cold etc..is coming from then it's ,ime, unusual for people to have the ability/inclination/motivation/head space to write about it. writing comes from a very different part of the brain than the default survival instincts of the rock bottom poor. Unless you are setting out as a poverty tourist who is able to keep the frontal cortex working because the hind /survival brain instincts know that, deep down, its only a game. This is ,imo, particuarly more intense with a dependent child.


 
thats just your experience though ... everyone is different, and what about hip hop etc lyrics written by people who are having to survive that way?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> I'm not sure how you are defining it then, if low paid work and benefits isn't poverty enough?


 
Her experience of low paid work/benefits is bullshit is what I'm trying to say. She does not know that feeling of "this is all there is, no one's gonna get you out of this" IYSWIM, you can see it plain as day from the words she writes. And I think it's potentially quite pernicious for her crap to be lauded as "yeah, this is what it's really like", when it just isn't.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i didn't think it was her message though


I havn't read enough of her blog to decide that for myself...this was what LiamO said inspired his op


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

ice-is-forming said:


> Its a Maslow thing. until you know where your next meal, safe nights sleep, shelter from the cold etc..is coming from then it's ,ime, unusual for people to have the ability/inclination/motivation/head space to write about it. .


 
 I think this is very certainly true. Feeding the belly comes first. But then I would say that it is even more important for those who are a tiny bit above that position to be active in highlighting the problem - precisely because those who are rock-bottom cannot; they're too busy surviving.

Otherwise it's like saying that nobody can be politically active unless they are as badly off as everyone they include as being 'on their side'.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I havn't read enough of her blog to decide that for myself...this was what @liam said inspired his op


 
i think that was just what he was getting from it (and yep i agree that other people are using her stuff in that way, but i cant see her agreeing with it)


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

ice-is-forming said:


> Its a Maslow thing. until you know where your next meal, safe nights sleep, shelter from the cold etc..is coming from then it's ,ime, unusual for people to have the ability/inclination/motivation/head space to write about it. writing comes from a very different part of the brain than the default survival instincts of the rock bottom poor. Unless you are setting out as a poverty tourist who is able to keep the frontal cortex working because the hind /survival brain instincts know that, deep down, its only a game. This is ,imo, particuarly more intense with a dependent child.


 
Nailed mate - What I've been trying to say. Thank you.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

ice-is-forming said:


> Its a Maslow thing. until you know where your next meal, safe nights sleep, shelter from the cold etc..is coming from then it's ,ime, unusual for people to have the ability/inclination/motivation/head space to write about it. writing comes from a very different part of the brain than the default survival instincts of the rock bottom poor. Unless you are setting out as a poverty tourist who is able to keep the frontal cortex working because the hind /survival brain instincts know that, deep down, its only a game. This is ,imo, particuarly more intense with a dependent child.


Again, you're saying she's not quite poor enough - that's what I don't understand.  Lots of people have been in the situation she was in, on benefits, or in low waged work trying to juggle childcare and housing benefit fuckups and tax credits - and have still been able to write about it.  Posters have written about those very same situations on here!  Just because some people are poorer, and have it worse, and don't have the headspace to write about it doesn't devalue the experience of those who do.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Her experience of low paid work/benefits is bullshit is what I'm trying to say. She does not know that feeling of "this is all there is, no one's gonna get you out of this" IYSWIM, you can see it plain as day from the words she writes. And I think it's potentially quite pernicious for her crap to be lauded as "yeah, this is what it's really like", when it just isn't.


 
there are posters on this forum who do blogs and are/have been in that situation tho ... im not saying i have cos i haven't really but other people on here have?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> Just because some people are poorer, and have it worse, and don't have the headspace to write about it doesn't devalue the experience of those who do.


 
And makes it even more important _for them_ that you do, no? Otherwise they would be totally invisible.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

and there are people/right wing twats who would say that you cant really be poor if you have a computer and post on forums ...


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> and there are people/right wing twats who would say that you cant really be poor if you have a computer and post on forums ...


It's the new big telly.

eta: except that it's deliberately aimed at reducing people's ability to comment, as well as shaming them.


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Her experience of low paid work/benefits is bullshit is what I'm trying to say. She does not know that feeling of "this is all there is, no one's gonna get you out of this" IYSWIM, you can see it plain as day from the words she writes. And I think it's potentially quite pernicious for her crap to be lauded as "yeah, this is what it's really like", when it just isn't.


How on earth do you know it's bullshit though?  What about her blog makes you think that?  I have read a few entries and many of them could have been written by posters on here having a tough time.

I don't know anything more about this woman than what she has said about herself, but can't see how you'd know it's bullshit?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i think that was just what he was getting from it (and yep i agree that other people are using her stuff in that way, but i cant see her agreeing with it)


Can you not see how this works though,can you not see the fuckin field day the right wing press will have with it...again she's fairly irrelevant it's *what* she is that's important


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> Again, *you're saying she's not quite poor enough* - that's what I don't understand. Lots of people have been in the situation she was in, on benefits, or in low waged work trying to juggle childcare and housing benefit fuckups and tax credits - and have still been able to write about it. Posters have written about those very same situations on here! Just because some people are poorer, and have it worse, and don't have the headspace to write about it doesn't devalue the experience of those who do.


 
Not what I've been saying. I've been saying I reckon her experience is bullshit.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Aug 30, 2013)

Tbh she just seems to be working about her own experience of having very little money and trying to cope in a situation that many would consider being on the breadline. And if that helps or  educates others them good.

I have no doubt there are people who have suffered more, who are in a worse situation, but as with most situations I don't think that negates what she has to say.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You're still missing the point lbj...it's worrying frankly


I don't think I am. I'm agreeing that on an absolute level, there must be people worse off than her, but I now think that this only makes what she's doing potentially even more important. I think the idea that she is/was a poverty tourist needs some justification.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's the new big telly.
> 
> eta: except that it's deliberately aimed at reducing people's ability to comment, as well as shaming them.


 
Ah come _on_. Misrepresenting much?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Tbh she just seems to be working about her own experience of having very little money and trying to cope in a situation that many would consider being on the breadline. And if that helps or educates others them good.
> 
> I have no doubt there are people who have suffered more, who are in a worse situation, but as with most situations I don't think that negates what she has to say.


Bootstraps,pull em,like we all should/can/have the opportunity to


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> *How on earth do you know it's bullshit though?* What about her blog makes you think that? I have read a few entries and many of them could have been written by posters on here having a tough time.
> 
> I don't know anything more about this woman than what she has said about herself, but can't see how you'd know it's bullshit?


 

The way it's worded. And what Ice said earlier.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> there are posters on this forum who do blogs and are/have been in that situation tho ... im not saying i have cos i haven't really but other people on here have?


 
There have. Jack chats shit though.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think I am. I'm agreeing that on an absolute level, there must be people worse off than her, but I now think that this only makes what she's doing potentially even more important. I think the idea that she is/was a poverty tourist needs some justification.


I never used the phrase poverty tourist at all


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Bootstraps,pull em,like we all should/can/have the opportunity to


 
How the fuck have you extrapolated that from what I said 

I did not mean that all all


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's the new big telly.
> 
> eta: except that it's deliberately aimed at reducing people's ability to comment, as well as shaming them.


Bang bang bullshit


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> The way it's worded. And what Ice said earlier.


 
people could say that about pretty much anyone on here though, think that it was worded wrong etc .. and to be honest when ive felt really really shit about stuff a bit of writing is often a bit of escapism ... and what about people who write hip hop etc? surely thats still a type of writing?

i see what you're saying and i agree with the things butchers said etc earlier up on the thread but i think you're a bit off target here mate


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Bootstraps,pull em,like we all should/can/have the opportunity to


 
I'm not sure that's fair. Put yourself in her position. She lives through this and finds herself coping in ways she hadn't previously imagined. She thinks she has something potentially valuable to say to others in that position and blogs about it.

That's not necessarily preaching bootstraps. All blogging involves a certain amount of arrogance - that what you're saying is worth reading. But so what? That applies to all writing really.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

QueenOfGoths said:


> How the fuck have you extrapolated that from what I said
> 
> I did not mean that all all


 
 i didn't say you said it,it's what she'll be used for and it's probably already happening


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Bang bang bullshit


You should probably go to bed tbh. This is going to be embarrassing in the morning, and you seem generally okay recently, I'd not wish it on you.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> i didin't say you said it,it's what she'll be used for and it's probably already happening


 
Well why quote my post then if you are not trying to link what I said to your post? I did not mean that at all and I'd rather there was no insinuation that I did, thanks


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not sure that's fair. Put yourself in her position. She lives through this and finds herself coping in ways she hadn't previously imagined. She thinks she has something potentially valuable to say to others in that position and blogs about it.
> 
> That's not necessarily preaching bootstraps. All blogging involves a certain amount of arrogance - that what you're saying is worth reading. But so what? That applies to all writing really.


Sorry lbj i give up with you you're refusing to respond to anything i've said,and you just keep wittering away about value how great,nice she is as an individual.I'm sure she is...i think that's all irrelevant


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> There have. Jack chats shit though.


 
there are loads of posters on here who do blogs about their experiences. i don't think there's anything wrong with what she's done (although if she starts sucking up to ed miliband etc, doing the whole "if i can do it anyone can" that's a different story, but has she actually done that?)


----------



## Thora (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Sorry lbj i give up with you you're refusing to respond to anything i've said,and you just keep wittering away about value how great,nice she is as an individual.I'm sure she is...i think that's all irrelevant


Is your point about how the right wing press have used her blogging/recipes?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

QueenOfGoths said:


> Well why quote my post then if you are not trying to link what I said to your post? I did not mean that at all and I'd rather there was no insinuation that I did, thanks


There was no insinuation,i'm sorry you felt there was


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Sorry lbj i give up with you you're refusing to respond to anything i've said,and you just keep wittering away about value how great,nice she is as an individual.I'm sure she is...i think that's all irrelevant


I don't think that is reasonable.

Ok: question: Are there circumstances in which you think it would be ok for someone to post a blog about coping with poverty?

I'm not her. My honest blog on such circumstances would involve shoplifting techniques. I would be encouraging people in that position to be looking for ways to do things the system tells them they are not supposed to do.

But that's me. And it has been posting on here, in fact, that has shown me that others in that position wouldn't react to their position like I would.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You should probably go to bed tbh. This is going to be embarrassing in the morning, and you seem generally okay recently, I'd not wish it on you.


Heh


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Heh


Well, look, don't blame me later on.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think that is reasonable.
> 
> Ok: question: Are there circumstances in which you think it would be ok for someone to post a blog about coping with poverty?


Thats not my point.For the last time,she can blog what she wants,just like multi millionaire jamie oliver can say what he wants...


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Well, look, don't blame me later on.


Deal


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Thats not my point.For the last time,she can blog what she wants,just like multi millionaire jamie oliver can say what he wants...


 
... and she's no different from multi millionaire Jamie Oliver?


----------



## kittyP (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> no. I didn't.


 

Again, yes, you did. 




			
				LiamO said:
			
		

> e2a are you referring to my response to Kitty? or failure to respond to your posts?


 
No I was responding to this post




			
				LiamO said:
			
		

> I
> 
> did
> 
> ...


 
When you clearly had here




			
				LiamO said:
			
		

> Why does food need to be 'delicious'? It's basically fuel ffs. and yet if you mention this you invite scorn and ridicule.[/QUOTE


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

> such a firm grasp of our manacles.


You speak for yerself LiamO


----------



## weepiper (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> She's called jack,has suspiciously expensive and tasteless,hipsteryish tattoo sleeves,she's well dictioned ,has nice big teeth,a nice kitchen with mirrored tiles,and i immediately thought networked media type soon as i saw her ...that's good enough for me


 
sorry bamalama but fuck this. I've got big tattoos, I paid for them when I've been working. I expect she did too. You know what, you can't actually sell them to feed your kids inbetween jobs. I'm quite nicely spoken, went to university. She lives in a rented flat, the mirror tiles are her landlord's choice not hers. This is falling into the same lazy stereotyping Jamie Oliver's using with the 'big fucking telly' line. it's bullshit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> This is falling into the same lazy stereotyping Jamie Oliver's using with the 'big fucking telly' line. it's bullshit.


 
And from what I've read, she's been calling him on this bullshit. So she's gained access to the mainstream media and is being heard? Well, that's good!


----------



## ice-is-forming (Aug 30, 2013)

just as an aside. thank fuck JO has started  cooking classes here in QLD! fuck knows what we'd do without him! hip hip....

http://www.thegoodfoundation.com.au/ministry-of-food/


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

ice-is-forming said:


> just as an aside. thank fuck JO has started cooking classes here in QLD! fuck knows what we'd do without him! hip hip....
> 
> http://www.thegoodfoundation.com.au/ministry-of-food/


 
He used to advertise for Tesco. Or Sainsbury. One of the two. And no doubt was paid a fortune for doing so. Until he acknowledges that he himself is part of the problem and goes some way towards making amends, he can clearly fuck off.

He's an example of how even genuine good intentions without a political grounding can be worse than useless. How about addressing the way that supermarkets control the supply chain and put this crap food on the shelves in the first place? He's attacking the wrong end of the process.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

JO's book was certainly prominently advertised in Sainsbury's when I popped in there earlier today.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> JO's book was certainly prominently advertised in Sainsbury's when I popped in there earlier today.


 
So what does he have to say about the way that Sainsbury etc have been cornering the corner shop market recently? And the way that they charge even more in those shops than they do in the big ones? And the way they actively stifle local markets and local supply chains. He's clueless.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> sorry bamalama but fuck this. I've got big tattoos, I paid for them when I've been working. I expect she did too. You know what, you can't actually sell them to feed your kids inbetween jobs. I'm quite nicely spoken, went to university. She lives in a rented flat, the mirror tiles are her landlord's choice not hers. This is falling into the same lazy stereotyping Jamie Oliver's using with the 'big fucking telly' line. it's bullshit.


 
yep.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So what does he have to say about the way that Sainsbury etc have been cornering the corner shop market recently? And the way that they charge even more in those shops than they do in the big ones? And the way they actively stifle local markets and local supply chains. He's clueless.


I think he's demonstrated fairly conclusively already that his thesis, such as it is, ignores food (and general economic) deprivation - i.e. not just pricing but also availability. Let alone spare time and life conditions. I used to think this was just naivety but the recent social hate stuff has led me to believe it's more deliberate than that.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I think he's demonstrated fairly conclusively already that his thesis, such as it is, ignores food (and general economic) deprivation - i.e. not just pricing but also availability. Let alone spare time and life conditions. I used to think this was just naivety but the recent social hate stuff has led me to believe it's more deliberate than that.


 
There is an air of bootstraps about him.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/aug/30/jamie-oliver-my-family-values




> *I grew up in a pub in Clavering, Essex.* When I was first on telly in The Naked Chef, people thought I was a mockney, that I was posh and had gone to private school. But I went to a comprehensive and my parents, Trevor and Sally, weren't middle class; they were publicans. That's where my estuary accent comes from.
> *My dad put me to work in the pub* as a young kid to earn pocket money, a pound an hour. My parents had a really strong work ethic that they've passed on to me. When I tried to sleep in, my dad would aim the hose at my bedroom window to wake me up at the crack of dawn


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

It's not just him. And I think this might be what balamama was getting at. It is every idiot who turns out on red nose day smiling holding a big cheque made out by a Sainsbury's branch. If Jack ends up in this circus, then balamama will have a point.


----------



## weepiper (Aug 30, 2013)

I've had the same attitude IRL. I can't ever have been poor because I've got tattoos. I can't know what it's _really_ like because of the area I live in. The fact that the rent has only been paid and the kids not taken off me because of Housing Benefit for the last 4 years doesn't seem to enter into it. I'm not anywhere near rock bottom but it's not fucking easy either. Am I not allowed to write about poverty because I don't quite qualify for the kids to get free school meals this year?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


> There is an air of bootstraps about him.


Nothing to do with happening to be around when a reality tv show was being made where he worked then? 


ETA: They weren't middle class. They were publicans. Petit bourgeois, then?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> sorry bamalama but fuck this. I've got big tattoos, I paid for them when I've been working. I expect she did too. You know what, you can't actually sell them to feed your kids inbetween jobs. I'm quite nicely spoken, went to university. She lives in a rented flat, the mirror tiles are her landlord's choice not hers. This is falling into the same lazy stereotyping Jamie Oliver's using with the 'big fucking telly' line. it's bullshit.


I explained this earlier in the thread...it was a pisstake/joke,that's why i used the face thingy


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nothing to do with happening to be around when a reality tv show was being made where he worked then?


----------



## weepiper (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I explained this earlier in the thread...it was a pisstake/joke,that's why i used the face thingy


 

Doesn't wash. Your attitude since has been the same. So has Frances Lengel's.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

sleaterkinney said:


>


That was how Oliver got his first break, I believe.

It's about acknowledging the role of luck in success and 'making it'. You need to be determined, sure (although not even that sometimes), but you also need luck. And those who do make it can easily start telling a story of themselves to themselves that they made it because they were that bit more determined than everyone else. Which is bollocks.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Doesn't wash. Your attitude since has been the same. So has Frances Lengel's.


 I'm not washing anything,read the thread...


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> *I'm not washing anything*,read the thread...


 

Not even the bellend? come on man, there is dirty protest then there is unwashed penis..


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> Not even the bellend? come on man, there is dirty protest then there is unwashed penis..


Scraping behind the rim


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So what does he have to say about the way that Sainsbury etc have been cornering the corner shop market recently? And the way that they charge even more in those shops than they do in the big ones? And the way they actively stifle local markets and local supply chains. He's clueless.


Sainsburys are cheaper than normal corner shops - one of the reasons it sickens me when middle class parasites try and oppose the building of local Sainsburys or Tesco


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm not washing anything,read the thread...


I think this is about the point where you look back tomorrow and think "oh _fuck_".


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 30, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> cooking is a joy- yes sometimes a chore- but a joy. Getting all knotty browed and banging about the place with the radio on and that.


 
Poetry. And also exactly how I cook. Some sort of dervish of panic/skill. I don't do it very often; I do pasta & veg for the kids and the occasional meal for me & her.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I think this is about the point where you look back tomorrow and think "oh _fuck_".


i think this is about the point where you stop tryin to get a rise mate...it's not working,although you're tryin ever so hard,bless your wee cotton socks


----------



## snadge (Aug 30, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Sainsburys are cheaper than normal corner shops - one of the reasons it sickens me when middle class parasites try and oppose the building of local Sainsburys or Tesco


 

Sainsburys are cooler than Tesco, at least in the 'workfare' context.


----------



## weepiper (Aug 30, 2013)

> When the BBC reported that she would be paid £25,000 for her book deal, the housing benefit office suspended payments until it saw her book contract, nearly causing her to be evicted. She has moved to a cheaper house share to escape the tyranny of housing benefit. "Because I'm in the media quite a lot now, everyone assumes that everything is fine. People forget I sleep on a mattress on the floor with my son in a house I share with five other people. They see me on Sky news and think, 'Oh, you must be loaded.'"


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Sainsburys are cheaper than normal corner shops - one of the reasons it sickens me when middle class parasites try and oppose the building of local Sainsburys or Tesco


Depends where you live. They're not in many parts of London.

Also depends what you're looking at. Local supermarkets sell a very limited and very expensive range of fresh veg. Again, depends where you live, but in many parts of London there are local shops that sell veg that are much cheaper. Where they are cheaper, they can often survive, admittedly.

With larger supermarkets, they can kill shopping streets by driving the local butcher, baker, etc out of business and having them come and work for the supermarket. Short-term, people may prefer to shop at the supermarket. But I would use fresh meat as the example of what is now happening in supermarkets - they have eliminated the competition and their prices are now really very high. Fresh veg likewise.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 30, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Depends where you live. They're not in many parts of London.
> 
> Also depends what you're looking at. Local supermarkets sell a very limited and very expensive range of fresh veg. Again, depends where you live, but in many parts of London there are local shops that sell veg that are much cheaper. Where they are cheaper, they can often survive, admittedly.
> 
> With larger supermarkets, they can kill shopping streets by driving the local butcher, baker, etc out of business and having them come and work for the supermarket. Short-term, people may prefer to shop at the supermarket. But I would use fresh meat as the example of what is now happening in supermarkets - they have eliminated the competition and their prices are now really very high. Fresh veg likewise.


You ignorant cunt


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

It's hardly that we have to choose between supermarkets and cornershops.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 30, 2013)

Some right fucking dicks on here.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> stuff


It's really only a couple of people tbh.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 30, 2013)

jamie Oliver thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thataway.

But thanks to Bama and Francisco for shooting the messenger and proving my point.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> You ignorant cunt


 
In town after town, the process has been that the supermarket has opened and the local butchers, bakers etc have ended up going to work for them. Now they are taking over the cornershop angle too. And I take issue with you about pricing. My experience of local Sainsbury/Tesco, etc, is that they are more expensive for the same goods than the larger shops and simply don't stock most of the cheaper alternatives. They only stock the expensive branded stuff, which is more expensive than NISA.

The way I read that - they are seeking to exploit the people unable for whatever reason to reach the larger shops by charging them considerably more for the same items. That's just continuing the process that produces food deserts and food poverty, but in a way that leaves the whole process under the control of a tiny number of businesses, which in turn control every aspect of the supply chain.

Independent corner shops are more expensive partly because they don't have the stock purchasing power. Sainsbury local doesn't have that excuse. They're just charging more because they can.

And once the competition is gone? Well, even in large supermarkets now, fresh meat and veg are really expensive.

If you don't believe me, go and check out your 'local' Sainsbury or Tesco and see how many of their saver ranges they stock. Then ask yourself why they're not there. It's not because everyone who shops there is rich.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 30, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Some right fucking dicks on here.


I know the scum


----------



## smokedout (Aug 30, 2013)

Thora said:


> When she started her blog, she wasn't known to anyone though? So at the point where she was actually living on a tenner a week, she did have to.
> 
> Now, due to the success of her blog she has a job and a book deal and probably isn't worrying so much about money.


 
according to her blog she lost her 25k a year job in november 2011, worked for a few months in march/april 2012 time, and went self-employed and was having photography exhibitions and pieces published in the national press by november 2012. In august she appeared in the local paper after having had a yard sale selling off all her possessions because she was so poor, at which she raised £3000. She says she was claiming child tax credits,income support, hb etc throughout, but because hb is paid in arrears she got into debt, havent found any mention of food banks, but she might have said that elsewhere. she seems to have been quite prominent in local politics as a labour party activist and featured in the local press regularly (for her age) , won community awards etc, for quite some time before the pov thing

now being skint with a kid is the most frightening thing in the world, and throughout that time she must have had some grim moments, but im a bit sceptical of the tenner a week thing, and her appearance now as a poverty star has been preceded by what looks like quite an ambitious attempt to lay the groundwork for a political career


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> people could say that about pretty much anyone on here though, think that it was worded wrong etc .. and to be honest when ive felt really really shit about stuff a bit of writing is often a bit of escapism ...* and what about people who write hip hop etc? surely thats still a type of writing?*
> 
> i see what you're saying and i agree with the things butchers said etc earlier up on the thread but i think you're a bit off target here mate


 
 Yeah,it is ... I _am_ hip hop, me, New York as fuck, me. Nah only messin but in all honesty what's hip hop got to do with the subject in hand?


----------



## snadge (Aug 30, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I know the scum


 
City life! At least I can eat locally sourced meat reasonably priced, for yams I go to Sainsburys. It's better than going to Amazon.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Doesn't wash. Your attitude since has been the same. So has Frances Lengel's.


 
Aw _come one  _- That's not where I'm coming from, not for a million miles. TBH, I can't even see how you'd get that from what I've posted.


----------



## weepiper (Aug 30, 2013)

smokedout said:


> according to her blog she lost her 25k a year job in november 2011, worked for a few months in march/april 2012 time, and went self-employed and was having photography exhibitions and pieces published in the national press by november 2012. In august she appeared in the local paper after having had a yard sale selling off all her possessions because she was so poor, at which she raised £3000. She says she was claiming child tax credits,income support, hb etc throughout, but because hb is paid in arrears she got into debt, havent found any mention of food banks, but she might have said that elsewhere. she seems to have been quite prominent in local politics as a labour party activist and featured in the local press regularly (for her age) , won community awards etc, for quite some time before the pov thing
> 
> now being skint with a kid is the most frightening thing in the world, and throughout that time she must have had some grim moments, but im a bit sceptical of the tenner a week thing, and her appearance now as a poverty star has been preceded by what looks like quite an ambitious attempt to lay the groundwork for a political career


 

People seem to dislike her purely because she's suddenly got a phenomenal profile. I wish I'd fucking thought of it. Good luck to her.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 30, 2013)

smokedout said:


> now being skint with a kid is the most frightening thing in the world, and throughout that time she must have had some grim moments, but im a bit sceptical of the tenner a week thing, and her appearance now as a poverty star has been preceded by what looks like quite an ambitious attempt to lay the groundwork for a political career


I don't get that at all tbh. You're claiming she was "quite prominent in local politics and featured in the local press" - like what? Won community awards, like what and in what way that other people don't do? She was skint and wrote about it.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 30, 2013)

LiamO said:


> jamie Oliver thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thataway.
> 
> But thanks to Bama and Francisco for shooting the messenger and proving my point.


What i'm doing ,liam,is questioning the messenger,and questioning her use as an example of what people affected by poverty should be doin as opposed to what they apparently do.An example supplied by your good self,during what i can only assume is some crazy hippy phase you may or may not be goin throughWhat frances does is his business


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> People seem to dislike her purely because she's suddenly got a phenomenal profile. I wish I'd fucking thought of it. Good luck to her.



I know imagine it a working class woman making a success, disgusting


----------



## smokedout (Aug 30, 2013)

weepiper said:


> People seem to dislike her purely because she's suddenly got a phenomenal profile. I wish I'd fucking thought of it. Good luck to her.


 
I dont dislike her, was disappointed to find out shes Labour, think it's less about her and more about why it is her the liberal media have picked as the voice of poverty, a very safe pair of hands and she'll still be dining out on the tenner a week line when shes a DWP Minister'


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> shes Labour ... she'll still be dining out on the tenner a week line when shes a DWP Minister'



Where's that come from?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I dont dislike her, was disappointed to find out shes Labour, think it's less about her and more about why it is her the liberal media have picked as the voice of poverty, a very safe pair of hands and she'll still be dining out on the tenner a week line when shes a DWP Minister'


 
Fuckin right. And I'm not even an anarchist. But I can smell the disengenuitety (sp?) off her words from a mile off.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Where's that come from?


She a mate of yours fridge,you seem to have an emotional tie


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> She a mate of yours fridge,you seem to have an emotional tie


Have you not gone to bed yet? You're just building up embarrassment points.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> I know imagine it a working class woman making a success, disgusting


Nobodies sayin that,good luck to her and her career


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Have you not gone to bed yet? You're just building up embarrassment points.


My wee fella's still teething and you're good value...


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

weepiper said:


> People seem to dislike her purely because she's suddenly got a phenomenal profile. I wish I'd fucking thought of it. Good luck to her.


 

She would only be truly worthy of praise if she were an anonymous frother on some obscure talk-board. 

Not content with taking action, she then has the cheek to go public with it and inspire others. Inconsiderate bastard then refuses to get preachy and worthy. Then she has the unbelievable cheek to raise her profile further by telling Jamie Oliver (just like most posters on here) that he is a dick... what a cunt eh?

and then publicly refusing to be a culinary Super-hod* for the era. The cheek! Never mind... we can still call her a cunt... not cos of anything she has actually said or done... but because of what the Right _want_ her to have said and done.

* _Super -hod was a thatcherite wet-dream in the 80's. A dimwit who did the work of 6 men... got the wages of three... carred brickie's muck in a plasterers hod... carried 24 bricks at a time instead of 12... 'there's loads of work if you wannit and are prepared to work hard'. probably crippled with arthritis now. Good enough for him. Wonder how many of his erstwhile champions in the CBI are queing up to visit him now?_


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> What i'm doing ,liam,is questioning the messenger,and questioning her use as an example of what people affected by poverty _*should*_ be doin as opposed to what they apparently do.An example supplied by your good self,during what i can only assume is some crazy hippy phase you may or may not be goin throughWhat frances does is his business


 
AFAIK she has never used that word. Nor have I. In fact she has gone to great lengths to _avoid_ using such terms. So have I.

But that does not fit your narrative. So you consistently ignore it.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> What i'm doing ,liam,is questioning the messenger,and questioning her use as an example of what people affected by poverty should be doin as opposed to what they apparently do.An example supplied by your good self,during what i can only assume is some crazy hippy phase you may or may not be goin throughWhat frances does is his business





LiamO said:


> She would only be truly worthy of praise if she were an anonymous frother on some obscure talk-board.
> 
> Not content with taking action, she then has the cheek to go public with it and inspire others. Inconsiderate bastard then refuses to get preachy and worthy. Then she has the unbelievable cheek to raise her profile further by telling Jamie Oliver (just like most posters on here) that he is a dick... what a cunt eh?
> 
> ...


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Where's that come from?


 
she describes herself publicly as a labour blogger (below was may 2012, which seems to be the first mention of her living on such a low food budget)


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she describes herself publicly as a labour blogger (below was may 2012, which seems to be the first mention of her living on such a low food budget)


The Labour blog describes her as a Labour blogger? Second of your images doesn't load.

And seriously, "she'll be dining out" etc?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> AFAIK she has never used that word. Nor have I. In fact she has gone to great lengths to _avoid_ using such terms. So have I.
> 
> But that does not fit your narrative. So you consistently ignore it.


I don't have a narrative,i have an opinion.As i've already explained what she does or doesn't do or write is fairly immaterial to what i'm sayin, which is that she's not to be held up as an example of what your average person on the poverty line can do or achieve because she's not your average person on the poverty line .It's fairly simple to grasp.She will, i believe be held up as such an example,as you did in your op which is what this is all about,but has been obscured by the rush of people to defend her as an individual.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

That Engels he was a right poverty tourist, rich cunt blogger in his day too. What the fuck would him or his poncy middle class cunt mate Marx know about anything. Pair of dilettante cunts.

The revolution starts at closing time.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> That Engels he was a right poverty tourist, rich cunt blogger in his day too. What the fuck would him or his poncy middle class cunt mate Marx know about anything. Pair of dilettante cunts.
> 
> The revolution starts at closing time.


I never used the phrase "poverty tourist",and marx and engels early writings on ireland were infused with a lack of understanding of the extreme poverty they saw


----------



## weepiper (Aug 31, 2013)

> she's not your average person on the poverty line


See that word 'average'? I don't think you understand what it means.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

weepiper said:


> See that word 'average'? I don't think you understand what it means.


Average as its common use you know, everyday,the usual,common is that what you want me to say?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I don't have a narrative,i have an opinion.As i've already explained what she does or doesn't do or write is fairly immaterial to what i'm sayin, which is that she's not to be held up as an example of what your average person on the poverty line can do or achieve because she's not your average person on the poverty line .It's fairly simple to grasp.She will, i believe be held up as such an example,as you did in your op which is what this is all about,but has been obscured by the rush of people to defend her as an individual.


 

I don't think what she did is average. I think what she did was extraordinary. Ordinary people doing extraordinary things. I like that. It's something I admire in James Connolly, John McLean, Viktor Frankl, Mandela and Ghandi too.

Like I said in the OP and first few posts... it is mostly a matter of mindset and perception.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I never used the phrase "poverty tourist",and marx and engels early writings on ireland were infused with a lack of understanding of the extreme poverty they saw


 

just as well they hung around then and wren't hounded out of it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Average as its common use you know, everyday,the usual,common is that what you want me to say?


Why is she not your average person on the poverty line?

Say what you have to say you cowardly tosser. Fucking say what you think her background is, how we should all hate her and dismiss everything she has to say.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> she's not your average person on the poverty line


 

Do you not live in an area and community _full_ of ordinary people who did lots of extraordinary things in their lives?


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Why is she not your average person on the poverty line?
> 
> Say what you have to say you cowardly tosser. Fucking say what you think her background is, how we should all hate her and dismiss everything she has to say.


 
she was on the poverty line for a few months then got a book deal, that is not the experience of the average person living in poverty


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Say what you have to say you cowardly tosser.


 
really? Careful now, or we'll have to call a mod.

You have been spoiling for a fight with Bama all evening. Is this beef old?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was on the poverty line for a few months then got a book deal, that is not the experience of the average person living in poverty


 

so she should tell them to stick their book deal up their arse... and forego her chance to influence people... to keep her cred?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was on the poverty line for a few months then got a book deal, that is not the experience of the average person living in poverty


I wasn't actually replying to you at all, but how does that change her experience of living in poverty? That _when she wasn't_ she got a book deal?

Tell me what was different. Was it that she went to a grammar school? That she... uh I can't think of anything else?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I don't think what she did is average. I think what she did was extraordinary. Ordinary people doing extraordinary things. I like that. It's something I admire in James Connolly, John McLean, Viktor Frankl, Mandela and Ghandi too.
> 
> Like I said in the OP and first few posts... it is mostly a matter of mindset and perception.


I think what she did was made a whole lot easier because of her background,which is the whole point,she had the mindset to put in the groundwork,to use opportunities given to her by her background.Perception is often  subjective,ours is different on this one...


----------



## weepiper (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was on the poverty line for a few months then got a book deal, that is not the experience of the average person living in poverty


 

She had a good job but got pregnant and found she couldn't keep the good job as a single mum with a baby and had to fall back on benefits, then couldn't get even a shitty job because of childcare impossibility. That sounds pretty normal and recognisable to me. What happened next doesn't detract from her experience.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think what she did was made a whole lot easier because of her background


You can't even state what her background was. You've refused to do so numerous times.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> really? Careful now, or we'll have to call a mod.
> 
> You have been spoiling for a fight with Bama all evening. Is this beef old?


Poor lad's tryin to get a rise...awww


----------



## weepiper (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think what she did was made a whole lot easier because of her background,which is the whole point,she had the mindset to put in the groundwork,to use opportunities given to her by her background.Perception is often subjective,ours is different on this one...


 
_What_ background?


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You can't even state what her background was. You've refused to do so numerous times.


It's been pointed out to ye a few times now your just not willing to acknowledge it...for some strange reason


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I don't get that at all tbh. You're claiming she was "quite prominent in local politics and featured in the local press" - like what? Won community awards, like what and in what way that other people don't do? She was skint and wrote about it.


 
she was blogging about attending council meetings before she was blogging about poverty, she talks about how she is good friends with several local councillors, she had an audience with ed milliband - _before_ she was blogging about poverty, she was happy to be represented in the food challenge as a labour blogger _before_ she blogged about poverty


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was blogging about attending council meetings before she was blogging about poverty, she talks about how she is good friends with several local councillors, she had an audience with ed milliband - _before_ she was blogging about poverty, she was happy to be represented in the food challenge as a labour blogger _before_ she blogged about poverty


Okay so please indicate links for all of that.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

weepiper said:


> _What_ background?


It's all over the thread


----------



## weepiper (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> It's all over the thread


 

Oh fuck off, you're just boring me now.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think what she did was made a whole lot easier because of her background,which is the whole point,she had the mindset to put in the groundwork,to use opportunities given to her by her background.


 
YOU come from an area full of working class political activists. I'd bet a week's wages you know SF councillors and MLA's personally. (I know I do. And a few SDLP ones. And I'm a fuckin blow-in). You (as in you, Bama,personally) _have_ to be socially and politically 'connected' to figures of influence in your community, no? Would that invalidate anything you do in the future?




bamalama said:


> Perception is often subjective,ours is different on this one...


 

Yes. See OP


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I wasn't actually replying to you at all, but how does that change her experience of living in poverty? That _when she wasn't_ she got a book deal?
> 
> Tell me what was different. Was it that she went to a grammar school? That she... uh I can't think of anything else?


 
what is different is that a few months on the breadline after a relatively privileged life, with an active social network and seemingly ample social capital, is very fucking different to staring a lifetime of shit in the face


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Oh fuck off, you're just boring me now.


Ditto


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> what is different is that a few months on the breadline after a relatively privileged life, with an active social network and seemingly ample social capital, is very fucking different to staring a lifetime of shit in the face


Seriously, what the fuck do you have to do to comment on anything these days? "Going to school" and "having a job" makes you too privileged to talk about anything? Fuck off.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was blogging about attending council meetings before she was blogging about poverty, she talks about how she is good friends with several local councillors, she had an audience with ed milliband - _before_ she was blogging about poverty, she was happy to be represented in the food challenge as a labour blogger _before_ she blogged about poverty


 

and fuckin what? 

As I'm after saying. I'm not  member of a political party but I am on first name terms with mebbe 10 present and former Sinn Féin Councillors, several ex-Mayors, two MLAs (one a Minister ffs), two SDLP councillors and one sdlp MLA. I've also met Gerry Adams a couple of times.This is because of community arts stuff and advocacy work I have been involved in. I would imagine that _most_ people round where I live know several of their councillors personally. It's not unusual and it does not 'taint' anything I do in the future.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> what is different is that a few months on the breadline after a relatively privileged life, with an active social network and seemingly ample social capital, is very fucking different to staring a lifetime of shit in the face


As long as she's never claimed otherwise, what's the problem?

Can you point to a specific piece of hypocrisy from her?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As long as she's never claimed otherwise, what's the problem?
> 
> Can you point to a specific piece of hypocrisy from her?


 
2 good questions. Don't hold your breath.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Seriously, what the fuck do you have to do to comment on anything these days? "Going to school" and "having a job" makes you too privileged to talk about anything? Fuck off.


 
I'm not questioning her right to comment, although personally I dont think we need another Owen, or Owen in fact

I am questioning the tenner a week thing though, because I cant understand where that actually happened from what she says about her life


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can you point to a specific piece of hypocrisy from her?


 
she's an active member of a party that supports fucking up the lives of people like she was


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's an active member of a party that supports fucking up the lives of people like she was


That's not hypocrisy, though, if she genuinely believes that the Labour Party is the best agent for change.

We might think that she is wrong in that belief, but that doesn't make it hypocritical.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

how is she an active member?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

I suspect that she wouldn't agree with the statement that the Labour Party actively supports fucking up the lives of people like she was anyway. If she did agree with that, then clearly she would be a hypocrite.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> how is she an active member?


 
stop being lazy, why not just read her blog before deciding what she is and then defending it


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> stop being lazy, why not just read her blog before deciding what she is and then defending it


You've got a fucking cheek calling me lazy. You've posted vague shite about her having gone to public school (untrue apparently) and been in the pockets of Labour party folk (no basis). Nothing whatsoever to back it up and we've had two wankers banging on about it.

You want that to stand here? Do some fucking work.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You've got a fucking cheek calling me lazy. You've posted vague shite about her having gone to public school (untrue apparently) and been in the pockets of Labour party folk (no basis). Nothing whatsoever to back it up and we've had two wankers banging on about it.
> 
> You want that to stand here? Do some fucking work.


Are ye drunk?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Are ye drunk?


You are really going to regret this tomorrow. Until then, shut up eh? Nobody needs your mithering bollocks.


----------



## bamalama (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You are really going to regret this tomorrow. Until then, shut up eh?


No and...no


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

bamalama said:


> No and...no


 

bold boy


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

What would be the attitude of someone who was potentially staring a lifetime in that position towards her, I wonder?

Would she be resentful that Jack's not suffered as much or as long as her? Or that Jack's found a way to improve her position? Or would she read it and be pleased that something that relates to her experiences is finally being heard more widely? Would she feel a little less invisible, perhaps? A little less patronised?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

Has FM _really_ just banned Bama? For disagreeing with him?


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

"Found this on somebodys path as I went to deliver a Labour leaflet… Really, littering is one of the issues that Southend residents complain about, without the Tories adding to it by strewing their rubbish around the streets."

"I wish I had time to care enough about Anne Chalk’s meant-to-be-damning opinion of the Labour Party as ‘only working in the 4-5 weeks in the run up to the election’ to correct her, but I’m far too busy in the office working (given that we’re in that 4-5 week period now, and obviously we’ve blown the dust off the office and chased the mice out, who’ve had the run of the place for the past 47 weeks…)"

"highlight that my situation is by far not a unique one, and if it’s happening to me, then it’s happening to countless men and women all over the United Kingdom that fall underneath this ConDem Government. Men and women who perhaps _don’t get an audience with Ed Miliband, his right hand mans business card as a point of contact, a blog with several thousand hits and friends who are local Councillors._ If it’s happening to me, then it’s happening to men and women who have the myth that work pays stuffed down their throats by the current Government."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

Hmm. fridge, that was out of order. Really.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

Some more quotes plz


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What would be the attitude of someone who was potentially staring a lifetime in that position towards her, I wonder?


 
I think youve seen it, on this thread


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> "Found this on somebodys path as I went to deliver a Labour leaflet… Really, littering is one of the issues that Southend residents complain about, without the Tories adding to it by strewing their rubbish around the streets."
> 
> "I wish I had time to care enough about Anne Chalk’s meant-to-be-damning opinion of the Labour Party as ‘only working in the 4-5 weeks in the run up to the election’ to correct her, but I’m far too busy in the office working (given that we’re in that 4-5 week period now, and obviously we’ve blown the dust off the office and chased the mice out, who’ve had the run of the place for the past 47 weeks…)"
> 
> "highlight that my situation is by far not a unique one, and if it’s happening to me, then it’s happening to countless men and women all over the United Kingdom that fall underneath this ConDem Government. Men and women who perhaps _don’t get an audience with Ed Miliband, his right hand mans business card as a point of contact, a blog with several thousand hits and friends who are local Councillors._ If it’s happening to me, then it’s happening to men and women who have the myth that work pays stuffed down their throats by the current Government."


 
don' see anything wrong with any of them tbh


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

I'm confused now. Did you just ban bamalama?


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> don' see anything wrong with any of them tbh


 
fm was demanding proof she was a labour party activist, I thought id better post some in case i got banned


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmm. fridge, that was out of order. Really.


 

Too right. And he reckons Bama will be the one embarrassed in the morning 

Ban me too fridgey - and make it a permanent one - you childish, spiteful twat.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm confused now. Did you just ban bamalama?


I did (just for 24h) as he said he wouldn't stop attacking regardless. I would have done the exact same thing if he'd been doing the same to another poster.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I think youve seen it, on this thread


Maybe. To my knowledge the only single mum claiming housing benefit that has posted has been weepiper.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fm was demanding proof she was a labour party activist, I thought id better post some in case i got banned


 

But like LBJ said - there is nothing wrong in being in the LP if you believe they can be an instrument of change.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I did (just for 24h) as he said he wouldn't stop attacking regardless.


 
Bollocks. You were goading him and got pissy when he would not bite. I'm embarrassed for you.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fm was demanding proof she was a labour party activist, I thought id better post some in case i got banned


Which you've not done.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I did (just for 24h) as he said he wouldn't stop attacking regardless. I would have done the exact same thing if he'd been doing the same to another poster.


Did he send you a PM?

All I saw was you telling him to shut up and him saying no, he wouldn't shut up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Bollocks. You were goading him and got pissy when he would not bite. I'm embarrassed for you.


This is how it looks to me, too.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Which you've not done.


 

Yes. he has. He just did exactly that. You've lost the plot mate. Totally.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> But like LBJ said - there is nothing wrong in being in the LP if you believe they can be an instrument of change.


 
yes there fucking is


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes there fucking is


 
There's nothing _hypocritical_ about it necessarily, though.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes there fucking is


 

that's just silly.

I know (well I knew... not lived in england for 20 years) loads of good skins in the LP.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Which you've not done.


 
she hands out leaflets for labour, she worked full time in the office before an election, she describes herself as a labour blogger, whats fucking wrong with you tonight


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2013)

Have fun. I'm sick of you all.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

Now fridgey has just removed a post of his. More (drunken?) authoritarianism.

Fuck this. I'm away to me bed. (of nails... in my sack-cloth and ashes)


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Have fun. I'm sick of you all.


 

goodbye cruel world? Calm down and breathe mate.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> that's just silly.
> 
> I know (well I knew... not lived in england for 20 years) loads of good skins in the LP.


 
some of us have standards


----------



## TruXta (Aug 31, 2013)

The fuck did bama get banned for? He or she was being a dick, but that's hardly bannable is it.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> some of us have standards


 

and round and round we go... on the inside pissing out or the outside pissing in... the never-ending bind.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

TruXta said:


> The fuck did bama get banned for? He or she was being a dick, but that's hardly bannable is it.


 

he got banned for making fwidgey cwoss.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 31, 2013)

Seriously fridge, you've lost the plot on this one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Have fun. I'm sick of you all.


TBH, I think it's you that will look at this tomorrow and feel a bit silly.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> TBH, I think it's you that will look at this tomorrow and feel a bit silly.


 

stop stealing my lines 



LiamO said:


> Too right. And he reckons Bama will be the one embarrassed in the morning


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

Ah yeah. 

That's a bannable offence in some quarters.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 31, 2013)

Honestly one of the worst modding decisions I've seen on here for a good long while.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 31, 2013)

why has blamalalading dong been banned?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Aug 31, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> why has blamalalading dong been banned?


 

Cos he argued with Fridgemagnet. A bannable offence. Seriously, Fridge should not be allowed to argue on threads if he's just going to ban people who disagree with him. Even Editor doesn't stoop that low. Shame.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Aug 31, 2013)

*sends pm of support to bamalama ....*

what you been taking tonight Mr Magnet! _you're out of control_!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
​


----------



## ice-is-forming (Aug 31, 2013)

> *A Girl Called Jack available to order at Waterstones*
> 
> BY JACK MONROE (OURSOUTHEND) _on_ AUGUST 23, 2013 • ( 5 )
> 
> ...



And only 13 quid! you could feed your family for over a week for that jack! sell 52 and you eat well for a year *spits* 
Respect for Jack but maybe not for the machine that's started turning. My cynical radar just blew up  i'm all for austerity, we should all be austere. there's too much f*g waste. But seriously this is the tip of an iceberg that is distracting from the true depth of the situation. it may not be her fault that she's being manipulated by the media, I hope I can see that shes trying not to be sucked in to their game but from experience I know its impossible not to be misrepresented. other than to not get out there in the first place. and what does that change? I want her to be real and make a difference but...... i hate being cynical. 10 quid a week for a short while snort ok, and teach people to eat cheaper and healthier...nothing wrong with that but to inadvertently end up being the 'go to person with the truth about long term benefits' poverty....nah, i hope it does no harm and causes some people to question, who otherwise wouldn't have, but tbh i'd rather see weepiper telling it how it really is and changing the world (well Scotland) She knows.
Or jack may just be a dick *shrugs* but aren't we all at times?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

I'm a bit puzzled. This article makes it sound like her budget is a bit more of a choice than I'd thought. Yes, she'd worked out that she only had £10 per week for food, but she sounds fine with that, and it sounds like she's happy to stick to it even with more money coming in.

She describes the father of her kid as a 'fantastic dad' so must still be in touch, yet he's not contributing anything? That would surprise me - to be a fantastic dad, he must be doing some stuff for the kid, and giving him at least the occasional treat. Nobody is that hard up that they can't give their kid something if they are a person who puts their kid first at least some of the time, which I would think any fantastic dad would have to. She's also on perfectly good terms with her parents, who own a chippy, so I'm sure they can give her some things sometimes.

So is it strictly £10 per week, or is it that she spends £10 per week but there are other inputs - from the father and perhaps the parents? Perhaps they are modest inputs, don't know. But she does seem to have calculated to do this, and to enjoy the fact that she does it. Her cooking also appears to involve a rather experienced hand to make it appealing, particularly for a kid.

This is all too sad but familiar for someone on benefits:



> She moved to a cheaper flat and signed on for benefits, but money was tight and she fell into debt.


 
I wonder if she had good advice about how she was entitled to pay those debts. The rules are more in favour of the indebted person than many think, and a court ought to order her to pay in total to all her creditors a maximum of around £5 per month. There's a formula they use, and it doesn't take into account the size of the debt, merely the size of the income and outgoings on basics such as rent, bills and food. Ironically if she'd been totally honest and said that she only needed £10 per week for food, that might have harmed her and increased the amount she'd have had to pay towards her debts each month. Courts will allow a person more than £10 per week to feed themselves and their child, and I hope they continue to do this after Jack's example has shown that they possibly don't have to. That's a genuine concern about her example - she is an example that others are unlikely to match but may be measured against anyway. It's like the freelancer who starts in a job - they have to be careful to gauge the working culture: doing loads more work than the permanent staff and showing them up won't win you any friends. You might be the quickest person you know at doing your job. If so, don't work at full speed all the time unless you're on a piece rate.

And here we're back to the point that Orwell made in Road to Wigan Pier. He was clear that if the poor had been more thrifty generally, as he himself thought they could have been if they had wanted or been forced to, the government's response would simply have been to have cut benefits. Even now, the wording is 'the minimum that the law says you need to live on'. There's not supposed to be anything spare after the essentials. But people smoke, people drink, people like eating chocolate... Particularly on the dole - the unemployed smoke more than anyone - more than 50 percent was the figure a few years ago, compared to around 20 percent among those in work. And there we're back to the motivational problem with being on benefits - it can be hard to motivate yourself to do something difficult that shows you are thinking of your future, like giving up smoking, when you can't really see a good future for yourself. There's going to be a 'fuck it' moment among many people, and why not?

Jack, on the other hand, appears to be highly motivated and apparently vice-free. She may have owed some nasty people, too. Either way, the desire to repay her debts led her to sell her stuff. She seems also to be rather law abiding - when I was skint, my advice to someone in her desperate position would quite possibly have been to suggest a bit of shoplifting, which was my solution to lack of money. She could justify that to herself, imo, by saying that her relative poverty wasn't fair on her child. But no, she appears to be law-abiding, and tbh I'm aware that many people find the idea of breaking the law terrifying, the thought of the shame of being caught acting as a strong enough deterrent to stop them ever attempting it. She's also a New Labour type whose cats are called Milliband and Harriet (after Harman).  I don't know whether to laugh or cry about that, but it does tickle my prejudices and make me think that at the very least, she is an extremely conventional person, one who might seriously fall out with someone if they even suggested that she should shoplift, taking a straight 'stealing is wrong under all circumstances' stance.

On balance, I don't hate her, but I don't warm to her much. She does seem a bit preachy about not wasting things, and she also seems very capable of lots of things such as cooking and clothes-making that put her in better stead with little money than someone without those skills, which are hard to acquire on your own. She gave herself the £10 per week food budget initially mostly out of necessity, although also in part at least due to choices she'd made - she doesn't sound like she's entirely been a victim of a heartless world that threw her onto the breadline. She took herself to that breadline in order to spend more time with her child, and I respect her for that - good on her. Perhaps she found it more difficult having NO MONEY than she had imagined it would be. I don't know, but I get the impression that she did at first, which is why she got into debt. But she had her sale and did it with a plan - a plan for a strictly structured thrifty way of life that she wants to continue indefinitely. She's keeping her budget at £10 even though she has a new job and no need to stick to it.

She likes living on her £10 per week food budget. She enjoys the challenge of shopping and making recipes within that now self-imposed discipline. As such, she is a standard-bearer for thrift and dare I say it puritanism - some food and drink tastes great and is expensive, but her kid won't get to try it any time soon. He's stuck with tins of pulses and tomatoes augmented by spices.

Cont. @self


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

Ironically, Jack's diet is exactly the suggestion I made on here a while back on a thread about food deserts, where I suggested that it was possible to live on not too much money and eat healthily more or less wherever you were in the country as long as you were healthy enough to get to the shops, and motivated enough, and had the time to cook. (I also stated very clearly that I didn't expect anyone to do this, that the motivation it would require to sustain such a diet could be hard to come by, and that it might get a bit boring after a while. I said that I didn't blame people at all for getting pizza or chips in occasionally. It's not even that unhealthy to have junk food once a week. You can turn it into a feature of the week,as my dad did with the days or nights my mum worked and he was in charge of food.  My dad is a good example of a man who didn't learn the first thing about cooking, even how to boil and egg, until my mum went back to work after having us, and it took him quite a while to learn - I think Jack underestimates the skills involved in her meals, which I could cook fine: I wouldn't need the recipes, tbh: I know what to do with an onion, some tomatoes, lentils and spices; but my dad, who's learned to cook a mean Sunday roast and how to TIME everything, would be a bit lost with Jack's recipes. I wouldn't fancy eating his lentil stew - and he wouldn't fancy eating mine either particularly, even though mine would be nice!)

I was absolutely flamed from all sides on here for suggesting this, told that I did not know what I was talking about, even though I gave a costed example of a lentil stew. I was very cautious not to sound like I was patronising (that means talking down to ) anyone, but I failed to come across to many as anything other than someone divorced from reality who DOESN'T KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE to be poor, even though I do. Although when I was poor I didn't follow this advice at all - I nicked fillet steaks from the supermarket and ate them. I may even dig the thread out as I'm not exaggerating either about my attempt to be tactful, knowing it was a sensitive subject, nor the reaction I was given - from ymu in particular as I recall, who embarked on a character assassination of me based on the idea that I was arrogant and had a sense of entitlement and was unwilling to listen and learn from what others were telling me.

So it does appear to depend who is saying it what reaction an instruction to be thrifty will get. Mine wasn't even an instruction, merely a suggestion of its existence within the (pretty undesirable) realms of possibility. Jack is saying far more than this, advocating it as a life choice for everyone with a tight budget and also for others who could afford more. She's an evangelist for thrift, and if I'd gone to her blog and taken some quotes from her and posted them up here as my own, I'd have been crucified. It's not just Jamie Oliver who's not allowed to say these things (and he really isn't), but it's also the likes of me, and I would suggest also the likes of Jack. Let's be consistent here. Let her publish her costed budget meals, which aren't all that to me tbh, but I say don't let her get away with promoting it as an entire diet and lifestyle choice. There should be more to eating than that - why deny yourself if you don't have to.

Ultimately, I find that there is less than first meets the eye about Jack, who got herself into a bit of financial trouble (but not terrible by the sounds of it, not made homeless or in emergency housing or hostels - that's far deeper in shit: how do you live on £10 per week if you don't have a kitchen, which can be the position of many single mums in emergency housing waiting to be rehoused - now there's a challenge: some kind of raw fruit and veg diet? The stories a housing officer in Hastings told me about the people he was trying to house were shocking,with whole families stuck in private housing that had been condemned by the environmental health months ago.)

She has learned to cook nice cheap meals while on benefits and shares how she does it with people, but there are no astounding tricks, and a good cook and experienced shopper will already know how to do most if not all of what she writes about. How could there be astounding tricks on a tenner a week? Pulses and tomatoes it is, pretty much every day, livened up with some spices. And always buy the cheapest brand. Well I could have told you that. I did pretty much on here about a year ago,and I had my head bitten off.

So that's her culinary advice sorted. As for her political advice, I'm afraid her cats may have sealed it for her with me, and have shown me a slightly disconcerting future. She sees Milliband as her leader, god help her. I can see a job in the next government in the pipeline if Labour get back in. Tsar of thrift and recycling. Perhaps even a place in the House of Lords? Who knows, but there will be somewhere Milliband can place her to get maximum benefit from her cost-cutting ways. It would be ironic if it were a _Labour_ government that made the cuts in benefits as a result of advice from the Girl called Jack. Watch this space - food prices are set to continue to rise year-on-year: it could happen.

Austerity as a moral good - but only for the poor, clearly. Rationing for the poor in order that the rich can continue to overconsume. That's pretty much been the message of 'austerity' so far. 'Rationing is not just for the poor' could become a theme as 'austerity' continues, and rationing creeps its way up the social scale. But we will be happy in our austerity, as Jack is. We won't even want any more. 


Sorry, turned into quite a ramble. Can't sleep.


----------



## ice-is-forming (Aug 31, 2013)

awesome, well thought out  ramble littlebabyjesus.

this x 1000000000000



> "Ultimately, I find that there is less than first meets the eye about Jack,"


 
shes a mpuppet.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 31, 2013)

I think her recipes are useful to people on a budget and I'm able to overlook that she knows a few local councillors. She is trying to do a good thing and some people on here need to get a grip.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Toast toppers was nice though.


 
Smegma in a small can.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Practical advice on how to survive on far less than you should ever have to survive on. That's fine-ish. Problem is that, even with Jack, there will be things she has access to that others don't. And there is also the 'fuck it' factor. It is reasonable to say fuck it and eat chips sometimes. It is human to do so.


 
Yep.  Practical advice isn't one-size-fits-all, and can come across as condescending if it doesn't take that into account.
The Imperial War Museum's website did an excellent "exhibit" a few years ago of the wartime propaganda exhorting housewifely thrift, etc.  Read 7 decades later, they too come across as incredibly condescending.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> What bit's not true? If she'd hit rock bottom she'd have sold her puter. And her twat. Trumpets like that don't know what rock bottom is.


 
To be fair, "rock bottom" is relative.  For you it might be selling your arse, for her it might be being faced with a socio-economic situation she's never had to contemplate before.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> oh ffs. No I did not.


 
You're as finicking, nitpicking and obfuscatory as a theologian, Liam.

And that *isn't* a compliment.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

Thora said:


> A quick google and it seems that Jack Monroe is from Southend, went to a grammar school, worked in a call centre. That doesn't sound like public school elite to me?


 
TBF, some people do still retain the delusion that grammars are somehow "posh".  Frankly, IME "grammar" merely tends to mean "the staff have a bit of an attitude problem".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm reminded of Primo Levi. Sorry to go all Godwin's, but those who saw the worst of Auschwitz never came back to tell their story. That doesn't invalidate Levi's story, though.


 
One should never start a peroration with "I'm reminded of Primo Levi" unless one is wearing carpet slippers and smoking a pipe in one's study.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Aug 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> TBF, some people do still retain the delusion that grammars are somehow "posh".  Frankly, IME "grammar" merely tends to mean "the staff have a bit of an attitude problem".



There's still an 11 plus in quite a lot of places. Kent and Bucks for a start. And as expensive tuition helps enormously in passing these, grammar kids are often posher on average than the secondary modern ones.


----------



## Thora (Aug 31, 2013)

Mr. Thora went to a grammar school and is definitely not posh and did not have any tuition.  5 out of 12 kids in his class went to grammar school.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Aug 31, 2013)

How does one only have 12 kids in a class?


----------



## Thora (Aug 31, 2013)

Small school


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Aug 31, 2013)

Hmm. It sounds as if he suffered from dysmetropolia.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Depends where you live. They're not in many parts of London.
> 
> Also depends what you're looking at. Local supermarkets sell a very limited and very expensive range of fresh veg. Again, depends where you live, but in many parts of London there are local shops that sell veg that are much cheaper. Where they are cheaper, they can often survive, admittedly.
> 
> With larger supermarkets, they can kill shopping streets by driving the local butcher, baker, etc out of business and having them come and work for the supermarket. Short-term, people may prefer to shop at the supermarket. But I would use fresh meat as the example of what is now happening in supermarkets - they have eliminated the competition and their prices are now really very high. Fresh veg likewise.


 
Many shopping streets are already dead or dying, and that isn't due to Sainsburys' locals or tesco metros, it's down to demographic and economic shifts that started to take place more than 30 years ago.  As I tried explaining elsewhere, local markets took a bullet in the head when the large supermarkets started making direct-with-producer agreements and cutting the produce wholesalers out of the supply chain.  This narrowed the wholesalers' customer base to mostly independent traders, and lowered the volume sales so that the same economies-of-scale as were previously obtained were no longer available.  The result was that your market stalls and independent traders were no longer as competitive on price as they were before.
So, even if you've still got a greengrocer, a baker and a butcher on your high street, they're often effectively viewed as sellers of "premium goods", as opposed to the heart of the local community, unfortunately.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I dont dislike her, was disappointed to find out shes Labour, think it's less about her and more about why it is her the liberal media have picked as the voice of poverty, a very safe pair of hands and she'll still be dining out on the tenner a week line when shes a DWP Minister'


 
Of course she'll still be dining out for a tenner a week once she's minister for the DWP.  She'll have access to the Parliamentary canteen!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> There's still an 11 plus in quite a lot of places. Kent and Bucks for a start. And as expensive tuition helps enormously in passing these, grammar kids are often posher on average than the secondary modern ones.


 
There's no such thing as a "secondary modern".  There hasn't been since I was a kid, you goatcock.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> How does one only have 12 kids in a class?


 
Village school, probably.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Aug 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> There's no such thing as a "secondary modern".  There hasn't been since I was a kid, you goatcock.



I'd missed that. Yes, they seem to call themselves "specialist upper schools" or something these days, but the intake is exactly the same.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 31, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> I'd missed that. Yes, they seem to call themselves "specialist upper schools" or something these days, but the intake is exactly the same.


 
In the transition phase (late '70s until the mid to late '90s) between "secondary modern" schools and "specialist upper schools" or "specialist academies" etc, they were known as....Comprehensives, which they'd been progressively amalgamated with/rolled into since the early to mid '70s.
As for the intake being "exactly the same", I'd disagree. The demographics are different/broader, even allowing for "white flight" and cachement-cruising by some people drawing potential intake away.


----------



## Thora (Aug 31, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> How does one only have 12 kids in a class?


I've checked and there were 30 in his class, 12 in his year.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Aug 31, 2013)

Fair enough. I know the systems in Bucks and in North London best and both of those are probably anomalous, the former having a universal 11 plus still and the latter having lots of selective provision.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

you can't live for ten pounds a week with a child, even a toddler, her weekly menus added up to about 300 calories per day each.

if you were forced to live off a tenner by circumstances, which happens often, then that week would probably involve a lot of blagging, borrowing, stealing and a foodbank. and why didn't her labour councillor friends help whilst her child was starving?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Many shopping streets are already dead or dying, and that isn't due to Sainsburys' locals or tesco metros, it's down to demographic and economic shifts that started to take place more than 30 years ago. As I tried explaining elsewhere, local markets took a bullet in the head when the large supermarkets started making direct-with-producer agreements and cutting the produce wholesalers out of the supply chain. This narrowed the wholesalers' customer base to mostly independent traders, and lowered the volume sales so that the same economies-of-scale as were previously obtained were no longer available. The result was that your market stalls and independent traders were no longer as competitive on price as they were before.
> So, even if you've still got a greengrocer, a baker and a butcher on your high street, they're often effectively viewed as sellers of "premium goods", as opposed to the heart of the local community, unfortunately.


Yes, that's the point I was making in an earlier post about supermarkets monopolising the supply chains, and so stifling local markets and shops.

And now the 'local' Sainsbury's and Tescos are moving in - taking advantage of the process that they themselves started with their large stores. And they are often rather shit, particularly the smaller ones, and also rather expensive. They kill the competition and move in to take over from that competition when it can no longer compete - because the whole system is run by the supermarkets.

There clearly are wholesalers in some parts of the country who have remained in business - in London, for instance, where street markets sell fruit and veg far far more cheaply than the supermarkets. I would guess that the Turkish supermarkets in North London must also have their own separate supply chain. And there are also clearly other parts of the country where there are few or none. There are still some butchers with direct links to farmers in some parts of the country, not necessarily rich parts either - in Hastings, this is true, and again the meat in the butchers is cheaper than meat in the supermarkets.

Ever get the feeling you've been ripped off?


----------



## weepiper (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> you can't live for ten pounds a week with a child, even a toddler, her weekly menus added up to about 300 calories per day each.
> 
> if you were forced to live off a tenner by circumstances, which happens often, then that week would probably involve a lot of blagging, borrowing, stealing and a foodbank. and why didn't her labour councillor friends help whilst her child was starving?


 

She said she did get referred to a foodbank. And her kid wasn't starving, she just didn't have enough to feed him something different if he didn't like what he was given. And how would you feel about begging food off your middle class acquaintances?


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 31, 2013)

Fridgemagnet (in red) Keane to end bananaman's career...

and this is why you should play the ball not the man. Otherwise someone gets hurt.

I think bama was a dickhead, but he didn't break the FAQ as far as I know so his banning is just plain wrong.

But that's the kind of shit that happens in an environment where Ad Hominem attacks are seen as a legitimate argument.

Play the ball.. concentrate on what someone has said... not on the faults of the person who said it. Everyone has faults.

Apologies for going back so far but this thread has moved like lightening overnight and there was a bit to catch up on...



LiamO said:


> I wasn't laying any trap. I posted this on the JO thread...
> 
> and got this from butchersapron (and similar from others) in return...
> 
> ...



Well, unintentionally then you laid a beautiful trap to show how ad hominem discussions fuck up good arguments.

Its really easy to dismiss an opinion just because you don't like the person saying it... but that leads to hypocrisy... which is why it is always better just to concentrate on what is said.

In this case... despite the vast differences between their experiences and finances both Jack and Jamie are saying similar things.

It really doesn't matter much why they are saying it... intention can be important... but not nearly as important as effect. Questioning a persons intentions is a way of trying to guage the effects... but is a very poor way... and often leads to nasty personal abuse. It really is better to avoid it.

What your thread has shown and also what littlebabyjesus has found personally is that when some people don't like the advice given they will turn the debate personal instead of discussing what about the actual content they don't agree with. It doesn't work and it isn't pleasant. 

Especially in difficult subjects. Asking people to eat austerity food is like going to a pub and asking everyone to stop drinking or going to a squat and telling them the downsides of k abuse.

Personally I think its a good thing for people to do... for a few simple reasons...

a) The general nutritional standards of the population should improve.

b) If everyone refused to pay over the odds for food the prices would go down... so this is not just about us... but  also for the future.

c) It would be a step away from rampant consumerism.

To me its totally irrelevant how the Tories would see this... this isn't about them... this is about us. Its about being together and strong as a population. Solidarity. Eating cheaply because that's the right way to make food cheaper for everyone.

I think the 10 limit is arbitrary, though... I would put it more like a need to reasses how much we pay for what foods so we don't overpay for anything.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

if her kid was existing on a couple of hundred calories a day he was by definition starving and that is why this is being distorted into such a dangerous message

and if i'd worked full time to get someone elected I wouldnt think twice about asking if I could borrow a score


----------



## Kizmet (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> if her kid was existing on a couple of hundred calories a day he was by definition starving and that is why this is being distorted into such a dangerous message
> 
> and if i'd worked full time to get someone elected I wouldnt think twice about asking if I could borrow a score



And after you've smoked that.. what?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> her weekly menus added up to about 300 calories per day each.


Got a link for that?. I didn't think she did weekly menus.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 31, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She said she did get referred to a foodbank. And her kid wasn't starving, she just didn't have enough to feed him something different if he didn't like what he was given. And how would you feel about begging food off your middle class acquaintances?


 
Exactly and there are some really disgusting sexist assumptions being displayed on this thread about exactly what it's like being a single mum with no money.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Exactly and there are some really disgusting sexist assumptions being displayed on this thread about exactly what it's like being a single mum with no money.


 
is it vastly different to being a single dad with no money?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> is it vastly different to being a single dad with no money?


 
In _whose_ experience?


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

I don't know, I doubt many people have experienced both

but in my experience, you have more than £10 a week to feed yourself and your child, which is a good thing because if you didnt you would starve


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2013)

Note: If you have a problem with a mod's decision, I would much prefer it if you simply used the report function to convey your concerns rather than launching a full-on pack attack, with posters taking it in turns to deliver a kick in the virtual groin.

Moderating these boards is a fucking hard and sometimes very stressful job, and while I appreciate the chances of being praised for good modding decisions (most of which go unnoticed) are pretty much close to zero, there really is no need to lay in mob-handed over one, relatively minor decision that you may not agree with.

Sure, mods can make mistakes - I certainly do - but some posters here seem to be relishing their chance to join in and slam one of our very best mods. And that concerns me.

Or, to put it another way, this is the kind of behaviour that has led to mods quitting in the part, and with no mods around, there will be no boards because I can't run this place single handedly.


----------



## stuff_it (Aug 31, 2013)

Clair De Lune said:


> Yeah it's possible to get creative and eat cheaply when there is just one person (or one and a non fussy toddler, sure) When I first left home and moved into a shared house with my friends, my mate took it really far and would only buy oats, 3p tins of beans, the cheapest pasta and pasta sauces. She did this because she wanted to save all her money to go out drinking  I spent more on my food but still not that much by buying fresh fruit and veg and milk and cheese and slowly collecting herbs and spices until I could make any meal taste fantastic. My mate with the beans and pasta used to constantly steal my leftover curry and pinch my milk for her porridge and cheese for her beans and pasta heh


Prices for food have changed a lot since then, I'm veggie and due to food intolerances pretty much have to live on fresh veg, dried pulses, pasta, rice etc. I still find it impossible to live on that little.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 31, 2013)

editor said:


> Or, to put it another way, this is the kind of behaviour that has led to mods quitting in the part, and with no mods around, there will be no boards because I can't run this place single handedly.


 
Which behaviour, ours or his?

That's a serious question - erratic, frankly random modding decisions are a worrying sign. Is FM ok?


----------



## weepiper (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> is it vastly different to being a single dad with no money?


 

Would anyone suggest you hadn't hit rock bottom if you'd never prostituted yourself?


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's a serious question - erratic, frankly random modding decisions are a worrying sign.


I'll worry about that if/when they ever become commonplace - which they haven't, as well you know.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 31, 2013)

Are we allowed to disagree with Fridgey again then?


----------



## Callie (Aug 31, 2013)

smokedout said:


> you can't live for ten pounds a week with a child, even a toddler, her weekly menus added up to about 300 calories per day each.
> 
> if you were forced to live off a tenner by circumstances, which happens often, then that week would probably involve a lot of blagging, borrowing, stealing and a foodbank. and why didn't her labour councillor friends help whilst her child was starving?


where are you getting this 300 calories figure from?? maybe she bought £10's worth of lard?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it's not. Or at least it is only in a straightlaced, vegan policeman kind of a way. *Should we be giving up drugs and alcohol too, for the sake of politics?*


 
It was good enough for James Connolly and Malcolm X.

You see it's all about perception and framing. You have phrased your post in such a way that it is impossible to disagree without the reader conjuring up images of some born-again, dry-shite, hair-shirt wearing evangelist. 

And even if the person is _none_ of these (like yer wan Jack) it doen't stop people attacking her.

I very specifically avoiding the use of words like 'should' and instead used 'could' and 'choose/chose'. That is because anything that smacks of imposition triggers all kinds of angry push-back. Attempting to impose significant dietary or drug using changes produces an increase in the consumption of the very things you are preaching about.

Docilely accepting these orders from our 'betters' would be basically be seen as bending over and spreading your cheeks for authority. Thus sugar, nicotine, alcohol and narcotic consumption can be perceived (by the consumers at least) as an act of defiance, an act of 'nobody tells me what to do'. In reality of course it is just one more barefaced self-deception for the consumer and one more shameless manipulation for those who control us.

However. If people _choose_ to make these changes, just because they can, just because they want to, just because it actually gives them some feeling of control over their otherwise pretty much reactive life, a sense of self-sovereignty. of freedom. Then it is a different kettle of fish altogether.

They can't pressurise or manipulate you by threatening to take away something you no longer want.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think my main issue with the OP is that it's quite individualistic.
> 
> Tackling isolation has to be done collectively. Can we agree that things like the IWCA's running club in Oxford would be a good way forward? Or neighbours sharing produce from gardens/allotments, even.


 
why is it necessarily individualistic Fozzie Bear? Can decisions/actions like this not be taken communally? The IWCA running club had to start with an idea and action from one or two people. Once you tale action, no matter how small, further (bigger) action becomes so much easier.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> You're as finicking, nitpicking and obfuscatory as a theologian, Liam.


 
not really. the inverted commas were important... but ignored.



LiamO said:


> This. the '...' were because 'delicious' is
> 
> a) a loaded, deeply subjective word - for example just look at the emotionally-laden reminiscences of childhood comfort foods above (mosyt of which would get a resounding yeeuch from kids of today.
> 
> ...


 
i was waiting for someone to post 'you're a fuckin liar' but it must be 8den's day off. 

The plain fact is that people chose to misread my post, to attack a position I did not hold and hadn't expressed. I was genuinely interested in seeing who would or wouldn't read what I had actually written - and who would respond to what they wantwed me to have written.

I could have been more helpful to Kittyp but she continued with this long after I had made the post above, so I couldn't be arsed.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

Callie said:


> where are you getting this 300 calories figure from??


 

Good question. smokedout?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

editor said:


> Note: If you have a problem with a mod's decision, I would much prefer it if you simply used the report function to convey your concerns rather than launching a full-on pack attack, with posters taking it in turns to deliver a kick in the virtual groin.


 
I can't speak for others but I can speak for myself.

1. I was the first to question Fridge's behaviour... long before his ban finger got twitchy. Any virtual kicks I delivered were justified and signposted a couple of hours in advance. I was party to the discussion that preceded the banning and the *only* place for me to state that I thought it was wrong was here... where the discussion was taking place. Report button me arse. Please Sir, Fridgey's being naughty? (of course, somebody not so involved may well have been justified in taking such an approach)

2. The 'pack' mentality _is_ an issue on these boards. What do you propose to do about it - other than when you feel one of your mates is getting it unfairly?


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

kittyP said:


> We are often on austerity eating atm (unless my mum brings us shopping which thankfully is reasonably frequent) and I have to say, if people started doing this when they didn't need to, I would find it fucking offensive and patronising.


 
I was gonna just type ... Really? Why?

But I realise we have been at cross purposes for much of this thread. So instead I will ask you to clarify exactly what 'doing this' means to you in this context?





kittyP said:


> People sitting at home making themselves suffer is not going to do anything positive at all.


 
again this is highly emotive language and a bit of a quantum leap. If people _choose_ to eat less shite they are not suffering at all, are they?



kittyP said:


> No one is going to be interested in Liam sitting at home just consuming limited "fuel" apart from him, for a pious sense of self worth.


 
and yet thousands of people are interested in _her_ doing it and more importantly how she is doing it - with a smile on her face and a sense of empowerment..

My interest in this is little to do with food really. I am an overweight, carnivorous, sugar addict and as far from a yoghurt knitting vegan as I can imagine.

And... ignoring me and concentrating on the issue in hand... why doss someone who felt powerless developing a sense of self-worth through deliberate action - and publicising it to inspire others, seen as an act of self-serving piety?


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> 2. The 'pack' mentality _is_ an issue on these boards. What do you propose to do about it - other than when you feel one of your mates is getting it unfairly?


Read back through the comments and count up how many people all decided to steam in and have a pop over what was a relatively minor modding decision. All mods make mistakes from time to time but we're not here to be your virtual punchbags.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

Like I said. I was speaking for myself... and seperating myself from the 'pack'.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 31, 2013)

T





editor said:


> Read back through the comments and count up how many people all decided to steam in and have a pop over what was a relatively minor modding decision. All mods make mistakes from time to time but we're not here to be your virtual punchbags.


The people who 'steamed in' were all people who'd either posted loads or otherwise read the thread closely. And it's not too much to ask that mods raise their hands and say sorry, got that one wrong.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

careful now. Itchybanfingeritis may be catching.


----------



## TruXta (Aug 31, 2013)

I'm off to board a flight, so that will be all from me.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2013)

LiamO said:


> careful now. Itchybanfingeritis may be catching.


Is it really? Perhaps I'd better ban you now then just to prove your point and not make you look like a mendacious little shit stirrer.


----------



## editor (Aug 31, 2013)

TruXta said:


> T
> The people who 'steamed in' were all people who'd either posted loads or otherwise read the thread closely. And it's not too much to ask that mods raise their hands and say sorry, got that one wrong.


Except that often there is no "right" or "wrong" because many modding decision are _judgement calls_.

Sometimes those calls will prove to be in line with what the majority of users (and not just the loudest posters) think and sometimes it won't.

The bottom line is whether you think posters all taking it in turns to slag off a mod for a relatively minor decision they disagree with is acceptable or not.

From my reading of this thread, that point was put across very early on and I saw nothing beneficial in other posters all joining in to put the boot in (some _many_ hours later), unless the intention was to try and humiliate FM.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

editor said:


> From my reading of this thread, that point was put across very early on and I saw nothing beneficial in other posters all joining in to put the boot in (some _many_ hours later), unless the intention was to try and humiliate FM.


 
Fair dues.


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

editor said:


> Is it really? Perhaps I'd better ban you now then just to prove your point and not make you look like a mendacious little shit stirrer.


 
g'way and fuck yourself, you sanctimonious cunt


----------



## LiamO (Aug 31, 2013)

just got your PM.

Stick that up your hole as well. Ban away... and make it permanent you bell-end



LiamO said:


> They can't pressurise or manipulate you by threatening to take away something you no longer want.


----------



## smokedout (Aug 31, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Would anyone suggest you hadn't hit rock bottom if you'd never prostituted yourself?


 
no, but if they had, compared to a hungry baby i couldnt afford nappies for, that would have been the least of my problems, particularly if I had a posh job lined up and a 25k book advance in the bank when they did


----------



## smokedout (Sep 1, 2013)

anyway (pissed) she lost her job and spent a few months on benefits, during which point she had a bit of trouble with her housing benefit claim whilst still maintaining a wide social network, winning community awards and helping get labour councillors elected, if thats rock bottom then her rock bottom is a good day for lots of people, so fuck her as the voice of poverty and fuck her austerity shit, and fuck her lying about starving her kid to big up her political ambitions and fuck her cats milliband and harriet.


----------



## Santino (Sep 1, 2013)

LiamO said:


> not really. the inverted commas were important... but ignored.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Have you ever considered doing something to address the distressing frequency with which posts of yours are misunderstood by others?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 1, 2013)

smokedout said:


> anyway (pissed)


no shit.


----------



## Geri (Sep 1, 2013)

smokedout said:


> anyway (pissed) she lost her job and spent a few months on benefits, during which point she had a bit of trouble with her housing benefit claim whilst still maintaining a wide social network, winning community awards and helping get labour councillors elected, if thats rock bottom then her rock bottom is a good day for lots of people, so fuck her as the voice of poverty and fuck her austerity shit, and fuck her lying about starving her kid to big up her political ambitions and fuck her cats milliband and harriet.



And she is really called Melissa.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 1, 2013)

Santino said:


> Have you ever considered doing something to address the distressing frequency with which posts of yours are misunderstood by others?



Santino misses a point again. Oh lordy.

Actually you haven't missed the point at all, have you? You are an intelligent chap so I can only conclude that you have, once again, _chosen_ to 'mis-read' and to misrepresent. .


----------



## Santino (Sep 1, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Santino misses a point again. Oh lordy.
> 
> Actually youi haven't missed the point at all have you. You are an intelligent chap so I can only conclude that you have, once again, _chosen_ to 'mis-read' and to misrepresent. .


Can you in all sincerity deny that, in general, a significant number of your posts on these boards are interpreted in a way that runs counter to way you intend?


----------



## fishfinger (Sep 1, 2013)

Geri said:


> And she is really called Melissa.



Aaaagh! not the bees!


----------



## Nice one (Sep 1, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Okay so please indicate links for all of that.



she was (as of may last year) the press officer for Labour's Local Campaign Forum in Southend which apparently all labour councillors are accountable to.
http://warelane.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/southend-lcf-an-encouraging-beginning/


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 1, 2013)

LiamO said:


> not really. the inverted commas were important... but ignored.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




So, as I said, you're as finicking, nitpicking and obfuscatory as a theologian.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 1, 2013)

weepiper said:


> no shit.



yeah, id probably have edited that last night but the board went down right after I posted it

was reading her blog though and i'm liking her less and less

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/06/11/anti-g8-protestors-have-got-it-all-wrong/


----------



## LiamO (Sep 1, 2013)

Santino said:


> Have you ever considered doing something to address the distressing frequency with which posts of yours are misunderstood by others?


"What is to give light must endure burning."
Viktor E. Frankl


You are at it again, aren't you Santino , you troll? 

You do know the difference between 'misinterpret', 'misread' and misunderstand don't you?

Why not grow a pair and post a thread in P&P that actually states a position (even one that may seem at odds with the Urban consensus) and discuss/defend it? But you don't that, do you? You just troll around making (usually off thread) drive-by, over-the-shoulder snipes... cos that 's all you are fit for, Mr Vanilla.

You even 'follow' yer man kabbes (just as he apparently 'follows' you) so you can troll around sniping at him and stinking up lots of threads. What a strange way for a grown man to 'invest' his intellect


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 1, 2013)

littlebabyjesus it's all very well to advocate shoplifting in times of hardship but I can fully understand that as a single mum she felt unable to do that in case she was caught and prosecuted. As the main parent to her son she would have worried that she couldn't pay fines if prosecuted, or even worried that she would be sent to jail and leave her son at the mercy to social services. 

Now realistically even I know that prison is unlikely for a first offence but as women are in prison for more minor offences (failure to pay TV licence fees for example) compared the male prison population, I can see why she wouldn't want to risk it.

So it's not as simple as 'shoplift some steak'.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 1, 2013)

Anyway, isn't a bit Daily Mail to be yelling that she insist on maintenance from her kid's father? He may be a fantastic dad but he might be unemployed himself and not have any money to give her, no matter how much he wanted to help.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 1, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Now realistically even I know that prison is unlikely for a first offence but as women are in prison for more minor offences (failure to pay TV licence fees for example) compared the male prison population, I can see why she wouldn't want to risk it.



I'm not sure she'd have much sympathy with them



> Why, as a taxpayer and as a member of society, am I paying for prisoners to have Playstations and to paint their walls in pretty colours, when I have had to cancel my own TV license because I cannot afford the bill?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 1, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I'm not sure she'd have much sympathy with them


She might not. Even more reason why I think she wouldn't risk some shoplifting.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life; everyone must carry out a concrete assignment that demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated, thus, everyone's task is unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.
Viktor E. Frankl

But don't do it... cos people on Urban... who have done fuck all themselves...  will call you a cunt


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

What a fucking pathetic mess.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

whereas the long-running comentariat thread is an oasis of reasoned debate?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

From your OP that expanded into _yeah i meant that all along i really did, and that too, and that, _to bamala and frances double act on friday night - the most pathetic example of _look i've been poor everyone _i've ever seen on here (frances at least has has the courage to crawl into a corner and reflect on his idiocy) to smokedouts unchallenged inaccuracies to lbj's craven me-too-isms. What a fucking shower. What use are you cunts to anti-cuts movement?


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> From your OP that expanded into _yeah i meant that all along i really did, and that too, and that, _too bamala and frances double act on friday night - the most pathetic example of _look i've been poor everyone _i've ever seen on here *(frances at least* has has the courage to crawl into a corner and reflect on his idiocy) to smokedouts unchallenged inaccuracies to lbj's craven mee-too-isms. What a fucking shower. What use are you cunts to anti-cuts movement?



whereas Bama was banned


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> whereas Bama was banned


Nicely avoided everything there liam._ We need to talk about this. _Not we with me you boring_ i have a project for you_ don't.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life; everyone must carry out a concrete assignment that demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated, thus, everyone's task is unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.
> Viktor E. Frankl
> 
> But don't do it... cos people on Urban... *who have done fuck all themselves*...  will call you a cunt


Who are you to say that I have done fuck all? You know nothing about me nor what I've done, never mind anybody else on this thread.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> whereas the long-running comentariat thread is an oasis of reasoned debate?


That would be the long-running commentariat thread that ended, yes? And in parts it was an excellent debate. You would know that if you'd participated on it at all recently - at least before it's rapid demise.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Nicely avoided everything there liam.



Sorry, were there actually questions in your post? I thought you had got a dose of headmasteritis having taken the head staggers from the lofty heights of your high horse. What questions do you have? I will answer them.



butchersapron said:


> _ We need to talk about this. _



Yes. Lets.



butchersapron said:


> Not we with me you boring_ i have a project for you_ don't.



But only if we can talk in english


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Who are you to say that I have done fuck all? You know nothing about me nor what I've done, never mind anybody else on this thread.


Liam did _a project_. Now if you don't do _a project,_ well, then maybe you just don't believe in his mr motivator self-help rubbish.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Who are you to say that I have done fuck all? You know nothing about me nor what I've done, never mind anybody else on this thread.



why do you, bizarrely, think that was aimed at you... rather than all the people who have queued up to cunt this woman off for daring to publish her blog?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Sorry, were there actually questions in your post? I thought you had got a dose of headmasteritis having taken the head staggers from the lofty heights of your high horse. What questions do you have? I will answer them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is it by chance your stupid thread became this piss pot? Or is it the way you tell 'em? Answer that one - as the last honest poster here.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

so you accuse me - on this thread - of getting all headmastery and then 'invest' your time going round threads this evening trying to close them down in a most headmasterish fashion? Behave yourself you buck eejit.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

Look at what you produced liam. Well done.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> why do you, bizarrely, think that was aimed at you... rather than all the people who have queued up to cunt this woman off for daring to publish her blog?


I didn't think it was aimed _specifically_ at me, I did however think it was incredibly judgmental and very holier-than-thou so I responded.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Liam did _a project_. Now if you don't do _a project,_ well, then maybe you just don't believe in his mr motivator self-help rubbish.



Now I understand you. You wretch. 

Are you so bereft of cognitive judgement (or pissed)  that you think dragging RL stuff onto here is OK now?


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Look at what you produced liam. Well done.



Kiss my stones, you waster.


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> From your OP that expanded into _yeah i meant that all along i really did, and that too, and that, _to bamala and frances double act on friday night - the most pathetic example of _look i've been poor everyone _i've ever seen on here (frances at least has has the courage to crawl into a corner and reflect on his idiocy) to smokedouts unchallenged inaccuracies to lbj's craven me-too-isms. What a fucking shower. What use are you cunts to anti-cuts movement?


Why don't you challenge smokedout  inaccuracies?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Now I understand you. You wretch.
> 
> Are you so bereft of cognitive judgement (or pissed)  that you think dragging RL stuff onto here is OK now?


Lord, you just sink lower. Let's talk about this blah blah


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Why don't you challenge smokedout  inaccuracies?


I did. He said Jack Monroe went to private school - i went out of my way to point out that she didn't.


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I did. He said Jack Monroe went to private school - i went out of my way to point out that she didn't.





butchersapron said:


> I did. He said Jack Monroe went to private school - i went out of my way to point out that she didn't.


Inaccuracies is a plural,and smoked out provided links


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> I didn't think it was aimed _specifically_ at me, I did however think it was incredibly judgmental and very holier-than-thou so I responded.



I am genuinely puzzled by your post.

It was aimed fairly and squarely - and IMO legitimately - at the many posters on this thread who have cunted this woman off... for no real reason... just that she has done something _useful_ with her internet time... instead of the nit-picking wank-fest that is Urban


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Inaccuracies is a plural,and smoked out provided links


Well let's get this one done first, Was he right that she went to private school?


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Lord, you just sink lower.



_I_ sink lower? Who is the one using mysterious references to RL stuff to 'back up' his nonsensical 'theory'?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

Oh yeah i forget Liam's_ martyr me_ post. Lack of nails ruined that one.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I am genuinely puzzled by your post.
> 
> It was aimed fairly and squarely - and IMO legitimately - at the many posters on this thread who have cunted this woman off... for no real reason... just that she has done something useful with her internet time... instead of the nit-picking wank-fest that is Urban


Many posters seem to have a problem with Jack Monroe, yes. But that doesn't mean that they haven't done anything useful themselves which was what your post implied.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh yeah i forget Liam's_ martyr me_ post. Lack of nails ruined that one.



wtf are you drooling on about? explain yourself... in english please


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Well let's get this one done first, Was he right that she went to private school?


I can't find any evidence for it,so imo no


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Many posters seem to have a problem with Jack Monroe, yes. But that doesn't mean that they haven't done anything useful themselves which was what your post implied.



Thank you for providing the opportunity to clarify then.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I can't find any evidence for it,so imo no


So, we're already 50% of his claim down. What would you do with someone who said i'm telling you lies 50% of the time? What's the rest?


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

Bama, are you about for a bit? If you are please argue with this wretched wastrel, I am off to bed shortly and he has no-one to play-fight with. Also see if you can tease out wtf he is slobbering about... other than he came on to complain about this thread being a mess ... and sparked off another one


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> wtf are you drooling on about? explain yourself... in english please


We are only minutes away from liam's _you're better than that/i respect you too much/you're too intelligent to say tha_t trope.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

What annoys me most about his thread is that it doesn't matter what she went through, some people are determined to make out she wasn't _really_ poverty-stricken. Poverty isn't a game to be won with the winner the one who is most poverty-stricken for longest.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> What annoys me most about his thread is that it doesn't matter what she went through, some people are determined to make out she wasn't _really_ poverty-stricken. Poverty isn't a game to be won with the winner the one who is most poverty-stricken for longest.



Yes. I pointed out pages ago that poverty/rock bottom etc are all very subjective experiences... as did VP and some others (I think).

But it's just typical of this place that some posters prefer invest their time and intelligence finding ever more petty ways to attack her... not for what she writes... but for having the temerity to write it... for not having checked her privilege first. That's the kind of shit that stops people doing things.


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> So, we're already 50% of his claim down. What would you do with someone who said i'm telling you lies 50% of the time? What's the rest?


I think he believes a grammar school is a private school,whereas in this country i don't exactly know,in the six counties they're not, the vast majority of their pupils passed the 11+,some pay fees(expensive fees).The majority of the pupils at them come from relatively privileged backgrounds ime .Hardly 50% of what he said.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

Whereas in this country? A Grammar school is not a private school. That's it. And for the record in this country they require a % of people to be w/c to exist.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> We are only minutes away from liam's _you're better than that/i respect you too much/you're too intelligent to say tha_t trope.



You _are _too intelligent for this shit... but you are also deeply scared of doing something more useful.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> You _are _too intelligent for this shit... but you are also deeply scared of doing something more useful.


Dr motivator!!!


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh yeah i forget Liam's_ martyr me_ post. Lack of nails ruined that one.



still waiting for you to decypher this one, sweetpea.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Dr motivator!!!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> still waiting for you to decypher this one, sweetpea.


_Isn't it really hard remembering what i said, how i acted then thinking about it. Maybe i need someone else to help me do it._


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Bama, are you about for a bit? If you are please argue with this wretched wastrel, I am off to bed shortly and he has no-one to play-fight with. Also see if you can tease out wtf he is slobbering about... other than he came on to complain about this thread being a mess ... and sparked off another one


Probly not and i don't want to get into another session of people missing the point.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> _Isn't it really hard remembering what i said, how i acted then thinking about it. Maybe i need someone else to help me do it._



talking to you is like reading abook with pages missing. Why can't you just explain what you mean. Obviously every posturing finger-wag makes perfect sense in your head but the rest of us cannot actually hear those voices... we can just read what you wrote


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> What annoys me most about his thread is that it doesn't matter what she went through, some people are determined to make out she wasn't _really_ poverty-stricken. Poverty isn't a game to be won with the winner the one who is most poverty-stricken for longest.


What people,where?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Whereas in this country? A Grammar school is not a private school. That's it. And for the record in this country they require a % of people to be w/c to exist.


Whereas for example, the King Edward VI School Foundation in Birmingham has both a grammar school and a fee-paying school as part of it's collection of schools.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> What people,where?


littlebabyjesus' posts for example.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Probly not and i don't want to get into another session of people missing the point.



are you chastened?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> are you chastened?


You should feel supported, one of the boys.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> What people,where?


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> You should feel supported, one of the boys.



I haven't felt the need to be part of a gang for many years. Unlike your good self, cherub. Are you gonna explain that martyr post crack or not?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I haven't felt the need to be part of a gang for many years.


Last free man. What a great thread. Can i just thank you again for it?


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Whereas for example, the King Edward VI School Foundation in Birmingham has both a grammar school and a fee-paying school as part of it's collection of schools.



How dare you question the authority of the head boy? You're in big trouble now.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Last free man. What a great thread. Can i just thank you again for it?



You could thank me by fucking off of it, Flashman.

In future I will submit thread ideas to you for approval... oh, no... I won't actually... cos your are not (sorry to be the one to break it to you) _actually_ the head prefect at all, are you? (except in your head)


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> are you chastened?


I'm attacking,apparently


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> littlebabyjesus' posts for example.


Peoples a plural,who else?

Edit:fwiw lbj did a wee bit of research and changed their mind


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Peoples a plural,who else?


Read the thread for yourself, over the last few pages. I'm not here to explain it to you.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> You could thank me by fucking off of it, Flashman.
> 
> In future I will submit thread ideas to you for approval


Maybe you could police your thread a bit better? Not allow such idiocies to take up 5 fucking pages. (oh i forgot, dialogue - with who?) Not for the first time you didn't have the brains for the debate you claimed to want to have. (Oh yeah and repeatadly making up what you really meant all along)


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm attacking,apparently



yes. relentlessly.... apparently. Welcome back. Mebbe have a bit of craic before I sign off on Tuesday.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I'm attacking,apparently


Are you not going to heed the masters word or what?


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Read the thread for yourself, over the last few pages. I'm not here to explain it to you.


I've read the whole thing a couple of times


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe you could police your thread a bit better?



I'll leave the police work to you Inspector Flashman.

I don't claim any ownership of any thread. Maybe I'll start one where I do. You won't be allowed to contribute. Is that OK with you?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I've read the whole thing a couple of times


And you agree with everything that's been written?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'll leave the police work to you Inspector Flashman.


Yeah, shit thread, you look like a cunt, so does bama, frances and the posh one who can't shut up and smokedout. Score.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

whereas you come across as a paragon of virtue and master of intellectual vigour (in your own head).


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, shit thread, you look like a cunt, so does bama, frances and the posh one who can't shut up and smokedout. Score.


Who is posh on this thread?


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> And you agree with everything that's been written?


I've never agreed with everythin that's been written on any thread,ever...that makes no sense at all,especially on a thread where theres been so much disagreement


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> I'll leave the police work to you Inspector Flashman.
> 
> I don't claim any ownership of any thread. Maybe I'll start one where I do. You won't be allowed to contribute. Is that OK with you?


You started this one, therefore it's your thread.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Who is posh on this thread?



reckon he means you. Told you you'd be in trouble.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Who is posh on this thread?


Why are you asking me this? Littlebabyjesus.


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, shit thread, you look like a cunt, so does bama, frances and the posh one who can't shut up and smokedout. Score.


So back to the other "50%", any progress,cos i'm willin to listen


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> You started this one, therefore it's your thread.



Some men are born thread owners... some achieve thread ownership... and some have thread ownership thrust upon them

... except Buthcher's ... who owns the whole P&P section... apparently


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I've never agreed with everythin that's been written on any thread,ever...that makes no sense at all,especially on a thread where theres been so much disagreement


The disagreement is with you and Frances going mental and joini in some made hate fest. It was clear that neither of you had read her site. It was fucking pathetic. Target people and target them properly. You owe me an apology.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Why are you asking me this? Littlebabyjesus.


Because I didn't know who was posh, did I? And now I do, so thanks.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> So back to the other "50%", any progress,cos i'm willin to listen


Are you agreeing again that someone who has been shown to lie 50% of the time (100% of the time in this at this point) is someone you can trust? Are you going to get the other 50% of the quote out or not?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> reckon he means you. Told you you'd be in trouble.


*snort*

The last time I got called posh I was at school, and it was because I didn't talk with a Birmingham accent like my tormentor. A comprehensive school in a new town by the way. About as far from posh as you can get.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Some men are born thread owners... some achieve thread ownership... and some have thread ownership thrust upon them
> 
> ... except Buthcher's ... who owns the whole P&P section... apparently


Some are just misunderstood because they tell the truth though dialogue. A  bit like James.


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> The disagreement is with you and Frances going mental and joini in some made hate fest. It was clear that neither of you had read her site. It was fucking pathetic. Target people and target them properly. You owe me an apology.


First off i didn't go mental,whatever that means,i'd read loads of her site,pathetic is your opinion,fair enough.Hate is a strong word and misrepresentative.I didn't target anyone,show me where that happened.What the fuck do i owe you an apology for?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

bamalama said:


> First off i didn't go mental,whatever that means,i'd read loads of her site,pathetic is your opinion,fair enough.Hate is a strong word and misrepresentative.I didn't target anyone,show me where that happened.What the fuck do i owe you an apology for?


No you hadn't. You had to be _told _who she was then carried on as if you hadn't read the site. Because you hadn't. And yeah, you did, you both fired each other up to a hate fest.

I didn't say that you targeted her, i said target people, target them properly. 

For making me type this shit on this thread.


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

Supposition and more supposition,and there's that word hate again.Don't get the targeting stuff,and as for an apology...what do you think?
No ones making you type anything ye seem to be managing that all by yourself.I'm done here now,crack on...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

That you're very sorry?


----------



## bamalama (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> No you hadn't. You had to be _told _who she was then carried on as if you hadn't read the site. Because you hadn't. And yeah, you did, you both fired each other up to a hate fest.
> 
> I didn't say that you targeted her, i said target people, target them properly.
> 
> For making me type this shit on this thread.


The first time i asked who she was on thursday 11.48 am.The second time she came up in my posts was friday 8.53 pm.
In the mean time i'd read a fair chunk of her blog,some interviews,some videos on sky news,and a brief  conversation about her on here between you and someone else.By that stage i'd come to my own conclusions.Which i outlined on this thread.I never attacked the lassie because i thought she was fairly irrelevant in the scheme of things except in relation to LiamO op,which i also said on this thread at least twice.
Mostly i never had a go at her personally because she came across,to me, as someone who maybe suffered a breakdown/some form of post natal depression after the birth of her kid,and on balance that would be unfair.It didn't stop some people trippin over themselves to defend her from a personal attack that never happened.The only reason i bothered to mention her again is cos FridgeMagnet could barely contain his over excitement,in her defence,which i thought was curious,and i got banned for that,bit of a so what moment for me though...As a matter of fact she wasn't mentioned at all between pages 2 and 10(i think)of the thread.Now,what about my apology for makin me type out this tedious shite on this thread...
As for an apology to you,i'll be a bit clearer for ye this time...away and fuck yourself.Now in case ye haven't picked up on that.away.and .fuck.yourself


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Because I didn't know who was posh, did I? And now I do, so thanks.


Neither does butchersapron who has never met me and knows far less about me than he thinks he does. 

As usual he is taking a position of superiority over everyone while contributing nothing himself. Ba always has more to say about other posters than about the subject at hand. He's a thoughtless cunt.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life; everyone must carry out a concrete assignment that demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated, thus, everyone's task is unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.
> Viktor E. Frankl
> 
> But don't do it... cos people on Urban... *who have done fuck all themselves...*  will call you a cunt



Just like to apologise for this part of this post.

basically I did exactly what I was accusing others of... making arrogant assumptions about people I don't actually know... because it suited my narrative... 


sorry.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As usual he is taking a position of superiority over everyone *while contributing nothing himself*. Ba always has more to say about other posters than about the subject at hand. He's a thoughtless cunt.



but a 'thoughtless cunt' who is king of the urban castle, no?... in a Laurie Penny-esque kind of way.


----------



## steeplejack (Sep 2, 2013)

what an absolute trainwreck of a thread.

embarrassing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Everyone has his own specific vocation or mission in life; everyone must carry out a concrete assignment that demands fulfillment. Therein he cannot be replaced, nor can his life be repeated, thus, everyone's task is unique as his specific opportunity to implement it.
> Viktor E. Frankl
> 
> But don't do it... cos people on Urban... who have done fuck all themselves...  will call you a cunt



Always with the projecting of your own sins onto others, eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> littlebabyjesus it's all very well to advocate shoplifting in times of hardship but I can fully understand that as a single mum she felt unable to do that in case she was caught and prosecuted. As the main parent to her son she would have worried that she couldn't pay fines if prosecuted, or even worried that she would be sent to jail and leave her son at the mercy to social services.
> 
> Now realistically even I know that prison is unlikely for a first offence but as women are in prison for more minor offences (failure to pay TV licence fees for example) compared the male prison population, I can see why she wouldn't want to risk it.
> 
> So it's not as simple as 'shoplift some steak'.



It certainly isn't, and as you mention, women are more likely to get custodial sentences for minor crimes, even first offences.  Why take the risk when what you've got to lose is worth so much more than a tray of supermarket meat?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> littlebabyjesus it's all very well to advocate shoplifting in times of hardship but I can fully understand that as a single mum she felt unable to do that in case she was caught and prosecuted. As the main parent to her son she would have worried that she couldn't pay fines if prosecuted, or even worried that she would be sent to jail and leave her son at the mercy to social services.
> 
> Now realistically even I know that prison is unlikely for a first offence but as women are in prison for more minor offences (failure to pay TV licence fees for example) compared the male prison population, I can see why she wouldn't want to risk it.
> 
> So it's not as simple as 'shoplift some steak'.



I agree. I thought I'd made it clear that didn't think it was that simple. Equally, it's not as simple as 'follow my recipes'.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> What annoys me most about his thread is that it doesn't matter what she went through, some people are determined to make out she wasn't _really_ poverty-stricken. Poverty isn't a game to be won with the winner the one who is most poverty-stricken for longest.



Poverty is, however, relative, so some people will always adopt a "you weren't a real pov, just a tourist" approach, losing sight of the fact that those of us who've lived below the poverty threshold for most of our lives income-wise are better-schooled in *dealing* with the effects and viccissitudes of poverty than someone who gets dropped in at the deep end.
I've got nothing particularly for or against Jack Monroe, but I do take umbrage at how she's *represented* by some elements of the media, i.e. as some "voice of the (deserving) poor", telling the rest of us how to eke out our pennies, and leading us into voluntary self-abnegation in the service of being good little povs. She's entitled to her views.  That doesn't mean I have to pay attention to them.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 2, 2013)

I just can't see how something so essentially individual-based as deciding to eat more lentils and homemade soup as some political statement instead of 'sticking it to the man' by eating sugary fatty comfort food for the same price is going to advance the cause of the poor working class in any useful way. It's middle-class left liberal student stuff. Fine if that's your personal choice but how is it going to make anything change?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I just can't see how something so essentially individual-based as deciding to eat more lentils and homemade soup as some political statement instead of 'sticking it to the man' by eating sugary fatty comfort food for the same price is going to advance the cause of the poor working class in any useful way. It's middle-class left liberal student stuff. Fine if that's your personal choice but how is it going to make anything change?


 
Yes, exactly.

I was trying to get into this with Liam earlier and he said:



LiamO said:


> why is it necessarily individualistic Fozzie Bear? Can decisions/actions like this not be taken communally? The IWCA running club had to start with an idea and action from one or two people. Once you tale action, no matter how small, further (bigger) action becomes so much easier.


 
Which is interesting, but confusing. I think most people see meals as being a private thing for their family (and possibly friends on occasion) rather than a social/communal thing. Whereas a running club is something people already recognise as being a social activity.

Decisions about diet can't be taken communally because people don't see that as a communal thing. You'd need new structures in place before you even got to "what shall we eat?".


----------



## weepiper (Sep 2, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Yes, exactly.
> 
> I was trying to get into this with Liam earlier and he said:
> 
> ...



Yup. Food co-ops in local areas, with that sort of collective backing it might work. But the problem with food co-ops is they usually require you to buy in bulk (big sacks of rice, pasta etc) and very many people living in this kind of poverty have tiny kitchens or no safe, dry storage space for bulk-purchase groceries.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

And the really great thing about the above is that _what _shall we eat quickly becomes _why _are we eating this? _How _is it that we are eating this? 

(I expect Liam to come back and say this was what he meant all along).


----------



## smokedout (Sep 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I did. He said Jack Monroe went to private school - i went out of my way to point out that she didn't.



fair play, I was wrong about that, but I'd have bet money it said in The Guardian that she went to private school on a scholarship and that it used to say I went to a posh school, blame my parents on her website, can't find any trace of either now though

should have corrected it, been quite a full on weekend and saw it had been corrected so didnt


----------



## smokedout (Sep 2, 2013)

anyway, its not her background I think is significant, but her seemingly uncritical allegiance to Labour and the message she's putting out, a hand up not a hand out, I applied for hundreds of jobs whilst being thrifty and decent and honest, and finally after working hard success as the modern voice of poverty

shes a poster girl for welfare reform whether she wants to be or not and IDS must read her stuff and not believe his luck


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fair play, I was wrong about that, but I'd have bet money it said in The Guardian that she went to private school on a scholarship and that it used to say I went to a posh school, blame my parents on her website, can't find any trace of either now though
> 
> should have corrected it, been quite a full on weekend and saw it had been corrected so didnt


I saw the_ blame my parents_ thing on saturday - not going to look for it now as not much point, but you didn't imagine it.


----------



## Nice one (Sep 2, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Whereas for example, the King Edward VI School Foundation in Birmingham has both a grammar school and a fee-paying school as part of it's collection of schools.



and manchester grammar school is a private school


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Always with the projecting of your own sins onto others, eh?



yes. Just as well I acknowledged that very same Jungian aberration... and apologised for it... nearly 3 hours before you posted then ViolentPanda ? 



LiamO said:


> Just like to apologise for this part of this post.
> 
> basically I did exactly what I was accusing others of... making arrogant assumptions about people I don't actually know... because it suited my narrative...
> 
> ...


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> yes. Just as well I acknowledged that very same Jungian aberration... and apologised for it... nearly 3 hours before you posted then ViolentPanda ?


Which was still a few hours after it was pointed out to you last night.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

Yes, by you. Thank you. Unfortunately last night I was distracted by the head boys badgering. it was a very easy apology to make this morning


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Yes, by you. Thank you. Unfortunately last night I was distracted by the head boys badgering. it was a very easy apology to make this morning


I wasn't looking for an apology, although you might want to apologise to VP given that he's posted several times about why he can't read all posts.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I just can't see how something so essentially individual-based as deciding to eat more lentils and homemade soup as some political statement instead of 'sticking it to the man' by eating sugary fatty comfort food for the same price is going to advance the cause of the poor working class in any useful way. It's middle-class left liberal student stuff. Fine if that's your personal choice but how is it going to make anything change?



This thread was never really about food though. In the OP I said...



LiamO said:


> Well, could you do it? Could you choose to follow her recipes for a month to see where it would leave you and yours... not just financially *but in terms of taking action for yourself, feeling empowered,* throwing off the shackles of deeply-conditioned consumerism?
> 
> I reckon it's a matter of mindset.



What I was referring to was this young woman, who found herself in a position that left her feeling helpless (and where many might feel hopeless and victimised) found a way - simply by changing her mindset - to take action. And to feel empowered by that action. So much so that she sought to inspire others... whilst resisting the temptation to get all Jamie-Oliver finger-waggy.

I continued... 



LiamO said:


> If you chose to think of each mouthful as swallowing your pride as well as food; as a reflection of your dire financial circumstances; as an infliction the bastard tories have forced upon you; then I'd imagine you would struggle to last two days. You'd be so busy producing excess bile and froth that you'd hardly be able to digest the food. With that mindset, every mouthful would stick to your teeth and stick in your craw.
> 
> Now if the plan is to fan the embers of anger and produce enough venom to go and wreck your local conservative club/Sainsbury's/tories head then you would be on a winner, But rage is as non-substainable (is that a word) as it is unproductive.
> 
> If, however, you chose to think of it as political action of the most liberating kind; as a chance to reverse so many years of societal conditioning; to free yourself and your family from the sugar-induced coma of inertia.... then every mouthful becomes, in and of itself, a subversive act, a step on the path to personal freedom.



As can be seen clearly by many of the immediately hostile posts that followed, many people _chose_ to see this (indeed _insisted _on seeing this) purely in terms of an imposition (whether by the state or it's finger-wagging stooges). And as we know, imposition is hard to swallow. In fact it makes us all angry quickly.

That too is a legitimate choice. But IMO it is a limited one... and one I have come to believe the Right are quite happy for us to have. 

My default reaction (over many, many years) would be exactly the knee-jerk 'fuck off you patronising yoghurt knitter - I'll eat what I fuckin want' that many on here have displayed (in varying hues). I have traditionally viewed many veggies/healthy eaters as preachy types and IME that preachiness puts off a lot of people.  Which was handy cos then I could call them cunts and carry on regardless. That is in no small part due to the long-established tendency of people on the left to know exactly what we don't want, but when asked what it is we do want, we often answer 'Not this'.




LiamO said:


> I'm not saying it would be easy, especially with kids, but most things worth having don't come easy.it would be worth a go, no?



Again. This is not really about food but a metaphor for taking action - however small - which in turn breeds more (bigger) action. It is a baby-step and no more. It is not a cure all and I never suggested it was a strategy for anything other than liberating your mind, achieving some degree of self-sovereignty and giving people the self-confidence to change other things.

IME, the left seems full of people (myself included) who want to change the world but who in reality struggle to change their socks.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think most people see meals as being a private thing for their family (and possibly friends on occasion) rather than a social/communal thing



I would argue that most people would see running (as a form of exercise) as a mostly solitary thing. 

I would also imagine that the IWCA running club met with much resistance in the beginning from people who might have chosen to regard and deride it too as an imposition by health freaks and geeks.


----------



## LiamO (Sep 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Yup. Food co-ops in local areas, with that sort of collective backing it might work.



Not being smart here weepiper, but how exactly do 'collective' initiatives happen without one or two individuals (acting collectively) to initiate them?



weepiper said:


> But the problem with food co-ops is they usually require you to buy in bulk (big sacks of rice, pasta etc) and very many people living in this kind of poverty have tiny kitchens or no safe, dry storage space for bulk-purchase groceries.



Yes. Anything like this includes significant logistical and personal challenges.



LiamO said:


> (I'm not saying it would be easy, especially with kids, but most things worth having don't come easy.it would be worth a go, no?



For me, Jack is not saying 'Oh look what I did... you should do it too... so you can be as good as me' like jamie Oliver et al.

Rather, she is saying 'I did this. It felt good and empowering. What could _you_ do if you put your mind to it?'

For me there is a world of difference.

Anyway I'm signing off Urban tomorrow (kids are back at school and I need to get up two hours earlier of a morning) so I don't suppose I will be posting much more on this thread. But then again, tomorrow is my day off work...


----------



## weepiper (Sep 12, 2013)

She's one of the three people talking on this Child Poverty Action Group film about families living on a low income. Doesn't come across as a posh girl slumming it to me.


----------



## andysays (Sep 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She's one of the three people talking on this Child Poverty Action Group film about families living on a low income. Doesn't come across as a posh girl slumming it to me.



And she's also miles away from saying "I'm able to get by on a pittance with my clever recipes, so why aren't you too, you thick prole scum with your TVs and shit..."


----------



## treelover (Sep 18, 2013)

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/18/jack-monroe-starve-benefits-england


New Jack article in the G about benefits, its very good as I would have expected.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 18, 2013)

andysays said:


> And she's also miles away from saying "I'm able to get by on a pittance with my clever recipes, so why aren't you too, you thick prole scum with your TVs and shit..."


 
Yep, in many ways she's an absolute nightmare for the government. Her message seems to be: even if you are as frugal, prudent and economical as you can possibly be with the increasingly meagre State benefits, you are still going to live an extremely difficult, unpleasant and undignified existance. Her example blows wide open the simplistic and phoney strivers/shirkers, deserving/undeserving poor divisions that the government use to demonise those living in poverty.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Yep, in many ways she's an absolute nightmare for the government. Her message seems to be: even if you are as frugal, prudent and economical as you can possibly be with the increasingly meagre State benefits, you are still going to live an extremely difficult, unpleasant and undignified existance. Her example blows wide open the simplistic and phoney strivers/shirkers, deserving/undeserving poor divisions that the government use to demonise those living in poverty.



bollocks does it, look at her demands, living wage, calendar monthly housing benefit (which will happen under UC and was a local authority decision anyway, not a national one), scrap the bedroom tax and bring back Crisis Loans - all soft Labour stuff, nothing to trouble Miliband or IDS that much

and this



> While it is easy for people to pontificate on what I could have done differently (taken my former employer to a tribunal would be first on my list if I could relive the past two years) or berate my "absent" friends and family (to whom I was too embarrassed and humiliated to admit how bad things were)



so humiliated that when she had a sale to sell all her possessions she sent out a press release and got the local press down to photograph it (no doubt utilising the contacts she had as the local Labour press secretary), this was to pay off rent arrears, which just over 2 weeks earlier she said were less than two week's rent (due to an hb fuck up which presumably got sorted out) and she had a live housing benefit claim

anyway this sale raised £3 grand, which isn't bad because she'd already sold her Ford Kia, netbook, smart phone and DVD collection in the previous six months.  didn't last long though because by October she was living on just £7 a week and then a tenner a week by December when she had a full splash 
in the (Mirror Group) Sunday People - presumably her income had risen because by then she had a column in the local newspaper and was working self-employed as an artist

I'm sorry, but this shit just doesnt stack up to me

and then theres this


> I could stay off work, claim my Housing Benefit, Child Support, Child Tax Credit, Income Support and Council Tax Benefit but I’m not going to. My small boy, aged only two, knows ‘Mummy work’ and knows he goes to ‘Sammys house’ because ‘Mummy work.’ Mummy work. Mummy will work, son.



which combined with this


> You don't know whether the young woman walking down the street with a black baby and a lanky blond nine-year-old on her arm is a foster carer or a "slut". I was that young woman taking the kids to the shops to give my parents, who were foster carers, five minutes' peace. I was always met with whispers and stares, because people judge and people assume. One woman told me that I "should have kept my legs shut". I told her that I was a virgin, and, funnily enough, she didn't have a comeback.



makes me wonder exactly where she is coming from


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

sorry I got that wrong, she had two local newspaper columns when that piece went in The People



> *The blog led me to land a newspaper column with two local newspapers, and set up as self employed to declare my income. Once self employed, I started to sell my photography under the same umbrella, and suddenly found myself accidentally employed. I didn’t stop there, and now make Cufflinks, cushions, canvas pictures, cross stitch, children’s clothes, bunting, patchwork quilts and I’m sure by tomorrow there will be something else on the list as my imagination is working quicker than my hands can these days!*


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> bollocks does it, look at her demands, living wage, calendar monthly housing benefit (which will happen under UC and was a local authority decision anyway, not a national one), scrap the bedroom tax and bring back Crisis Loans - all soft Labour stuff, nothing to trouble Miliband or IDS that much


 
What matters isn't the political solutions that she proposes but the dominant narratives that she helps to contest - her writings provide a powerful counter-challenge to the stuff about scroungers clocking the system, living it large, being lazy etc. Dunno why you're so obsessed with the total value her assets, has she got a large flat screen t.v too do you suppose?


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

because she's a labour party stooge, who I'd suggest has been less than honest, and who's narrative is really just a fluffy version of the scroungers/skivers rhetoric


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> because she's a labour party stooge, who I'd suggest has been less than honest, and who's narrative is really just a fluffy version of the scroungers/skivers rhetoric


 
Not really, the basis of that narrative is that poverty is primarily the product of individual failings of moral/phychological character. JM's argument has consistantly been that the increase in poverty is principly the product of government policy.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

> Suddenly those hours when Small Boy is at nursery are vital, *for me to seek out an Internet connection and work on the website*, fill in forms, research. I discovered that my printer opens at 8am, and I am there, with boy in pushchair and orders in my hand.



based on her year long claim that she doesnt have internet access

same fucking paragraph



> Blogging has taken a noticeable backseat, as I read the news, think about it a bit, *turn my computer on to write something and find I have emails to answer* instead. And a column to write!


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> based on her year long claim that she doesnt have internet access
> 
> same fucking paragraph


Could be she meant she had no internet access at home, and instead went to cafes etc. Anyway, you sure have it in for her don't you?


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Not really, the basis of that narrative is that poverty is primarily the product of individual failings of moral/phychological character. JM's argument has consistantly been that the increase in poverty is principly the product of government policy.



her narrative is that poverty in her case is principly the product of government policy, but a bit of tinkering about, mainly concentrated on pushing for a living wage to make work pay will sort things out

why isn't she calling for higher benefits?


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Could be she meant she had no internet access at home, and instead went to cafes etc. Anyway, you sure have it in for her don't you?



then how did she get emails on her computer


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> then how did she get emails on her computer


In a cafe/at a mate's/use your imagination? FFS.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> In a cafe/at a mate's/use your imagination? FFS.



why does she keep her computer in an internet caf "*turn my computer on to write something "*


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Anyway, you sure have it in for her don't you?



I didn't, I thought she was great till I found out about the labour links and then read her blog and saw where she's really coming from


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> why does she keep her computer in an internet caf "*turn my computer on to write something "*


Could be that she has a laptop?


smokedout said:


> I didn't, I thought she was great till I found out about the labour links and then read her blog and saw where she's really coming from


Yeah, she's like the epitome of all that is wrong with this country innit.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Could be that she has a laptop?
> 
> Yeah, she's like the epitome of all that is wrong with this country innit.



no, but she ain't a real champion of claimants either, or hasn't shown herself to be - she's a non-critical and active member of a party that supports what is happening - and if she can't see that, or won't speak against it, then her newly found status as the voice of poverty is a problem


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> no, but she ain't a real champion of claimants either, or hasn't shown herself to be - she's a non-critical and active member of a party that supports what is happening - and if she can't see that, or won't speak against it, then her newly found status as the voice of poverty is a problem


Well, criticise her for that then instead of doing this weird and creepy shit where you waffle on about whether or not she really really had internet access or not.


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

Or you know, you could ask her all these questions herself.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Well, criticise her for that then instead of doing this weird and creepy shit where you waffle on about whether or not she really really had internet access or not.



do you not think whether she is telling the truth is at all relevant?


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> do you not think whether she is telling the truth is at all relevant?


If you have doubts, why not ask her? Your recent attempts at poking holes in her story have been pretty woeful.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> If you have doubts, why not ask her? Your recent attempts at poking holes in her story have been pretty woeful.



not to anyone who understands the benefits system and actually lives in poverty they aren't.  christmas 2012: 


> Jackie has only £10 a week to spend on meals for her and son Johnny, two, and is among thousands of people who will be queuing for food handouts this Christmas.



when this article was published she had two newspaper columns, a craft business, and was debt free (according to her).  even if shes only pulling £100 a week out of her self-employment, or less, shes still got a lot more than a tenner a week to spend on food, unless she isn't claiming in-work benefits out of some sense of martyrdom

so she's lying, or isnt claiming what she was legally due which is up to her, but thats her choice, and given shes spent a year blogging about in work benefits its unlikely she isnt aware what shes entitled to.  just because she's lying in our direction (if you know what I mean) doesnt mean she always will


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

and someone with two newspapers columns, a middle class (her words) family, a craft business and no debts - which is the truth about her position when that piece was published, would not have got her a splash in a labour supporting tabloid would it - shes misrepresenting her situation to further her ambitions, and that tbh that pisses me off, because there are people in the position she describes and they have no voice


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not to anyone who understands the benefits system and actually lives in poverty they aren't.  christmas 2012:
> 
> 
> when this article was published she had two newspaper columns, a craft business, and was debt free (according to her).  even if shes only pulling £100 a week out of her self-employment, or less, shes still got a lot more than a tenner a week to spend on food, unless she isn't claiming in-work benefits out of some sense of martyrdom
> ...


I know fuck all about the benefits system, what I was on about was your pitiful rant about her internet access. But again, why not ask her directly?


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I know fuck all about the benefits system, what I was on about was your pitiful rant about her internet access. But again, why not ask her directly?



are we only supposed to discuss people in the news we've had a conversation with now?


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> are we only supposed to discuss people in the news we've had a conversation with now?


 the hell are you on about?


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

why do I have to ask her, she cant be telling the truth - someone in her position and paying £140 a week in rent, earning £75 a week would receive around £362.60 per week - so £220 a week after rent, now thats far from minted, but she says she has no debts, so where is the tenner a week for food thing coming from


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

Why shouldn't you ask her? She'd be the best placed to answer your questions after all.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

because I dont fucking want to, because it would cause a row, and because id rather talk about it here for now, is that okay?


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

and I dont need to ask her to find out what benfits she would have been entitled to, I know


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> because I dont fucking want to, because it would cause a row, and because id rather talk about it here for now, is that okay?


It would cause a row? With her? Maybe if you write to ask her why she's a liar and Labour stooge yes. OTOH you could try and be a bit polite.


----------



## killer b (Sep 18, 2013)

You're being a bit weird trux. Its not really out of order to discuss innacuries in high profile columnists writing is it? Happens all the time on here...


----------



## treelover (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> based on her year long claim that she doesnt have internet access
> 
> same fucking paragraph


 
if you do a Hari on her, then disadvantaged people have lost an important ally, your work is fantastic, but we also need more mainstream voices.

same as Sue Marsh who also is too close to Labour


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

I've never known Sue to be dishonest even if she does have a naive faith in party politics


----------



## killer b (Sep 18, 2013)

treelover said:


> if you do a Hari on her, then disadvantaged people have lost an important ally, your work is fantastic, but we also need more mainstream voices.
> 
> same as Sue Marsh who also is too close to Labour


 you fucking what? Can't say ive looked into it deeply enough to have much of an opinion, but if she's lying she's lying. Fuck having allies like that.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

killer b said:


> you fucking what? Can't say ive looked into it deeply enough to have much of an opinion, but if she's lying she's lying. Fuck having allies like that.



I don't think she is lying. I think smokedout has a fixed idea of what can and can't be called 'poor' and she doesn't fit it.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

I'm not denying she was poor at times, but her claims made in The People, which was the article that brought her to wider attention, don't stand up

and does no-one else find it a little  that a local labour press secretary should be picked for a big splash in a labour supporting newspaper as the voice of poverty


----------



## killer b (Sep 18, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I don't think she is lying. I think smokedout has a fixed idea of what can and can't be called 'poor' and she doesn't fit it.


As I say, I dont know enough to have an opinion. But the idea she shouldn't be questioned because she's a 'good ally for the poor' is a whole load of bullshit.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

fucks sake, Rowling's at it as well


> "Rather than focusing on ever more austerity measures, it's investment in single-parent employment that will allow single parents to work their own way out of poverty and secure real savings from the welfare bill."




http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/sep/18/jk-rowling-government-poor-people

Single parents are working.  Current policy is that parents with kids under 5 dont have to work - this shit is to the right of IDS


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

killer b said:


> You're being a bit weird trux. Its not really out of order to discuss innacuries in high profile columnists writing is it? Happens all the time on here...


There's material inaccuracies, which are perfectly legitimate, and then there's rubbish like did she or did she not have Internet access. I've no particular interest in defending this columnist fwiw.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fucks sake, Rowling's at it as well
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can see both sides of this. Yes, it's wrong to just constantly push single parents of young children into work, any work (the IDS route) because there's huge barriers in place for most of us (childcare being the obvious one). But equally, if you _do_ want to work before your kids reach five, that doesn't mean you're 'buying into the skivers v scroungers rhetoric'. I went back to work when my youngest one was 16 months, because I was offered a job and because frankly I was fucking bored of being isolated at home in a rural area with no-one but my children for company all week, having already done it for 5 years. Going to work means retaining some identity outside of 'single mother'. It means talking to adults, getting to go to the toilet unaccompanied, tea breaks. It's not just about the money. I don't know where Gingerbread get that more single parents working would save the government money though; I was 'costing' the taxpayer far more when I first started working again than I was on Income Support because I was getting full housing benefit and tax credits for 70% of nursery fees for two kids. That's a lot of money.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 18, 2013)

I know smokedout's already posted it, but this is quite telling.



> You don't know whether the young woman walking down the street with a black baby and a lanky blond nine-year-old on her arm is a foster carer or a "slut".


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

I agree if single parents want to work, that's fine, but presenting it as the only available way out of poverty is dangerous and will be used to justify extending conditionality to parents of under 5s - to help them like Rowling and Jack asked them to


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I know smokedout's already posted it, but this is quite telling.



there's a whole lot of giving the benefit of the doubt needs to be done to read that paragraph as anything but at least Im not one of those chavs


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I know smokedout's already posted it, but this is quite telling.



I don't think it is. She's talking about other people's assumptions.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> there's a whole lot of giving the benefit of the doubt needs to be done to read that paragraph as anything but at least Im not one of those chavs



And why bring colour/race into it?


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> And why bring colour/race into it?



Clumsy way of indicating that the person judging will assume the children are by different fathers, the ultimate single mum crime in the eyes of the right-wing bystander.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I don't think it is. She's talking about other people's assumptions.



yes, they assumed she was a slut, but she was a nice girl and a virgin, come on - I'll accept it was badly written/edited but its pretty difficult to defend


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 18, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I don't think it is. She's talking about other people's assumptions.



The way I read it she's implying that if the young woman is the mother of the kids rather than being a foster carer then she's fair game for criticism. The rest of the article seems to be saying little more than "don't judge people who aren't at work during the day, they might not be benefit scum they might work shifts".

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/18/jack-monroe-starve-benefits-england


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 18, 2013)

Total misreading.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> The way I read it she's implying that if the young woman is the mother of the kids rather than being a foster carer then she's fair game for criticism. The rest of the article seems to be saying little more than "don't judge people who aren't at work during the day, they might not be benefit scum they might work shifts".
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/18/jack-monroe-starve-benefits-england



I think you've got it completely arse about tit tbh.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Total misreading.



easy to read it that way though.  I find this of more concern



> When I first needed to claim housing benefit, the payments were delayed, leaving me in arrears. I had to involve my MP and the town clerk, but the rent arrears were already piling up. When payments are delayed, bills bounce, leaving you with hundreds of pounds in bank charges, on top of your rent arrears. When you go back to work, you need to pay for a month's fees in advance to secure your child's nursery place. The money allocated to benefits is for housing, food and bills. But when it is not paid in full, or not paid on time, when you have to wait 11 weeks for it due to "administrative backlog", the money also has to pay for late payment fees, bank charges and rent arrears.
> 
> This mess is not unique to me. According to the Trussell Trust, the most cited reason for referral to food banks is delayed and missed benefit payments. Meaning, yes, Mr Gove, you were half right that food bank use is down to financial mismanagement, but it is the financial mismanagement of the Department for Work and Pensions, and the financial mismanagement of local authorities that administer housing benefit. Not quite the fault of the "feckless poor".



its not that there's a problem with benefits, or wider political direction, its down to DWP screw ups, no mention of sanctions, the benefit cap etc, just incompetence, which labour will no doubt fix - pure party line


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

The way I read it was that she was saying 'you think you know everything about these people because they're on benefits, whereas actually you know fuck all. Fuck off with your quick judgements.'


----------



## weepiper (Sep 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> easy to read it that way though.  I find this of more concern
> 
> 
> 
> its not that there's a problem with benefits, or wider political direction, its down to DWP screw ups, no mention of sanctions, the benefit cap etc, just incompetence, which labour will no doubt fix - pure party line



But when you're on the sharp end, that_ is _what causes hardship. Delays and fuckups. When everything is paid on time you can budget and yeah it's shit but you can predict the level of shitness, but it's so teetery on a knife edge of being able to cope with it that it only takes a little fuckup or backlog to send it all crashing down. I think you're barking at the wrong target here, at worst she's a naive soft-leftie who hasn't had as many years of this crap as others have to beat the optimism that Labour might do anything about it out of her yet.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

great, just what we need, another labour supporting naive soft leftie speaking for the poor, we're ok for them aren't we, a touch over-burdened with them even


----------



## TruXta (Sep 18, 2013)

_Not poor enough, not left enough_.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 18, 2013)

what a jaw-droppingly stupid thing to say


----------



## fiannanahalba (Sep 19, 2013)

Fake poverty.


----------



## weepiper (Sep 19, 2013)

This is destructive bullshit.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 19, 2013)

she didnt need to lie weepiper, shes been through a few rough months, theres no doubt about that, but by dramatically over-egging things - presumably with one eye on a political/media career - shes poisoned what little she is saying thats of use

thats why this me me me shit is so toxic


----------



## Nylock (Sep 19, 2013)

...and so what if she does end up having a career in politics/the media and continually uses it to counteract the equally toxic 'benefit claimants = feckless scroungers' rhetoric from the right? What then? If she spends the remainder of her life campaigning to draw attention to the fact that pretty much all of this bile directed at the poorest in society is disingenuous bullshit that needs to be countered -will she then achieve some sort of redemption? Or is she damned for eternity?


----------



## Greebo (Sep 19, 2013)

Nylock said:


> ...and so what if she does end up having a career in politics/the media and continually uses it to counteract the equally toxic 'benefit claimants = feckless scroungers' rhetoric from the right? What then? If she spends the remainder of her life campaigning to draw attention to the fact that pretty much all of this bile directed at the poorest in society is disingenuous bullshit that needs to be countered -will she then achieve some sort of redemption? Or is she damned for eternity?


It depends on whether she'll take the line of "I got out so why can't they?" or not.


----------



## Nylock (Sep 19, 2013)

Greebo said:


> It depends on whether she'll take the line of "I got out so why can't they?" or not.


True enough, but at least at the moment that doesn't seem to be the case... Hopefully she won't get caught out by hubris and ends up crossing that line...


----------



## Frances Lengel (Sep 19, 2013)

Maybe, but it's what I think anyway.


Nylock said:


> True enough, but at least at the moment that doesn't seem to be the case... Hopefully she won't get caught out by hubris and ends up crossing that line...



It's my belief that everything she's doing so far is done with the intent of enabling her to cross that line. I could be wrong of course, but it's what I reckon. We'll see in due course.


----------



## Nylock (Sep 19, 2013)

I hope you're not proven to be right... There's precious few people in the public eye speaking out against this malevolent bollocks as it is


----------



## smokedout (Sep 19, 2013)

Nylock said:


> ...and so what if she does end up having a career in politics/the media and continually uses it to counteract the equally toxic 'benefit claimants = feckless scroungers' rhetoric from the right? What then? If she spends the remainder of her life campaigning to draw attention to the fact that pretty much all of this bile directed at the poorest in society is disingenuous bullshit that needs to be countered -will she then achieve some sort of redemption? Or is she damned for eternity?



she's not doing that now, she's just doing evil Tory stuff.  we'll see next week, she's speaking at at least one fringe event at the Labour Party conference, if she doesn't use that platform and her new found celebrity to tear Liam Byrne and Miliband to shreds over Labours policies on benefits then she's just another careerist with a good line in dishonest poverty porn


----------



## Nylock (Sep 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's not doing that now, she's just doing evil Tory stuff.


What evil tory stuff is this? Got any links? 



smokedout said:


> we'll see next week, she's speaking at at least one fringe event at the Labour Party conference, if she doesn't use that platform and her new found celebrity to tear Liam Byrne and Miliband to shreds over Labours policies on benefits then she's just another careerist with a good line in dishonest poverty porn


Couldn't agree more on this. She should take them to task just as much for their own brand of shitness tbh...


----------



## treelover (Sep 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's not doing that now, she's just doing evil Tory stuff.  we'll see next week, she's speaking at at least one fringe event at the Labour Party conference, *if she doesn't use that platform and her new found celebrity to tear Liam Byrne and Miliband to shreds over Labours policies on benefits then she's just another careerist with a good line in dishonest poverty porn*


 
I agree with that.


----------



## smokedout (Sep 23, 2013)

> *James Grant-Morris* ‏@*jamesgm*  22 Sep
> @*MsJackMonroe* How long before we see Jack in the House of Commons? I'm sure Labour are sounding her out and she would be gold dust.
> 
> Retweeted by *A Girl Called Jack*


https://twitter.com/MsJackMonroe

I think it's pretty obvious where this is going


----------



## tufty79 (Sep 23, 2013)

killer b said:


> you fucking what? Can't say ive looked into it deeply enough to have much of an opinion, but if she's lying she's lying. Fuck having allies like that.


amen.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 4, 2013)

So apparently she read this out at the Conservative Party conference, it's brilliant http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/10/...sacre-conservative-party-address-jack-monroe/


----------



## treelover (Oct 4, 2013)

bit confused here, is that what she would have liked to have said at the conference?

if she was there perhaps at a fringe meeting, then what response did she get?


----------



## J Ed (Oct 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> bit confused here, is that what she would have liked to have said at the conference?
> 
> if she was there perhaps at a fringe meeting, then what response did she get?



She explains in the comments section



> The Oxfam fringe event on Food Banks. I didn’t count the audience but it was standing room only in the end, and people perched on window cills



She also says that the Tories tried to ban her from going, deleted any reference to her in the agenda and the audience applauded her but not two Tory speakers.


----------



## treelover (Oct 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> She explains in the comments section
> 
> 
> 
> She also says that the Tories tried to ban her from going, deleted any reference to her in the agenda *and the audience applauded her but not two Tory speakers*.


 
I wonder who the audience was?

btw, they expunged Farage as well, attacked on both flanks


----------



## treelover (Oct 4, 2013)

Btw, has Jack been on QT yet?


----------



## treelover (Oct 4, 2013)

> I also attended a fringe meeting on welfare reform; and caused a bit of consternation when it came to asking questions at the end. True to form, when they smugly proclaimed that they would be “helping” people by giving them “work experience” for “their benefits”, I asked loudly and clearly (as the whole room turned round) “If there are jobs to be had, if someone like Tescos needs shelf stackers or the local council needs litter pickers, why not pay a full time wage for them and call it a job? That would be helping people into employment, not exploiting them by paying them a third of the amount that their colleague receives.” The answer I received was unsatisfasctory, again insisting that the “work experience” would be good for people, so I pressed on, quoting Article 23 in the Human Rights Act that states that everyone has a right to equal pay and fair remuneration for work. They didn’t really have an answer to that,* but I was congratulated at the end by a lot of delegates for my question – which surprised me*!


 
Could this be right, there are One Nation conservatives, but Tories opposed to the welfare agenda?


----------



## chilango (Oct 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> Could this be right, Tories opposed to the welfare agenda?



Of course it could.


----------



## treelover (Oct 4, 2013)

Well, they need to be more visible, as do those in the LP, etc.


----------



## chilango (Oct 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> Well, they need to be more visible, as do those in the LP, etc.



No they don't.

Think about _why_ they'd be opposed to the current welfare agenda and then the consequences of them leading the Conservative Party.

It wouldn't be good for us.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> Could this be right, there are One Nation conservatives, but Tories opposed to the welfare agenda?


Fringe events are not really all events organised by the parties whose conference it is. Through they will all organise fringe events for you at a cost.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> Could this be right, there are One Nation conservatives, but Tories opposed to the welfare agenda?



I thought this was interesting (although not strictly talking about welfare) http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9000951/the-missing-middle/


----------



## chilango (Oct 4, 2013)

...and treelover not just "one nation" conservatives might be opposed to the current welfare agenda but equally a harder headed tendency who seek a more sustainable, longer term strategy for implementing, and profiting from, neo-liberalism than the current adolescent posturing passing for policy in the govt.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I thought this was interesting (although not strictly talking about welfare) http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9000951/the-missing-middle/


 
The middle classes are just waking up to the fact that they're about to get the treatment the working classes have experienced over the past thirty years.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 4, 2013)

How odd that today we so rarely hear these people bleating that the middle class were always really working class anyway (and that was a common theme from hard-right to hard-left).


----------



## chilango (Oct 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> How odd that today we so rarely hear these people bleating that the middle class were always really working class anyway (and that was a common theme from hard-right to hard-left).



Oi!

I argue that.

Sorta.


----------



## Belushi (Oct 13, 2013)

Belushi said:


> The middle classes are just waking up to the fact that they're about to get the treatment the working classes have experienced over the past thirty years.


 
oh noes, not the middle class 

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/oct/12/middle-class-young-people-future-worse-parents


----------



## Humberto (Oct 13, 2013)

Probably because middle-class children are not much more important to the Neo-libs than anyone else who isn't proper privileged. The economy is all smokes and mirrors. You go on a workfare scheme or job finding scheme ( so you aren't unemployed). Or if you are a university leaver you might be 'lucky' enough to get an internship after which you are fucked off. Surely the problem is people wanting to be and actually believing they are 'middle class'. If you don't have lands which you are named after you aren't part of the the Neo-Lib plan.

The thing is their system is so hollow. We could bury them and their superiority like farm animals. Are we STILL afraid of people that are richer than us? Just kill them and then see how rich they are.


----------



## treelover (Oct 21, 2013)

Ah, I ve found the quote about the Lady Bountiful during WW2, it was Lady Astor addressing an wartime austerity meeting in the East End, she was describing how "a nutritious soup can be made from the head and tail of a fish" when a voice from the back retorted, "Who ate the fish?".."


----------



## LiamO (Oct 21, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Are we STILL afraid of people that are richer than us? Just kill them and then see how rich they are.



off you go then... lead the way so we can follow


----------



## Humberto (Oct 22, 2013)

Fuck the enemy. I will lead you. A bow and arrow and I will tread all over them.They hate us so lets fill them with bullets.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Oct 22, 2013)

Bullets fired from a bow?


----------



## yield (Oct 22, 2013)

Special bullet arrows?

How to get justice without becoming like those I hate?

I ain't one for internet revenge fantasys and that. Things are messed up plain to see.


----------



## Balbi (Oct 30, 2013)

I like her writing.


----------



## Kizmet (Oct 31, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Fuck the enemy. I will lead you. A bow and arrow and I will tread all over them.They hate us so lets fill them with bullets.



Yes. I think you should lead. You go right ahead. We'll be right behind you. Really.

no, really.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 31, 2013)

You can actually shoot bullets from a crossbow.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 31, 2013)

superglue a bullet to the end of a crossbow bolt?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 31, 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet-shooting_crossbow

Not amazingly popular but perfectly usable.


----------



## prunus (Nov 1, 2013)

Down with the Judean People's Front!

Focus on the enemy, people.


----------



## likesfish (Nov 1, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet-shooting_crossbow
> 
> Not amazingly popular but perfectly usable.


http://www.crossbows4u.co.uk/eagle-pro/4539742904 only £500*


----------



## Balbi (Nov 1, 2013)

Littlejohn's gone after her today in the Wail.

Her response: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/01/dear-richard-littlejohn-heres-some-polish-for-that-turd/

Some of Littlejohn's comments match up with some made on here.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 1, 2013)

Littlejohn's had a predictably loathsome pop at her in the Mail yesterday

http://dontfeedthetrolls.wordpress....ving-to-pay-for-it-writes-richard-littlejohn/

here's her reply

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/01/dear-richard-littlejohn-heres-some-polish-for-that-turd/

I fucking _love _Jack Monroe and I don't care what anyone thinks about that.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 1, 2013)

Balbi said:


> Littlejohn's gone after her today in the Wail.
> 
> Her response: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/01/dear-richard-littlejohn-heres-some-polish-for-that-turd/
> 
> Some of Littlejohn's comments match up with some made on here.


snap!


----------



## Balbi (Nov 1, 2013)

JINX!


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2013)

i don't like it when people respond to criticism of people on benefits having tattoos / tellies / whatnot by saying 'but yeah, i got them when i was working'. 

it seems to me that it still plays into the idea that there is hardworking families, down on their luck due to economic circumstances, and grasping skivers who spend their benefits on tattoos & tellies.


----------



## Nylock (Nov 1, 2013)

Jack's riposte to littlecock was great reading. The comments thread on littlecock's hatchet piece was, largely, depressing reading posted by the usual cavalcade of bitter arseholes commenting on any right-wing rag piece. Luckily these days I don't read beyond the first post or two lodged by these knuckledragging mouth-breathers...


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2013)

what i mean is, her defence seems to be "but i'm not one of _them_ - here's why" rather than a defence of _them_, which is what is desperately needed atm.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 1, 2013)

It's a mistake to respond to the article at all tbh, as if it was some sort of reasoned debate and he wasn't just pulling out every stereotype in the world (somehow she manages to be a Guardian luvvie as well as a feckless single mother and a scrounging doley). He doesn't care and his audience doesn't care and replying to the "points" just puts you on the defensive.

The only response Littlejohn needs is a slap round the chops.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 1, 2013)

killer b said:


> i don't like it when people respond to criticism of people on benefits having tattoos / tellies / whatnot by saying 'but yeah, i got them when i was working'.
> 
> it seems to me that it still plays into the idea that there is hardworking families, down on their luck due to economic circumstances, and grasping skivers who spend their benefits on tattoos & tellies.



Tbf if you read his article he was having a go for having spent money on tattoos at all, not because he thought she'd spent benefits on them. If she hadn't spent her wages on tattoos she'd have had money to pay for non-existent overnight childcare I suppose? I don't think he really does joined up thinking.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 1, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's a mistake to respond to the article at all tbh, as if it was some sort of reasoned debate and he wasn't just pulling out every stereotype in the world (somehow she manages to be a Guardian luvvie as well as a feckless single mother and a scrounging doley). He doesn't care and his audience doesn't care and replying to the "points" just puts you on the defensive.
> 
> The only response Littlejohn needs is a slap round the chops.



As she points out, he's done her a favour really because every time someone shares her blog she gets advertising money.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2013)

I haven't read his article, but I got the gist from hers. I dont think what he says affects my point though, which is that the narrative Monroe is pushing still allows for the  skivers/strivers divide - she's just putting herself on the side of the strivers. its the narrative that should be challenged, not where you are in it.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 1, 2013)

killer b said:


> I haven't read his article, but I got the gist from hers. I dont think what he says affects my point though, which is that the narrative Monroe is pushing still allows for the  skivers/strivers divide - she's just putting herself on the side of the strivers. its the narrative that should be challenged, not where you are in it.



Sure. But she also exposes the lie that you can escape this kind of judgemental sneery bollocks by getting a job. You can't, you'll always be a feckless single mum. See that wee lassie who had a hatchet job done on her in a Newsnight interview by Allegra Stratton.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 1, 2013)

killer b said:


> what i mean is, her defence seems to be "but i'm not one of _them_ - here's why" rather than a defence of _them_, which is what is desperately needed atm.



I'm currently crediting her with having made points that convey the message that no-one is like the stereotypes Littlejohn chucks around.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 1, 2013)

killer b said:


> I haven't read his article, but I got the gist from hers. I dont think what he says affects my point though, which is that the narrative Monroe is pushing still allows for the  skivers/strivers divide - she's just putting herself on the side of the strivers. its the narrative that should be challenged, not where you are in it.



I agree with that, but I can also see why some writers, especially partisan ones, might be wary of deviating too far from their party's narrative.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 1, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Littlejohn's had a predictably loathsome pop at her in the Mail yesterday
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2482111/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Ah-Pesto-Meet-poverty-poster-girls.html?ico=home^headlines



Does Littlejohn think his readers have the attention spans of mayflies? In the space of a couple of paragraphs he goes from this,



> Presumably, the lovely Cait Reilly wasn’t available, on account of the fact that she was in the High Court complaining that being made to work in Poundland in exchange for claiming benefits was ‘slave labour’. She thought she should choose what kind of work she was out of, while continuing to receive the Jobseekers’ Allowance. The court didn’t agree, but did decide that the Government’s initial measures to encourage  people into work were legally flawed. The rules have since been changed.



to this



> Incidentally, you may recall Cait Reilly initially claimed that working in a supermarket was an affront to her dignity. So you will be amused to learn she has now got a job — on the check-out in Morrisons. *It would appear that Duncan Smith’s welfare reforms are working*, after all.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 1, 2013)

Balbi said:


> Littlejohn's gone after her today in the Wail.
> 
> Her response: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/01/dear-richard-littlejohn-heres-some-polish-for-that-turd/
> 
> Some of Littlejohn's comments match up with some made on here.





weepiper said:


> Littlejohn's had a predictably loathsome pop at her in the Mail yesterday
> 
> http://dontfeedthetrolls.wordpress.com/2013/11/01/ah-pesto-these-poverty-poster-girls-of-welfare-britain-want-the-gravy-too-without-having-to-pay-for-it-writes-richard-littlejohn/
> 
> ...


One for Don't Feed the Trolls, I think


----------



## weepiper (Nov 1, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


> One for Don't Feed the Trolls, I think



edited, cheers.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 1, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Tbf if you read his article he was having a go for having spent money on tattoos at all, not because he thought she'd spent benefits on them. If she hadn't spent her wages on tattoos she'd have had money to pay for non-existent overnight childcare I suppose? I don't think he really does joined up thinking.



And yet when I worked on Fleet Street (mid '80s), Littlejohn was well-known for enjoying the company of tattoo'd men (not an insinuation of homosexuality, by the way - he was attracted to being in the company of "hardmen", and was roundly mocked for it!).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 1, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Sure. But she also exposes the lie that you can escape this kind of judgemental sneery bollocks by getting a job. You can't, you'll always be a feckless single mum. See that wee lassie who had a hatchet job done on her in a Newsnight interview by Allegra Stratton.



I'd love to do a hatchet job on Allegra Stratton, starting with removing her tongue for telling fibs...


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 1, 2013)

weepiper said:


> edited, cheers.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Sure. But she also exposes the lie that you can escape this kind of judgemental sneery bollocks by getting a job. You can't, you'll always be a feckless single mum. See that wee lassie who had a hatchet job done on her in a Newsnight interview by Allegra Stratton.


yes, i remember that case, and remember feeling similarly uncomfortable about the thrust of her defence (and the defence being made by others) at the time (i think i made a similar point in that thread). I think it's an easy knee-jerk reaction to being attacked on these terms, but it does nothing to challenge the basis of the attack - which imo is what needs to be challenged most urgently.


----------



## Balbi (Nov 1, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


>



Equally for mine, can you edit the quote links?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 1, 2013)

killer b said:


> yes, i remember that case, and remember feeling similarly uncomfortable about the thrust of her defence (and the defence being made by others) at the time (i think i made a similar point in that thread). I think it's an easy knee-jerk reaction to being attacked on these terms, but it does nothing to challenge the basis of the attack - which imo is what needs to be challenged most urgently.


In think her priority should be to eternally  1) make littlejohn look like a dick , then internally 2) discuss how she did it and why it could have been loads better.

edit: i meant externally, but eternally works as well.


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In think her priority should be to eternally  1) make littlejohn look like a dick , then internally 2) discuss how she did it and why could have been loads better.
> 
> edit: i meant externally, but eternally works as well.


yeah, and she's certainly made him look a dick. just flagging it up 'cause it's an attitude i see a lot, and i think it does need to be challenged.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 1, 2013)

Balbi said:


> Equally for mine, can you edit the quote links?


Done 

Although now it makes me look a little mad


----------



## purenarcotic (Nov 1, 2013)

She appears in the latest Labour Party political broadcast thing talking about heating vs eating.

Bit misguided thinking Labour are going to solve that one.


----------



## likesfish (Nov 1, 2013)

Well as a realistic option calling for an armed revoultion and overthrow of capitalism might make you feel good but isnt likely to achieve anything is it?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Nov 1, 2013)

Her blog piece has now been republished by The Gruan. Which I assume she was paid for, and fair play to her.

http://t.co/A22ArvPlJd


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 1, 2013)

purenarcotic said:


> She appears in the latest Labour Party political broadcast thing talking about heating vs eating.
> 
> Bit misguided thinking Labour are going to solve that one.


Perhaps, but at least it gets it heard on a bigger platform. Caveat: I don't know how it's framed and whether or not it does more good or harm.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 1, 2013)

purenarcotic said:


> She appears in the latest Labour Party political broadcast thing talking about heating vs eating.
> 
> Bit misguided thinking Labour are going to solve that one.



Heating bills really do seem like the one issue that Labour politicians have been allowed to attack the Tories over (by their spin doctors), which is fine - the energy companies' bosses should be thrown in prison and the companies should be nationalised - but it just shows you what they're _not _willing to do over workfare, the bedroom tax, ATOS, GCHQ ad infinitum


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

Lord Camomile said:


> Perhaps, but at least it gets it heard on a bigger platform. Caveat: I don't know how it's framed and whether or not it does more good or harm.



its framed to encourage people to vote labour, and she is an uncritical and ambitious supporter of the party that started this shit towards claimants.  one day she will do it claimants herself and I will remind you all of how you helped make her.

(sorry, she drives me up the wall, I might be really wrong and sometimes I get a bee in my bonnet about people, but to me shes laurie penny from a slightly less well off family who was skint for a few months once  - its the same me me me shit, the same elaboration of her circumstances, the same calculating ambition and the same shit politics)


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> its framed to encourage people to vote labour, and she is an uncritical and ambitious supporter of the party that started this shit towards claimants.  one day she will do it claimants herself and I will remind you all of how you helped make her.
> 
> (sorry, she drives me up the wall, I might be really wrong and sometimes I get a bee in my bonnet about people, but to me shes laurie penny from a slightly less well off family who was skint for a few months once  - its the same me me me shit, the same elaboration of her circumstances, the same calculating ambition and the same shit politics)



FWIW that's exactly my take on her as well.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 2, 2013)

I never read her blog much, seems ok to me. I don't dig her partisan choices,  but life goes on.

The fact that she is at war with a man who can only have been instrumental in the death of Lucy Meadows, a persistent and virulent bully, reactionary daily blackshirt scum, makes me know which side I'm on.

The only problem is that he loves the publicity of people like me (us) despising the putrid noxious essence occupying the place where most of the rest of us have a soul.


----------



## HST (Nov 2, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You can't be political on your own, basically. It doesn't work like that.



There's a Jorge Luis Borges short story about a political activist who breaks all their social contacts, moves to a strange city where he befriends no-one then after a few months have passed El Presidente comes to town. So he goes out and shoots him.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 2, 2013)

Shame that he was an apologist for Franco, Pinochet and Videla while claiming to be 'non-political'. Eurgh.


----------



## HST (Nov 2, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Shame that he was an apologist for Franco, Pinochet and Videla while claiming to be 'non-political'. Eurgh.



In my defence it's 30 odd years since I read the book. That story just stuck in my head. I know nothing of Borges' politics.


----------



## treelover (Nov 2, 2013)

> I should have stayed *feckless and unemployed*, and not tried to feed myself and my son decent nutritious meals, nor had the audacity to write about it.


 
Dis she really write that? (in the article) 'feckless and unemployed',


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 2, 2013)

treelover said:


> Dis she really write that? (in the article) 'feckless and unemployed',



I think so. Sarcasm.


----------



## treelover (Nov 2, 2013)

Are you sure?, she quite often uses the bifurcation of deserving/undeserving poor, how she escaped such a life, etc, maybe without realising it.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 2, 2013)

treelover said:


> Are you sure?, she quite often uses the bifurcation of deserving/undeserving poor, how she escaped such a life, etc, maybe without realising it.



It's definitely sarcasm. She's aping Daily Mail opinion.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 2, 2013)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I think so. Sarcasm.



Is it eckers like sarcasm.


----------



## LiamO (Nov 2, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Is it eckers like sarcasm.



It clearly _is _Frances. She is pointing out that Gobshite finds her awkward because she refuses to fit his stereotypes.


----------



## treelover (Nov 2, 2013)

I think it wasn't meant to be a slur, but the fact she put it in without the (can't remember what they are called!) maybe gives an insight into how she will respond when she is a LP MP, as is inevitable.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> It clearly _is _Frances. She is pointing out that Gobshite finds her awkward because she refuses to fit his stereotypes.



The article's sarcastic, but she often makes the distinction between working and non working poor. She's clearly after a paid gig in the commentariat and/or labour party and will tailor her message to whatever gives her the best chance of getting it.


----------



## treelover (Nov 2, 2013)

That may sound cynical


until we read about Mehdi's Hasan's job application to the DM.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

I think what winds me up is the second christmas interview with the Star, when she already has two newspaper columns, her benefits are sorted out (according to her blog) and shes got a small craft business thats doing okay

but still she says she'll have to visit a foodbank, cant put the heating on, is unscrewing lightbulbs in case she accidentally turns them on and is having to feed herself and her kid on a tenner a week

now thats a child protection issue given her income is reasonably stable, if meagre, and if she'd said that anywhere but a newspaper she'd have social workers turning up going through her cupboards and asking her why shes not managing her money properly

the alternative of course is that its complete bullshit, and if thats bullshit then what else is?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> It clearly _is _Frances. She is pointing out that Gobshite finds her awkward because she refuses to fit his stereotypes.



It is sarcasm, but her sarcasm itself takes on an ironic twist given how she talks about herself. She does very much portray herself as the deserving poor. Thrifty, honest, playing the game, _applying for 300 jobs a week_. No flicking herself off in front of Trisha for Jack, and she makes a big point of letting everyone know it.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 2, 2013)

Ok, she's a lying fraudulent bitch who can't ever do anything right then. Fine.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

what has she done right?

there are scores of blogs out there of people struggling telling their stories which do sound authentic, nuanced, and dont present poverty in such a simplistic manner as Jack does.  I dont think shes lying outright, I think shes had a few really tough weeks due to benefit fuck ups, and has used that experience to create a brand, and part of the creation of that brand has meant claiming that this is her life all the time, her a middle class girl (her words) of all people who's applying for 300 jobs a week, the ultimate deserving poor

the fact that throughout her direst period of poverty she was also a local labour party press secretary just makes the whole thing even more


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 2, 2013)

Where has she said that she's from a middle class background?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

I'm looking through her blog now


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 2, 2013)

I've seen her repeatedly say that she is from a working class family and was bullied at school because of it.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

If she is a fraud she'll get thoroughly undone at some point as she's such a target. It would be foolhardy to think you could escape the fair and unfair scrutiny coming your way.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I've seen her repeatedly say that she is from a working class family and was bullied at school because of it.



I went to a private school on the now defunct assisted places scheme. Nothing more fun than being called "peasant" by your peers.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

> I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side.



http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/06/...-happen-to-normal-people-the-guardian-6-june/

there

(thank fuck  )


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

in fact the full quote is worth repeating

“I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.”


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

labour party press secretary? 

two columns and a little craft business on the side and she is still unscrewing light bulbs etc

Either she is a total mug or a Labour sock puppet.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/06/...-happen-to-normal-people-the-guardian-6-june/
> 
> there
> 
> (thank fuck  )





> I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.”



That is rancid.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

yup if anyone posted that on here they'd be torn to shreds.

Tbh being a local Labour press secretary should have been enough to damn her.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 2, 2013)

How on earth is she 'well educated' if she left school at 16 after failing most of her exams? I think she may well be wrong with her self-identification in that example (the guardian writer who did that piece also did another one that called her w/c).


----------



## weepiper (Nov 2, 2013)

Can nobody fucking read? In reply to Littlejohn



> in order to _*satisfy the stereotype that you peddle*_ day in day out in the rag currently lining my ferret cage, I should have stayed feckless and unemployed


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Can nobody fucking read? In reply to Littlejohn



No this quote is from a different piece from June.

“I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.”


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> How on earth is she 'well educated' if she left school at 16 after failing most of her exams? I think she may well be wrong with her self-identification in that example (the guardian writer who did that piece also did another one that called her w/c).



You can educate yourself I guess. Whether that fits what is generally understood by the phrase is a moot point.

e2a "moot" in the traditional British English sense of the word.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Can nobody fucking read? In reply to Littlejohn



Not you apparently.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> How on earth is she 'well educated' if she left school at 16 after failing most of her exams? I think she may well be wrong with her self-identification in that example (the guardian writer who did that piece also did another one that called her w/c).



brand development

I agree she's wrong with her self-identification in the first quote, but I don't think that gets her off the hook, in fact I think it makes it worse


----------



## weepiper (Nov 2, 2013)

Christ. She's using the stereotypical image of a single mother on benefits to point out that that stereotype is bollocks. You're all reading it as her saying 'but I'm not like that' but she's really saying '_we're_ not like that'. It's a stereotype built on falsehood because really, who _actually _enjoys 'sitting around' on benefits? Fucking no-one does.


----------



## purenarcotic (Nov 2, 2013)

I am still struggling to see how social services would be involved if she said it in another context tbh. 

It would need a hell of a lot more to meet my council's threshold for a section 47 investigation at any rate.


----------



## LiamO (Nov 2, 2013)

Favelado said:


> e2a "moot" in the traditional British English sense of the word.



what other kind is there?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

I failed most of my GCSEs

she left school at 16 with seven GCSEs,


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

her whole angle is mired in "deserved poor" shite anyway.

look at this well spoken, attractive, cultured white woman, look how she isn't like the feckless underclass scum with their flat screen tvs and iphones, look at how the Tories are hurting even her, isn't this wrong, she could be your daughter, not like that other feral lot you see on Jeremy Kyle. She makes hearty meals for next to nothing, not like the other scum who live on KFC and Pot Noddles.


----------



## bamalama (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout has been dead on through this whole thread imo,and the've done the most research into the subject as well,fair play to ye


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Christ. She's using the stereotypical image of a single mother on benefits to point out that that stereotype is bollocks. You're all reading it as her saying 'but I'm not like that' but she's really saying '_we're_ not like that'. It's a stereotype built on falsehood because really, who _actually _enjoys 'sitting around' on benefits? Fucking no-one does.



I read it as her drawing a distinction between "normal" people like her ending up in that situation and working-class people. It then takes a swipe at the general stereotype, but only once she's marked herself out as separate from some other claimants. It seems fairly clearly obviously written that way. If I have some kind of bias or stupidity filter affecting my reading then it seems at the very least ambiguous and therefore badly written.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

purenarcotic said:


> I am still struggling to see how social services would be involved if she said it in another context tbh.
> 
> It would need a hell of a lot more to meet my council's threshold for a section 47 investigation at any rate.



I've known people have social workers round their gaff for less


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> what other kind is there?



The American meaning of "moot"is "redundant" and the British meaning is "salient" isn't it? The American meaning seems to be catching on in UK bit by bit.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Christ. She's using the stereotypical image of a single mother on benefits to point out that that stereotype is bollocks. You're all reading it as her saying 'but I'm not like that' but she's really saying '_we're_ not like that'. It's a stereotype built on falsehood because really, who _actually _enjoys 'sitting around' on benefits? Fucking no-one does.



She is challenging the idea that it doesn't happen to "normal" people, she isn't challenging the idea about people being brought up in track suits and Jeremy Kyle. Her argument is basically, yeah you think it only happens to feckless scum but actually it happens to nice normal people like me too.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I failed most of my GCSEs
> 
> she left school at 16 with seven GCSEs,



Might be misquote from daily telegraph though there..

TBH - pretty easy to be 'well educated' and done shit at school. i left school at 12 with no qualifications and if all goes well should finish uni this year with a first or 2:1


----------



## Bakunin (Nov 2, 2013)

I love her demolition job on Littlejohn, though.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> I love her demolition job on Littlejohn, though.



Yeah, no quibbling with that.


----------



## purenarcotic (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I've known people have social workers round their gaff for less



Best practice should really say 'we need more information and more context' tbh but bad practice does happen so I don't know why I am surprised.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 2, 2013)

> *I will not stop talking about it until people stop dividing poverty into ‘the deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor based on what they look like*


----------



## J Ed (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I failed most of my GCSEs
> 
> she left school at 16 with seven GCSEs,



Not necessarily contradictory statements, she might have gotten D or lower in most of her GCSEs or even have taken 13+ GCSEs and only gotten C in 6 of them.

This nitpicking is all ridiculous, I think that she is being naive to support Labour but I'm not about to start taking apart someone who is obviously an on the whole decent woman who has struggled badly and seen through the constant stream of propaganda heaped upon the disenfranchised that they or their neighbour are the problem.

Yeah there are themes of deserving vs undeserving poor in what she writes but mostly she is ridiculing them as the stupid caricatures that they are.



> look at this well spoken, attractive, cultured white woman



Ridiculous identity politics, if she was Asian and saying the exact same things then would it matter? What if she was a bit less attractive? Is she more right when she isn't wearing makeup? She is gay, but is that cancelled out in privilege theory top trumps by her being fertile?


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

I think the test would be how much of a divergance her criticisms of causes of poverty are at odds with the labour parties take on things. If its just another add on to the labourish critique of the tory policy impacts on poverty then its not really of value.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 2, 2013)

> Yeah there are themes of deserving vs undeserving poor in what she writes but mostly she is ridiculing them as the stupid caricatures that they are.



Mostly, but the "normal" quote seems to be a fairly distasteful bit of snobbery.


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I failed most of my GCSEs
> 
> she left school at 16 with seven GCSEs,


If she passed with grades D or lower, technically that's a fail.

ETA. J Ed beat me to it.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> I think the test would be how much of a divergance her criticisms of causes of poverty are at odds with the labour parties take on things. If its just another add on to the labourish critique of the tory policy impacts on poverty then its not really of value.



I think the fact that as a benefit blogger she has remained silent and uncritical of labours past record, labours workfare plans, Liam Byrne and then Rachel Reeves tougher than IDS rants and Labour voting through IDS' backdated workfare rules which denied compensation to tens of thousands of claimants who were illegally sanctioned tells you everything you need to know

she could be a critical friend like Polly or Owen, but shes not even fucking agricola - shes in there, in the middle, helping to drive this stuff


----------



## smokedout (Nov 2, 2013)

"Before that, I had spent weekends at my grandfathers guest houses, folding sheets and making tea for a tenner in my back pocket."

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/10/...sacre-conservative-party-address-jack-monroe/

that's guest house*s*, nouveau proletarian then


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I think the fact that as a benefit blogger she has remained silent and uncritical of labours past record, labours workfare plans, Liam Byrne and then Rachel Reeves tougher than IDS rants and Labour voting through IDS' backdated workfare rules which denied compensation to tens of thousands of claimants who were illegally sanctioned tells you everything you need to know
> 
> she could be a critical friend like Polly or Owen, but shes not even fucking agricola - shes in there, in the middle, helping to drive this stuff



well this is the thing. having lived on the dole through the times of new-labours new deal when riddled with the rhetoric of "hard working  familes" just seems like the same piss in a different bottle vis todays "skivers and strivers" its hard to really get behind someone thats recommending cooking good recipies on the dole, when it was so similair to how it was back in the day for people on the dole in new labour time. Back then it was fucking impossible to live on £10 a week when a kg of flour was 9p at asda. Its a helluva a lot more now for a kg of flour at asda  ergo some serious talking out of arse happening ehre.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Ridiculous identity politics, if she was Asian and saying the exact same things then would it matter? What if she was a bit less attractive? Is she more right when she isn't wearing makeup? She is gay, but is that cancelled out in privilege theory top trumps by her being fertile?



I'm not holding her responsible for it but it is quite obvious that these factors are relevant to her dispelling of myths about people on benefits, that wouldn't be a problem if she didn't feel the need to identify herself as a "normal" and not like the other lot.

She is very palpable to liberal middle england, if she did grow up in tracksuits, if she smoked or enjoyed the odd take away or let her kid eat crisps she'd be condemned by the Guardian not lauded.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

reckon that with my electricty card costing a tenner for a week
gas about the same
dog food say 15 quid

that leaves about 25 pounds from a weekly giro for a single person approximately.
Going by that tenner a week nonense logic should be able to live like a king with 25 quid


----------



## weepiper (Nov 2, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> reckon that with my electricty card costing a tenner for a week
> gas about the same
> dog food say 15 quid
> 
> ...



She was living in a private let claiming housing benefit. Housing benefit very often doesn't cover your complete rent for a private let. We had the bedroom tax long before council tenants got it.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

there is absolutly no way anybody could stretch a tenner to feed an adult and a kid. Been in similiar situations myself with a kid back in new labour days before food prices shot through the roof, and benefits were not frozen and there is no way a tenner would have stretched to that. When single and in that economic situation had to fill myself up with 6 mile round walks to the soupkitchens often in the rain to fill up my stomach - a tenner would not come close to satisfying hunger. im amazed that people have managed to suspend their disbelief to allow this narrative to develop beyond first hurdle.


----------



## LiamO (Nov 2, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> there is absolutly no way anybody could stretch a tenner to feed an adult and a kid.



and her publishing a blog outlining exactly how she did it only proves my point... errr


----------



## Corax (Nov 2, 2013)

I'm going to be really controversial here, and suggest that some of what she writes is excellent stuff and delivers a good message, but sometimes she writes stuff that isn't so good and perhaps illuminates some flaws in her outlook.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

I think people are naive if they don't think there is a serious dose of deserving poor in her rise to prominence, mix that with the Guardian's love of patronising the working class about their "poor diets" and hey presto.

All this would be true even without her seeking to perpetuate such a narrative but as the quote from June about being "normal" and not brought up in tracksuits watching Jeremy Kyle shows she has used it herself.

Then we get the more interesting stuff like her support for the Labour Party and suddenly things begin to look a little more cynical.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

LiamO said:


> and her publishing a blog outlining exactly how she did it only proves my point... errr



well due to my rent arrears im going to have to pay double rent of my student loan this week. taking off dog food and electricity (no gas alas cause i already owe the gas meter £320 last time i checked) and my contribution to my daughters birthday present im gonna have to live on £30 a week. I suspect if i was to write a blog documentign that experience, there would be a fair few entries of me going round to various pals houses for dinner at theirs to make the £30 stretch..


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Then we get the more interesting stuff like her support for the Labour Party and suddenly things begin to look a little more cynical.



"hardworking families" Vs "strivers and skivers"


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2013)

revol68 said:


> if anyone posted that on here they'd be torn to shreds.


Yep, this.


----------



## Corax (Nov 2, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I think people are naive if they don't think there is a serious dose of deserving poor in her rise to prominence


I'm going to be shot for this, but I think there may sometimes be a place for that in the media.

Gerald and Christine, reading the Guardian in their leafy Merton Park semi, are far more likely to empathise with Jack than [insert stereotype here].

If that results in them being critical of welfare policies that effect [stereotype] as well as Jack, then it's an improvement on when they were totally uncritical of those policies.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2013)

*cocks gun*


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

only until enough provisos have been inserted into welfare policies to take in to account people that they feel for whilst excluding the rest of the dole scum to carry on doing as they do..


----------



## Corax (Nov 2, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> well due to my rent arrears im going to have to pay double rent of my student loan this week. taking off dog food and electricity (no gas alas cause i already owe the gas meter £320 last time i checked) and my contribution to my daughters birthday present im gonna have to live on £30 a week. *I suspect if i was to write a blog documenting that experience*, there would be a fair few entries of me going round to various pals houses for dinner at theirs to make the £30 stretch..


I think you should tbh.  Would be interesting to see the reaction *that* would get in the Graun...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 2, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> only until enough provisos have been inserted into welfare policies to take in to account people that they feel for whilst excluding the rest of the dole scum to carry on doing as they do..


Yes, I agree. I see lots of downside to narratives like that about deserving poor. If you prove yourself as thrifty and resourceful as Jack, you deserve help. But if you don't - if you're a bit chaotic - you don't.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

Corax said:


> I think you should tbh.  Would be interesting to see the reaction *that* would get in the Graun...



id be a bit scared that by my scrounging off my friends that id be confirming the narrative of scroungers haha . actually i forget im a full time student now. totally deserving poor me now


----------



## LiamO (Nov 2, 2013)

Corax said:


> I'm going to be really controversial here, and suggest that some of what she writes is excellent stuff and delivers a good message, but sometimes she writes stuff that isn't so good and perhaps illuminates some flaws in her outlook.



agreed. but the question then becomes a bit 'glass half-full or glass half-empty' doesn't it? With everyone who sees it as half-full being 'naieve' and assorted other insults.... and everyone who sees half-empty as equally 'cynical and nasty'. Yawn.


----------



## Balbi (Nov 2, 2013)

Whatever good she's doing is mitigated by what an awfully inauthentic person she is 


*rends garments and wails*


----------



## Delroy Booth (Nov 2, 2013)

This thread's pretty depressing. If the worst you can say about her is "she's a Labour party member" and then to dismiss her as a fraud and liar on that alone seems well out of order to me. I know plenty of Labour members who are from a working class background, who struggle the same as anyone else, are their experiences to be dismissed too? How many tens of thousands of Labour members/supporters, or millions of Labour voters, have their agency negated like that? Are they to be written off too? 

If you can make a case that her blog is a part of a Labour orchestrated PR campaign that consciously re-inforces undeserving vs deserving poor narratives, and that she's a careerist hack who'll end up with a political position as a result of this fraudulent blog, then that's different. But I don't see that that case being made to be honest, what I see here mostly is people scouring over her finances in a hope to expose her with the same kind of relish and delight as the Telegraph and Mail, but with a whole different set of rationalisations to justify it. It's pretty ugly, just like when people elsewhere on here start linking homophobic articles in the Evening Standard to attack Owen Jones. 

And that's not meant to be an endorsement of some of the things she's written or her politics or the Labour party. That quote on the other page for instance, is well suspect, even if it's out of context and intended to undermine certain stereotypes about the unemployed, even so then I don't think she's expressed it very well.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

actually see if her blog actually did show some of the shit that needs to be done in order to live rather than this tenner malarky would be far better and more raw imo. Like phoning up disaproving parents for a tap of a 5er to get lectuers on ones lifestyle, like going to the bank in a long que to get out the last £1.67 in ones bank account, all that kinda stuff culimativly presents a much more authentic take on how degrading poverty is, rather than "yay lets cook up another intereting meal" ever could


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

Actually, fuck her and her healthy foodie shite, I'm fed up with cunts and their cookery shows, blogs, whatever. When did everyone turn into a poncy foodie fuck. Sure by all means eat nice food, but stop blogging and instagraming about it like it says anything about you other than being a tedious aspirational cunt.

How many blogs out there about how shit benefits are, how many blogs with proper anaylsis, and yet what one rises to prominence in the Guardian, the one about making a great little risotto on a budget.

Sorry just needed to rant about the fixation on food that seems to have gripped the country for the past 10 years.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 2, 2013)

i could make a lump of seitien with 9p bag of flower back in the day. being vegan and thrifty with it is the way forward...


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> This thread's pretty depressing. If the worst you can say about her is "she's a Labour party member" and then to dismiss her as a fraud and liar on that alone seems well out of order to me. I know plenty of Labour members who are from a working class background, who struggle the same as anyone else, are their experiences to be dismissed too? How many tens of thousands of Labour members/supporters, or millions of Labour voters, have their agency negated like that? Are they to be written off too?
> 
> If you can make a case that her blog is a part of a Labour orchestrated PR campaign that consciously re-inforces undeserving vs deserving poor narratives, and that she's a careerist hack who'll end up with a political position as a result of this fraudulent blog, then that's different. But I don't see that that case being made to be honest, what I see here mostly is people scouring over her finances in a hope to expose her with the same kind of relish and delight as the Telegraph and Mail, but with a whole different set of rationalisations to justify it. It's pretty ugly, just like when people elsewhere on here start linking homophobic articles in the Evening Standard to attack Owen Jones.
> 
> And that's not meant to be an endorsement of some of the things she's written or her politics or the Labour party. That quote on the other page for instance, is well suspect, even if it's out of context and intended to undermine certain stereotypes about the unemployed, even so then I don't think she's expressed it very well.



I think I've been making that second point, though I don't think criticism of Labour party membership or support for them is to negate agency, on the contrary the criticism is based on the fact they have agency and yet align themselves with a party that is just as responsible for the demonisation of those on benefits.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Nov 2, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I think I've been making that second point....



Yeah that'd be a much more convincing reply if you hadn't just posted



revol68 said:


> Actually, fuck her and her healthy foodie shite, I'm fed up with cunts and their cookery shows, blogs, whatever. When did everyone turn into a poncy foodie fuck.



Directly beforehand you witless macho fool. Top political critique that.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 2, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Yeah that'd be a much more convincing reply if you hadn't just posted
> 
> 
> 
> Directly beforehand you witless macho fool. Top political critique that.



Haha that's a seperate criticism of the foodie bullshit that has been going on for years, of which the success of her blog is only one tiny little speck. Though there is something to be said as to why a blog about cooking cheap meals becomes the focus of politics when there are tons of blogs about benefits that are completely overlooked, and that's because politics have been replaced with "lifestyle" and "cultural" matters. 

Macho, no, bitter rant, yes.


----------



## agricola (Nov 2, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she could be a critical friend like Polly or Owen, but shes not even fucking agricola - shes in there, in the middle, helping to drive this stuff



This has cheered me up after an otherwise drab day, thankyou.


----------



## Nylock (Nov 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> This thread's pretty depressing.


QFT.

This thread does make for some fucking depressing reading. I can't wait for the 'Urban75 approved' blogger to hit the mainstream and get loads of attention... 

Considering everything in the media that's currently stacked up against wc/unemployed/disabled/poor people I'd have thought that even one voice, no matter how misguided they may be in their support of labour, that spoke from some genuine first-hand experience would be cautiously (obv) welcomed here. Seriously, what was the most widely publicised 'left wing' voice prior to Jack Monroe? Oh yes, that's right, a proven bullshitter with a taste for turgid prose who tended to crowd-source their articles and whose activities spawned and 800-page mega-thread that bore witness to some of the lowest points i've ever seen these boards stoop to.Some people around here need to have a long fucking talk with themselves. 

I also have my suspicions about where she may be coming from with some of her commentary but overall, due to the complete dearth of there being any other 'high profile' bloggers/writers out there challenging this malevolent bullshit, i'm happier having her tearing strips off the likes of odious cunts like littlejohn and attempting to challenge some pretty ingrained preconceptions than having no-one at all doing so. Or, worse still, having proven frauds attempting to do so. 

/rant


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 3, 2013)

Is this the new Laurie Penny thread? When's Jack going to come on and answer her critics? Has she got the balls?


----------



## J Ed (Nov 3, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Is this the new Laurie Penny thread? When's Jack going to come on and answer her critics? Has she got the balls?



I hope she never sees this thread because unlike the Laurie Penny thread most of the criticism here is not deserved.

Some of this stuff reminds me of when apologists for neoliberalism excuse any and every attack on the working-class in Western countries by claiming that the working-class in the West is part of the "global 1%". Not good.


----------



## Nice one (Nov 3, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Is this the new Laurie Penny thread? When's Jack going to come on and answer her critics? Has she got the balls?


only after someone scours the internet looking for pictures of her bedroom to post up for everyone to laugh at


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I hope she never sees this thread because unlike the Laurie Penny thread most of the criticism here is not deserved.



What is she saying that Polly Tonybee, Owen Jones, Ed Miliband and a host of other people aren't saying?  So she was poor for a bit once, big fucking deal, for most people it lasts a lifetime.  Does this get her off the hook for her shit politics, is Jack Monroe, or more correctly Labour Party policy where we want the line drawn?  Is this applying for 300 jobs a week thing and not watching jeremy kyle, the narrative she helps create whether by accident or design, really helpful?  Is it helpful when the current voice of poverty is exposed as being the Labour Party stooge she always was but had tried to hide by the Daily Mail?

Laurie Penny is fucking irrelevant to most people, Jack isn't, she's on daytime tv talking about shit that is affecting people's lives, starting to make good money out of it in fact, if her politics are questionable or unhelpful - if they drag the argument in the wrong direction, then that is a problem worthy of discussion


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

smokedout said:


> What is she saying that Polly Tonybee, Owen Jones, Ed Miliband and a host of other people aren't saying?  So she was poor for a bit once, big fucking deal, for most people it lasts a lifetime.  Does this get her off the hook for her shit politics, is Jack Monroe, or more correctly Labour Party policy where we want the line drawn?  Is this applying for 300 jobs a week thing and not watching jeremy kyle, the narrative she helps create whether by accident or design, really helpful?  Is it helpful when the current voice of poverty is exposed as being the Labour Party stooge she always was but had tried to hide by the Daily Mail?
> 
> Laurie Penny is fucking irrelevant to most people, Jack isn't, she's on daytime tv talking about shit that is affecting people's lives, starting to make good money out of it in fact, if her politics are questionable or unhelpful - if they drag the argument in the wrong direction, then that is a problem worthy of discussion


Have you finally got to the bottom of how she could afford to blog without a computer?

In fact, has anyone commented on her tits yet?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Have you finally got to the bottom of how she could afford to blog without a computer?
> 
> In fact, has anyone commented on her tits yet?



see this is bollocks, straw man shit to deflect from any criticism at all, you are laurie penny now


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Have you finally got to the bottom of how she could afford to blog without a computer?
> 
> In fact, has anyone commented on her tits yet?


How is that in any way a sensible reply to smokedout's post? He made a series of specific points that you could instead have addressed directly.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

smokedout said:


> see this is bollocks, straw man shit to deflect from any criticism at all, you are laurie penny now


Really? It wasn't you who brought this up in the first place then? Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 3, 2013)

So Jack is drawing people in the wrong direction by favouring Labour, okay I'd probably agree with that, but since very few people on here (including myself) know exactly what the RIGHT direction is I would say that her doing a very good job of highlighting the effects of austerity on ordinary people while favouring Labour isn't the worst thing in the world. It's a fuck of a lot better than 99.9% of what's in the media.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> In fact, has anyone commented on her tits yet?


this is a bit shit tbf trux. the criticism on this thread has - as far as i've seen - been restricted to pointing out apparent inacuracies in her articles, and about her politics. maybe you could stick to talking about that too?


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> this is a bit shit tbf trux. the criticism on this thread has - as far as i've seen - been restricted to pointing out apparent inacuracies in her articles, and about her politics. maybe you could stick to talking about that too?


No it hasn't.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> No it hasn't.


ok. where are the tit posts?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Favouring Labour isn't the worst thing in the world. It's a fuck of a lot better than 99.9% of what's in the media.



do you actually read the media, there's stuff like this all over the mirror, star, people, daily record now as well as the guardian and independent - she is the left of neo-liberalism, thats why shes where she is

and being an uncritical supporter of labour, when they are attacking claimants is the worst thing in the world if you are setting yourself up as a representative of claimants


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> there is absolutly no way anybody could stretch a tenner to feed an adult and a kid. Been in similiar situations myself with a kid back in new labour days before food prices shot through the roof, and benefits were not frozen and there is no way a tenner would have stretched to that. When single and in that economic situation had to fill myself up with 6 mile round walks to the soupkitchens often in the rain to fill up my stomach - a tenner would not come close to satisfying hunger. im amazed that people have managed to suspend their disbelief to allow this narrative to develop beyond first hurdle.



It's possible to feed an adult and small child on £10 a week, but *ONLY* if you have:

a) Close access to a street market that sells fruit and veg.
b) a larder full of "store cupboard" ingredients.
c) a willingness to eat what's available.
d) the ability to spend at least half the day planning your daily meals.
e) luck.

Otherwise, you're completely Donald Ducked.  I suspect that the "tenner a week" thing is an extrapolation of her cheapest-ever week's eating into something achievable every week.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> ok. where are the tit posts?


That was a joke. The rest stands.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> That was a joke. The rest stands.


which rest of it? the only thing i was asking you about was the tits.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> which rest of it? the only thing i was asking you about was the tits.


That wasn't immediately obvious to put it that way. The rest? The creepy and weird forensic dissection of her words and putative actions/lifestyle in order to cut her down to size. Like, how could she blog when she said she didn't have a laptop/internet connection? (Hint: she used her phone to blog and a cafe for its internet connection.)


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Have you finally got to the bottom of how she could afford to blog without a computer?
> 
> In fact, has anyone commented on her tits yet?


She says the site she used allowed her to email her blog posts, and she had a cheap phone that could send emails.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> She says the site she used allowed her to email her blog posts, and she had a cheap phone that could send emails.


 see my above post


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Really? It wasn't you who brought this up in the first place then? Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.




so what about her reference to 'tracksuits and jeremy kyle'? She didn't say 'i'm not a chav, you know' but that is what she meant.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> so what about her reference to 'tracksuits and jeremy kyle'? She didn't say 'i'm not a chav, you know' but that is what she meant.


What about it? I think all that needs saying on that has already been said better by the likes of weepiper.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

the counter-definition of the person activly seeking work by futiley applying to 50 jobs a day is just as harmful as the stereotype of the feckless jermy kyle watcher imo.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's possible to feed an adult and small child on £10 a week, but *ONLY* if you have:
> 
> a) Close access to a street market that sells fruit and veg.
> b) a larder full of "store cupboard" ingredients.
> ...



most of which requires some degree of wealth/social capital lurking in the background. putting that into the foreground by detailing how one accessed such resources would've been a more authentic take on the undignifying experience poverty begets imo. erasing that dimension definately plays into the hands of victorian self help nonsense..


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> the counter-definition of the person activly seeking work by futiley applying to 50 jobs a day is just as harmful as the stereotype of the feckless jermy kyle watcher imo.


300 wasn't it? Sounds mental tbf.


----------



## prunus (Nov 3, 2013)

A question to those who are decrying Jack for supporting the Labour Party in an attempt to address some of the issues of poverty: what should she be supporting instead that has a better chance of changing the system for the better for the poor?  

Actual question, not rhetoric, I genuinely want to know what the realistic alternative to labour is.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 3, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> so what about her reference to 'tracksuits and jeremy kyle'? She didn't say 'i'm not a chav, you know' but that is what she meant.



She described herself as normal and very clearly implied that claimants who were unlike her were not "normal". It wasn't irony, she meant it.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

jeez. that sorta seems to confirm the underserving/deserving poor dichotomy by showing that one has value being a job seeker by making job applying an ocupation in and of itself.

eta - aimed at truxtas last post..


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

Favelado said:


> She described herself as normal and very clearly implied that claimants who were unlike her were not "normal". It wasn't irony, she meant it.


She meant this thing that you think you read? Jesus on a fucking stick.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

Favelado said:


> She described herself as normal and very clearly implied that claimants who were unlike her were not "normal". It wasn't irony, she meant it.


absolutely. and regardless of whether thats deliberate, unconscious or just a fudged attempt at irony, it's ok for us to discuss it without being accused of being creepy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> most of which requires some degree of wealth/social capital lurking in the background. putting that into the foreground by detailing how one accessed such resources would've been a more authentic take on the undignifying experience poverty begets imo. erasing that dimension definately plays into the hands of victorian self help nonsense..



TBF, in previous generations, most poor households would have been near a street market, and (like my mum, nan and great-gran) would have tins of basics, and rice and flour stockpiled, even root veg laid up in sandboxes) It's not so much a question of social capital, as knowing your past for most of us.  Unfortunately, many people have either forgotten or never learned, and now capitalism has made sure that even if people do learn, if you're in an urban "food desert", or a rural transport blackspot etc you're still going to be fucked, social capital or no.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> jeez. that sorta seems to confirm the underserving/deserving poor dichotomy by showing that one has value being a job seeker by making job applying an ocupation in and of itself.
> 
> eta - aimed at truxtas last post..



Undoubtedly. Applying for jobs you know you won't get as a form of self-flagellation to atone for the sin of being without work.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2013)

prunus said:


> A question to those who are decrying Jack for supporting the Labour Party in an attempt to address some of the issues of poverty: what should she be supporting instead that has a better chance of changing the system for the better for the poor?
> 
> Actual question, not rhetoric, I genuinely want to know what the realistic alternative to labour is.



I'm not sure it's a reasonable question, because if you take her politics as parliamentarism, then there's no alternative, is there?

What I'd like to ask her is "why Labour?", as I suspect she'd reply in much the same vein as I've written above.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> absolutely. and regardless of whether thats deliberate, unconscious or just a fudged attempt at irony, it's ok for us to discuss it without being accused of being creepy.


Come on, I've never ever said people shouldn't discuss her politics. Rip them apart for all I care, I'm sure it's not very difficult. It's the other stuff I'm less fond of. If you can't see that fair enough, but me and others can.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

prunus said:


> A question to those who are decrying Jack for supporting the Labour Party in an attempt to address some of the issues of poverty: what should she be supporting instead that has a better chance of changing the system for the better for the poor?
> 
> Actual question, not rhetoric, I genuinely want to know what the realistic alternative to labour is.



for me im just coming from this from a personal point of view. i was 'dole scum' for the longest period of my life when labours new deal was let in. got sent to hunners of bullshit back to work/start your own buisness programmes and the discourse about being dole scum was very much the norm. when my daughter was born that was even worse, not only was i dole scum but _my choices _meant that i was a feckless layabout dad too. i was most certainly not one of the hard working families that new labour were all about .Its not just an austerity thing. so for me, im sorry, its very difficult for me to get behind someone goes into that party political arena when being part of the aparatus that developed the policy framework that enveloped my experience of poverty.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> She meant this thing that you think you read? Jesus on a fucking stick.



I'm sorry. I'm referring to the quote I definitely read. It's pretty clear.


----------



## prunus (Nov 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not sure it's a reasonable question, because if you take her politics as parliamentarism, then there's no alternative, is there?



I don't see why it's not a reasonable question?  I, like you, can't see any alternative, so what should she (and we) be doing differently?


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Come on, I've never ever said people shouldn't discuss her politics. Rip them apart for all I care, I'm sure it's not very difficult. It's the other stuff I'm less fond of. If you can't see that fair enough, but me and others can.


what other stuff? be specific what you can see that i can't, please.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 3, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> for me im just coming from this from a personal point of view. i was 'dole scum' for the longest period of my life when labours new deal was let in. got sent to hunners of bullshit back to work/start your own buisness programmes and the discourse about being dole scum was very much the norm. when my daughter was born that was even worse, not only was i dole scum but _my choices _meant that i was a feckless layabout dad too. i was most certainly not one of the hard working families that new labour were all about .Its not just an austerity thing. so for me, im sorry, its very difficult for me to get behind someone goes into that party political arena when being part of the aparatus that developed the policy framework that enveloped my experience of poverty.



I agree with you about New Labour 100%, I just don't think that this woman is being that calculated, I think that she is wrong and naive but I just don't think that this is all some long game for her to become a Labour MP. Maybe I'm the one being naive, but I just don't see it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 3, 2013)

Favelado said:


> I'm sorry. I'm referring to the quote I definitely read. It's pretty clear.



any worthwhile advocacy of the disadvantaged would explicitly include, not exclude, those with chaotic lives.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> what other stuff? be specific what you can see that i can't, please.


Like what I referred to above about how she could blog without a laptop and internet connection.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Like what I referred to above about how she could blog without a laptop and internet connection.


what's creepy about that? so what if someone's looked through her writing looking for inconsistencies? that strikes me as pretty sensible, seeing as she's a big noise on the left atm. don't want any more hari's do we?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 3, 2013)

if you're applying for 300 jobs a day you're not really putting much thought into each job application are you? 

im undecided on this thread tbh. i tend to agree with J Ed in that i dont reckon she's being so calculated, but i do see where smokedout and slavearc are coming from


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I agree with you about New Labour 100%, I just don't think that this woman is being that calculated, I think that she is wrong and naive but I just don't think that this is all some long game for her to become a Labour MP. Maybe I'm the one being naive, but I just don't see it.



yeah that probably true. ironically at one of the new deal lets start a buisness courses i was at - the buisness plan i was working on was a low budget vegan catering buisness (yuck!). maybe just my bitterness seeing something of a similiar nature succeeding where mines failed haha


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> if you're applying for 300 jobs a day you're not really putting much thought into each job application are you?
> 
> im undecided on this thread tbh. i tend to agree with J Ed in that i dont reckon she's being so calculated, but i do see where smokedout and slavearc are coming from



some of the jobs in community work that i used to apply for the amount of work to write one of the personal statements was like writing a 2500 word essay for uni...


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Unfortunately, many people have either forgotten or never learned, and now capitalism has made sure that even if people do learn, if you're in an urban "food desert", or a rural transport blackspot etc you're still going to be fucked, social capital or no.



que funding app proposal for setting up a community project to redevelop the cultural capital for those who have lost those skills. could make a killing on doing workshops aimed at 'empowering' people in that situation


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Like what I referred to above about how she could blog without a laptop and internet connection.



if that was on its own, then yeah fine, but its not, it comes along with a hugely implausible story about living on a tenner a week for months on end, even whilst she was self-employed and had two newspaper columns.  I've been following her blog for a while, before she was wider known because I read a lot of benefit related blogs, and there comes a point where you stop giving people the benefit of the doubt and start thinking nah, actually this is the bullshit it sounds like

and even that wouldnt matter so much if it wasnt that the £10 a week thing is so toxic, if she can feed herself and kid on a tenner a week than of course Iain Duncan Smith could live on £53 a week and what are claimants moaning about

and then it makes you angry, because there are people living on not much more than that for weeks on end, usually because of sanctions, which she never mentions because goody fucking two shoes like her would never get sanctioned, she is hijacking their poverty to build a political career and that she has never criticised labour shows that her party and personal ambitions take precedence over the people she claims to represent every time


----------



## Nice one (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> That wasn't immediately obvious to put it that way. The rest? The creepy and weird forensic dissection of her words and putative actions/lifestyle in order to cut her down to size.


not unlike the laurie penny thread then.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

Have you got a link to where she goes on about having to unscrew lightbulbs smokedout   ?


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Have you finally got to the bottom of how she could afford to blog without a computer?
> 
> In fact, has anyone commented on her tits yet?



Good old Trxuta, always the clueless "I'm just a nice guy" liberal.

Except you're not a nice guy at all, you're a dishonest prick who never misses a chance to misrepresent someones point  in order for you to do your "fair minded guy"routine.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> what's creepy about that? so what if someone's looked through her writing looking for inconsistencies? that strikes me as pretty sensible, seeing as she's a big noise on the left atm. don't want any more hari's do we?



agreed.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> She meant this thing that you think you read? Jesus on a fucking stick.





> I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.”



Hardly takes Derrida to see what is going on here...


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Have you got a link to where she goes on about having to unscrew lightbulbs smokedout   ?


Then you start to take lightbulbs out. If they aren’t there, you can’t turn them on. Hallway, bedroom, small boys bedroom, you deem them unnecessary, and then in a cruel twist of fate, the Eon man rings the doorbell to tell you that you owe £390

Paragraph 8

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2012/07/30/hunger-hurts/


----------



## TruXta (Nov 3, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Good old Trxuta, always the clueless "I'm just a nice guy" liberal.
> 
> Except you're not a nice guy at all, you're a dishonest prick who never misses a chance to misrepresent someones point  in order for you to do your "fair minded guy"routine.


Yeah fuck you very much.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

Ta.

HST  btw


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Yeah fuck you very much.



revol's bang on though.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Have you got a link to where she goes on about having to unscrew lightbulbs smokedout   ?



here: http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-afford-heat-food-big-six-energy-jack-monroe
http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-afford-heat-food-big-six-energy-jack-monroe
which since it came up, two men coming round every morning because she owed a few hundred on the leccy sounds dubious to me, I have lots of experience of not paying my bills and the power companies just fit a metre, dont remember anyone ever turning up prior to that, just lots of threatening letters and phonecalls - they certainly dont send two people round every morning over £300

also in an earlier piece she said that these were bailiffs who were coming round her house because of her electricity bill: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2012/12/29/2012-tears-fears-and-cheers/


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

smokedout said:


> here: http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-afford-heat-food-big-six-energy-jack-monroe
> which since it came up, two men coming round every morning because she owed a few hundred on the leccy sounds dubious to me, I have lots of experience of not paying my bills and the power companies just fit a metre, dont remember anyone ever turning up prior to that, just lots of threatening letters and phonecalls - they certainly dont send two people round every morning over £300
> 
> also in an earlier piece she said that these were bailiffs who were coming round her house because of her electricity bill: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2012/12/29/2012-tears-fears-and-cheers/



And if she was having to take bulbs out to conserve electric, how did she charge her jurassic phone


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

thing is I hope I'm not being unfair, but so many times I read her stuff and thought that cant be true can it, and then thought well I suppose if this happened and then this happened, but when you find yourself doing that all the time then there comes a point where you call bullshit


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta 

It wasn’t a laptop, I blogged from my mobile phone. And before everyone starts bitching and bickering about the fact I had a mobile phone, it wasn’t a fancy smartphone – i’d sold that to pay the rent – it was a Nokia that could send emails, and I emailed the posts in.

Item 7.

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/01/dear-richard-littlejohn-heres-some-polish-for-that-turd/


----------



## peterkro (Nov 3, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Have you got a link to where she goes on about having to unscrew lightbulbs smokedout   ?


This is a thing that bothers me,in the UK most bulbs are bayonet fit so you don't unscrew them,you take them out.A small point but it makes me wonder about the truth of other things.


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

peterkro said:


> This is a thing that bothers me,in the UK most bulbs are bayonet fit so you don't unscrew them,you take them out.A small point but it makes me wonder about the truth of other things.


i've got a mixture. i don't think that's something you can really pick her up on tbf


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

peterkro said:


> This is a thing that bothers me,in the UK most bulbs are bayonet fit so you don't unscrew them,you take them out.A small point but it makes me wonder about the truth of other things.


 Rented accomodation? I remember a place with psychedelic lino on the kitchen ceiling. Landlords can be very strange.


----------



## peterkro (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> i've got a mixture. i don't think that's something you can really pick her up on tbf


I guess not however referring to a hallway it would be quite unusual to have ES bulbs in anything other than a residence  which has seen the bollocks that only an architect can bring.Ever seen them in social housing for instance.(by the way I am not offering evidence it just jars of someone who's not familiar with actual DIY but of someone who is more than familiar with "Americanese")


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

peterkro said:


> I guess not however referring to a hallway it would be quite unusual to have ES bulbs in anything other than a residence  which has seen the bollocks that only an architect can bring.Ever seen them in social housing for instance.(by the way I am not offering evidence it just jars of someone who's not familiar with actual DIY but of someone who is more than familiar with "Americanese")


seriously, shit like this makes it look like truxta has a point.


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

To be fair we'd normally talk about "taking out" lightbulbs, whether bayonet or screw type.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> To be fair we'd normally talk about "taking out" lightbulbs, whether bayonet or screw type.



Even bayonet type lightbulbs need a slight twist to take them out, which isn't a million miles away from unscrewing it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2013)

bulb chat


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Even bayonet type lightbulbs need a slight twist to take them out, which isn't a million miles away from unscrewing it.


Yes, but that's not how we talk in my part of the UK.

ETA I have two work colleagues who live in Southend, one born and bred. I'll ask them if it's local dialect.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Yeah fuck you very much.



But I'm right, aren't I.

Someone posts a fair point and you reply with some shit about how "has anyone mentioned her tits", implying that the person making the point is some sexist pig and you are the "nice guy", despite the fact you are the first person to mention her tits, you snivelling, drippy creep.


----------



## rover07 (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> TruXta
> 
> It wasn’t a laptop, I blogged from my mobile phone. And before everyone starts bitching and bickering about the fact I had a mobile phone, it wasn’t a fancy smartphone – i’d sold that to pay the rent – it was a Nokia that could send emails, and I emailed the posts in.
> 
> ...



Very funny shredding of Littlejohn.


----------



## Balbi (Nov 3, 2013)

Oh my god, really, we're focusing on her using 'unscrewing' as a word? It's got a more physical thump to it, it's one word instead of two, it makes the writing flow better. Really? I'd use unscrewing, because unscrewing is the better word for the format.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2013)

how many people does it take to screw put in a light bulb?

nope, dosen't scan.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2013)

prunus said:


> I don't see why it's not a reasonable question?  I, like you, can't see any alternative, so what should she (and we) be doing differently?



it's not a reasonable question if you accept her adherence to her brand of politics, because her brand of politics leave no other option for her.  IMO people that ideological and/or idealistic tend to be intellectually rigid.  Thinking outdide of the standard track not only doesn't occur to them, but would "feel wrong" if it did occur to them.


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

Balbi said:


> Oh my god, really, we're focusing on her using 'unscrewing' as a word? It's got a more physical thump to it, it's one word instead of two, it makes the writing flow better. Really? I'd use unscrewing, because unscrewing is the better word for the format.


But a basic of blogging is to write as you talk...


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> it's not a reasonable question if you accept her adherence to her brand of politics, because her brand of politics leave no other option for her.  IMO people that ideological and/or idealistic tend to be intellectually rigid.  Thinking outdide of the standard track not only doesn't occur to them, but would "feel wrong" if it did occur to them.



she's also talking to people like her. people who assume that poverty doesn't happen to their kind and she is saying it can and that is why they should have some empathy with the poor. it's probably more effective at describing the 'realities' of benefits to them than a more nuanced approach would be. 

if ti's a deliberately considered tactic, I'd have some time for that, but I don't think it is.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> But a basic of blogging is to write as you talk...



even if that's universal, most people talk about screwing in lightbulbs.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> But a basic of blogging is to write as you talk...


erm


----------



## Balbi (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> But a basic of blogging is to write as you talk...



Erm. No.


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

toggle said:


> even if that's universal, most people talk about screwing in lightbulbs.


Not in England.

ETA Maybe it's a generational thing. Maybe younger people in the UK do talk about screwing in lightbulbs.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> But a basic of blogging is to write as you talk...



lol, so if someone speaks in a language other than English 100% of the time they can't write in English? Even ignoring foreign languages, almost all native English speakers write in a dialect which is different from their spoken dialect.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> Not in England.



bollocks


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

jesus christ HST just shut up about the stupid fucking lightbulb thing. who gives a fuck? what difference does it make - do you think she's a secret american or something? FFS.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> jesus christ HST just shut up about the stupid fucking lightbulb thing. who gives a fuck? what difference does it make - do you think she's a secret american or something? FFS.



Obvious CIA sleeper cell posing as a British victim of austerity. When Julian Assange ventures out of the Ecuadorian embassy she will assume her final lizard form and consume him whole


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> But a basic of blogging is to write as you talk...



So bloggers, following that, should all write in their particular vernacular?

Colour me unconvinced!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> Not in England.
> 
> ETA Maybe it's a generational thing. Maybe younger people in the UK do talk about screwing in lightbulbs.



I dunno about younger people. I'm 50, and everyone I can remember replacing a lightbulb referred to it as "screwing a new bulb in", even though the fittings were usually bayonet mounts.


----------



## purenarcotic (Nov 3, 2013)

peterkro said:


> This is a thing that bothers me,in the UK most bulbs are bayonet fit so you don't unscrew them,you take them out.A small point but it makes me wonder about the truth of other things.



Unscrewing bulbs is a figure of speech IMO, our bulbs are a mixture of bayonet and screw and regardless of which one goes we refer to  screwing / unscrewing (fnar). 

In fact everyone I know, and I live and grew up in England refers to screwing or unscrewing lightbulbs.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 3, 2013)

I _definitely_ talk about unbayonetting lightbulbs. It's just such a natural phrase.


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

Anyway, I have to go and change a lightbulb (really). It's a low energy bayonet type and I'm hoping the unused one that's been sitting in the kitchen for several years hasn't expired of old age. I shall not be engaging in any screwing or unscrewing . See you later.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 3, 2013)

of all the things to attack her over ffs


----------



## equationgirl (Nov 3, 2013)

Talk about clutching at straws...


----------



## Nice one (Nov 3, 2013)

what about her curtains!


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2013)

I've enjoyed the patridgesque diversion into the finer points of lightbulbs and lightbulb related things


----------



## Favelado (Nov 3, 2013)

Would be a great phone-in on NND.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 3, 2013)

I understand she split an infinitive once. IT'S ALL LIES QED


----------



## killer b (Nov 3, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Talk about clutching at straws...


 it isnt really, thatd suggest theres nothing to criticise. Its just really fucking weird.


----------



## toggle (Nov 3, 2013)

HST said:


> I shall not be engaging in any screwing



that's such a supprise...


----------



## prunus (Nov 3, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> it's not a reasonable question if you accept her adherence to her brand of politics, because her brand of politics leave no other option for her.  IMO people that ideological and/or idealistic tend to be intellectually rigid.  Thinking outdide of the standard track not only doesn't occur to them, but would "feel wrong" if it did occur to them.



Ok, so given that, what is the outside-the-track alternative that she is failing to consider?


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2013)

Obviously this screwing in lightbulb issue has been deliberately planted to put us off the trail of her links to the Illuminati.


----------



## Bakunin (Nov 3, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I've enjoyed the patridgesque diversion into the finer points of lightbulbs and lightbulb related things



DotCommunist, yesterday:


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

I brought up the light bulb thing. I fucked up massively there.

Thing is though, it just doesn't ring true - Having to take out bulbs so you don't accidently turn the light on and use a tiny little bit of electric. Bollocks. Lights cost hardly anything. I can imagine if a bulb goes, someone not replacing it coz money's tight but taking out a working bulb, nah that's bullshit.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I brought up the light bulb thing. I fucked up massively there.
> 
> Thing is though, it just doesn't ring true - Having to take out bulbs so you don't accidently turn the light on and use a tiny little bit of electric. Bollocks. Lights cost hardly anything. I can imagine if a bulb goes, someone not replacing it coz money's tight but taking out a working bulb, nah that's bullshit.



not sure tbh, this rings true to me



> I spent 18 months with the furniture parked in front of the radiators, cooking as quickly as I possibly could to use the least amount of gas and electricity. I unscrewed the lightbulbs in the hallway, unplugged everything at the wall so not even the LCD display was blinking away on the oven.



although it is a bit weird if you dont have a prepay meter

this not so true



> I eventually turned the fridge and freezer off – they were empty anyway – and the boiler, desperate to save money, shocking myself awake in the morning with the shortest, coldest showers, and boiling a kettle of water twice a week to bath my young son.



for 18 months, despite for a huge chunk of that period having an income that must have been at least £250 a week and probably more?


----------



## HST (Nov 3, 2013)

toggle said:


> that's such a supprise...



For you ducks tps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AO43p2Wqc08


----------



## fiannanahalba (Nov 3, 2013)

Its pure faking poverty.


----------



## Buckaroo (Nov 3, 2013)

fiannanahalba said:


> Its pure faking poverty.


 
It's poor fucking poetry.


----------



## 8den (Nov 3, 2013)

I'm really offended and upset but all this. 

People really think it's fake? Or that Jack is undeserving?

I've been following Jack on and off for a few years, thanks to a a Grundian article. And I think she's wonderful. The article focused on her food (I think it was in the observer food monthly). Cheap healthy nutritious food for a single parent was a big focus for me at the time. 

She's got a engaging witty and relaxed writing style, and I followed her for ages. I literally can't understand the hate, or the vitriol. She's a smart intelligent person, coming to terms with her own sexuality at a awful time. 

Honest to fucking god urban this is a lesbian single mum writing a blog about cooking, and struggling with benefits. If baby eating atheist anarchists had patron saints, surely she'd be one of them.


----------



## 8den (Nov 3, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I brought up the light bulb thing. I fucked up massively there.
> 
> Thing is though, it just doesn't ring true - Having to take out bulbs so you don't accidently turn the light on and use a tiny little bit of electric. Bollocks. Lights cost hardly anything. I can imagine if a bulb goes, someone not replacing it coz money's tight but taking out a working bulb, nah that's bullshit.



Ever had a meter? They don't work in your favour. Switching on your light for 10 seconds will still probably cost you ten minutes of leccy. If you don't have it. That costs.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

she didnt have a pre-pay meter


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 3, 2013)

8den said:


> Ever had a meter? They don't work in your favour. Switching on your light for 10 seconds will still probably cost you ten minutes of leccy. If you don't have it. That costs.



When you ask if I've had a meter, do you mean a card/key meter? Of course I have. I don't really understand the rest of your post TBH. And I still maintain lights use hardly anything.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2013)

8den said:


> I'm really offended and upset but all this.
> 
> People really think it's fake? Or that Jack is undeserving?
> 
> ...



Some are sceptical about some of her claims, but no one is claiming her "undeserving", on the contrary people are critical of the fact that her rise to fame is precisely because she fits the criteria of "deserving poor" and is a cut above the "undeserving" with their tracksuits and burgers, something that she herself has actually implying in interview.

Add to that her involvement with the Labour Party and funny enough people are a bit "ummmmm".

I'm happy to give her the benefit of the doubt regarding the truth of her stories but then I haven't followed her and can't be arsed turning Colombo over it but some of the things people have highlighted on this thread do raise eyebrows, for example the claim she was soo poor she had to take out lightbulbs despite the fact she had two weekly columns and a home craft cottage industry.

I'm more concerned with her support for the labour party, her deserving poor shtick (apparently she applied for 300 jobs in a week, which does sounds like bullshit tbf) and her concern to point out she didn't grow up wearing tracksuits, watching jeremy kyle or eating burgers.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 3, 2013)

8den said:


> Ever had a meter? They don't work in your favour. Switching on your light for 10 seconds will still probably cost you ten minutes of leccy. If you don't have it. That costs.



balls I've had meters in loads of houses, when I've been on the dole, it doesn't cost you ten mins of leccy (however you'd measure that).


----------



## smokedout (Nov 3, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I'm more concerned with her support for the labour party, her deserving poor shtick (apparently she applied for 300 jobs in a week, which does sounds like bullshit tbf) and her concern to point out she didn't grow wearing tracksuits, watching jeremy kyle or eating burgers.



this is it really, no-one's claiming she's a complete fraud and if she's blagged her way in fair play to her, it's where she's coming from politically and what she does now she's there that's important and so far it doesn't look good


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

although the reason she's got away with blagging her way in is interesting, which is that no-one she'll come across, including Littlejohn (and that's why he missed) knows anything about being poor, you have to know that to raise an eyebrow at what she says


----------



## revol68 (Nov 4, 2013)

Anyone accusing people of being unfair on Jack willing to defend this,



> "I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone."



Personally I'd let it go as a slip if it wasn't for the fact she portrays herself as the most deserving of the poor, feeding herself and her child on a tenner a week (some creative accounting going on there) and then cosying up to the Labour Party whose line on benefits reforms has simply been that they aren't punishing the right people and the evil tories are even throwing the "strivers" under the bus.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> apparently she applied for 300 jobs in a week, which does sounds like bullshit tbf.



42 jobs a day? Plus searching time to find those 42 jobs. Plus time to write 42 opening letters tailored to each and every job which you have have even vaguely relevant skills and experience for. Nope thats a lie.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 4, 2013)

actually before I call bullshit, can anyone link to the source of the claim for 300 job applications?

Also she called her two cats Miliband and Harriet after the Labour leadership.

Just shoot her.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 4, 2013)

In fairness, she mentions applying for 300 jobs, but she doesn't claim to have done it in a week.

http://www.bigissue.com/features/2830/jack-monroe-going-bed-hungry-difficult-forget



> I realised that – after applying for over 300 jobs and hearing nothing back – that our situation wasn’t going to change any time soon. I realised that I needed to find a way to feed us both, three times a day, on the little that we had.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> actually before I call bullshit, can anyone link to the source of the claim for 300 job applications?



dont think it matters about the truth value of the claim or indeed the time frame. what matters is how the notion of making applying to jobs as an occupation in and of itself feeds into the deserving/undeserving poor dichotomy. Given the fact that the kites been flown at the moment of getting jobseekers to spend 35 hours a week in the jobcentre; a blogger that puts forward frugality more so than ian duncan smiths claim of £54 per week boasts and constant jobseeking it would be easy to be transformed as a standard bearer ideal citizen of that kinda policy direction..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 4, 2013)

*jimmy hill*

/bad person


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Anyone accusing people of being unfair on Jack willing to defend this,
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I'd let it go as a slip if it wasn't for the fact she portrays herself as the most deserving of the poor, feeding herself and her child on a tenner a week (some creative accounting going on there) and then cosying up to the Labour Party whose line on benefits reforms has simply been that they aren't punishing the right people and the evil tories are even throwing the "strivers" under the bus.




No go explain the your objection please...


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

Humberto said:


> 42 jobs a day? Plus searching time to find those 42 jobs. *Plus time to write 42 opening letters tailored to each and every [\b]job which you have have even vaguely relevant skills and experience for. Nope thats a lie.*


*
Um the what the fuck? You can send out 42 CVS a day just because you insiet on rescturting your cvs for every job does she have to?

She wasn't applying for jobs as*


Humberto said:


> 42 jobs a day? Plus searching time to find those 42 jobs. Plus time to write 42 opening letters tailored to each and every job which you have have even vaguely relevant skills and experience for. Nope thats a lie.



This is why people think you are a cunt. 

She wasn't applying for a directorship in BP, she was applying for jobs that would provide her a liveable wage while providing for care for her child. 

How many times can you say "I am happy enthusiastic, with relevant experience" or their synonyms before a employer sees' "single mum" and looks past everything else. 

Perhaps she figured it was best to go for a quantity not quality approach. Thats not a excuse to call her a liar Humberto. IF THAT IS YOUR REAL NAME!


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Anyone accusing people of being unfair on Jack willing to defend this,
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I'd let it go as a slip if it wasn't for the fact she portrays herself as the most deserving of the poor, feeding herself and her child on a tenner a week (some creative accounting going on there) and then cosying up to the Labour Party whose line on benefits reforms has simply been that they aren't punishing the right people and the evil tories are even throwing the "strivers" under the bus.



So people aren't allowed to be a member of the Labour party, and object to certain aspects of their policies?

The concept of internal reform is objectionable to you?

I'm not a member of the Labour party but the idea of a single mum, looking for a job, writing a blog about trying to feed her child, and being politically active strikes me as being quiet admirable, your problem appears to be that you object to the colour of her politics. 

Frankly if she was a single mum, writing a blog, raising her child and was a active revolutionary socialist you'd love her. 




> balls I've had meters in loads of houses, when I've been on the dole, it doesn't cost you ten mins of leccy (however you'd measure that).



It's got to do with how they measure leccy. 



> Some are sceptical about some of her claims, but no one is claiming her "undeserving", on the contrary people are critical of the fact that her rise to fame is precisely because she fits the criteria of "deserving poor" and is a cut above the "undeserving" with their tracksuits and burgers, something that she herself has actually implying in interview.



No I don't think  she's ever claimed that there's "deserving" or "undeserving" poor. It's just that she started a blog about making healthy good food on the dole. 

It's people getting their backs up because they think she or those around them are having a go at people who eat badly on the dole. 




> Add to that her involvement with the Labour Party and funny enough people are a bit "ummmmm".



Again you'll really giving her shit for being a single mum being active in party politics. 




> I'm happy to give her the benefit of the doubt regarding the truth of her stories but then I haven't followed her and can't be arsed turning Colombo over it but some of the things people have highlighted on this thread do raise eyebrows, for example the claim she was soo poor she had to take out lightbulbs despite the fact she had two weekly columns and a home craft cottage industry.



You're happy not to play columbo just repeat other peoples bullshit.

Just one more thing. Is it not plausible that the lightbulbs and cottage industry thing happened AFTER the cottage industry and columns?



> I'm more concerned with her support for the labour party, her deserving poor shtick (apparently she applied for 300 jobs in a week, which does sounds like bullshit tbf) and her concern to point out she didn't grow up wearing tracksuits, watching jeremy kyle or eating burgers.



So to be clear you object to her participation of a political party you don't like, and her attacks on the tories claims that people on the dole aren't lazy, and apathetic.

Fucking bitch....


----------



## revol68 (Nov 4, 2013)

Of course it comes down to her politics, I'm not interested in giving her a patronising pat on the back for being a single mum with a blog and cooking skills, I'm interested in the politics of her blog and that is straight up Labour  shit, with the same narrative of "strivers versus skivers", the deserving poor versus the undeserving, or in her terms "middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side vs brought up on benefits, tracksuit wearing scumbags who are eating burgers and watching day time tv".



> "I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone."



If you can't see the issue with the above quote I really do despair.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

8den said:


> This is why people think you are a cunt.



I didn't realise there was an consensus either way. 



8den said:


> She wasn't applying for a directorship in BP, she was applying for jobs that would provide her a liveable wage while providing for care for her child.
> 
> How many times can you say "I am happy enthusiastic, with relevant experience" or their synonyms before a employer sees' "single mum" and looks past everything else.
> 
> Perhaps she figured it was best to go for a quantity not quality approach. Thats not a excuse to call her a liar Humberto. IF THAT IS YOUR REAL NAME!



If your applying for actual jobs they ask for a covering letter in most cases. One were you have to think about how you would be a good suitable candidate for the role and sell yourself. They specify the skills and experience they would like job candidates to have and you have to blag about yourself a bit.

And I said it was a lie that she could do 300 in a _week. _It was established she never actually claimed to have done 300 _in a week._ So I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

Humberto said:


> And I said it was a lie that she could do 300 in a _week. _It was established she never actually claimed to have done 300 _in a week._ So I think you've got the wrong end of the stick.



You called her a liar for because you thought she claimed she applied for 300 jobs a week, so I'd really get off the high horse there Belle Star.


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Of course it comes down to her politics, I'm not interested in giving her a patronising pat on the back for being a single mum with a blog and cooking skills, I'm interested in the politics of her blog and that is straight up Labour



It's a fucking cooking blog.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Of course it comes down to her politics, I'm not interested in giving her a patronising pat on the back for being a single mum with a blog and cooking skills, I'm interested in the politics of her blog and that is straight up Labour  shit, with the same narrative of "strivers versus skivers", the deserving poor versus the undeserving, or in her terms "middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side vs brought up on benefits, tracksuit wearing scumbags who are eating burgers and watching day time tv".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


this is the important bit. whether she writes her blog with a little extra creativity doesn't really matter that much.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

8den said:


> It's a fucking cooking blog.


it isn't. or, at least that isn't all it is.


----------



## Santino (Nov 4, 2013)

HST said:


> There's a Jorge Luis Borges short story about a political activist who breaks all their social contacts, moves to a strange city where he befriends no-one then after a few months have passed El Presidente comes to town. So he goes out and shoots him.


Are you sure it was Borges? I thought I'd read all his short stories and it doesn't ring a bell. What book was it in?


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

Going to repeat this



> *I will not stop talking about it until people stop dividing poverty into ‘the deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor based on what they look like*



I still maintain she's being unfairly misread. That quote about 'normal' can still fit perfectly if you change the emphasis on the words. YOU think it doesn't happen to 'normal' people, YOU think WE are all scumbags.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

8den said:


> You called her a liar for because you thought she claimed she applied for 300 jobs a week, so I'd really get off the high horse there Belle Star.



Whereas you argued that it was feasible to apply for 300 jobs in a week. Which nobody has even claimed to do.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Anyone accusing people of being unfair on Jack willing to defend this,
> 
> 
> 
> Personally I'd let it go as a slip if it wasn't for the fact she portrays herself as the most deserving of the poor, feeding herself and her child on a tenner a week (some creative accounting going on there) and then cosying up to the Labour Party whose line on benefits reforms has simply been that they aren't punishing the right people and the evil tories are even throwing the "strivers" under the bus.



I'm not about to defend it but it's obviously aimed at those who do think that all unemployed people are like that rather than something she herself thinks. It was the wrong way to phrase something like that but I don't think that we should assume any bigotry on her part.

The most worrying thing I've heard so far is the cat names...


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

Humberto said:


> Whereas you argued that it was feasible to apply for 300 jobs in a week. Which nobody has even claimed to do.




You think someone can't send three hundred emails in a week?

I'd try and get off the moral high ground here Humberto you've misplaced your Sherpa.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

No I don't and nobody has claimed to have done that.


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2013)

For most people, politics is electoral politics with a choice mainly between the big three and perhaps one of the smaller ones if there happens to be a candidate standing. People don't come fully fledged into far/ultra left politics - think about how many people started off belonging to the Labour Party and only left to move further left when they became disillusioned. I think she should be cut some slack and given some credit for the fact that all this is quite soon for her.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 4, 2013)

In these days of Reed and Job Centre Plus which automates sending CV via email how the fuck is it not possible to send 300 applications when you are sat at home with nothing else to do? You could do it in less than a week.


----------



## 8den (Nov 4, 2013)

Humberto said:


> No I don't and nobody has claimed to have done that.


You called her  A liar because you thought she did.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> In these days of Reed and Job Centre Plus which automates sending CV via email how the fuck is it not possible to send 300 applications when you are sat at home with nothing else to do? You could do it in less than a week.



You've done it then have you?


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

8den said:


> You called her  A liar because you thought she did.



Because I thought she DIDN'T


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I still maintain she's being unfairly misread. That quote about 'normal' can still fit perfectly if you change the emphasis on the words. YOU think it doesn't happen to 'normal' people, YOU think WE are all scumbags.


you could be right. but i think if she is being misread, it's because she's not made that clear enough. it's a theme that runs throughout her writing, and intentional or not, it does - imo - reinforce the same narratives about worthiness that i'd like to see challenged.

In fact, i'd probably go so far as to say that the reason she's been promoted so heavily by the liberal press is because she's a 'worthy' poor person. because she can come back to littlejohn and his ilk when they slag her off, and say - _but look, i'm not like that. _


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> In fact, i'd probably go so far as to say that the reason she's been promoted so heavily by the liberal press is because she's a 'worthy' poor person. because she can come back to littlejohn and his ilk when they slag her off, and say - _but look, i'm not like that. _



I would absolutely agree with that, that's why she's got as much media attention as she has for sure. I just take issue with the idea that it's coming from her, because reading her blogs I don't think it is.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

fwiw, i don't think she's calculated, or even conscious about it - it's easy to forget that most people don't have the, erm, _rigorous peer review system _we have on urban re: their writing on politics... but it's there, and it shouldn't be ignored because some of the other stuff she writes is good.


----------



## andysays (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Going to repeat this
> 
> *I will not stop talking about it until people stop dividing poverty into ‘the deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor based on what they look like*​
> I still maintain she's being unfairly misread. That quote about 'normal' can still fit perfectly if you change the emphasis on the words. YOU think it doesn't happen to 'normal' people, YOU think WE are all scumbags.



I would like to believe that your quote represents what she is intending to say, though even there it would be better if she'd said

I will not stop talking about it until people stop dividing poverty into ‘the deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ poor, end of​
However, when she has also said things like this

I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.​
she *is* worthy of criticism, because it can be taken to mean that some of those on benefits *are* scumbags, brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle, eating burgers and watching day time TV, and therefore not as deserving as "normal" people like her, a middle class, well educated young woman who had a £27 grand a year job but then fell a bit by the way side.

She is therefore providing ammunition for those who want to push the idea of a deserving/non-deserving poor/benefit claimant distinction, even if that's the opposite of what she's intending.

At the same time, I don't think we should expect her to be something she's not and to have a fully worked out analysis which she is expressing perfectly. In the end it's as if some people here are critcising her personally for not being what they'd like her to be, but which she probably has no interest in being.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 4, 2013)

Humberto said:


> You've done it then have you?


 
300 in one week probably not but half that in a week maybe, I could easily have applied for more if I lived in London. When you're sat at home miserable with nothing to do but applying for the same sort of restaurant and retail jobs with 2 template CVs tailored to both already in the Reed/Job Centre system and you can apply to a lot of jobs very quickly while watching TV or with the radio on.

I don't think that this is a reasonable thing to expect people to do or the best way to apply for jobs it but it's not fantastical to suggest that she is telling the truth here.


----------



## marty21 (Nov 4, 2013)

revol68 said:


> actually before I call bullshit, can anyone link to the source of the claim for 300 job applications?
> 
> Also she called her two cats Miliband and Harriet after the Labour leadership.
> 
> Just shoot her.


Imagine if it was a tory blog, would you shoot her twice ?


----------



## J Ed (Nov 4, 2013)

There are a lot of otherwise really good people in Jack's situation, some of them working-class some middle-class, who have said or _thought_ something at some point that goes with the current drip drip propaganda of blaming the disenfranchised for being disenfranchised. If we're going to just dismiss people because they may have at one point said or thought something that might have gone along with that or seemed like it went along with that then you're dismissing an awful lot of people. She isn't a politician, you can't demand absolute ideological purity in all aspects of her life.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> 300 in one week probably not but half that in a week maybe



So definately not then


----------



## andysays (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> it's easy to forget that most people don't have the, erm, _rigorous peer review system _we have on urban re: their writing on politics...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 4, 2013)

I think that's a bit patronising, tbh, jed.


----------



## andysays (Nov 4, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think that's a bit patronising, tbh, jed.



So does that mean we *should* just dismiss people because they may have at one point said or thought something that might have gone along with that or seemed like it went along with that?

Laters...


----------



## HST (Nov 4, 2013)

Santino said:


> Are you sure it was Borges? I thought I'd read all his short stories and it doesn't ring a bell. What book was it in?



Maybe I'm wrong - it was 30 odd years ago.


----------



## likesfish (Nov 4, 2013)

Thing is unless your fairly articulate and come across as "normal"
 Your going to be ignored by the mass media or ridiculed.
  I spend my time plotting revoultion against the capitalist state and the state onyl gives me £75 a week to live on barstards! Isnt going anywhere.
  A girl called jack actually has been talked about and is seen as a realistic story. Where the left are mostly ignored.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

who's demanding ideological purity? can't speak for anyone else, but all i'm doing is criticising some stuff she's written. 

at what point does it become ok to pull her up on her politics? when she gets a regular column with the guardian? when she gets parachuted into a safe labour seat? i don't understand why we have to give her a break now, when she's _already_ an influential 'voice of the left'.


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> There are a lot of otherwise really good people in Jack's situation, some of them working-class some middle-class, who have said or _thought_ something at some point that goes with the current drip drip propaganda of blaming the disenfranchised for being disenfranchised. .



FWIW my experience is that a lot of people getting benefits experience a lot of shame which they often don't acknowledge and some of the maddest fulminating I have heard against "undeserving claimants" has been from people who are claiming themselves. The closer you are to the bottom, the more important it is to identify yourself as distinct from the bottom, it's psychological self-protection.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

possible that the paucity of voices from the left in everyday media etc is so great theres a reluctance to criticise. see: Owen Jones. Who I think is actually ok but madness to be with Labour. Also I'm reliably informed trots were raving about brand on facebook because he mentioned revo. on the tele. On here he did not get uncritical praise, which was nice


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

co-op said:


> FWIW my experience is that a lot of people getting benefits experience a lot of shame which they often don't acknowledge and some of the maddest fulminating I have heard against "undeserving claimants" has been from people who are claiming themselves. The closer you are to the bottom, the more important it is to identify yourself as distinct from the bottom, it's psychological self-protection.



Absolutely. 'This won't happen to _me_ because I'm not like _them_. If I say it often enough it can't happen.' I hear it all the time from other people at my work (barely above minimum wage)


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> possible that the paucity of voices from the left in everyday media etc is so great theres a reluctance to criticise. see: Owen Jones. Who I think is actually ok but madness to be with Labour. Also I'm reliably informed trots were raving about brand on facebook because he mentioned revo. on the tele. On here he did not get uncritical praise, which was nice



they were.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> at what point does it become ok to pull her up on her politics? when she gets a regular column with the guardian? when she gets parachuted into a safe labour seat? i don't understand why we have to give her a break now, when she's _already_ an influential 'voice of the left'.



I think it's fine to pick through her politics, considering what she's talking about supporting Labour doesn't make a lot of sense (though she is hardly alone in that) but a lot of the discussion has been about her GCSEs, internet access, the number of jobs she had applied for or not and the way she has phrased things in the past...


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I think it's fine to pick through her politics, considering what she's talking about supporting Labour doesn't make a lot of sense (though she is hardly alone in that) but a lot of the discussion has been about her GCSEs, internet access, the number of jobs she had applied for or not and the way she has phrased things in the past...


And the lightbulbs


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I think it's fine to pick through her politics, considering what she's talking about supporting Labour doesn't make a lot of sense (though she is hardly alone in that) but a lot of the discussion has been about her GCSEs, internet access, the number of jobs she had applied for or not and the way she has phrased things in the past...


which is nothing to do with ideological purity, rather how far we can trust her writing. 

it's not something i care too much about much myself, but its understandable that people might take an interest, considering the issues we've had in the recent past from other _voices of the left_ and their slipshod approach to facts.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I think it's fine to pick through her politics, considering what she's talking about supporting Labour doesn't make a lot of sense (though she is hardly alone in that) but a lot of the discussion has been about her GCSEs, internet access, the number of jobs she had applied for or not and the way she has phrased things in the past...


A lot of it has. A lot of it has been about other things. And all these are being discussed because she herself discusses them. She makes a big point of her own personal circumstances, and some of what she says stretches credibility somewhat.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

prunus said:


> Ok, so given that, what is the outside-the-track alternative that she is failing to consider?


Any form of local/community organisation that lies outside Labour's _fiat_, for a start.


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Absolutely. 'This won't happen to _me_ because I'm not like _them_. If I say it often enough it can't happen.' I hear it all the time from other people at my work (barely above minimum wage)



And also 'even if it does happen to me I still won't be like _them_'. 

It's ironic that the workers/shirkers dichotomy really hits the workers hardest (in terms of the psychological wounding) - proper shirkers don't give a monkeys. I signed on for years when I was in my 20s and couldn't have cared less what anyone who disapproved thought of that, in fact it was a good chance to tell them where to stick it. It wouldn't be the same for me now, my life is very different and I would be under a lot of social and personal pressure.


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

Ran into someone I know (vaguely) in an Oxfam shop a couple of days ago. He was _obviously_ embarrassed - and I instantly knew it was because we were meeting in an Oxfam shop. There's a lot of shame about.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> this is the important bit. whether she writes her blog with a little extra creativity doesn't really matter that much.



Also worth making the point that what she writes on her blog is mediated by her, and therefore her responsibility, but that what gets reported in the media, even under her byline, is mediated by a sub-editor or (hawk, spit) an editing program, so any flaws in media representations may not be the result of bullshit on her part, but poor re-writing on the paper's part.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

Obviously the lightbulb thing was ridiculous, but that's just standard messageboard Columbo bullshit. it shouldn't detract from the more substantive points made elsewhere in the thread.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

Santino said:


> Are you sure it was Borges? I thought I'd read all his short stories and it doesn't ring a bell. What book was it in?



It sounds similar to a Mario Vargas Llosa story I read, but I'm buggered if I can remember the name of it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

cesare said:


> For most people, politics is electoral politics with a choice mainly between the big three and perhaps one of the smaller ones if there happens to be a candidate standing. People don't come fully fledged into far/ultra left politics - think about how many people started off belonging to the Labour Party and only left to move further left when they became disillusioned. I think she should be cut some slack and given some credit for the fact that all this is quite soon for her.



While I agree with everything you've said, I'd add a small codicil, which is that she doesn't merely *belong* to the Labour Party, she's become a local functionary for them, which both implies and requires a greater degree of commitment to party ideals than merely holding membership.


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> While I agree with everything you've said, I'd add a small codicil, which is that she doesn't merely *belong* to the Labour Party, she's become a local functionary for them, which both implies and requires a greater degree of commitment to party ideals than merely holding membership.


Yes, that's true.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

doesnt necessarily have to be about the ideals, it could be about local work she's seen them do etc (one of the reasons i got so involved in the sp).


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> doesnt necessarily have to be about the ideals, it could be about local work she's seen them do etc (one of the reasons i got so involved in the sp).


Yes, I suppose if the LP is particularly active near her she might well have got involved for that reason.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

i kind of try and avoid writing about my personal experiences too much on my blog because i know that ive been a lot luckier than a lot of other people, and also because the stuff i want to write about could end up getting me in a load of trouble


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> There are a lot of otherwise really good people in Jack's situation, some of them working-class some middle-class, who have said or _thought_ something at some point that goes with the current drip drip propaganda of blaming the disenfranchised for being disenfranchised. If we're going to just dismiss people because they may have at one point said or thought something that might have gone along with that or seemed like it went along with that then you're dismissing an awful lot of people. She isn't a politician, you can't demand absolute ideological purity in all aspects of her life.



A fair point.
However (you knew that was coming, didn't you?  ), what needs to be borne in mind is that such prejudices don't take root in unfertile soil - one doesn't interpellate with ideas one has no truck with - so even if one is merely reflecting back the unending stomp of mainstream propaganda, one has to have some small affinity to the message the propaganda sends in order to do so.
This doesn't, by any stretch of the imagination, make "Jack Monroe" a bad person (we all, after all, are prey to our own prejudices), it merely makes them a product of their environment who hasn't yet appreciated the importance of not leaving "hostages to fortune" in your public writings/utterances, and who hasn't learned to sufficiently suppress the desire to air such prejudices as they hold.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

i know loads of committed LP members  who's politics are well to the left of the national party. their view is that the LP is the only game in town, so their only hope of making a difference is through them, regardless of their ideological differences. i think they're wrong, but it's a POV i can understand.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i kind of try and avoid writing about my personal experiences too much on my blog because i know that ive been a lot luckier than a lot of other people, and also because the stuff i want to write about could end up getting me in a load of trouble



I got some nasty comments on a facebook share of one of mine because the commenter refused to believe I had spent nearly a year buying my kids shoes from Lidl because I couldn't afford anything better, living on Income Support. This was someone who worked for the DWP.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I got some nasty comments on a facebook share of one of mine because the commenter refused to believe I had spent nearly a year buying my kids shoes from Lidl because I couldn't afford anything better, living on Income Support. This was someone who worked for the DWP.




 People can become all levels of nasty when faced with truths they don't like/they have their beliefs challenged.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> A fair point.
> However (you knew that was coming, didn't you?  ), what needs to be borne in mind is that such prejudices don't take root in unfertile soil - one doesn't interpellate with ideas one has no truck with - so even if one is merely reflecting back the unending stomp of mainstream propaganda, one has to have some small affinity to the message the propaganda sends in order to do so.
> This doesn't, by any stretch of the imagination, make "Jack Monroe" a bad person (we all, after all, are prey to our own prejudices), it merely makes them a product of their environment who hasn't yet appreciated the importance of not leaving "hostages to fortune" in your public writings/utterances, and who hasn't learned to sufficiently suppress the desire to air such prejudices as they hold.



we all have our prejudices and i know i have made remarks about jeremy kyle, sitting on my arse etc in the past. when i said that stuff i wasnt trying to slag off anyone but its like a knee jerk reaction against people who think you're lazy and doing nothing. its wrong tho but there you go.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

co-op said:


> Ran into someone I know (vaguely) in an Oxfam shop a couple of days ago. He was _obviously_ embarrassed - and I instantly knew it was because we were meeting in an Oxfam shop. There's a lot of shame about.



For me, second-hand clothes were a necessary fact of life during my childhood in the '60s and into the first half of the '70s, so I've never really made an association between them and "shame", but I can understand how others might.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> For me, second-hand clothes were a necessary fact of life during my childhood in the '60s and into the first half of the '70s, so I've never really made an association between them and "shame", but I can understand how others might.



i always used to get my sister's and mum's clothes, not all of them but a lot of my stuff came from them (and i "gave" a lot of my stuff to them). isnt that normal?


----------



## Fedayn (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I got some nasty comments on a facebook share of one of mine because the commenter refused to believe I had spent nearly a year buying my kids shoes from Lidl because I couldn't afford anything better, living on Income Support. This was someone who worked for the DWP.



Who?


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> Who?



FG.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

of course now charity shops have become cool and the place to find vintage clothes. Get out of my shops, hipsters.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> of course now charity shops have become cool and the place to find vintage clothes. Get out of my shops, hipsters.



i picked up a really good pair of interview trousers for a pound


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> of course now charity shops have become cool and the place to find vintage clothes. Get out of my shops, hipsters.


been shopping in charity shops since before it was cool eh?


----------



## Favelado (Nov 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> There are a lot of otherwise really good people in Jack's situation, some of them working-class some middle-class, who have said or _thought_ something at some point that goes with the current drip drip propaganda of blaming the disenfranchised for being disenfranchised. If we're going to just dismiss people because they may have at one point said or thought something that might have gone along with that or seemed like it went along with that then you're dismissing an awful lot of people. She isn't a politician, you can't demand absolute ideological purity in all aspects of her life.



She knew exactly what she was saying and she was being a snob. Whether there are loads of people on benefits slagging off other claimants off or not, they need to be called out on it too. I wouldn't demand ideological purity of her, I just think it's reasonable to ask that she doesn't slag off other poor people or make herself out to be normal while they aren't. You wouldn't type a sentence like that on accident or without realising its implications. We don't have to dismiss people wholesale when they come out with this rubbish, but we can fight these statements instead of apologising for them.




weepiper said:


> I got some nasty comments on a facebook share of one of mine because the commenter refused to believe I had spent nearly a year buying my kids shoes from Lidl because I couldn't afford anything better, living on Income Support. This was someone who worked for the DWP.



Awful that someone wouldn't understand that shoes would rip a giant hole in your budget. They're plain expensive. It sounds entirely plausible that you had to do that.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

i can rarely afford to buy shoes tbh


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 4, 2013)

Even as a single adult,having to get new shoes is the main thing that throws a spanner in your works when you're having to live on a small amount of money - I can only imagine it's even worse with kids shoes coz they need replacing so often.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

well you can goe to shoezone or somewhere else cheap and pick up blokes shoes of the lowest quality for 10-15 quid. But. Shoes for women and children are more expensive. You buy cheap jack and the kids shoe will fall apart before he's outgrown the size. and of course, on low earnings/benefits with children that 15 quid is not lying spare is it. Every penny is earmarked.

There used to be some recognition of this with the social fund for claimants. But they scrapped that shit last year


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

Favelado said:


> Awful that someone wouldn't understand that shoes would rip a giant hole in your budget. They're plain expensive. It sounds entirely plausible that you had to do that.



yeah but I was getting £65 a week Income Support and £150 a week tax credits and £38 a week Child Benefit, I was rolling in it surely? Except that I lived 5 miles from the nearest town with no buses, so had to run a car to be able to buy shopping and take my eldest child to and from school and the middle one to and from nursery (no school buses for 3 year olds), and I was also treading water on two credit cards at around a hundred quid a month. His problem was that as a single man he had absolutely no idea of how much it costs to keep three children fed and clothed. Just couldn't see it.

My eldest daughter's toes are wonky now btw and I'm sure it's because of the dirt cheap shoes. But yeah, people choose to live on benefits.


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

8den said:


> Ever had a meter? They don't work in your favour. Switching on your light for 10 seconds will still probably cost you ten minutes of leccy. If you don't have it. That costs.


 

can you expand on that 8den?


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

Favelado said:


> You wouldn't type a sentence like that on accident or without realising its implications.



What I've been trying to say is that I think people could do exactly this and because they are acting out of impulses to avoid feeling personal shame. And it all gets a bit screwy because people don't acknowledge their own shame - why would they? Feeling shame is itself shameful; it means there's something to be ashamed of. 

Fuck, even murderers and rapists in prison, reviled by 'decent', 'normal' people - including many posters on here - make a point of trying to do in nonces in prison; it's exactly the same kind of psychological distancing process - 'I may have done wrong, but I'm not that kind of scum'. But I don't think they are analysing why they feel this, they just do so because it satisfies a need for self-respect. The less your "legitimate" grounds for claiming that, the more you will need it.



Favelado said:


> We don't have to dismiss people wholesale when they come out with this rubbish, but we can fight these statements instead of apologising for them.



I agree but I think it's a minefield getting through this terrain. Not having a big go at you here, but the other part of this statement of yours that I quoted at the top seems unaware of the reasons why people might hold these opinions and unaware of the complexity here. I'm not apologising for the opinion but I think I can see why it gets held; it does a job.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> who's demanding ideological purity? can't speak for anyone else, but all i'm doing is criticising some stuff she's written.
> 
> at what point does it become ok to pull her up on her politics? when she gets a regular column with the guardian?



she's got a regular column in the guardian

and she's more than just a casual labour supporter, she was a local party press secretary and worked full time for them during the 2012 local elections, shes spoke this year at the Tory, Labour, Green and TUC conferences, was part of a delegation to the G8 and has written at least two political columns on her local papers and has just appeared in a Labour party political broadcast

oh but we musn't criticise her for her politics, she's only half-formed, naive, but a child, fuck off, what patronising shit - she should be judged by her words and her actions like every other fucking labour party careerist

and I agree there are some good people at grassroots in the labour party, I have worked with some even though I disagree, but every single one of them wanted Liam Byrnes head on a spike and were disgusted about where the party is going on benefits, but not Jack, all that political work and never one word of criticism for a labour party that will be tougher on welfare than Iain Duncan Smith


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's got a regular column in the guardian
> 
> and she's more than just a casual labour supporter, she was a local party press secretary and worked full time for them during the 2012 local elections, shes spoke this year at the Tory, Labour, Green and TUC conferences, was part of a delegation to the G8



do you have a link to that?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> do you have a link to that?



which bit?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> which bit?



the tory conference/g8 bit


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> For me, second-hand clothes were a necessary fact of life during my childhood in the '60s and into the first half of the '70s, so I've never really made an association between them and "shame", but I can understand how others might.


 

I've always just seen them as a place to get a bargain, there was some stigma when I was growing up, but since adolescence I got loads of clothes there, but even that has been commodified now, clothes classed as 'vintage' with prices certainly not.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

Tory conference: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/10/...sacre-conservative-party-address-jack-monroe/

G8: http://www.cpag.org.uk/ambassadors/jack-monroe

all the stuff about her local work for the labour party seems to have recently disappeared from her blog, probably to try and cover up this story


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

i've got a cancer research pound shop on my street that sells clothes for a pound


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

Humberto said:


> You've done it then have you?



I applied for 100 odd jobs in a week back in the old days of postal applications and handwritten forms.

These days (with online cvs, linked in, one click applications etc. etc.) it would be a piece of piss. I could do it no problem.

If only there were 300 fucking jobs to apply for!


----------



## Fedayn (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> FG.



During his very long idiot phase.... All too often a dick.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

She didn't speak _at _the tory conference (which suggests some sort of process of them asking her to come and speak about their common perspectives and her agreeing) but at a fringe anti-food bank event organised by oxfam, and the tories tried to stop her. Fringe events are not really speaking at conference.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

with the labour thing- theres a lot of difference between holding your nose and voting for a decent local (andy sawford for corby with his weird labour co-op party coalition thing) and actively supporting a vote labour regardless strategy. I think the likes of reformist soc/dec owen et al want to change the party from within. A total no hoper if ever I saw one. 

Unswerving support for the party that traditionally uses lube before they fuck you over but won't even promise any KY next time they get in is....bizarre


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> I applied for 100 odd jobs in a week back in the old days of postal applications and handwritten forms.
> 
> These days (with online cvs, linked in, one click applications etc. etc.) it would be a piece of piss. I could do it no problem.
> 
> If only there were 300 fucking jobs to apply for!


I've _pretended _to to make a particularly twatish advisor go check through them all when i knew i was signing off later that day anyway.


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> the tory conference/g8 bit


 

she blogged about the Tory conference on her site, after her talk on poverty/soup kitchens, she claims she was inundated with Tory punters 'wanting to help' etc

well, don't cut benefits then, easy!


----------



## Favelado (Nov 4, 2013)

co-op said:


> What I've been trying to say is that I think people could do exactly this and because they are acting out of impulses to avoid feeling personal shame. And it all gets a bit screwy because people don't acknowledge their own shame - why would they? Feeling shame is itself shameful; it means there's something to be ashamed of.
> 
> Fuck, even murderers and rapists in prison, reviled by 'decent', 'normal' people - including many posters on here - make a point of trying to do in nonces in prison; it's exactly the same kind of psychological distancing process - 'I may have done wrong, but I'm not that kind of scum'. But I don't think they are analysing why they feel this, they just do so because it satisfies a need for self-respect. The less your "legitimate" grounds for claiming that, the more you will need it.
> 
> ...



I'm not sure I agree that shame is an acceptable excuse for laying into others. I'm interested in what you say, however, and it did get me thinking. I spent a lot of my childhood in a single-parent family on benefits in the '80s and '90s and I was teased at school for being poor, but no-one laughed at the fact that it was state money we were getting. Nor did I feel the need to cover it up. It is sad that this has changed. I think I recall "being on welfare" was seen as something that was cause for mirth in the United States long before the UK (based only on memories of popular culture) and it's a disaster that this mentality has crossed the Atlantic, as well as so much of the associated vocabulary. I still think it might almost be patronising to let people off the hook for criticising other benefits claimants because they feel ashamed, but I do get where you're coming from.


----------



## bamalama (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's got a regular column in the guardian
> 
> and she's more than just a casual labour supporter, she was a local party press secretary and worked full time for them during the 2012 local elections, shes spoke this year at the Tory, Labour, Green and TUC conferences, was part of a delegation to the G8 and has written at least two political columns on her local papers and has just appeared in a Labour party political broadcast
> 
> ...



It's hard to understand why,when people read stuff like this they insist on sticking their fingers in their ears and ignoring the criticism/debate thats goin on here.She's gonna have a nice wee career as another spoke in the wheel of media commentary.Fair play to her for carvin that out for herself,with the help of her background,labour party contacts,and her endorsing(wether deliberately or not)the idea of the deserving/undeserving poor narrative used by neo liberals to attack the poorest.She is what she is ,come to peace with it.If criticism is good enough for the rest of the "commentariat" why not jack?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> She didn't speak _at _the tory conference (which suggests some sort of process of them asking her to come and speak about their common perspectives and her agreeing) but at a fringe anti-food bank event organised by oxfam, and the tories tried to stop her. Fringe events are not really speaking at conference.



fair enough, but thats how she presented it: 
Jack Monroe, Conservative Party conference address, 1st October 2013.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fair enough, but thats how she presented it:
> Jack Monroe, Conservative Party conference address, 1st October 2013.


Yes but  presumably you've a) read her piece pointing out the reality in the comments section or b) this being pointed out on this thread before already?


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Tory conference: http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/10/...sacre-conservative-party-address-jack-monroe/
> 
> G8: http://www.cpag.org.uk/ambassadors/jack-monroe
> 
> all the stuff about her local work for the labour party seems to have recently disappeared from her blog, probably to try and cover up this story


 
A right own goal there, a millionaire restaurateur (does he pay the living wage?) what were they thinking?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yes but  presumably you've a) read her piece pointing out the reality in the comments section or b) this being pointed out on this thread before already?



yes, accept my apologies, it was a rhetorical slip made in the context of a wider point which is that she is far from some political naif who doesn't know what she's saying


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

Actually, going to talk at the tory conference would have been brilliant. So many opportunities.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

I was a labour press sec once - the very important role involved sending generic copy from the centre with our towns name/issue filled in to the local paper once a week.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i always used to get my sister's and mum's clothes, not all of them but a lot of my stuff came from them (and i "gave" a lot of my stuff to them). isnt that normal?



IME a lot of people of the next generation along from mine (people of yours and Dottie's age) were the recipients of parental attitudes that went along the lines of "I had to wear 2nd-hand clothes, and I'll be damned if you'll have to".  I know that both of my brothers and my sister were like this with their kids (although they did do clothes-swaps, but that's not quite the same).


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Actually, going to talk at the tory conference would have been brilliant. So many opportunities.



only if she took a loaded weapon with her


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

Reading around social media Jack has many many supporters, some very passionate, as they are with Brand, its as if many people are desperately looking for 'leaders' to get us out of the mess we are in,

in many ways, politics seems to be now undertaken by 'proxies', Monroe/Brand vs Littlejohn, etc.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

Funnily enough, and in some ways at odds with what might be expected, I get a fair few ostensibly middle class people I meet encouraging me to claim benefits.

No stigma.

No judgement.

Just a pleasantly surprising belief that people should be entitled to, and claim, benefits if they need them.


----------



## cesare (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I was a labour press sec once - the very important role involved sending generic copy from the centre with our towns name/issue filled in to the local paper once a week.


I wondered what they did!


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

i updated the local SP website for ages, mostly putting press releases up and announcing demos


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> only if she took a loaded weapon with her


_A hungry belly and an angry mind is the most dangerous loaded weapon of all _etc . See, that's how i got the press sec job - for glib shite like that.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Funnily enough, and in some ways at odds with what might be expected, I get a fair few ostensibly middle class people I meet encouraging me to claim benefits.
> 
> No stigma.
> 
> ...



me too.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I was a labour press sec once - the very important role involved sending generic copy from the centre with our towns name/issue filled in to the local paper once a week.



have you got a cat called kinnock


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

Favelado said:


> I'm not sure I agree that shame is an acceptable excuse for laying into others. I'm interested in what you say, however, and it did get me thinking. I spent a lot of my childhood in a single-parent family on benefits in the '80s and '90s and I was teased at school for being poor, but no-one laughed at the fact that it was state money we were getting. Nor did I feel the need to cover it up. It is sad that this has changed. I think I recall "being on welfare" was seen as something that was cause for mirth in the United States long before the UK (based only on memories of popular culture) and it's a disaster that this mentality has crossed the Atlantic, as well as so much of the associated vocabulary. I still think it might almost be patronising to let people off the hook for criticising other benefits claimants because they feel ashamed, but I do get where you're coming from.



I don't think it's an acceptable excuse once it's out in the open but I think it's the kind of thing that many people spontaneously do when they feel vulnerable to social shaming. It's really widespread and it's also invisible to many of the people who do it. 

I'd also really disagree with the idea that it's new - as many have pointed out the deserving/undeserving poor is a Victorian trope - linked to ideas of charity rather than human need. A huge part of the history of the working class in the UK has been dominated by a quest for respectability and it may have been a short historical window after WW2 through to the 80s when the newly-won welfare state 'allowed' non-stigmatised use of welfare.

Certainly in my own family my most obsessively respectable grandmother was the daughter of domestic servants and she was _obsessed_ by respectability - and I really don't mean metaphorically, it underwrote nearly every decision she made from what she wore to what she believed to what she ate to where she shopped. The more middle class lot are far less worried about it.

It's not that I'm defending the distinction, it's just that I think it's easy to underestimate the internalisation that goes on here, it's an emotional and psychological parallel to economic precarity; you are always being judged on your moral worth now, there is less and less security. I'd attack the opinion but not those who express it (obviously excluding here those who are so privileged that they have no excuse).


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i always used to get my sister's and mum's clothes, not all of them but a lot of my stuff came from them (and i "gave" a lot of my stuff to them). isnt that normal?



Yeah.

Pretty much everyone I know - from all classes - gets and giveshand me downs, picks up stuff at charity shops etc.

As an aside, I once met two ambassadors (Japanese and Irish iirc) sifting through stalls in a second market in Africa "looking for bargains".


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> have you got a cat called kinnock


One called geri after ms haliwell and one called Jimmy after jimmy floyd hasselbaink.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> One called geri after ms haliwell and one called Jimmy after jimmy floyd hasselbaink.



at least its not victoria and eric


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 4, 2013)

Favelado said:


> I'm not sure I agree that shame is an acceptable excuse for laying into others. I'm interested in what you say, however, and it did get me thinking. I spent a lot of my childhood in a single-parent family on benefits in the '80s and '90s and I was teased at school for being poor, but no-one laughed at the fact that it was state money we were getting. Nor did I feel the need to cover it up. It is sad that this has changed. I think I recall "being on welfare" was seen as something that was cause for mirth in the United States long before the UK (based only on memories of popular culture) and it's a disaster that this mentality has crossed the Atlantic, as well as so much of the associated vocabulary. I still think it might almost be patronising to let people off the hook for criticising other benefits claimants because they feel ashamed, but I do get where you're coming from.



I'm not so sure co-op is saying that shame is an *acceptable* excuse, but rather that people tend to hierarchise levels of acceptableness based on their own feelings/how they would or do feel shame about certain things, and that informs how they see others.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

> a quest for respectability and it may have been a short historical window after WW2 through to the 80s when the newly-won welfare state 'allowed' non-stigmatised use of welfare.



long before that surely? methodism, guilds, patriotism of the old school- surely the fierce attempt to have better and be better than the peasant/guttersnipe accuations of society as a whole predates post ww2 and certainly the aspirational shit of the 80's


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not so sure co-op is saying that shame is an acceptable excuse, but rather that people tend to hierarchise levels of acceptableness based on their own feelings/how they would or do feel shame about certain things, and that informs how they see others.


Which is exactly why all this chav bollocks started up when the pinch was starting to be felt at the top-end of the w/c lower end of the m/c before 2008. As i've probably bored everyone by pointing out by now.


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

I read Jack's blog regularly and what comes across to me is that she seems genuinely traumatised by her experiences, she repeats them in nearly every non food blog post/article she writes.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> long before that surely? methodism, guilds, patriotism of the old school- surely the fierce attempt to have better and be better than the peasant/guttersnipe accuations of society as a whole predates post ww2 and certainly the aspirational shit of the 80's


That was based on the real possibility of these groups _potential _upward movement - today it's based on the reality of their _downward _movement. Big big difference.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

one of my mates at uni (still a mate now) was a daughter of a chinese government official in hong kong who had gone to boarding school etc over here, from a very wealthy family, she was always constantly searching out bargains and never buying anything expensive. she also worked throughout her degree etc 

her job these days is very far from what her family do tho,


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Funnily enough, and in some ways at odds with what might be expected, I get a fair few ostensibly middle class people I meet encouraging me to claim benefits.
> 
> No stigma.
> 
> ...


 



> Great example of Unite Community working together with the wider union below. Great work.
> 
> The Barnsley Unite Community Centre Volunteers would like to thank Pegler Yorkshire Branch NE/405/22 For the Amazing donation of £2000, this money will help the people of Barnsley in their fight against the cruel and unnecessary Welfare Reforms.
> United We Bargain Divided We Beg!
> ...


 
Maybe another sign that people are becoming more sympathetic, though the news that Crosby has gone full time for the Tories doesn't bode well.


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> long before that surely? methodism, guilds, patriotism of the old school- surely the fierce attempt to have better and be better than the peasant/guttersnipe accuations of society as a whole predates post ww2 and certainly the aspirational shit of the 80's



Yes I meant that the 'unjudged' use of benefits was just in that window (massive generalisation of course) - but the fight for equality of respect is much older - as old as class society probably.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> long before that surely? methodism, guilds, patriotism of the old school- surely the fierce attempt to have better and be better than the peasant/guttersnipe accuations of society as a whole predates post ww2 and certainly the aspirational shit of the 80's



it was also fighting against a strong reactionary current, the skivers rhetoric goes back a long way and arguments to introduce the 1834 poor law amendment act were very close to the current stuff used to justify welfare reform - there was an exhibition about it at the bookfair this year, would be good to get it online somewhere


----------



## Favelado (Nov 4, 2013)

The rhetoric has really ramped up again recently though. Could it be said there was a lull during the post-war consensus era and we've slipped back into default mode now?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

There are two rhetorics here - the one from above and the one from below. The one imposed and the one developed out of what you see around you and why/how you view it (or not) in this way. It is useful to look at how they are linked and what are driving both, because they are very different things. It's not very useful to assume the two are just the same or the result of the same things.


----------



## co-op (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> it was also fighting against a strong reactionary current, the skivers rhetoric goes back a long way and arguments to introduce the 1834 poor law amendment act were very close to the current stuff used to justify welfare reform - there was an exhibition about it at the bookfair this year, would be good to get it online somewhere



It's fucking depressing but there are many echoes of the Poor Laws in contemporary politics and economics. there was this whole debate about Speenhamland "outdoor relief" in the late18th C/early 19th C which gave assistance to the working poor who were unable to feed their families on their wages - it's basically Tax Credits by another name. Last year was the first time in the modern era that there were more people in poverty who are working for wages than on benefits. When I was first being taught about this stuff in the early 80s the link between poverty and unemployment was pretty much an Iron Law; you wouldn't get one without the other. that's all in the past now.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

Favelado said:


> The rhetoric has really ramped up again recently though. Could it be said there was a lull during the post-war consensus era and we've slipped back into default mode now?



I'd like to source the figure but google is not letting me win- I do recall reading that during its 'golden age' even a fair percentage of the wealthiest in the country lived in council housing. Nowadays living in a council house is the mark of cain, despite the fact that you won't get one outwith a 2 year waiting period and despite the fact that HB just pays private landlords mortgages on their second or third homes. Means tested benefits are poisonous, create divisions and foster animosity.


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

BOT, who is Jacks readership?, again going by blog comments, it seems to be people who want to save money and feel they are doing their bit to challenge austerity, I may be wrong and hope I am) but there doesn't seem to be many 'track suited' single mums on estates, etc.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

Favelado said:


> The rhetoric has really ramped up again recently though. Could it be said there was a lull during the post-war consensus era and we've slipped back into default mode now?



the rhetoric moved the other way even before the war, with even people like Churchill calling for some kind of universal welfare provision - I read a quote somewhere that I havent been able to find since which I think was Churchill, when asked about the problem of alcoholics or the idle said better a few of them than to continue with the kind of poverty that was present

it strikes me as more cyclical, the scrounger narrative ramps up in times of economic downturn, which leads to workhouses or what weve got now, which leads to mass poverty, which leads to demands for something to be done about the poverty weve just created - took about a hundred years last time


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> Maybe another sign that people are becoming more sympathetic, though the news that Crosby has gone full time for the Tories doesn't bode well.



I don't think it's a case of people becoming more sympathetic in an abstract sense. But that people's reaction to stuff in real life, on the ground, to people they know is often very different to what might be gleaned from social media postings and throw away frothings about media stories.

...as, of course, butchers has already noted.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

**oops, not the cricket thread**


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> There are two rhetorics here - the one from above and the one from below. The one imposed and the one developed out of what you see around you and why/how you view it (or not) in this way. It is useful to look at how they are linked and what are driving both, because they are very different things. It's not very useful to assume the two are just the same or the result of the same things.



quite - i don't think it's a good idea to try and tell people that the skiving dole dosser doesn't exist at all, as that goes against the evidence they see with their own eyes - a woman I work with is virulently anti-benefits, and when challenged gives the example of her brothers, neither of whom have ever had a job. but it does mean a more challenging conversation has to be had about the reasons why people might end up in such a hole, and why they are still deserving of help. 

i guess that's what i think needs challenging - not the idea that_ these people_ exist (although their menace is wildly exaggerated), but the idea that they're undeserving.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> BOT, who is Jacks readership?, again going by blog comments, it seems to be people who want to save money and feel they are doing their bit to challenge austerity, I may be wrong and hope I am) but there doesn't seem to be many 'track suited' single mums on estates, etc.



Don't go by "blog comments". It's not helpful.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Technology news:


Talk about lighbulbs being a non-sequiteur...


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> quite - i don't think it's a good idea to try and tell people that the skiving dole dosser doesn't exist at all, as that goes against the evidence they see with their own eyes - a woman I work with is virulently anti-benefits, and when challenged gives the example of her brothers, neither of whom have ever had a job. but it does mean a more challenging conversation has to be had about the reasons why people might end up in such a hole, and why they are still deserving of help.
> 
> i guess that's what i think needs challenging - not the idea that_ these people_ exist (although their menace is wildly exaggerated), but the idea that they're undeserving.



I think it needs to go further and there is space opening up to question waged work in an economy where there will never be enough jobs.  thats really difficult, but as has been said, even openly idle claimants were not always judged this way - think Joey in Bread - which may have contributed to the idea life on benefits is easy - but the Boswells were still cultural heroes on prime time tv

when I first went on the dole (very early 90s) it was seen as a personal failing/mistake, as in you dont want to spend all your life on benefits lad, get yourself a job, there was never the we are paying for you bollocks you get now, and even an argument that if people who didnt want a job didnt have one then that was fine because it meant a job for someone who did

somewhere along the way unemployed people became blamed for unemployment and that they are scrounging off the rest of it, apart from being a daft argument it also ignores that most of us are scroungers, in a distributive tax system you would expect 50% of people to be net beneficiaries, and the reason its more is because the rich have got so much money that they pay most of the tax - unravelling all this is fucking hard, but it has to be done and in my opinion any fightback against what is taking place now has to come from a radical perspective, otherwise even if we win, (and we wont) we wont really win, we'll just go round the block again

I think people are realising that, was at a meeting recently with quite a lot of mainstream people there, labour left, DPOs etc, and everyone was talking about a citizens income of some form, that needs seizing on along with the current very real impacts of digitisation on the jobs market which some people are saying could replace up to 50% of all jobs in the next couple of decades


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

and the wham! rap, of course.



> Hey everybody take a look at me,
> I've got street credibility,
> I may not have a job,
> But I have a good time,
> ...


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

Tuckers Luck


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> I don't think it's a case of people becoming more sympathetic in an abstract sense. But that people's reaction to stuff in real life, on the ground, to people they know is often very different to what might be gleaned from social media postings and throw away frothings about media stories.
> 
> ...as, of course, butchers has already noted.


 

That's what I meant:, people are encountering these issues in their own lives, most will now know someone who has been made redundant, lost their disability benefits or been treated like crap by the DWP, etc.


----------



## treelover (Nov 4, 2013)

> I think people are realising that, was at a meeting recently with quite a lot of mainstream people there, labour left,* DPOs* etc, and everyone was talking about a citizens income of some form, that needs seizing on along with the current very real impacts of digitisation on the jobs market which some people are saying could replace up to 50% of all jobs in the next couple of decades


 
DPO's?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

disabled peoples organisations


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> I read Jack's blog regularly and what comes across to me is that she seems genuinely traumatised by her experiences, she repeats them in nearly every non food blog post/article she writes.




She's angry, and has every right to be so. Regardless of the labourite support- she's angry that her kids who have no understanding of why this is happening (because you don't get political nuance as a kid) are subject to this.


It's a fair platform. I do agree with those who point out that the shirkers/striver narrative she is apparently OK with is counter productive. However I have not seen overwhelming evidence that she does adhere to that narrative. Just an isolated quote in riposte to Littledick using his own terms of reference back on him.


Personally her austerity recipes make me wish for starvation- a three bean burger patty? Are you having a giggle? I can get for the same price a load of skinny chicken thighs and veg from Farmfoods then make a nice stew. But thats just culinary disagreement.

I dunno- I'd rather she was there, saying inconvienient things than not. Yes we don't need another dishonest left voice but I see no evidence of that save some really hilarious bulb chat

'So what does Jack favour out of the Lords? Is it of the Flies, Of the Ring or indeed of the Dance? phone in'


----------



## weepiper (Nov 4, 2013)

This report out today is as well going here as anywhere else I reckon

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-24773201



> Many young families cut back on fresh fruit and vegetables and switched to less healthy processed food as the recession squeezed budgets, a UK study of 15,000 households' data suggests.
> 
> It showed rising food prices and stagnating wages had led people to buy less food and choose cheaper products.





> Food prices rose by 33% between 2007 and 2013, official figures show.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> However I have not seen overwhelming evidence that she does adhere to that narrative. Just an isolated quote in riposte to Littledick using his own terms of reference back on him.


nah, there was other stuff too - which smokedout found while looking for something else...



smokedout said:


> http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/06/...-happen-to-normal-people-the-guardian-6-june/
> 
> there
> 
> (thank fuck  )


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> nah, there was other stuff too - which smokedout found while looking for something else...


Same quote as before isn't it?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> nah, there was other stuff too - which smokedout found while looking for something else...


Still a total misreading - the two _yous _don't match up for example:



> “I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone."



How can she mean _me _in the first instance of _you _then _other people_ in the second instance. If she meant what is suggested it would be i/we in the later uses.

I blame the journo. That so much has been hatched on this is pretty poor.


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Same quote as before isn't it?


it's not her littlejohn riposte. there's two separate quotes under discussion.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 4, 2013)

Well she is well on the way to nice labour career now, so it's all by the by.

The notion she is some naive political waif just finding and developing a voice is really patronising, she has long been deeply political, attending every council meeting she can, working for the labour party. Fuck you don't call your cats after two of the blandest Labour leaders in living memory without being committed to the labour party and its vision (or lack of).

She's every bit as up the arse of the labour party as articul8 but without the side dressing of radical posturing.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> it's not her paxo riposte. there's two separate quotes under discussion.


Paxo? You mean Littlejohn? Is this the quote your're on about from above or something else?



> “I had a £27 grand a year job. I’ve not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I’m a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone."


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

yes, littlejohn. i edited.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

Perhaps then this is the most contentious statement



> You think it doesn’t happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.”



Killer b

thats open to some interpreation- I'd suggest that here she is not drawing a line between striver/shirker etc but rather referring to the scrounger trope, not endorsing it. 'You think we are all' Is the problematic piece of that quote as it suggests that some folk are the negative stereotype. On reading it I do not think this is so, it reads like she is just saying 'we fucking try' while utilising the negative language to underscore her point.

Christ, I don't imagine it was more than a throwaway comment made with a certain cynical edge. I don't buy the idea that she personally adheres to such, but if she sticks with the fabian labourite bubble they'll use her.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> yes, littlejohn. i edited.


Cool, but the quote - same or a different one? I'm confoozzled.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> Perhaps then this is the most contentious statement
> 
> 
> 
> ...


She didn't even write it. (and it needs the prior part). It's reported speech, It's a journo reporting stuff she said without bothering to even clarify for readers. He shouldn't impose a narrative on it, but he should at least read back and understand how he's chosen to present it reads. It makes no literal sense whatsoever. It's just journos being shit.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I got some nasty comments on a facebook share of one of mine because the commenter refused to believe I had spent nearly a year buying my kids shoes from Lidl because I couldn't afford anything better, living on Income Support. This was someone who worked for the DWP.



doesnt surprise me. jobcentres ive come across some real bad shit many a time


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

There's stuff chipping away at her facts from people hostile to her, claiming that they undermine her credibility - does the same work for them and the facts they have presented that have been chipped away over the course of the thread? Or, because it comes from the best of intentions it doesn't matter?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

I think the hari-chase has ruined all this challenging prominent people stuff. It leads to the mentality that rather than political responses, there must be hidden connections, lies and exposes.


----------



## J Ed (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> and she's more than just a casual labour supporter, she was a local party press secretary and worked full time for them during the 2012 local elections, shes spoke this year at the Tory, Labour, Green and TUC conferences, was part of a delegation to the G8 and has written at least two political columns on her local papers and has just appeared in a Labour party political broadcast



I knew that she spoke at a fringe event at the Tory conference and I knew about the broadcast but I didn't know the rest of it. I've changed my mind a bit about her now tbh :/


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

its the applying for 300 jobs thing. its classic going above and beyond the demands of the jobseekers agreement thing turning it into an occupation in and of itself.

when i was on the dole from 1999-2004 ish. i watched day time telly - back then killroy was the place one went to get anti dole moanings. although that was generally too early for me to watch - after all getting into that weird sleep pattern that comes with being on the dole for a long time with not much hope of a meaningful existence.  to me that aint no stereotype - watching the telly is about the only thing one can afford to do, going for a coffee or whatnot, is beyond what one can afford really.

if we are going to smash the stereotypes, surely the replacement of one state of being - an outcome of hopelessness by being on the scrap heap - with an image of the idealised jobseeker agreement citizen surely aint gonna do for those of us in the dole any good. especially when the tories are floating the kite of having people in the jobcentre 35 hours a week . the 300 jobs thing is the deserving part of that deserving poor/underserving poor thing in the contemporary context. the contrast of that with despondant peeps as the narsty other is the other side of that equation. fuck that.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

how exactly are they going to get people to be in the jobcentre 35 hours a week? i havent been unemployed since 2012 but my local jobcentre the desks are frequently empty and haven't got many permanent staff. they can hardly cope with the amount of people there let alone forcing people to be there 35 hours a week. I can't see it happening.

unless it's changed massively since i was last unemployed but i dont see many dole centre jobs being advertised?


----------



## Favelado (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> how exactly are they going to get people to be in the jobcentre 35 hours a week? i havent been unemployed since 2012 but my local jobcentre the desks are frequently empty and haven't got many permanent staff. they can hardly cope with the amount of people there let alone forcing people to be there 35 hours a week. I can't see it happening.
> 
> unless it's changed massively since i was last unemployed but i dont see many dole centre jobs being advertised?



What would you do after day 3?


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

they must be talking complete bollocks. and what happens if you get a job interview?


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> how exactly are they going to get people to be in the jobcentre 35 hours a week? i havent been unemployed since 2012 but my local jobcentre the desks are frequently empty and haven't got many permanent staff. they can hardly cope with the amount of people there let alone forcing people to be there 35 hours a week. I can't see it happening.
> 
> unless it's changed massively since i was last unemployed but i dont see many dole centre jobs being advertised?



aye its just a total kite they are flying but its the notion that we should be endlessly applying for pointless jobs that i think is the problem. 

maybe though having one having to talk about ones jobsearches online will allow greater monitoring of ones fidleity to the jobseeker agreement


----------



## Santino (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> how exactly are they going to get people to be in the jobcentre 35 hours a week? i havent been unemployed since 2012 but my local jobcentre the desks are frequently empty and haven't got many permanent staff. they can hardly cope with the amount of people there let alone forcing people to be there 35 hours a week. I can't see it happening.
> 
> unless it's changed massively since i was last unemployed but i dont see many dole centre jobs being advertised?


Get the unemployed to work in job centres for free, increasing their capacity to allow the unemployed to spend more time there (helping to run the job centre). All the current job centre staff can be made redundant, thus increasing the supply of unemployed people with experience of running job centres.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

Santino said:


> Get the unemployed to work in job centres for free, increasing their capacity to allow the unemployed to spend more time there (helping to run the job centre). All the current job centre staff can be made redundant, thus increasing the supply of unemployed people with experience of running job centres.


Best delete that before someone with a mandate can put it into action.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

Santino said:


> Get the unemployed to work in job centres for free, increasing their capacity to allow the unemployed to spend more time there (helping to run the job centre). All the current job centre staff can be made redundant, thus increasing the supply of unemployed people with experience of running job centres.



last time i was on the dole was getting the chat by this annoyingly enthusiastic job centre worker about how in the near future we wont need to have interviews with people like him but can all be done online - and me thinking - thats your job mate wtf!


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

Santino said:


> Get the unemployed to work in job centres for free, increasing their capacity to allow the unemployed to spend more time there (helping to run the job centre). All the current job centre staff can be made redundant, thus increasing the supply of unemployed people with experience of running job centres.



actually thats kinda what happens with reed partnership, wise group, working links etc. oftern their job coach roles are done by people in their programme. nearly got forced into one of them once!!!


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Nov 4, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> if we are going to smash the stereotypes, surely the replacement of one state of being - an outcome of hopelessness by being on the scrap heap - with an image of the idealised jobseeker agreement citizen surely aint gonna do for those of us in the dole any good. especially when the tories are floating the kite of having people in the jobcentre 35 hours a week . the 300 jobs thing is the deserving part of that deserving poor/underserving poor thing in the contemporary context. the contrast of that with despondant peeps as the narsty other is the other side of that equation. fuck that.


 
35 hours per week?  I'd rather slit my wrists.  The last time I was unemployed I couldn't stand more than about 10 minutes of their patronizing crap... and I had better luck finding a job without them kibitzing.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 4, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> its the applying for 300 jobs thing. its classic going above and beyond the demands of the jobseekers agreement thing turning it into an occupation in and of itself.
> 
> when i was on the dole from 1999-2004 ish. i watched day time telly - back then killroy was the place one went to get anti dole moanings. although that was generally too early for me to watch - after all getting into that weird sleep pattern that comes with being on the dole for a long time with not much hope of a meaningful existence.  to me that aint no stereotype - watching the telly is about the only thing one can afford to do, going for a coffee or whatnot, is beyond what one can afford really.
> 
> if we are going to smash the stereotypes, surely the replacement of one state of being - an outcome of hopelessness by being on the scrap heap - with an image of the idealised jobseeker agreement citizen surely aint gonna do for those of us in the dole any good. especially when the tories are floating the kite of having people in the jobcentre 35 hours a week . the 300 jobs thing is the deserving part of that deserving poor/underserving poor thing in the contemporary context. the contrast of that with despondant peeps as the narsty other is the other side of that equation. fuck that.



Well said.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well said.


300 jobs over what period? This hasn't been established. Hence the, _it doesn't matter _stuff when the original claim of it being in a week was undermined (with no loss of cred on the part of those who either used this or bought other peoples use of it without doing any research of course).


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

10/week = 500 a year. If you want a job that's piss easy. If you really want a job and you're in the right area, then 15 a week is piss easy - so under six months. So being on benefits and applying for jobs for under six months then becomes this nonsense above. Who is scapegoating who here? No less of cred for being wrong remember!!


----------



## Favelado (Nov 4, 2013)

You can apply for five jobs in 10 minutes once you've registered with the right websites. A couple of clicks and you're done. In a place like Southend the challenge would be finding new vacancies, as the same jobs you've already applied for pop-up again and again after the first couple of weeks.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> how exactly are they going to get people to be in the jobcentre 35 hours a week? i havent been unemployed since 2012 but my local jobcentre the desks are frequently empty and haven't got many permanent staff. they can hardly cope with the amount of people there let alone forcing people to be there 35 hours a week. I can't see it happening.
> 
> unless it's changed massively since i was last unemployed but i dont see many dole centre jobs being advertised?




1. They don't have space for it.
2. They don't have resources/appropriate work search equipment etc.
3. They don't have the staff for it.
4. It will drive people nuts. Many will refuse to go. More sanctions or agree to do other things/anything but have to suffer this is inevitable?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

5. It's just election guff.


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

it don't matter what the frequency was, or whether indeed it actually took place. what matters is the reportage of the fact as signifier as good jobseeker citizen and how this contrasts with the other not so good jobseeker that matters


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

Also a lot of people working in the job centre are temps who won't have had much training. I've had to do some challenging things as a temp but dealing with a room full of angry people who've been sanctioned etc, is not one of them. Won't they have to get more security etc in, at a time when those kinds of jobs are being cut as well


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 4, 2013)

I do 10 a week. Half of those are ones I have no hope of getting but you should chance your arm.

Can't do agency warehouse stuff anymore. I'm physically incapable. Time was I'd sling boxes for 8 hours with the best but not so much now.

52x10 is 520.

it is doable to apply for that many jobs per month but applying for ones you have a chance of getting is perhaps a third of if you are lucky.


inhospitable hours, part time, nil hour contract.Fuckoff. What ever happened to just employing a man and having a faircontract


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

Regardless of its relevance to jack. The whole "300 jobs" thing is a bit meaningless without detail.

It depends upon way too many factors to make sweeping statements on number of applications alone.

I could send off 300 applications by the end of this evening if I wasn't bothered about the type of job, the location, the wage or whether I got it.

On the other hand for a job I actually wanted, and had a decent chance of getting, it could take hours, even days, honing the application till I was satisfied. On the other hand if it was with a tech savvy employer or similar to a job I'd already applied for it could merely be a matter of moments to apply.

That's if the vacancy existed in the first place.

You really can't infer too much from a comment of "having applied for 300 jobs".


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> You really can't infer too much from a comment of "having applied for 300 jobs".



Or, you can.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

As yet another aside remember there are plenty of companies and individuals whose industry is "job seeking" in the old days they books about the "perfect cv" these days it's all about personal branding, becoming a linked in "power user" etc etc. it's in their interests to turn job seeking into a full-time activity. If employers and would be employees listen to them it becomes so.

It would be very easy for me to spend 35 hours a week on job seeking activities.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Or, you can.


 Only if contextualised.


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 4, 2013)

This stuff is making me worried because I'm doing quite precarious work at the moment and it just reminds me of the possibility that it may dry up. I prefer not to think about it.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Only if contextualised.


You can - any people have without contextualising it.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> 5. It's just election guff.



its not, daily signing or full time workfare begins in April next year for people leaving the Work Programme, tendering is taking place now.  IDS' 35 hours a week jobsearch will also go live then, although its a pilot, but will mean people sitting not in Jobcentres but at welfare-to-work companies everyday for up to six month - this can include new claimants.

Claimant commitments went live from last month although they are being staggered on a regional basis, that means a claimant has to agree to spend 35 hours a week on 'work related activity'.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I think the hari-chase has ruined all this challenging prominent people stuff. It leads to the mentality that rather than political responses, there must be hidden connections, lies and exposes.



I think the reaction to Jack is more visceral tbh, certainly from my own perspective, who is this fucking do gooder, why does her story sound so implausible in a lot of cases, and fuck off with the tenner a week shit, I dont want her representing me and I dont trust her not to be fucking me over when/if labour get re-elected, in fact I can see her as the bright young face of Labour's wonderful jobs guarantee already


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> its not, daily signing or full time workfare begins in April next year for people leaving the Work Programme, tendering is taking place now.  IDS' 35 hours a week jobsearch will also go live then, although its a pilot, but will mean people sitting not in Jobcentres but at welfare-to-work companies everyday for up to six month - this can include new claimants.
> 
> Claimant commitments went live from last month although they are being staggered on a regional basis, that means a claimant has to agree to spend 35 hours a week on 'work related activity'.


There is no 35 hours a week jobsearch going live. You're are doing the same stuff as has led you to making so many mistakes on this thread. Saying partial things are universal things.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I think the reaction to Jack is more visceral tbh, certainly from my own perspective, who is this fucking do gooder, why does her story sound so implausible in a lot of cases, and fuck off with the tenner a week shit, I dont want her representing me and I dont trust her not to be fucking me over when/if labour get re-elected, in fact I can see her as the bright young face of Labour's wonderful jobs guarantee already


I meant the use of the _they have something to hide model, let's use a laptop (a friends maybe?) to colombo her - _because there is some definitive lie we can catch them out on, some false identity, something. I mean, fucking lightbulbs ffs.


----------



## Favelado (Nov 4, 2013)

The lightbulbs bit was excellent, let's not take credit way from that.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> There is no 35 hours a week jobsearch going live. You're are doing the same stuff as has led you to making so many mistakes on this thread. Saying partial things are universal things.



err yes there is



> new activities trialled in Hammersmith Jobcentre Plus including claimants having 3 face-to-face interviews with their work coach within the first 2 weeks of their Universal Credit claim – this will enable their work coach to assess that claimants are completing up to 35 hours of positive job-seeking activity each week



https://www.gov.uk/government/news/jobseekers-to-start-signing-new-claimant-commitment-today


----------



## killer b (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I think the hari-chase has ruined all this challenging prominent people stuff. It leads to the mentality that rather than political responses, there must be hidden connections, lies and exposes.


i don't think that's fair. threads like this are always full of the occasional bit of mad witch hunt bollocks. that doesn't make the other less hysterical discussion invalid.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> err yes there is
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/government/news/jobseekers-to-start-signing-new-claimant-commitment-today



Which doesn't say that there is 35 hours a week jobsearch going live does it?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

killer b said:


> i don't think that's fair. threads like this are always full of the occasional bit of mad witch hunt bollocks. that doesn't make the other less hysterical discussion invalid.


I said it _produces_ that mad bollocks - i didn't mention the rest of it. Or the chipping away of facts the other way - remember she started off this thread as a posho private school girl. These things all live together, but the i think the hari thing gave impetus to the colombos. (which i've never seen btw)


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

More on the various commitments people might have to sign up to http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/engla..._related_requirements_do_you_have_to_meet.htm


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> You can - any people have without contextualising it.



...well you shouldn't. It's just froth otherwise.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Which doesn't say that there is 35 hours a week jobsearch going live does it?



claimant commitments are all about 35 hours a week 'work related activity', which can be carried out anywhere from Jobcentres to homes to welfare to work companies - its the bedrock of universal credit, its not electioneering, its in all the legislation that underpins welfare reforms


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> claimant commitments are all about 35 hours a week 'work related activity', which can be carried out anywhere from Jobcentres to homes to welfare to work companies - its the bedrock of universal credit, its not electioneering, its in all the legislation that underpins welfare reforms


UP TO 35 hours a week, depending on how you're categorized in the UC system. Considering your concern for possible misrepresentations of facts surely you'd wanna be clear on this?


----------



## xenon (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> 300 jobs over what period? This hasn't been established. Hence the, _it doesn't matter _stuff when the original claim of it being in a week was undermined (with no loss of cred on the part of those who either used this or bought other peoples use of it without doing any research of course).





xslavearcx said:


> it don't matter what the frequency was, or whether indeed it actually took place. what matters is the reportage of the fact as signifier as good jobseeker citizen and how this contrasts with the other not so good jobseeker that matters



That isn't what the 300 meant. She was just saying, look I've applied for loads of jobs. Which in fairness is what peple who want jobs do. There was no claim about 300 per week, that's mental.

Personlly I accept the scepticism about her, in relation to Labour party links and career moves. But peple are over annalising reteric and hyperbole, in which after all is an online rebuttle to that odious cunt Littlejohn. You think we're all tracksuit burger eating etc... The you being the Littlejohns and their ilk.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

Work related activity isn't _quite_ the same as job search. Making a pretty CV or "networking" are work related activities.

I fear JC staff etc won't be quite as flexible in their understanding though.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

TruXta said:


> UP TO 35 hours a week, depending on how you're categorized in the UC system. Considering your concern for possible misrepresentations of facts surely you'd wanna be clear on this?



35 hours a week for mainstream unemployed claimants ie people on JSA now


----------



## TruXta (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> 35 hours a week for mainstream unemployed claimants ie people on JSA now


That's better.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 4, 2013)

Do you know her butchers? Cos you're being extremely generous.

She's a poster girl for liberal "deserving poor" narratives, something which isn't really under her control tbf but her role with the labour party, her lack of criticism of labour policy on benefits and it's disgusting anti claimants rhetoric is something she can do something about.

Apart from her as an individual, the whole foodie on a tenner shit and how it ties into make do and mend shite is problematic.

She's worse than articul8 and you don't give him any by balls.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Work related activity isn't _quite_ the same as job search. Making a pretty CV or "networking" are work related activities.



in fairness I didnt say it was, although making a pretty CV would be regarded as job search in the context of welfare to work provision

the scheme announced by IDS, which is 30 or 35 hrs a week (cant remember which) is being piloted from april next year but will only affect about 2000 claimants, Osborne's scheme goes live then (nationally) for people leaving the work programme who will face either six months full time (30 hrs) workfare plus between 4 and 10 hours of jobsearch on top, or intensive support at the Jobcentre and daily signing


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> claimant commitments are all about 35 hours a week 'work related activity', which can be carried out anywhere from Jobcentres to homes to welfare to work companies - its the bedrock of universal credit, its not electioneering, its in all the legislation that underpins welfare reforms


It's not - the 35 component is just guff. No one thinks it's possible. It's like those fake returns from factories in the USSR where the factory floor lies to the foreman, the foreman lies to the white collars and the white collars lie to the bosses who return  - yet again - great results to their political bosses.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> It's not - the 35 component is just guff. No one thinks it's possible. It's like those fake returns from factories in the USSR where the factory floor lies to the foreman, the foreman lies to the white collars and the white collars lie to the bosses who return  - yet again - great results to their political bosses.



of course its guff, that doesnt mean its not being introduced and it doesnt mean that people wont get sanctioned for not meeting it


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> of course its guff, that doesnt mean its not being introduced and it doesnt mean that people wont get sanctioned for not meeting it


That's exactly what it means. That's why the 'up to' bit is built into it. Let's be clear, the idea, which you sort of did their work for above, that all the unemployed will compulsarily have to do 35 a week work-search related stuff is not true and is just rhetorically packed into a wider program so come 2015 they can say 'we compelled the unemployed to blah bla blah'


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> in fairness I didnt say it was, although making a pretty CV would be regarded as job search in the context of welfare to work provision
> 
> the scheme announced by IDS, which is 30 or 35 hrs a week (cant remember which) is being piloted from april next year but will only affect about 2000 claimants, Osborne's scheme goes live then (nationally) for people leaving the work programme who will face either six months full time (30 hrs) workfare plus between 4 and 10 hours of jobsearch on top, or intensive support at the Jobcentre and daily signing



I know. I wasn't having a pop at you. Just musing on the subtleties of modern job seeking. Most weeks I can easily put in 12 to 15 hours of "work related activities" and I don't even sign on.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> I know. I wasn't having a pop at you. Just musing on the subtleties of modern job seeking. Most weeks I can easily put in 12 to 15 hours of "work related activities" and I don't even sign on.


I can still do 12/15 minutes if i can be bothered. But _i'm seriously thinking about going on the revamped EAS. I_s that good enough? Oh, it is


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> It's not - the 35 component is just guff. No one thinks it's possible. It's like those fake returns from factories in the USSR where the factory floor lies to the foreman, the foreman lies to the white collars and the white collars lie to the bosses who return  - yet again - great results to their political bosses.



Course it's possible.

Same way most work officially takes much longer than it really does. Job seeking is a time consuming business, it wouldn't be too hard to pad this out to 35hpw.

The problem is you'd run out of actual job vacancies on day 1.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's exactly what it means. That's why the 'up to' bit is built into it. Let's be clear, the idea, which you sort of did their work for above, that all the unemployed will compulsarily have to do 35 a week work-search related stuff is not true and is just rhetorically packed into a wider program so come 2015 they can say 'we compelled the unemployed to blah bla blah'



'up to' means people in the WRAG group of ESA in this context, or single parents with kids under 13.  the expectation is that mainstream unemployed claimants will be expected to carry out 35 hours a wek 'work related activity' - that thats impractical, unenforceable on mass and comes with caveats (such as those below) doesnt change the rules and doesnt mean that people wont get sanctioned



> We consider it reasonable to expect that
> work search activity will take up the
> majority of a claimant’s time –
> normally 35 hours a week. Within this
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Course it's possible.
> 
> Same way most work officially takes much longer than it really does. Job seeking is a time consuming business, it wouldn't be too hard to pad this out to 35hpw.
> 
> The problem is you'd run out of actual job vacancies on day 1.


It's not possible that they can politically or technically impose 35 hours compulsory intensively monitored  job-search activity to all unemployed. Not with 3 million people + unemployed and no work.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> It's not possible that they can politically or technically impose 35 hours compulsory intensively monitored  job-search activity to all unemployed. Not with 3 million people + unemployed and no work.



sanction figures come out on wednesday, expected to be around a million a year for 2012/13, it may not be impossible to implement what they want properly, but it is possible for mass sanctioning of claims for non-compliance


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> sanction figures come out on wednesday, expected to be around a million a year for 2012/13, it may not be impossible to implement what they want properly, but it is possible for mass sanctioning of claims for non-compliance


Absolutely, but only within the bounds of what is politically possible - 35 hours across the board ain't.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Absolutely, but only within the bounds of what is politically possible - 35 hours across the board ain't.



its all bollocks, but that doesnt mean it should be written off as election guff, because it will happen to some people, possibly lots of people. its easy to point and laugh at this stuff but that doesnt mean the impact of how this will play out in Jobcentres should be ignored

Osbornes scheme is a good example, have been reading through the tender specs today, theres no way they can get that many placements, but instead claimants will be expected to attend welfare-to-work companies full time until a placement is found, just like the worst of the new deal.  it will be a shambles, it will be quietly scrapped for the next crazy scheme eventually, but for the people stuck in the middle of it that wont make it any less shit


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

That's a fairr enough point regarding stuff in existence or seriously proposed - this isn't.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's a fairr enough point regarding stuff in existence or seriously proposed - this isn't.



its serious if you get sanctioned for not meeting your 35 hour claimant commitment, and people will, almost certainly


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 4, 2013)

That's the people then who are going to get sacrificed for the opp to say that we make scroungers work 35 hours.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Course it's possible.
> 
> Same way most work officially takes much longer than it really does. Job seeking is a time consuming business, it wouldn't be too hard to pad this out to 35hpw.
> 
> The problem is you'd run out of actual job vacancies on day 1.



depends who you are, not everyone finds it easy to apply for 20/30 jobs a week, especially now the profile of mainstream claimants has changed due to the WCA


----------



## 8ball (Nov 4, 2013)

35 hours?  Surely either the jobs are hiding very well or there just aren't enough jobs about.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> It's not possible that they can politically or technically impose 35 hours compulsory intensively monitored  job-search activity to all unemployed. Not with 3 million people + unemployed and no work.



Course it's not possible to monitor. That's not what I meant. I meant it's possible to credibly fill in a time sheet with 35hpw job seeking related activity.

They have no interest in actually making people spend 35 hours a week doing job stuff though.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 4, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's the people then who are going to get sacrificed for the opp to say that we make scroungers work 35 hours.



but thats always been the case with this stuff hasnt it, there always been ways to duck out of stuff (coughs working tax credits), but a lot of people fall victim to it as well


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

8ball said:


> 35 hours?  Surely either the jobs are hiding very well or there just aren't enough jobs about.



There's always CV/interview workshops to attend. Speculative letters to send. Agencies to register with. Blah blah blah. All making a nice bit of money out of it.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> depends who you are, not everyone finds it easy to apply for 20/30 jobs a week, especially now the profile of mainstream claimants has changed due to the WCA



Yup.

They're not doing it to help people get jobs.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> There's always CV/interview workshops to attend. Speculative letters to send. Agencies to register with. Blah blah blah. All making a nice bit of money out of it.


 
At my place, if there's a job going it is advertised.  Then people come and get interviewed etc.  Works pretty well.  Worked for me.  If you send everyone to CV/interview workshops then it just means the people who apply/turn up have got better CVs and interviews.  Adds no economic value whatsoever.  And bollocks to agencies.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

8ball said:


> At my place, if there's a job going it is advertised.  Then people come and get interviewed etc.  Works pretty well.  Worked for me.  If you send everyone to CV/interview workshops then it just means the people who apply/turn up have got better CVs and interviews.  Adds no economic value whatsoever.  And bollocks to agencies.



Yup.

You should see my CV. A thing of beauty. Well CVs actually. Loadsa different versions; infographic Resumes, Visual CVs, multimedia CVs, interactive CVs. More than that I have promo videos, online portfolios, registered with countless agencies etc. etc.

Doesn't create job vacancies for me to apply to though.


----------



## chilango (Nov 4, 2013)

Despite all this...

...if people want to sign on and slack off on the dole then they fucking should be able to .


----------



## 8ball (Nov 4, 2013)

chilango said:


> Yup.
> 
> You should see my CV. A thing of beauty. Well CVs actually. Loadsa different versions; infographic Resumes, Visual CVs, multimedia CVs, interactive CVs. More than that I have promo videos, online portfolios, registered with countless agencies etc. etc.
> 
> Doesn't create job vacancies for me to apply to though.


 

Have you tried a rap video?


----------



## xslavearcx (Nov 4, 2013)

watching the football on p2p site the now and got a pop up advert from amazon with two books side by side. "a girl called jack" and "save with jamie"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Which is exactly why all this chav bollocks started up when the pinch was starting to be felt at the top-end of the w/c lower end of the m/c before 2008. As i've probably bored everyone by pointing out by now.



Not *everyone*! 
But yeah, what was till then an undercurrent (mainly centred around a few newspaper punts about a subset of working-class youth in post-industrial towns), was pushed to the fore and broadened in scope, as was the "loads of disabled people are frauds" trope.  The bald class aspect isn't particularly visible unless you winkle it out, but of course a significant minority of disabled people are former manual workers with workplace damage of various sorts, and anyone in receipt of benefits is automatically assumed to be a member of "the lower orders" anyway.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Nov 5, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> watching the football on p2p site the now and got a pop up advert from amazon with two books side by side. "a girl called jack" and "save with jamie"


 
He's got a show on television here that's seriously patronizing.  By God, he's going to teach those Americans how to cook if it kills him.  He needs a good slap.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 5, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I think it needs to go further and there is space opening up to question waged work in an economy where there will never be enough jobs.  thats really difficult, but as has been said, even openly idle claimants were not always judged this way - think Joey in Bread - which may have contributed to the idea life on benefits is easy - but the Boswells were still cultural heroes on prime time tv
> 
> when I first went on the dole (very early 90s) it was seen as a personal failing/mistake, as in you dont want to spend all your life on benefits lad, get yourself a job, there was never the we are paying for you bollocks you get now, and even an argument that if people who didnt want a job didnt have one then that was fine because it meant a job for someone who did
> 
> somewhere along the way unemployed people became blamed for unemployment and that they are scrounging off the rest of it...



I'd say it's a theme that fades in and out, as it was certainly the case in the late '70s and early '80s people on social security were scroungers (even as the just-under-a-million people unemployed under Labour in '79 became 2.5 million in '83).  it's a convenient excuse to throw in the mix, especially when the unemployment is as a result of government policy (as then and now).  It distracts those who aren't particularly politically-minded from the reality that the people at Westminster are the authors of misfortune, not those on benefits.



> ...apart from being a daft argument it also ignores that most of us are scroungers, in a distributive tax system you would expect 50% of people to be net beneficiaries, and the reason its more is because the rich have got so much money that they pay most of the tax -



By sum, but not often by proportion of earnings, let it be said!



> ...unravelling all this is fucking hard, but it has to be done and in my opinion any fightback against what is taking place now has to come from a radical perspective, otherwise even if we win, (and we wont) we wont really win, we'll just go round the block again



Without revolution and a full accounting (and yes, I *do* include the murder of "enemies of the people"), then the best we can hope for is to balance the scales for as long as possible.



> I think people are realising that, was at a meeting recently with quite a lot of mainstream people there, labour left, DPOs etc, and everyone was talking about a citizens income of some form, that needs seizing on along with the current very real impacts of digitisation on the jobs market which some people are saying could replace up to 50% of all jobs in the next couple of decades



How long before we're having full-on Dreddtastic block wars, though?


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 5, 2013)

I do wonder if the Lib Dem policy of lifting people out of tax (£10,000 threshold) will be used as a stick to beat people earning below this amount - 'you don't pay tax, you have no right to say anything'.  Kind of like a nastier version of the ribbing I used to get working a summer job in a warehouse as a student ('you lot don't pay tax').  I can see this becoming a new front against the poor, expanding the demonisation of the unemployed to the low-waged - nothing to do with how 'hardworking' someone is, but how much they 'pay in'  (A narrative already set by the income requirements for people wanting to bring their overseas partners into the country).


----------



## Greebo (Nov 5, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> I do wonder if the Lib Dem policy of lifting people out of tax (£10,000 threshold) will be used as a stick to beat people earning below this amount - 'you don't pay tax, you have no right to say anything'. <snip>


Highly probable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 5, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> I do wonder if the Lib Dem policy of lifting people out of tax (£10,000 threshold) will be used as a stick to beat people earning below this amount - 'you don't pay tax, you have no right to say anything'.  Kind of like a nastier version of the ribbing I used to get working a summer job in a warehouse as a student ('you lot don't pay tax').  I can see this becoming a new front against the poor, expanding the demonisation of the unemployed to the low-waged - nothing to do with how 'hardworking' someone is, but how much they 'pay in'  (A narrative already set by the income requirements for people wanting to bring their overseas partners into the country).




Good point. Another trap that Jack fell into in her response to Littlejohn, telling him how she had paid in when she was working. I can well believe that she didn't realise she was falling into a trap by accepting his terms for framing the debate, but she was.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 5, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> I do wonder if the Lib Dem policy of lifting people out of tax (£10,000 threshold) will be used as a stick to beat people earning below this amount - 'you don't pay tax, you have no right to say anything'.  Kind of like a nastier version of the ribbing I used to get working a summer job in a warehouse as a student ('you lot don't pay tax').  I can see this becoming a new front against the poor, expanding the demonisation of the unemployed to the low-waged - nothing to do with how 'hardworking' someone is, but how much they 'pay in'  (A narrative already set by the income requirements for people wanting to bring their overseas partners into the country).



Absolutely. There's also a difference in the amount of childcare help you will be able to get depending on whether you earn enough to pay tax or not too, I wrote a blog about it just after the Budget where it was announced

http://furcoatnaenicks.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/hardworking-families/

They're trying quite nakedly to extend the division between 'us' and 'them' so that the 'them' will include the working poorest.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 7, 2013)

Whilst her Labour politics are hard to stomach, I think I'll give her fish tangine recipe a go.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2013/nov/06/jack-monroe-fish-tagine-recipe




			
				Central Casting Guardian Comment said:
			
		

> Nice recipe but I would have preferred the Guardian to promote the vegetarian version of this dish rather than promote the consumption of fish that is not MSC certified.


----------



## love detective (Nov 24, 2013)

Good article this

This is why poor people's bad decisions make perfect sense


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 25, 2013)

I find a lot of these low cost reciupes utterly impractical. 

Perhaps I'm just lazy but the cost of buying yeast and stuff to do something as straghtforward as baking bread is still more expensive than buying a couple of loaves as part of weekly shopping - even reasonably decent quality stuff not just the bluestripe cardboard. 

I don't neecessarily feel good about saying that. 

Her website's quite upmarket for someone living in poverty - perhaps that's not terribly fair. Though markedly less unfair than the vile character assassination attempt by Littledick. 

I don't know. It's hard to know what to think these days.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 25, 2013)

she's got a chair now at least: http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...ddle-class-recipe-for-kale-pesto-8932248.html


another helpful quote: 





> her mother was a nurse but had to leave due to a medical condition and so became a full-time foster carer. “The philosophy of the household was: if you’ve got something, help someone else out with it. My mum could have sat on her arse. She couldn’t work so she decided to foster children instead.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 25, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Perhaps I'm just lazy but the cost of buying yeast and stuff to do something as straghtforward as baking bread is still more expensive than buying a couple of loaves as part of weekly shopping - even reasonably decent quality stuff not just the bluestripe cardboard.


 No it isn't.


----------



## treelover (Nov 25, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's got a chair now at least: http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...ddle-class-recipe-for-kale-pesto-8932248.html
> another helpful quote:




There is definitely something of the ''pull yourself up by your bootstraps" about her approach however heartfelt her campaigning is, maybe her upbringing.

btw, very balanced article that.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 25, 2013)

You can pick and choose quotes to show what 'she really means'




			
				Jack Monroe said:
			
		

> Regardless of how I ended up in the circumstances that I did, one of the main things I want to do is to make sure no one else ends up like that. Me and a very young boy were in a freezing cold flat, wrapped up in jumpers, struggling to feed ourselves. It was a miserable, shoddy existence. *And I just don’t think anyone should have to go through that.*



See, I just did it there.

And I still don't see how the daughter of a fireman and a nurse who left school and got a job in a chippy is 'pretending'.


----------



## treelover (Nov 25, 2013)

Btw, she is marrying a copper.


----------



## treelover (Nov 25, 2013)

weepiper said:


> You can pick and choose quotes to show what 'she really means'
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Who is that aimed at?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 25, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> No it isn't.


For you, not for me.

I live in a rural area that does not have cheap shopping options, nor farmers markets (if they are ever cheap).

It is simply not true to say that everyone can afford to eat cheaply in this way.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 25, 2013)

> Saturday evening saw me at the Southend YMCA Youth Awards



still actively supporting the most outspoken defenders of workfare then


> I got home just in time for breakfast (a Greek inspired honey and yoghurt and date bircher) and an interview with Red magazine for an upcoming feature.



oh how she suffers for us

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/11/...k-fraud-secret-photo-shoots-and-moving-house/


----------



## weepiper (Nov 25, 2013)

treelover said:


> Who is that aimed at?



smokedout, but also Frances Lengel and others who have said she's a middle class girl who was just playing at being poor. She's not poor right now before anyone has a go about that.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 25, 2013)

she said she was a middle class girl, I disagreed, although would be interesting to know how senior a fire officer her father was and how many guesthouses her grandparents owned


----------



## treelover (Nov 25, 2013)

smokedout said:


> still actively supporting the most outspoken defenders of workfare then
> 
> 
> oh how she suffers for us
> ...



That is sad.

maybe posters could politely email her and ask why she is endorsing them?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 25, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> For you, not for me.
> 
> I live in a rural area that does not have cheap shopping options, nor farmers markets (if they are ever cheap).
> 
> It is simply not true to say that everyone can afford to eat cheaply in this way.


If you buy bread from a supermarket (which you imply by talking about blue stripes) you can definitely buy flour and yeast. Even the ultra-shite tiny Tesco near me has flour and yeast. For that matter even corner shops usually do.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 25, 2013)

treelover said:


> That is sad.
> 
> maybe posters could politely email her and ask why she is endorsing them?



I think she answers that question herself



> I was honoured to be given the Courage and Inspiration Award,


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 25, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> If you buy bread from a supermarket (which you imply by talking about blue stripes) you can definitely buy flour and yeast. Even the ultra-shite tiny Tesco near me has flour and yeast. For that matter even corner shops usually do.


My point isn't that the ingredients aren't available; it's that they aren't any cheaper.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 25, 2013)

I thought she had a few grand rto play with from her book deal? Why does she need to go do the BHF for furniture? 

Not suggesting she sheould be shopping in fortnum and masons either.


----------



## Smyz (Nov 25, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> If you buy bread from a supermarket (which you imply by talking about blue stripes) you can definitely buy flour and yeast. Even the ultra-shite tiny Tesco near me has flour and yeast. For that matter even corner shops usually do.


I don't think it is any cheaper once you've paid for the fuel to cook it. Especially if you don't have a lot of freezer space --it goes off a lot quicker.

Also very time consuming if you don't have the freezer space to make large batches.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 25, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> My point isn't that the ingredients aren't available; it's that they aren't any cheaper.


I can't remember having seen bread sold for 28p.


----------



## andysays (Nov 25, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> If you buy bread from a supermarket (which you imply by talking about blue stripes) you can definitely buy flour and yeast. Even the ultra-shite tiny Tesco near me has flour and yeast. For that matter even corner shops usually do.





Awesome Wells said:


> My point isn't that the ingredients aren't available; it's that they aren't any cheaper.



The question of whether or not the ingredients to bake your own bread are cheaper or more expensive than buying a similar loaf ready baked are kind of irrelevant to the overall question of how people who live in poverty can best (or should best) spend their money, though.

I don't remember who first brought that up on this thread, nor do I remember whether Jack suggests people can or should bake their own bread, specifically.

There are many other considerations which people who live in poverty for any length of time may have to take into account than whether the raw ingredients to make bread or anything else from scratch which those of us who are relatively affluent don't generally have to consider.

Do they have a properly functioning cooker and all the other bits of kitchen equipment necessary?
Do they have a constant and affordable source of energy for cooking, as well as heating etc, which means they can always rely on being able to cook rather than use ready cooked food of some sort?
Do they even have proper access to a kitchen in the first place - if they're living in temporary homeless accomodation, for instance, then the answer is likely to be no.
Do they have the time, or the inclination frankly, to spend large amounts their time preparing food when they may have worked long hours in a tiring job for a pittance, have young kids who need looking after and "entertaining", have mental health problems etc?
I would suggest that most people who bake their own bread, or regularly spend lots of time cooking meals from the raw ingredients, do it from choice because they enjoy it, rather because it saves them a few quid, and that's fine (I do it myself when I choose to, although not the bread).

It really shouldn't be used as an argument to suggest that people who are living in poverty should do this all the time (even if they can, which for many reasons they may not be able to) or that if they occasionally splash out on the luxury of a ready cooked meal or a take-away they are squandering the benefits which hard-working tax-payers have earned for them.

And unfortunately, whether this is Jack's intention or not, given the current neo-liberal, bash the poor, stigmatise-those-on-benefits message which all political partys and the media are pushing, to varying degrees, the message of her blog and her wider media presence is always going to be twisted to suit this message.


----------



## Smyz (Nov 25, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I can't remember having seen bread sold for 28p.


Fuel costs?

45p for a 500g loaf is a lot cheaper than that.

It is hard to take her seriously when she says things like "if potatoes sprout, plant them".

Where? Where can I plant them Jack?

 Alongside all those "free" herbs I don't have because the only flat window ledges I have are in the bathroom and kitchen and they are the only space there is for sponges and soaps?

She is not the worst of her kind but that is faint praise indeed.


----------



## fiannanahalba (Nov 25, 2013)

Make bread and beat poverty you witless workshy poor cunts.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 25, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I can't remember having seen bread sold for 28p.


I can't remember seeing yeast that cheap. Nor would I know what else to do with lemon juice once I made the bread.

I'm sure it tastes nice, but the equivalent of 4 slices is hardly good value IMO.


----------



## love detective (Nov 25, 2013)

love detective said:


> Good article this
> This is why poor people's bad decisions make perfect sense



Been quite a response to this 



> I wrote a thing on the Internet about being poor and the effect of years of relentless struggle, and it's gone viral. I have a gofundme, because at first people were just giving me a few thousand dollars so that I could cut back on one of my jobs and write, but the last 48 hours have been a whirlwind and so I have decided to set up some kind of nonprofit dedicated to telling the stories of the people who are not ever allowed to speak. If that is a thing you would like to help with, it would be amazing. I have been so lucky in the last week, and I have managed to turn my part-time job into something full-time, and so I will suddenly have the time to write that I was lacking a few days ago. I figure I should do something good with all of this.


----------



## bamalama (Nov 25, 2013)

smokedout said:


> still actively supporting the most outspoken defenders of workfare then
> 
> 
> oh how she suffers for us
> ...



It's drippin in it's own twee smugy smugness.She knows her audience...kerchiiing


----------



## smokedout (Nov 25, 2013)

just noticed this



> I sat on my futon and had a look around me this afternoon, and pretty much all I have from ‘the old days’ before I put everything up for sale to pay off bills and rent arrears in August 2012, is a set of heavy curtains, a Wedgwood espresso cup, and my out of tune Fender guitar.



even second hand a fender guitar is worth at least a couple of hundred, possibly a lot more - so she sold her kids toys to pay for a deposit (or set up her business which is what she originally said on her blog), but not her fender guitar

what kind of cunt sells their kid's toys when they don't have to, most people on smack wouldn't go there


----------



## smokedout (Nov 25, 2013)

(probably the kind of cunt that didn't really sell her kids toys btw)


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

weepiper said:


> smokedout, but also Frances Lengel and others who have said she's a middle class girl who was just playing at being poor. She's not poor right now before anyone has a go about that.



For me, it's not so much the middle class thing. Though I probably have gone a bit OTT in that direction earlier in the thread.

Bottom line is though, there's just loads of things that don't really ring true. That and the labour party stuff. Once she gets a full time paid commentariat/labour gig, I honestly do think she'll sell you right out.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 26, 2013)

If she is not a labour party shill I'm a duck.




			
				A girl named Jack said:
			
		

> However, I did have £12.30 in change and my Oyster card, so made it to Woolwich on Friday evening to speak at *David Prescott’s “Food and Ideas Bank”*, along with Jos Bell from Save Lewisham A&E (photo below). The evening was a great success, with lots of ideas from attending members about what priorities and policies should be over the next year. I agree with David – this is what politics should look like. Ideas should come from the ground up, rather than a few people “in charge” setting the priorities and writing the rule books. I only wish there were many more successful events like this one.



So who is this David Prescott with his grassroots ground up initiative? 



> I’m an experienced campaign strategist and media trainer with more than 22 years of experience in the field. I’m director ofCommucan, a PR and social media consultancy which is part of the Brand Action Group.
> 
> I was MD and co-founder of the campaign consultancy Game Changer and worked closely with Alastair Campbell on improving the Labour Party’s capacity to campaign online.
> 
> ...



Lord a-fucking-bove!


----------



## bamalama (Nov 26, 2013)

treelover said:


> Btw, she is marrying a copper.



Coup de grace


----------



## Delroy Booth (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> even second hand a fender guitar is worth at least a couple of hundred, possibly a lot more



If it's an actual branded fender that's well maintained you would, but if it's the much more ubitiquous squire mass produced type and it's out of tune you'd get £40 for it at a pawn shop. £20 after christmas.

And fuck you for even suggesting any poor person should sell a musical instrument for a pittance to temporarily relieve their poverty. I'd be on the fucking streets before I sold my guitar. Music matters, even for prolescum


----------



## FNG (Nov 26, 2013)

Isn't it all a bit?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 26, 2013)

Has anyone asked her about the YMCA and it's workfare connection? I just think she's naive.


----------



## Nylock (Nov 26, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> If it's an actual branded fender that's well maintained you would, but if it's the much more ubitiquous squire mass produced type and it's out of tune you'd get £40 for it at a pawn shop. £20 after christmas.


Even less if it's any other type of Strat clone -and that's the thing, anyone who owns a Strat clone will call it a 'Fender' or 'Fender Style' guitar seeing as how Leo Fender invented the design and all. It's like calling a £100 Argos Les Paul knockoff a 'Les Paul'. Just because you call your £100 Les Paul copy a Les Paul, it doesn't actually add the extra £900 onto it's price tag that an original one will command (and that's for the 'cheap' studio version as well)...

The other thing is, when you're a pov with an instrument, if you sell it off for a fraction of it's price to some cunt in a pawn shop you may never get the money back to buy a replacement.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Nov 26, 2013)

Nylock said:


> Even less if it's any other type of Strat clone -and that's the thing, anyone who owns a Strat clone will call it a 'Fender' or 'Fender Style' guitar seeing as how Leo Fender invented the design and all. It's like calling a £100 Argos Les Paul knockoff a 'Les Paul'. Just because you call your £100 Les Paul copy a Les Paul, it doesn't actually add the extra £900 onto it's price tag that an original one will command (and that's for the 'cheap' studio version as well)...



Exactly. And if I did own an actual Fender/Gibson or some other expensive studio guitar by a quirk of fate you'd better believe it'd the very last thing going to the pawn shop. Which assumes expecting someone to pawn these kinds of valued possesions is even tolerable in the first place. Which is just isn't.


----------



## Nylock (Nov 26, 2013)

I'm lucky to own an entry-level Les Paul Studio and there have been times when i have been *seriously* tempted to sell it on to ease my circumstances. But then the thought of amassing the insurmountable quantity of cash to buy a replacement has always held me back... Then again, it might be more to do with being a guitarist and having that Charlton Heston NRA-style attitude towards my instrument... "from my cold, dead hands" etc


----------



## love detective (Nov 26, 2013)

revol68 said:


> So who is this David Prescott with his grassroots ground up initiative?



He's John Prescott's son as well and it's pretty much a certainty he'll be an MP at the next election


----------



## rioted (Nov 26, 2013)

Here's a thought - why don't those people continually whining on about "the poor" just fuck off? I've had enough of your smug "correct" politics which enables you to speak for other people without ever talking to us. Fair enough if you ARE poor, but otherwise FUCK OFF! Every day I watch with horror what my neighbours eat, as they walk past the corner shop butchers and greengrocers where they could buy food cheap and in small quantities, to ASDA where they can pay more for the shiny lights and mega-processed salty fatty sweet food.If you are poor, share with us your survival techniques, otherwise, as I've already said FUCK OFF.

My survival techniques revolve partly through those good old anarchist standbys of mutual aid and solidarity - with neighbours and friends I bulk buy - and partly from a refusal to buy processed food and using corner shop food which for fresh produce is nearly always cheaper than supermarkets. 

We will either liberate ourselves or not, but spare us your fake tears of concern when all you are really interest is in scoring internet points. Fuck you all, you haven't got a clue.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 26, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> And fuck you for even suggesting any poor person should sell a musical instrument for a pittance to temporarily relieve their poverty. I'd be on the fucking streets before I sold my guitar. Music matters, even for prolescum



if you'd sell your kids toys before you'd sell a guitar you're a cunt who doesnt deserve to be a parent


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 26, 2013)

we are veering back into bulb chat again


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> just noticed this
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> I sat on my futon and had a look around me this afternoon, and pretty much all I have from ‘the old days’ before I put everything up for sale to pay off bills and rent arrears in August 2012, is a set of heavy curtains, a Wedgwood espresso cup, and my out of tune Fender guitar.


I'll happily be corrected if I've misread this, but surely she said that this is what she had left after she put *everything* up for sale? Not everything except her guitar.


----------



## Nylock (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> I'll happily be corrected if I've misread this, but surely she said that this is what she had left after she put *everything* up for sale? Not everything except her guitar.


You need to read it with 200% more hatred for the person who wrote the article, then you'll be reading it right....


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Nylock said:


> You need to read it with 200% more hatred for the person who wrote the article, then you'll be reading it right....


Maybe that's what it is. I'm not keen on the Labour Party aspect and it's entirely possible that she'll be the new face of the commentariat at some point; but as it stands at the moment this thread feels like race to the bottom politics.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 26, 2013)

Nylock said:


> You need to read it with 200% more hatred for the person who wrote the article, then you'll be reading it right....



not hate, but a simmering anger towards someone who is setting new benchmarks of how poor people are supposed to behave, what is normal and should be expected - from someones whose experience of poverty is short lived and frankly doesnt ring true in many cases


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not hate, but a simmering anger towards someone who is setting new benchmarks of how poor people are supposed to behave, what is normal and should be expected - from someones whose experience of poverty is short lived and frankly doesnt ring true in many cases


You're substituting your *own* benchmarks of how poor people are supposed to behave.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> Maybe that's what it is. I'm not keen on the Labour Party aspect and it's entirely possible that she'll be the new face of the commentariat at some point; but as it stands at the moment this thread feels like race to the bottom politics.



Yeah exactly. I've never felt any need to get so angry about what she's written on her blog but the notion that it's a cynical ploy to establish a future career in the Labour party bugs me.


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> You're substituting your *own* benchmarks of how poor people are supposed to behave.



And that, in the end, is just as unwelcome and unhelpful as some lady bountiful suggesting that all the proles should exist on home-baked bread and some nourishing soup made from left-overs.

This issue really shouldn't be about obsessive rooting through Jack's every utterance, searching for ammunition to dismiss her as a posh bird who's only slumming it to serve her own personal ends.

Would you like to go through her underwear drawer next, and see what you can glean from that?

I find it increasingly depressing that some posters here spend so much time and energy slagging those who are not, in the greater scheme of things, that important as individuals or personalities, when that energy could be far better spent discussing, and even arguing if necessary, about the issues and positive responses to the increasingly harsh conditions we're all in.

But I suppose it's easier to focus on a daily two minutes hate of another young woman (and the fact that it's a young woman is not a coincidence, *IMO*), who is naive enough to think that the Labour party might still be a worthwhile source of change. Of course, no one posting here would ever have been so naive to have thought that, would they...

Although this post is a response to cesare, it's clearly not aimed at her 

ETA: in my opinion, not in my experience


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

andysays said:


> <snip>But I suppose it's easier to focus on a daily two minutes hate of another young woman (*and the fact that it's a young woman is not a coincidence,* IME), who is naive enough to think that the Labour party might still be a worthwhile source of change. Of course, no one posting here would ever have been so naive to have thought that, would they...
> 
> Although this post is a response to cesare, it's clearly not aimed at her



That's bullshit for a start.


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> That's bullshit for a start.


Young single mothers get demonised. It's as easy to fall into that narrative as it is to fall into the narrative of race to the bottom.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

True, but I don't reckon she's been demonised anywhere on this thread for being either young or a single mum.


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> That's bullshit for a start.



I've edited my post slightly since you quoted to make it clear that I'm stating an opinion.

I wish it were bullshit Frances, but I'm increasingly convinced that it's not.

Young women are routinely criticised in far more personal ways than older men like you or me. It's the personalising of it that I'm noticing and commenting on - I'm not saying that Jack's ideas are beyond criticism, because she is, at the least, rather naive, but that doesn't excuse the level of personal attack we've seen here from some.

If you're in doubt, ask yourself where are the equivalent threads where similar men who people disagree with are criticised in such vehement terms over such a period of time, and details of their personal lives are used to attack them?


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> True, but I don't reckon she's been demonised anywhere on this thread for being either young or a single mum.


Her parenting skills have been called into question because her guitar survived the "sell everything" as an example.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

There's one about Owen Jones.

E2a That was andysays  btw


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> Her parenting skills have been called into question because her guitar survived the "sell everything" as an example.



Being pedantic about it though - Calling her parenting skills into question does not equate to demonising her for being a single mum. A single dad/couple could have been equally criticised over the guitar business.


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> There's one about Owen Jones.


He's being criticised for his politics. Sometimes people take the piss out of his blue checked shirts. I don't see much in the way of raking the minutiae of his personal life.


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> There's one about Owen Jones.
> 
> E2a That was andysays  btw



Yes there is, but I don't think details of Owen Jones' personal life have been dragged into the discussion to anything like the same extent as they have with Jack and used as a stick to beat him (except perhaps his wearing of blue checked shirts...)


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> ...blue checked shirts...


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> He's being criticised for his politics. Sometimes people take the piss out of his blue checked shirts. I don't see much in the way of raking the minutiae of his personal life.



If he went on about his personal circumstances as much, it'd be a different story then I reckon. And let's have it right - People on here are, in the main, not "raking the minutia of her personal life", what they are doing is calling into question some of the claims she makes about her personal circumstances. Different gig altogether IMO.


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Being pedantic about it though - Calling her parenting skills into question does not equate to demonising her for being a single mum. A single dad/couple could have been equally criticised over the guitar business.



That's not how demonisation works though, is it? Demonisation mostly works by marginalisation, feeding on prejudice and stereotyping.


----------



## _angel_ (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> True, but I don't reckon she's been demonised anywhere on this thread for being either young or a single mum.


God people aren't actually honest about it. It's like the Thatcher effect. I am not sure about this girl, and certainly not a fan of Thatcher either. Pretending the stick they've got isn't somehow proportional to their  gender is naive though.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> That's not how demonisation works though, is it? Demonisation mostly works by marginalisation, feeding on prejudice and stereotyping.



Still though, I maintain no one's tried to demonise her on this thread. The poster who mentioned the guitar thing did so, IMO, in order to question the veracity of what Monroe was claiming rather than call into question her parenting skills.  He was saying he thought the whole story was bullshit because the idea of a parent selling their childs toys before their own guitar seems so unlikely. Have I got that right smokedout  ?


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> If he went on about his personal circumstances as much, it'd be a different story then I reckon. And let's have it right - People on here are, in the main, not "raking the minutia of her personal life", what they are doing is calling into question some of the claims she makes about her personal circumstances. Different gig altogether IMO.



Owen Jones has been fortunate enough to come into politics in a different way. Jack's blog was just a blog about what she was experiencing together with some recipes. The media have seized upon it and it's snowballed from there - she's in the public eye now and reaping the benefits and the downsides, and the latter include scrutinising every move she makes.

"Calling into question some of the claims that she makes about her personal circumstances" - why? And despite the efforts to prove her false, it hasn't worked particularly well.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> Owen Jones has been fortunate enough to come into politics in a different way. Jack's blog was just a blog about what she was experiencing together with some recipes. The media have seized upon it and it's snowballed from there - she's in the public eye now and reaping the benefits and the downsides, and the latter include scrutinising every move she makes.
> 
> "*Calling into question some of the claims that she makes about her personal *ci*rcumstances" - why?* And despite the efforts to prove her false, it hasn't worked particularly well.



A lot of them don't ring true.


----------



## cesare (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> A lot of them don't ring true.


Which ones?


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

And even if she is a lying, cynical Labour party careerist, rather than a naive young woman who has suddenly been thrust into the media, how does picking over every last detail of her blog for factual descrepancies do anything to help the many, many thousands of young single mothers (for instance) who are genuinely in the position of struggling every day to feed their kids adequetely?


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> A lot of them don't ring true.





cesare said:


> Which ones?



You're both getting sucking into a pointless, distracting argument which is about as important as whether the ingredients to bake your own bread cost more or less than buying a ready-baked loaf 

Can't we leave this shit to cunts like Littlejohn and focus on something more useful?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

cesare said:


> Which ones?



All these connections in the labour party and that give the lie to the idea that she's some poor struggling single mum.



andysays said:


> And even if she is a lying, cynical Labour party careerist, rather than a naive young woman who has suddenly been thrust into the media, how does picking over every last detail of her blog for factual descrepancies (fo*do anything to help the many, many thousands of young single mothers for instance) who are genuinely in the position of struggling every day to feed their kids adequetely?*



It doesn't and no one's claiming it does. But what her blog does is give ammunition to wankers who'll slag off those very young single mums you mention - That Jack Monroe bakes her own bread and manages without even a washing machine etc, why can't they? That kind of bullshit.

E2a - Hadn't seen you last post when I wrote this one, andy


----------



## Nylock (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not hate, but a simmering anger towards someone who is setting new benchmarks of how poor people are supposed to behave, what is normal and should be expected - from someones whose experience of poverty is short lived and frankly doesnt ring true in many cases


It's about how her stuff gets read and, depending on how this person is seen by the reader, this determines how their words are interpreted. For instance, I have seen several examples on this thread where your reading of Jack Monroe's words is at variance with, say, Weepiper's. Yes you are clearly angry with this person and what she *may* represent and, if your predictions for her future come to pass, justifiably so as well. Her experience of the kind of poverty that many of us have had to live with may have been fleeting in the grand scheme of things, but surely this shouldn't invalidate her experience of it or prohibit her writing about what she went through. Some of what she says in her writings may leave a nasty taste when read the right way but you have to admit she is nowhere near as bad as the likes of Laurie Penny....

I may return to this later if i have the time to, am a bit busy at work atm...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

_angel_ said:


> God people aren't actually honest about it. It's like the Thatcher effect. I am not sure about this girl, and certainly not a fan of Thatcher either. Pretending the stick they've got isn't somehow proportional to their  gender is naive though.



you think thatcher got more stick because she was a woman? You do a disservice to the people who hated her I think.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 26, 2013)

andysays said:


> Yes there is, but I don't think details of Owen Jones' personal life have been dragged into the discussion to anything like the same extent as they have with Jack and used as a stick to beat him (except perhaps his wearing of blue checked shirts...)



Owen Jones doesn't write almost exclusively about his personal life and base his political 'expertise' on his past circumstances.  Alex Andreau got the exact same shit on the lp thread when he did his I was so poor I had to sleep in my theatre routine and if he'd kept doing it, and become the official voice of poverty in the guardian and at the labour/TUC/green conferences then this thread would be about him


----------



## _angel_ (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> you think thatcher got more stick because she was a woman? You do a disservice to the people who hated her I think.


Yes I do, and no I don't.
Same with the Myra Hindley/Ian Brady. Both are as bad but we're only interested in her. No way am I expressing any sympathy btw.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

_angel_ said:


> Yes I do, and no I don't.
> Same with the Myra Hindley/Ian Brady. Both are as bad but we're only interested in her. No way am I
> expressing any sympathy btw.



how is it the same? Who is the man that is as bad as thatcher but people are not interested in?


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> All these connections in the labour party and that give the lie to the idea that she's some poor struggling single mum.
> 
> It doesn't and no one's claiming it does. But *what her blog does is give ammunition to wankers who'll slag off those very young single mums you mention* - That Jack Monroe bakes her own bread and manages without even a washing machine etc, why can't they? That kind of bullshit.
> 
> E2a - Hadn't seen you last post when I wrote this one, andy



Yeah, I agree, it does. But you know what? Those wankers will always find or create ammunition to slag off young single mums and whoever else they choose to target. Some of this thread actually reads like doing their work for them.

What I'm saying is we shouldn't allow ourselves to be distracted into squabbling over, to reduce it to absurbity, whether it was a genuine Fender Strat or just a copy that Jack didn't sell


----------



## _angel_ (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> how is it the same? Who is the man that is as bad as thatcher but people are not interested in?


Ian Duncan Smith, just to begin with. Tony Blair. Definitely not getting the hate he deserves.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

Not sure who the 'we' is here then. Plenty of people see blair for what he is, a lying war criminal.


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Owen Jones doesn't write almost exclusively about his personal life and base his political 'expertise' on his past circumstances.  Alex Andreau got the exact same shit on the lp thread when he did his I was so poor I had to sleep in my theatre routine and if he'd kept doing it, and become the official voice of poverty in the guardian and at the labour/TUC/green conferences then this thread would be about him



OK, I don't remember Alex Andreau being discussed, but that may be because I joined that thread after it had begun and was playing catch up.

I didn't mean the issue of Jack being a young woman to be the main focus of this - it was a small part of a much larger comment which Frances Lengel chose to pick up on. 

And now I see people are into arguing Hindley/Brady  Not my intention, although maybe my fault


----------



## smokedout (Nov 26, 2013)

andysays said:


> I find it increasingly depressing that some posters here spend so much time and energy slagging those who are not, in the greater scheme of things, that important as individuals or personalities, when that energy could be far better spent discussing, and even arguing if necessary, about the issues and positive responses to the increasingly harsh conditions we're all in.



the cuts to benefits have created a big problem for labour and they have been desperate to drag any resistance to them under their umbrella and set clearly defined demands which ultimately are coming from the same place as the tories - work is the best route out of poverty, single parents should work, benefit sanctions are necessary, the welfare system is broken and needs reform etc

meanwhile many increasingly politicised claimants have been saying fuck you, you started this, and you arent planning to stop.  then up pops jack monroe, a press savvy labour party activist from a reasonably good background who's clearly ambitious and happy to play the game - and her game is to use her voice, and her 'expertise' as someone who was poor once, to frame the current demands in labours direction - in two years of blogging about benefits and poverty she has never once mentioned benefit sanctions - the one thing most likely to be the cause of the type of poverty she says she experienced, shes gone quiet on workfare and is an active supporter of one of the biggest and most outspoken defenders of workfare, she believes it is right that single parents with pre-school kids should work (placing her far to the right for want of a better term than both Labour and IDS incidentally) - her demands right now, are exactly the same as Labours - scrap the bedroom tax and sack atos

her platform means that she is where the line is drawn - she is a liberal gate-keeper and is setting the media agenda in labours direction, and using her experience of poverty as justification for that and a moral shield against any criticism

the fact that people who have been poorer than her are calling bollocks on a lot of what she says about her experiences, based on their own experiences of poverty, just adds fuel to the fire because she is using us to advance her career and labours political objective which is to fuck us over just as much as the tories


----------



## Frances Lengel (Nov 26, 2013)

That's what I was trying to say, but not very well.


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> the cuts to benefits have created a big problem for labour and they have been desperate to drag any resistance to them under their umbrella and set clearly defined demands which ultimately are coming from the same place as the tories - work is the best route out of poverty, single parents should work, benefit sanctions are necessary, the welfare system is broken and needs reform etc
> 
> meanwhile many increasingly politicised claimants have been saying fuck you, you started this, and you arent planning to stop.  then up pops jack monroe, a press savvy labour party activist from a reasonably good background who's clearly ambitious and happy to play the game - and her game is to use her voice, and her 'expertise' as someone who was poor once, to frame the current demands in labours direction - in two years of blogging about benefits and poverty she has never once mentioned benefit sanctions - the one thing most likely to be the cause of the type of poverty she says she experienced, shes gone quiet on workfare and is an active supporter of one of the biggest and most outspoken defenders of workfare, she believes it is right that single parents with pre-school kids should work (placing her far to the right for want of a better term than both Labour and IDS incidentally) - her demands right now, are exactly the same as Labours - scrap the bedroom tax and sack atos
> 
> ...



Yeah, I'm inclined to agree with you on most of that, certainly your wider assessment of the role of the Labour party.

I just think that you (and others) are spending too much time focussing on ultimately trivial personal shit like the Fender Strat business, and that is distracting and detracting from your wider political point.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

She appears to be building a career on talking about trivial personal shit. How else do we know about her bread-making troubles?


----------



## panpete (Nov 26, 2013)

I got 6 pieces of salmon from Tesco, as they were on offer for a fiver.
I made them go really far.
For example, I would have them with pasta, onion, garlic, and frozen green beans.
I would make one of the pieces last enough to last enough for three evening meals.
I would grate cheese on top for extra protein.
You can substitute pasta for couscous, or if you want to splash out a litle more, quinoa.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2013)

love detective said:


> He's John Prescott's son as well and it's pretty much a certainty he'll be an MP at the next election



Wasn't he the cause of Prescott Snr's union sponsors taking legal action to take back Prescott's union flat, after he'd basically sub-let to his own son?


----------



## andysays (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> She appears to be building a career on talking about trivial personal shit. How else do we know about her bread-making troubles?



She may well be "building a career" and some of what she's mentioned may even be unnecessarily personal, but if you actually think you can dismiss all of what she's written, on her blog and elsewhere, about her experiences as a young single mother to support herself and her child through a period on benefits and the wider issues as she sees them as trivial personal shit, then you really need to pull your head out of your self righteous arse


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

andysays said:


> She may well be "building a career" and some of what she's mentioned may even be unnecessarily personal, but if you actually think you can dismiss all of what she's written, on her blog and elsewhere, about her experiences as a young single mother to support herself and her child through a period on benefits and the wider issues as she sees them as trivial personal shit, then you really need to pull your head out of your self righteous arse


According to a few posters on here, she's simply lying about a lot of that, in order to further her career as a Labour mouth-piece. Also, she's posh. What else have i missed?


----------



## love detective (Nov 26, 2013)

TruXta said:


> What else have i missed?



this?




			
				smokedout said:
			
		

> the cuts to benefits have created a big problem for labour and they have been desperate to drag any resistance to them under their umbrella and set clearly defined demands which ultimately are coming from the same place as the tories - work is the best route out of poverty, single parents should work, benefit sanctions are necessary, the welfare system is broken and needs reform etc
> 
> meanwhile many increasingly politicised claimants have been saying fuck you, you started this, and you arent planning to stop. then up pops jack monroe, a press savvy labour party activist from a reasonably good background who's clearly ambitious and happy to play the game - and her game is to use her voice, and her 'expertise' as someone who was poor once, to frame the current demands in labours direction - in two years of blogging about benefits and poverty she has never once mentioned benefit sanctions - the one thing most likely to be the cause of the type of poverty she says she experienced, shes gone quiet on workfare and is an active supporter of one of the biggest and most outspoken defenders of workfare, she believes it is right that single parents with pre-school kids should work (placing her far to the right for want of a better term than both Labour and IDS incidentally) - her demands right now, are exactly the same as Labours - scrap the bedroom tax and sack atos
> 
> ...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

andysays said:


> She may well be "building a career" and some of what she's mentioned may even be unnecessarily personal, but if you actually think you can dismiss all of what she's written, on her blog and elsewhere, about her experiences as a young single mother to support herself and her child through a period on benefits and the wider issues as she sees them as trivial personal shit, then you really need to pull your head out of your self righteous arse


A lot of it is trivial personal shit, and I include her cookery advice in that. Either it's trivial personal shit or it's massively patronising in the same way that Jamie Oliver is massively patronising.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

love detective said:


> this?


Fair enough, but that doesn't excuse or validate the muck-raking that's taken place over the last 47 pages of this thread.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Fair enough, but that doesn't excuse or validate the muck-raking that's taken place over the last 47 pages of this thread.


If someone posts up a whole load of stuff about their personal life, and uses those posts as the basis for a career as a campaigner and also as an advocate of particular ways of living, they deserve to have what they say about themselves scrutinised and in certain places criticised. It's her decision.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If someone posts up a whole load of stuff about their personal life, and uses those posts as the basis for a career as a campaigner and also as an advocate of particular ways of living, they deserve to have what they say about themselves scrutinised and in certain places criticised. It's her decision.


It's her decision that some posters on here went to great and hilarious lengths to try and prove that she couldn't be poor because she was posting to her blog, hence must own a laptop and have internet at home? Was that her decision?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

TruXta said:


> It's her decision that some posters on here went to great and hilarious lengths to try and prove that she couldn't be poor because she was posting to her blog, hence must own a laptop and have internet at home? Was that her decision?


You've picked out one criticism out of a great many. The thread is not adequately represented by that cherry-picked criticism.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You've picked out one criticism out of a great many. The thread is not adequately represented by that cherry-picked criticism.



You didn't answer my question. Was that her decision?


----------



## where to (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> or it's massively patronising in the same way that Jamie Oliver is massively patronising.



that's a really daft comparison.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

TruXta said:


> You didn't answer my question. Was that her decision?


It was her decision to throw her personal life open to scrutiny.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2013)

where to said:


> that's a really daft comparison.


They're both trying to teach poor people how to cook. I have to lay my cards out on this one. I don't believe everything she says about living on 10 quid a week for the two of them. She herself is very contradictory about the level of outside help she received from the father, her parents and her friends.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You've picked out one criticism out of a great many. The thread is not adequately represented by that cherry-picked criticism.



The thread's a fucking joke lbj. If people want to criticize her political positions and political affiliations that's absolutely fine. However, the third rate Columbo inferences about whether she's really in poverty or whether she is a 'good parent' based on her internet access, light bulbs or guitar have more than a whiff of Jamie Oliver/Richard Littlejohn about them.


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It was her decision to throw her personal life open to scrutiny.



And it was the decision of a bunch of posters on this thread to read everything in the worst possible light. Besides, the thing about her having/not having a laptop/internet connection went on for bloody days and days and was repeatedly held up as an indicator of her vile lying ways.

For the last time - by all means criticize her political ideas and allegiances. Just try and go about it in a way that isn't so pathetic and vindictive and patently shit (not you particularly, lbj).


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2013)

Not a single post over three years in the penny thread - a hundred now in this one. Some peoples enemy radar needs a bit of work.


----------



## smokedout (Nov 26, 2013)

shes more dangerous than penny ever was because shes being taken seriously and is talking about real things that affect peoples lives


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> shes more dangerous than penny ever was because shes being taken seriously and is talking about real things that affect peoples lives


I think she's had zero impact on the packaging and sale of austerity, of cuts - of anything on any policy on any future strategy, whatsoever. What on earth does 'being taken seriously' even mean here? It's not the revelation that powerful people want to use less powerful people is it? To use what they say, to _twist _what they say?


----------



## smokedout (Nov 26, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I think she's had zero impact on the packaging and sale of austerity, of cuts - of anything on any policy on any future strategy, whatsoever. What on earth does 'being taken seriously' even mean here? It's not the revelation that powerful people want to use less powerful people is it? To use what they say, to _twist _what they say?



well she was a bit late to the austerity party but she's catching up fast.  Shes not there to have an impact on policy, she agrees with the LP policy as far as I can tell, or is completely uncritical of it - she is being used, and allowing herself to be used as the go-to media person on poverty, crowding out more authentic or radical voices both within and outside of the LP and setting a narrative which is no different beneath the surface to the one being trotted out by IDS.  

According to her recently her blog has had 9 million hits, given shes only come to prominence recently thats probably close to a million a month - now I suspect she might be fibbing about that, but thats a huge amount - more than guido fawkes - that cant fail to have an impact on the kind of people who cheer on her stuff, which seems to be guardian readers who've finally got someone who's been poor who seems decent and a bit like them and they can root for rather than dole scum like the rest of us.  She's high profile and outside of the radical ghetto in a way Penny isnt at all, and if her rich grandparents had stumped up for a private school you'd be agreeing with all this I suspect


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2013)

How would who reads her now effect anything though? What's changed? What's been deepened? What have they moved from and where are they now? How does that effect either govt or labour policy? She's not crowding out more radical voices either - more radical voices never get to set the mainstream narrative. That's how mainstream narratives work.

She's irrelevant in terms of how we help in class based fightbacks, she's not pretending to be part of that response to austerity. Penny is.


----------



## mentalchik (Nov 26, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> you think thatcher got more stick because she was a woman? You do a disservice to the people who hated her I think.



yes i do


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

I just did a quick twitter comparison between LP, Fawkes and Jack.

GF: ~120.000 followers
LP: ~ 84.000
AGCJ: ~ 24.000

I expect that Jack's had a lot bigger growth in her audience the last year tho.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 26, 2013)

120,000 people follow that piece of shit? Know your enemy?

How depressing.


----------



## The Pale King (Nov 26, 2013)

I don't like the way she is marketing herself / being marketed as the 'exemplary poor person'. i.e applying to hundreds of jobs a week, never drinking or seeking pleasure, always, always doing the right thing and whipping up Mexican beanburgers no matter the circumstances. It opens the space for the unemployed to be berated as to why they can't do it if she can, perversely legitimating poverty social security rates. The reply to Littlejohn turned my stomach a bit because it was devoted to showing him that she wasn't 'one of them' - she had an answer for everything. What about the people who don't have answers for everything?

I haven't read enough of her blog to comment really so perhaps I am doing her an injustice. She seems well intentioned and has obviously improved her position enormously. But I'm not sure what she is doing is really political - more a branch of lifestylism. I'm not sure of she's even held herself out as a political figure of any sort - very, very different kettle of fish to Laurie Penny anyway.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2013)

The Pale King said:


> I don't like the way she is marketing herself / being marketed as the 'exemplary poor person'. i.e applying to hundreds of jobs a week, never drinking or seeking pleasure, always, always doing the right thing and whipping up Mexican beanburgers no matter the circumstances. It opens the space for the unemployed to be berated as to why they can't do it if she can, perversely legitimating poverty social security rates. The reply to Littlejohn turned my stomach a bit because it was devoted to showing him that she wasn't 'one of them' - she had an answer for everything. What about the people who don't have answers for everything?
> 
> I haven't read enough of her blog to comment really so perhaps I am doing her an injustice. She seems well intentioned and has obviously improved her position enormously. But I'm not sure what she is doing is really political - more a branch of lifestylism. I'm not sure of she's even held herself out as a political figure of any sort - very, very different kettle of fish to Laurie Penny anyway.


This is the key part though - smokedout and others see her as playing a political role, a functional role for someone - i can't see who myself. Not a thing of those who set and sell policy has changed due to her, her blog or her doing well off it.


----------



## The Pale King (Nov 26, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> This is the key part though - smokedout and others see her as playing a political role, a functional role for someone - i can't see who myself. Not a thing of those who set and sell policy has changed due to her, her blog or her doing well off it.


 
Yes I'd agree with this. Her political horizons seem very limited and she isn't making the sorts of claims L.P and so on do - it's much more narrowly focussed and might not go further than a couple of cookbooks.
She may have good things to say about the difficulty that just maintaining dignity presents on a poverty budget, or she might be contributing to a harmful discourse that says only a goody-two-shoes has any moral worth in neoliberal Britain. Or maybe both.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 26, 2013)

She isn't a member of the labour party is she?


----------



## TruXta (Nov 26, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> She isn't a member of the labour party is she?


She is I think.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2013)

smokedout said:


> shes more dangerous than penny ever was because shes being taken seriously and is talking about real things that affect peoples lives



I think it's at a bit more of a remove than that - I think she's put herself (very earnestly) in a position where she can be a "useful idiot" to anyone who cares to use her as such, regardless of her political affiliations.  In effect she can be used as a stick to beat anyone who doesn't show the same "competence" as Ms Monroe, by any wanker willing to pick the stick up.  Whatever good her blog etc have done, that all risks being undone by the use to which she can be put by those in power.

And as for Penny, she's unfortunately taken very seriously by those pols aiming to capture and captivate those in the bubble.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> She isn't a member of the labour party is she?



Yes, and a constituency functionary at one time.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The thread's a fucking joke lbj. If people want to criticize her political positions and political affiliations that's absolutely fine. However, the third rate Columbo inferences about whether she's really in poverty or whether she is a 'good parent' based on her internet access, light bulbs or guitar have more than a whiff of Jamie Oliver/Richard Littlejohn about them.



How do you know what Jamie Oliver and Richard Littlejohn smell like?  
You're not one of those saddle-sniffers, are you?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 26, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I think she's had zero impact on the packaging and sale of austerity, of cuts - of anything on any policy on any future strategy, whatsoever. What on earth does 'being taken seriously' even mean here? It's not the revelation that powerful people want to use less powerful people is it? To use what they say, to _twist _what they say?



She has been used by a few commentators as an exemplar of "what can be done of only the proles made an effort", and while that may not exert an effect on how austerity is "sold" to the public, it does have some effect on the public perception of benefits recipients, and on what the media can *claim* is the public perception of benefits claimants.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 27, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> How would who reads her now effect anything though? What's changed? What's been deepened? What have they moved from and where are they now? How does that effect either govt or labour policy? She's not crowding out more radical voices either - more radical voices never get to set the mainstream narrative. That's how mainstream narratives work.
> 
> She's irrelevant in terms of how we help in class based fightbacks, she's not pretending to be part of that response to austerity. Penny is.



But no one on here takes Penny seriously, or atleast anyone with wit.

The issue I have with A girl named Jack is that her unpolitical nature is what is so ideological, it dovetails with the reduction of politics to lifestyle choices. Penny is a prick but atleast she is still within the realm of political discussion and can be criticised on such a basis, Jack on the other hand seeks to hide (poorly I might add) her politics behind a facade of "ordinary single mum just doing her best".

How anyone can buy this after all these years is baffling and I'm genuinely struggling to understand why you can't see through her deserving poor shilling for Labour scum routine. Jack more than Penny sums up the post ideological Blairite landscape.


----------



## revol68 (Nov 27, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> This is the key part though - smokedout and others see her as playing a political role, a functional role for someone - i can't see who myself. Not a thing of those who set and sell policy has changed due to her, her blog or her doing well off it.



why for "someone", I see her political role as more in keeping with a general depoliticisation, something much wider and not reducible to particular groups direct interests. Foodie, deserving poor and apolitical pragamatist "just doing her best" (despite obviously being a through and through Labour supporter) are what make her far more repellent to me than Penny.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 27, 2013)

revol68 said:


> But no one on here takes Penny seriously, or atleast anyone with wit.
> 
> The issue I have with A girl named Jack is that her unpolitical nature is what is so ideological, it dovetails with the reduction of politics to lifestyle choices. Penny is a prick but atleast she is still within the realm of political discussion and can be criticised on such a basis, Jack on the other hand seeks to hide (poorly I might add) her politics behind a facade of "ordinary single mum just doing her best".
> 
> How anyone can buy this after all these years is baffling and I'm genuinely struggling to understand why you can't see through her deserving poor shilling for Labour scum routine. Jack more than Penny sums up the post ideological Blairite landscape.


This itself is the reduction of politics (or political discourse - i forgot) to be labour or not. Be a winner or not. What else is there? There's no gap between? The life. No.

She's trapped in doing things ideologically/non ideologically like a good 50s Frankfurt school robot with no subjectivity(or maybe one gone all wrong and not like what they're supposed to).


----------



## revol68 (Nov 27, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> This itself is the reduction of politics (or political discourse - i forgot) to be labour or not. Be a winner or not. What else is there? There's no gap between? The life. No.
> 
> She's trapped in doing things ideologically/non ideologically like a good 50s Frankfurt school robot with no subjectivity(or maybe one gone all wrong and not like what they're supposed to).



I don't have a notion what that means?

my argument is that Jack's pretty transparent hiding of her politics, of her "I'm just a single mum trying to get by" is bullshit.

Did you miss her bullshit about David Prescott, the fact that she has never criticised the Labour Party for it's role in demonising or indeed sanctioning those on benefit?
She isn't some Frankfurt school prole trapped with no subjectivity, on the contrary she is blatantly political as fuck to anyone who looks into her shit, she just thinks she can pretend not to be.

I really don't get how you can be so hard on articul8 whilst giving this shit a by ball?

You think there's no significance that a foodie blog about a very respectable girl from a "good background" is what is pushed by Guardinista fucks, that it's just a coincidence that this blogger is an out and out labourite who is up to her neck in their "grassroots" mechanics? For me it sums up everything I despise, foodie, apolitical, lifestyle crap, it's even funnier that this time it's soo brazenly tied to the Blairite Labour.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 27, 2013)

revol68 said:


> But no one on here takes Penny seriously, or atleast anyone with wit.



Why not?


----------



## N_igma (Nov 27, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Why not?



Cos she's a fucking idiot?


----------



## youngian (Nov 27, 2013)

Not really bothered about deeply studying the shortcomings of a low budget food tipster but as the arena of TV chefs is cluttered with reactionary blabbermouths like Jamie Oliver, she's not doing too much harm.

Although any of them are welcome to come round and give me free cooking tips. I don't feel patronised by someone who knows more about a subject than I do.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 27, 2013)

N_igma said:


> Cos she's a fucking idiot?


Are you asking me?

I've heard her comment here and there and broadly her points are reasonable and I agree with a lot of them.


----------



## weepiper (Nov 27, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I don't have a notion what that means?
> 
> my argument is that Jack's pretty transparent hiding of her politics, of her "I'm just a single mum trying to get by" is bullshit.
> 
> ...


She's never hidden that she's a Labour fan. She talks about it quite a lot. You're making out that it's some big secret.


----------



## treelover (Nov 27, 2013)

Does she ever mention the benefit regime she was on, she must have had to attend the JC, write up job plans, searches, etc?


----------



## weepiper (Nov 27, 2013)

treelover said:


> Does she ever mention the benefit regime she was on, she must have had to attend the JC, write up job plans, searches, etc?


No, she'll have been on Income Support, not JSA as her son was only a baby. You just have an interview once every six months


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 27, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Why not?



Possibly something to do with her mutable view of her personal history (for example the whole "vote Lib-Dem"/"I never encouraged people to vote Lib-Dem" fiasco; her accusations of sexism and racism on this forum against two posters; her lack of commitment to her _ouvre_ (for example her "I'm not risking getting arrested just to get a story" _schtick_ while in New York during one of the clearings of "Occupy! Wall Street") and sundry other examples of her mendacity and/or ignorance.
She occasionally pokes the wasp's nest, and that's good, but most decent journalists do that.  She just happens to be young and apparently idealistic, and is amenable to having all sorts of "voce of youth" tags hung from her.


----------



## andysays (Nov 27, 2013)

treelover said:


> Does she ever mention the benefit regime she was on, she must have had to attend the JC, write up job plans, searches, etc?





weepiper said:


> No, she'll have been on Income Support, not JSA as her son was only a baby. You just have an interview once every six months



So, now that this henious error has been revealed, can we look forward to a ten-page denunciation of treelover as having demonstrated beyond question that he has no knowledge or experience of the benefit system, being unequivically posh, masterminding the Labour party's destruction of the welfare state and having no right to speak out about anything ever again?


----------



## TruXta (Nov 27, 2013)

andysays said:


> So, now that this henious error has been revealed, can we look forward to a ten-page denunciation of treelover as having demonstrated beyond question that he has no knowledge or experience of the benefit system, being unequivically posh, masterminding the Labour party's destruction of the welfare state and having no right to speak out about anything ever again?


Yes, off you go


----------



## andysays (Nov 27, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Yes, off you go



I'm sure there are others far more able (and far more inclined) than me to indulge in such things


----------



## Awesome Wells (Nov 27, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Possibly something to do with her mutable view of her personal history (for example the whole "vote Lib-Dem"/"I never encouraged people to vote Lib-Dem" fiasco; her accusations of sexism and racism on this forum against two posters; her lack of commitment to her _ouvre_ (for example her "I'm not risking getting arrested just to get a story" _schtick_ while in New York during one of the clearings of "Occupy! Wall Street") and sundry other examples of her mendacity and/or ignorance.
> She occasionally pokes the wasp's nest, and that's good, but most decent journalists do that.  She just happens to be young and apparently idealistic, and is amenable to having all sorts of "voce of youth" tags hung from her.



I'll have to take your word for it. Don't get me wrong, i'm not suggesting you're lying of course -I simpley don't know and I'm not terribly comfortable judging people, rightly or wrongly, on the basis of the experience of others. I feel the same about Galloway; the man may be the most vainglorious shitbag ever, but I can't personally prove that (nor do I care do dig up his bio and personal life).

I can only hope that's fair.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 27, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I don't have a notion what that means?
> 
> my argument is that Jack's pretty transparent hiding of her politics, of her "I'm just a single mum trying to get by" is bullshit.
> 
> ...


Your argument is that she's hiding stuff in public view. She's not. She's openly putting her views. All ideology is hidden -  that's how it's supposed to work. Being liked by guardian people - oh no!


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 3, 2013)

Jack Monroe has set up a petition to debate food poverty in parliament.

My only real complaint is that website is fucking awful; i have to disable my anti script software about 5 times to get it to work.


----------



## treelover (Dec 3, 2013)

> *That’s why I’ve started **a petition** calling for Parliament to debate the causes of UK hunger -- and to ask why, in modern Britain, foodbank use is escalating so rapidly. *



Will she mention benefit sanctions as a key cause of this obscenity?


----------



## treelover (Dec 3, 2013)

> know what it’s like to turn the fridge off because it's empty anyway. To unscrew the lightbulbs to alleviate the temptation of turning them on.



She has mentioned this again, imo, it must have scarred her for her to keep repeating all this.

btw, in the Autumn Statement this week, Osborne is going to signal/outline an even  wider decimation of the welfare state


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 3, 2013)

Of course he will.

if he could get his way he'd remove JSA altogether. Thank god for the libdems eh!!!


----------



## smokedout (Dec 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> How would who reads her now effect anything though? What's changed? What's been deepened? What have they moved from and where are they now? How does that effect either govt or labour policy? She's not crowding out more radical voices either - more radical voices never get to set the mainstream narrative. That's how mainstream narratives work.
> 
> She's irrelevant in terms of how we help in class based fightbacks, she's not pretending to be part of that response to austerity. Penny is.



I've been thinking about this and I thought you were right - although as VP said she is part of the general mood music steering the debate in an unhelpful direction - and thats reason enough to whinge about her on a thread on urban if you ask me.

But now I'm not so sure, she's everywhere at the moment, speaking along with Owen at the upcoming South London Peoples Assembly - the only representative of claimants I can see who will be at the top table - shes not trying to be part of a class based fightback, shes trying to dominate it from above and launch her career on the back of it

I thought this quote was telling: "I sometimes describe my job, or what I do, as a publicly elected post."

What's her job?  And who fucking elected her?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> She has mentioned this again, imo, it must have scarred her for her to keep repeating all this.



maybe, or maybe its just lazy writing based on a very narrow experience of short term poverty - she repeatedly uses the same stock phrases over and over.  No mention of sanctions is interesting particularly given this has been called as a week of action against workfare and sanctions.  She should be all over that, why isn't she?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 3, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I've been thinking about this and I thought you were right - although as VP said she is part of the general mood music steering the debate in an unhelpful direction - and thats reason enough to whinge about her on a thread on urban if you ask me.
> 
> But now I'm not so sure, she's everywhere at the moment, speaking along with Owen at the upcoming South London Peoples Assembly - the only representative of claimants I can see who will be at the top table - *shes not trying to be part of a class based fightback, shes trying to dominate it from above and launch her career on the back of it*
> 
> ...



I reckon you've nailed it there, smokedout.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 3, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I've been thinking about this and I thought you were right - although as VP said she is part of the general mood music steering the debate in an unhelpful direction - and thats reason enough to whinge about her on a thread on urban if you ask me.
> 
> But now I'm not so sure, she's everywhere at the moment, speaking along with Owen at the upcoming South London Peoples Assembly - the only representative of claimants I can see who will be at the top table - shes not trying to be part of a class based fightback, shes trying to dominate it from above and launch her career on the back of it
> 
> ...


Anything based around her and Owen isn't a class based fightback by definition. People like them will always run things like that.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 3, 2013)

that doesnt make it okay


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 3, 2013)

smokedout said:


> that doesnt make it okay


It does make it irrelevant to developing alternative class bad initiatives in the way i suggested though.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 3, 2013)

hmm, her irrelevence doesnt mean that she annoys me any less and her timing makes me suspicious - christmas is coming, drag the debate away from sanctions, Labour support sanctions so lets call for another fucking debate in parliament by means of a magic petition that completely ignores the main reason people will be hungry this christmas


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 3, 2013)

Well, she's starting to annoy me as well now. I just don't buy into what i think is a mad model of her motivations from years ago. And i still don't her actually dragging the debate anywhere at all.


----------



## treelover (Dec 3, 2013)

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/03/person-of-year-2013-who-gets-your-vote

She has been nominated as a possible 'Guardian person of the Year' along with Pope Francis.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/03/person-of-year-2013-who-gets-your-vote
> 
> She has been nominated as a possible 'Guardian person of the Year' along with Pope Francis.



Well, that's quite flattering.


----------



## The Pale King (Dec 3, 2013)

They describe her thusly:

The blogger, cookery writer and campaigner Jack Monroe brought a flash of colour, wit and authenticity (not to mention delicious food) to the debates around austerity and poverty in 2013. A year ago the Southend-based single mother was enjoying a tiny, if devoted, following for her blog, which mixed cheap, nutritious recipes with incisive posts on welfare reform and how to survive on a food budget of £10 a week. Scroll forward 12 months and she has a Penguin book deal, two columns in the Guardian and is in demand as a regular commentator on radio and TV.
In October Monroe entered the Independent on Sunday Pink Power list at number 19; a fortnight later her arrival as a star of the liberal left was confirmed when the Daily Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn criticised her as a "Poverty poster girl". Monroe replied with typical eloquence. Smart and down-to-earth, Monroe, who left school at 16, brilliantly articulates the fears and frustration of a life on benefits. She may have a TV cookery show in development but shows no sign of easing up on her anti-poverty campaigning. As she said in June: "Until people realise benefits doesn't mean scrounger and austerity isn't a fun middle-class way to grow your own vegetables, there's still a lot of work to do." *Patrick Butler, social policy editor*

Flash of authenticity...star of liberal left...I hate the Guardian!

Don't think she'll beat Andy Murray to the big prize anyway...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2013)

I hope Pope Francis begbie gets it


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 4, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I hope Pope Francis begbie gets it


yeah, but what about the guardian award?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 4, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I've been thinking about this and I thought you were right - although as VP said she is part of the general mood music steering the debate in an unhelpful direction - and thats reason enough to whinge about her on a thread on urban if you ask me.
> 
> But now I'm not so sure, she's everywhere at the moment, speaking along with Owen at the upcoming South London Peoples Assembly - the only representative of claimants I can see who will be at the top table - shes not trying to be part of a class based fightback, shes trying to dominate it from above and launch her career on the back of it
> 
> ...


Are you sure you're not reading too much into that? She might well just, perhaps clumsily, be referring to the support she gets as a blogger.

Does she really see herself as a representative of the claimants under austerity? Should she turn down the opportunity to speak? Would that do anything positive?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Well, she's starting to annoy me as well now. I just don't buy into what i think is a mad model of her motivations from years ago. And i still don't her actually dragging the debate anywhere at all.



So Jacks me me me petition hit 100,000 signatures after heavy backing from The Mirror, John Prescott and UNITE and Labour are using it to call for an opposition day debate about foodbanks in the next couple of weeks

This all happened shortly after a string of reports from Homeless Link and others about benefits sanctions causing extreme poverty and news stories had started popping up showing the suffering sanctions are causing.  Jacks petition, which doesnt mention sanctions, was launched during a well publicised week of action against workfare and sanctions and shortly after a petition opposing sanctions was all over twitter and the number of signatures were climbing faster than expected.

And now everyones talking some vague de-politicised shit about foodbanks and scratching their heads going why are so many people going hungry?

I'm not saying anything deliberate has taken place,or theres any secret plots, but if Jack was genuinely embedded within, and gave a shit about what claimants have been doing and calling for, then she could have added to that without leading the part of public opinion she has influence over in a different direction and down a dead end

sorry for the wordy post, but you see what I mean?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 5, 2013)

and I think the reason Jack doesnt mention workfare and sanctions is that Jack supports workfare and sanctions _for people who aren't like her_


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

*A Girl Called Jack* ‏@*MsJackMonroe*  2h
RIP Nelson Mandela. A legend, a visionary, a true campaigner, inspirational and courageous. Rest as you lived, in peace.

in peace ffs, one of many trying to portray Mandela's life as that of some liberal fucking hippy


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> and I think the reason Jack doesnt mention workfare and sanctions is that Jack supports workfare and sanctions _for people who aren't like her_


I think you're grasping here.

Come on, seriously? You think she supports workfare?


----------



## Combustible (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> and I think the reason Jack doesnt mention workfare and sanctions is that Jack supports workfare and sanctions _for people who aren't like her_



You could have at least bothered to google it rather than making up what you think her opinion is.

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2012/03/03/boycott-workfare-national-day-of-action-3rd-march-2012-2/


----------



## LiamO (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> *A Girl Called Jack* ‏@*MsJackMonroe*  2h
> RIP Nelson Mandela. A legend, a visionary, a true campaigner, inspirational and courageous. Rest as you lived, in peace.
> 
> in peace ffs, one of many trying to portray Mandela's life as that of some liberal fucking hippy



Only if you choose to view Mandela's 30-year campaign of non-violence and reconciliation... which was itself a philosophical progression from his suport for the armed campaign...  as liberal hippy-ism. Do you smokedout?


----------



## LiamO (Dec 6, 2013)

Combustible said:


> You could have at least bothered to google it rather than making up what you think her opinion is.
> 
> http://agirlcalledjack.com/2012/03/03/boycott-workfare-national-day-of-action-3rd-march-2012-2/



coming on here... bothering people with your pesky _facts_... when they are perfectly happy with their _opinions_


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

Combustible said:


> You could have at least bothered to google it rather than making up what you think her opinion is.
> 
> http://agirlcalledjack.com/2012/03/03/boycott-workfare-national-day-of-action-3rd-march-2012-2/



Ive mentioned that before, it was the first post on her blog and the only mention of workfare anywhere

Labour claim not to support workfare as well, but they do


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> I think you're grasping here.
> 
> Come on, seriously? You think she supports workfare?



I think she probably supports Labours Job Guarantee and that she thinks sanctions are necessary in some cases


----------



## LiamO (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> and I think the reason Jack doesnt mention workfare and sanctions is that Jack supports workfare and sanctions _for people who aren't like her_





smokedout said:


> I think she probably supports Labours Job Guarantee and that she thinks sanctions are necessary in some cases



are there two smokedouts?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

not sure what you mean, theres nothing inconsistent in those two statements


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 6, 2013)

LiamO said:


> are there two smokedouts?



Why, do you think that one post contradicts the other?
If you do, STOP DRINKING THE HARPIC FFS!


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I think she probably supports Labours Job Guarantee and that she thinks sanctions are necessary in some cases


You 'think'?

You spend a lot of time being very negative about her, why don't you ask her view directly?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> You 'think'?
> 
> You spend a lot of time being very negative about her, why don't you ask her view directly?



because I can't be arsed with a row on twitter and because the onus is on her, shes the one who's never mentioned sanctions in two years of writing about food poverty, shes the one who supports workfare advocates YMCA and she's the one who has never once been critical of the party she actively supports being in favour of workfare and sanctions


----------



## weepiper (Dec 6, 2013)

Never except in March 2012, you mean?

And May 2013



> Speaking to Daybreak she said: "The queues at our local food bank have got so great that they are now opening twice a day, and that came in about April [time], and that was in line with the bedroom tax and harder benefit sanctions."



Oh and in September 2013 too



> Michael Gove blames child poverty and hunger on reckless parenting – with no acknowledgement to the fact that many people using food banks are doing so because of benefit delays, sanctions, low income and unemployment.



Oh, and what's this? October 2013 too



> The three food banks opened a week by the Trussell Trust can’t possibly be related to cuts to Housing Benefit, Council Tax Benefit, the Bedroom Tax, benefit sanction, can it?



Anyone would think you're just determined to believe what suits your own agenda.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

fair enough, but shes never mentioned them explicitly, or called for them to be scrapped, or given any support to anti-sanction campaigns - in fact by plugging YMCA who are being boycotted because of their support for workfare/sanctions she's done the opposite and apart from that one post two years ago she has never mentioned workfare as far as I can find

she's used the word sanctions in a throw away manner a couple of times, in the same way all labour politicians do, I'm sure shes opposed to 'unfair' sanctions, 'unnecessary' sanctions, 'unreasonable' sanctions as well, so is Iain Duncan Smith


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

this has to be seen in the context of a concerted effort from the soft left to water down the demands of claimants and drag the campaigns behind labour - this was most apparent in the bedroom tax attempted hijacking, but also in McClusky praising Milibands get tough on claimants speech, TUC support for workfare, the Labour commitment to keeping the WCA in some form etc.  charities have also been complicit with this, working with the TUC to vaguely campaign about how nasty welfare reform is on one hand and bidding for contracts to carry out those reforms on the other

Now all those people have fallen behind Jack - she almost certainly didnt intend that, but she's in a position to do something about it and get behind claimants, not Labour, the unions and charities - and she hasn't,. shes done the opposite


----------



## andysays (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> this has to be seen in the context of a concerted effort from the soft left to water down the demands of claimants and drag the campaigns behind labour - this was most apparent in the bedroom tax attempted hijacking, but also in McClusky praising Milibands get tough on claimants speech, TUC support for workfare, the Labour commitment to keeping the WCA in some form etc.  charities have also been complicit with this, working with the TUC to vaguely campaign about how nasty welfare reform is on one hand and bidding for contracts to carry out those reforms on the other



As I've said before, I'm in agreement with you on this, but what I still can't agree with and genuinely don't understand is



smokedout said:


> Now all those people have fallen behind Jack



As if she, somehow, is the one directing the whole thing, the one who is ultimately responsible for deciding the policy of the Labour party, the Trades Union movement, assorted charities and other unspecified arms of the soft left.

This is just ridiculous, frankly. You're attributing to a young woman from Southend, on the basis of a blog and a few other appearances in the media, the power to determine the direction of political discourse which even Laurie Penny wouldn't claim for herself...


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

andysays said:


> As if she, somehow, is the one directing the whole thing, the one who is ultimately responsible for deciding the policy of the Labour party, the Trades Union movement, assorted charities and other unspecified arms of the soft left.
> 
> This is just ridiculous, frankly. You're attributing to a young woman from Southend, on the basis of a blog and a few other appearances in the media, the power to determine the direction of political discourse which even Laurie Penny wouldn't claim for herself...



thats not what I meant, they are using her and she's happy to be used that's all, up until now they didnt have a tame claimant, now they have


----------



## andysays (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> thats not what I meant, they are using her and she's happy to be used that's all, up until now they didnt have a tame claimant, now they have



If that's not what you meant, you should have been a little more careful about what you said, because that is the clear implication from what you've posted, and not for the first time.

And if it's really not what you meant, and she's merely a tame claimant whose words are being used, why are you spending so much time searching through her words, looking for things to discredit what she's saying?

It's looking like you have some sort of obsession with Jack which is way beyond her real significance...


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

andysays said:


> If that's not what you meant, you should have been a little more careful about what you said, because that is the clear implication from what you've posted, and not for the first time.
> 
> And if it's really not what you meant, and she's merely a tame claimant whose words are being used, why are you spending so much time searching through her words, looking for things to discredit what she's saying?



I used to read her blog before she was famous, I knew what was there




> It's looking like you have some sort of obsession with Jack which is way beyond her real significance...



why, because Ive made the occasional post about her on an internet forum?


----------



## cesare (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I used to read her blog before she was famous, I knew what was there
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Out of your last 28 posts, 22 have been about her.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

over the space of about two weeks, so what, I only tend to post on one thread at a time, posting on an internet thread is hardly an obsession, I hadn't even thought about her until she annoyed me again a couple of days ago


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

how many times did you, and others, post on the lp thread, were you obsessed with her?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> because I can't be arsed with a row on twitter and because the onus is on her, shes the one who's never mentioned sanctions in two years of writing about food poverty, shes the one who supports workfare advocates YMCA and she's the one who has never once been critical of the party she actively supports being in favour of workfare and sanctions


I think you'll find a lot of people support the YMCA without really understanding the depth of the issue, same with the Salvation Army, for example. I don't think that autonmatically means she's pro-workfare and to make that insinuation when you aren't prepared to ask her seems unfair to me.

Perhaps the reason she has never mentioned sanctions is because she has never faced them perhaps. 

Again, without really knowing it's impossible to say. She may well be incredibly ill informed and easily led by a superficial and naive belief in the labour party.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 6, 2013)

I fucking hate the sally army


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fair enough, but shes never mentioned them explicitly, or called for them to be scrapped, or given any support to anti-sanction campaigns - in fact by plugging YMCA who are being boycotted because of their support for workfare/sanctions she's done the opposite and apart from that one post two years ago she has never mentioned workfare as far as I can find
> 
> she's used the word sanctions in a throw away manner a couple of times, in the same way all labour politicians do, I'm sure shes opposed to 'unfair' sanctions, 'unnecessary' sanctions, 'unreasonable' sanctions as well, so is Iain Duncan Smith


How do you know she has never called for sanctions to be scrapped? Have you heard her every word, read everything she's said?

Frankly if you can't be 'arsed' to find out what she actually thinks when you could ask her then you can't really expect to be taken seriously. Noone said you should engage in a row.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 6, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I fucking hate the sally army


I fucking hate the bullying work programme cunts on salvation army employment plus and i shall tell the next tin rattling 'soldier' that I come acrss. They are a pretend army ffs even with ranks and uniforms and a magazine called 'war cry'!


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 6, 2013)

muscular christianity


----------



## cesare (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> how many times did you, and others, post on the lp thread, were you obsessed with her?


I don't know, I haven't counted. The only reason that I just counted your last 28 posts was because you said you made the "occasional" post about her - which was such a blatant misrepresentation, that I thought I'd challenge it.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

cesare said:


> I don't know, I haven't counted. The only reason that I just counted your last 28 posts was because you said you made the "occasional" post about her - which was such a blatant misrepresentation, that I thought I'd challenge it.



no its not, I have, about one a fortnight probably, and have then answered when people replied, like I am now, except I'm not even talking about Jack, this is a daft line of argument


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

your obsessed with Jack, you post about her all the time

no I dont

yes you do, you just did

come on


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 6, 2013)

cesare said:


> Out of your last 28 posts, 22 have been about her.


Smokedout is right, though, that this figure needs the timeframe to give it context. And he's not the only person who tends to post on one thread at a time.


----------



## cesare (Dec 6, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Smokedout is right, though, that this figure needs the timeframe to give it context. And he's not the only person who tends to post on one thread at a time.


It's not an "occasional post" if he's mostly posting on this thread. I don't give a flying fuck how many posts he wants to make about her - what irritates me is the way he positions it ie "occasional". Bollocks is it "occasional". 

I never usually give smokedout any grief but I'm finding it really irritating to find myself double checking him all the time tbh. The reason that I'm doing that is because he's misrepresented lots of things about this woman that are easily disprovable just by reading her bloody blog. I'm sick of the sight of her blog now and the only reason I've been looking at it is because of his misportrayals. He's driving traffic there ffs 

 at self


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

cesare said:


> It's not an "occasional post" if he's mostly posting on this thread. I don't give a flying fuck how many posts he wants to make about her - what irritates me is the way he positions it ie "occasional". Bollocks is it "occasional".



well if you're going to get into daft pedantry like this then I'm sure you'll find it everywhere - would my posts have been less occasional if Id posted some inane shit about kittens in between them?


----------



## cesare (Dec 6, 2013)

smokedout said:


> well if you're going to get into daft pedantry like this then I'm sure you'll find it everywhere - would my posts have been less occasional if Id posted some inane shit about kittens in between them?


Perhaps if you'd posted more about what's been going on this week re workfare, maybe putting your blog posts on your thread. Or if you hadn't said "occasional" at all I wouldn't even have noticed. As it is, to me you look as if you've spent most of your urban time talking about this Jack woman and now making out that you haven't.

Edit: I like your blog and read each time you post. You could do with some more posts about food poverty though.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 6, 2013)

I make occasional posts on urban, mostly on one thread at a time, at the moment this one


----------



## bamalama (Dec 7, 2013)

cesare said:


> Perhaps if you'd posted more about what's been going on this week re workfare, maybe putting your blog posts on your thread. Or if you hadn't said "occasional" at all I wouldn't even have noticed. As it is, to me you look as if you've spent most of your urban time talking about this Jack woman and now making out that you haven't.
> 
> Edit: I like your blog and read each time you post. You could do with some more posts about food poverty though.


Given the context of the op and the content of the *whole* thread,this is very unfair on smokedout  who's done some good research here,which given the content and trajectory of lots of jacks stuff must have been mind numbingly tedious.
I lost interest in her stuff pages ago,and getting into back and forth arguments with the lassies apparent fan club on here is a waste of time imo,they're not interested.People should read the whole thread,and the op  to see where smokedout's comin from...It's also linked to the jamie oliver thread which was started around the same time.
Questioning and researching the "commentariat" media bubble, and those in it, is not weird or obsessive and it's a defence bein pushed by some who've written acres of stuff on laurie penny (another irrelevant media hack imo).Thats the laurie penny school of defence/distraction...
Got a link to smokedouts' blog cesare ?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 7, 2013)

smokedout said:


> how many times did you, and others, post on the lp thread, were you obsessed with her?



Do those hairy bears shit in the woods?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

Maybe someone


DotCommunist said:


> muscular christianity


In my experience, it's more like fat christianity.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Questioning and researching the "commentariat" media bubble, and those in it, is not weird or obsessive and it's a defence bein pushed by some who've written acres of stuff on laurie penny (another irrelevant media hack imo).Thats the laurie penny school of defence/distraction...
> Got a link to smokedouts' blog cesare ?



I agree. But this seems more like a set of prejudices than anything else. 

The impression I get is that Jack is just not as politically astute as others might like her to be. You could make the same accusation about a great many campaigners and it seems counter productive to dismiss them all. Sue Marsh is feted by the likes of Michael Meacher and his massive property portfolio, for example.

I think it's a bit riduclous to say Jack is pro-workfare when there's no evidence, and that she's 100% pro labour policies when she shares a platform with labour. Just as it's unfair to judge her on the basis of those that follow her blog. 

How many people would have refused the offer of a book deal in her position? Or a platform to speak, however naively or ignorantly.


----------



## chilango (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> How many people would have refused the offer of a book deal in her position? Or a platform to speak, however naively or ignorantly.



Me. I would refuse.

Don't give a damn about Jack either way really though.

I don't read her blog. She's never come up in my daily life. 

Don't see what's worth getting worked up over here.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> I agree. But this seems more like a set of prejudices than anything else.
> 
> The impression I get is that Jack is just not as politically astute as others might like her to be. You could make the same accusation about a great many campaigners and it seems counter productive to dismiss them all. Sue Marsh is feted by the likes of Michael Meacher and his massive property portfolio, for example.
> 
> ...


I think you should read the whole thread for some context awesome.I think the unfair judgement here is being thrown in smokedout's direction.Jacks a media hack imo so she's fair game for criticism/analysis,although i agree with chilango,in the wider scheme of things she's fairly irrelevant despite her looming career as the acceptable voice of the deserving poor...


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I think you should read the whole thread for some context awesome.I think the unfair judgement here is being thrown in smokedout's direction.Jacks a media hack imo so she's fair game for criticism/analysis,although i agree with chilango,in the wider scheme of things she's fairly irrelevant despite her looming career as the acceptable voice of the deserving poor...


Well it's 50 pages, so that's not going to happen 

I'm not judging anyone. I'm simply saying that some clear verification of her views or stance is required rather than what is starting to come across as a character assassination. It might be that she is in favour of workfare or sanctions, but how can I know for sure from this thread? It's starting to sound more like a witch hunt quite frankly.

And what action is the OP calling for? I don't read her blog. I don't find a lot of these kinds of cheap food writings terribly practical personally.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

chilango said:


> Me. I would refuse.
> 
> Don't give a damn about Jack either way really though.
> 
> ...


why would you refuse?


----------



## chilango (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> why would you refuse?



Because I wouldn't want to be put in that position. I've always been pretty strict about not letting any activism etc. I've done in the past become about "me". I also had no intention of being "used" in this way.

I almost always refused to engage with the media, and on the few occasions when I did I was strictly anonymous. 

We were pretty hard on "media whores" and "ego warriors".

Since then, stuff I've produced like writing, art, design etc. has often also been anonymous, and almost always available for people to copy and reproduce at will and for free.

I'm not judging her for accepting to the book deal or the platforms offered. That's her decision, she has to live with the consequences. They're of little import to the rest of us.

Just that I wouldn't, and haven't.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> why would you refuse?


because you would have to get into bed with the likes of these fellas


> DCD Publishing has signed a global representation deal with Jack Monroe – author of the successful budget food blog ‘A Girl called Jack’ and in a pre-emptive deal sold world rights to a tie-in cookbook to Penguin, UK. As well as publishing* DCD represents Jack for television; licensing; endorsements; consumer products; public appearances and DVD...
> *
> Adrian Sington, CEO, DCD Publishing, said: “Jack is a woman of our times – facing head-on the realities of recession-hit Britain and responding with a ‘make do and mend’ way of thinking that we all need to consider. *We look forward to further brand development opportunities through the channels DCD operates in including television and merchandising”*.


DCD Publishing


who incidentally she signed up with in may of this year


----------



## J Ed (Dec 7, 2013)

Nice one said:


> because you would have to get into bed with the likes of these fellas
> 
> DCD Publishing
> 
> ...



Wow, what a world we live in. _Monetize _your personality/[perceived] social circumstances


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

That...is troubling.

I find it very hard to jump on any bandwagon bashing someone. Not without good reason. I don't like being on the receiving end of the mob. However i'm not entirely convinced a genuine activist needs a bunch of poncey media luvvies.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 7, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she's used the word sanctions in a throw away manner a couple of times, in the same way all labour politicians do, I'm sure shes opposed to 'unfair' sanctions, 'unnecessary' sanctions, 'unreasonable' sanctions as well, so is Iain Duncan Smith



IDS couldn't give a flying fuck if a sanction is unreasonable, unfair or unnecessary. He just likes people being sanctioned because his entire viewpoint is that people on benefits are scroungers, have always been scroungers and will always be scroungers. So they should be punished through sanctions.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Well it's 50 pages, so that's not going to happen
> 
> I'm not judging anyone. I'm simply saying that some clear verification of her views or stance is required rather than what is starting to come across as a character assassination. It might be that she is in favour of workfare or sanctions, but how can I know for sure from this thread? It's starting to sound more like a witch hunt quite frankly.
> 
> And what action is the OP calling for? I don't read her blog. I don't find a lot of these kinds of cheap food writings terribly practical personally.


A good startin point for ye here,awesome,and it's just a suggestion ye know,a wee pointer...would be to read the thread...maybe?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> That...is troubling.
> 
> I find it very hard to jump on any bandwagon bashing someone. Not without good reason. I don't like being on the receiving end of the mob. However i'm not entirely convinced a genuine activist needs a bunch of poncey media luvvies.



they're not poncey media luvvies. They are hard-nosed capitalists, out to create, market, and profit from a brand.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2013)

'a make do and mend' attitude that we all need to consider' says the rich head of a marketing company who has made his money by persuading people to buy stuff they don't need. 

He says it seemingly without a hint of irony.

This is a process of normalising austerity. Whatever she was, Jack is now part of the problem.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 7, 2013)

what do people like him think people have been doing already? eating pureed money washed down with luak coffee?


----------



## chilango (Dec 7, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> what do people like him think people have been doing already? eating pureed money washed down with luak coffee?



You never had a fiver smoothie? Mmmm.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2013)

'we all'. Rich and poor, we're all in this together, eh? Marketing austerity. She's sold herself to the tory agenda.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'a make do and mend' attitude that we all need to consider' says the rich head of a marketing company who has made his money by persuading people to buy stuff they don't need.
> 
> He says it seemingly without a hint of irony.
> 
> This is a process of normalising austerity. Whatever she was, Jack is now part of the problem.


That would sadly seem to be the case. 

Maybe someone should send her a message to this effect? Does she not see this, care?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2013)

Maybe she's looking forward to all the money she's going to make out of marketing austerity.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

I just think she's naive about all this. The attitude of these sales and marketing types is repugnant. I guess if she feels she needs an agent she must think she has some career in the media. But even then I still think she thinks she's operating with good intentions. The road to hell...

So, basically, she's a Land Girl for 2013. Dig for victory, austerity britain needs YOU!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2013)

There are many different kinds of agent. If she just wanted a book deal, an old-fashioned literary agent would have done. But no, she chose this lot, whose webpage proudly presents them as:



> *DCD Publishing is an agency specialising in 360 degree brand development in all areas including: television; book publishing; consumer products; brand endorsements; public appearances and DVD. DCD Publishing is part of the UK and US based television production and distribution group DCD Media plc.*



360 degree brand development. 

And they haven't even properly copy-edited their mission statement. 

With her high public profile, she will have been able to choose from many agents.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 7, 2013)

Awesome,do us a favour and re-read all your posts on this page,and when your shock at how confused and uninformed you sound subsides,go and read the *whole* thread and, maybe, some of jacks blog before you post again...please.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 7, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There are many different kinds of agent. If she just wanted a book deal, an old-fashioned literary agent would have done. But no, she chose this lot, whose webpage proudly presents them as:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Has she said why she chose this lot?


----------



## treelover (Dec 7, 2013)

Nice one said:


> because you would have to get into bed with the likes of these fellas
> 
> DCD Publishing
> 
> ...




Its the EMI/Pistols signing of the povo food movement


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Has she said why she chose this lot?


I can see why they chose her. They have a small list, tbh, and that badly copy-edited home page smacks of an outfit that isn't too big. But their list includes food writers, interior designers, sex writers, a 'yummy mummy' - they are largely a lifestyle list for the glossy mags, and they clearly see themselves as a bit edgy, hence Jack and the sex writer.

They probably told her they'd get her on the telly. That's my guess. It is of course only a guess, but 360 degree brand development is bound to include the telly.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 7, 2013)

Someone told me today that her recipes are in Waitrose's supermarket magazine


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 7, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Awesome,do us a favour and re-read all your posts on this page,and when your shock at how confused and uninformed you sound subsides,go and read the *whole* thread and, maybe, some of jacks blog before you post again...please.


How will that inform me? If there's somewhere in the 50 pages that provides actual facts and not supposition to back up the case against Jack Monroe, then I'm happy to read it. 

I'm not looking for an argument; this entire thing is uninformed - without hearing her side of the story none of us can know for sure. So I maintain that she's just naive. I'm not making excuses for her, she can make her own decisions and live with them. I've not said that any of the stuff posted here against her couldn't be true, I'm just not comfortable with an online 'outing' of someone that may well be off the mark. 
All I have suggested is that smokedout ask her for some answers. I don't see why that should automatically lead to a twitter argument.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 7, 2013)

So if a girl called Jack has an agent does Laurie Penny have one? How widespread is it for twitter personalities/bloggers to have them?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 7, 2013)

well I can only speculate but if you are plugged into the right networks from the get go you probably don't require an agent


----------



## weepiper (Dec 8, 2013)

*Observatoring* ‏@Observatoring113h
@stousee @MsJackMonroe What specifically do you think are the top causes of rise in food bank use?
*A Girl Called Jack*‏@MsJackMonroe
@Observatoring1 @stousee Benefit delays, _sanctions_ and bedroom tax. @TrussellTrust research backs this up.

She's currently busy vehemently denying any interest in standing for _any_ party anytime soon on twitter. On this status if anyone wants a look



> MPs to get £74k a year. So 1 in 5 people hungry, families homeless, & THEY get an 11% rise for starving kids and freezing wages? FUCK OFF.



https://twitter.com/MsJackMonroe/status/409465282433142785


----------



## smokedout (Dec 8, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She's currently busy vehemently denying any interest in standing for _any_ party anytime soon on twitter. On this status if anyone wants a look



whilst describing herself as a prominent labour party activist

*A Girl Called Jack* ‏@*MsJackMonroe*  17m
@*muggyfresh_* But if you think a fairly prominent LP activist being asked to stand for a local seat is far fetched then you're a bit naive.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 8, 2013)

colours nailed to the mast there


----------



## weepiper (Dec 8, 2013)

She's never denied being a LP activist. You keep acting as if you've found her out in some great secret and it's frankly childish


----------



## Geri (Dec 8, 2013)

I'm surprised she hasn't been on Saturday Kitchen yet.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 8, 2013)

Probably saving herself for great british bake off which we all know to be the better program


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Wow, what a world we live in. _Monetize _your personality/[perceived] social circumstances



One supposes we should at least be thankful that she isn't attempting to monetise her hotness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> IDS couldn't give a flying fuck if a sanction is unreasonable, unfair or unnecessary. He just likes people being sanctioned because his entire viewpoint is that people on benefits are scroungers, have always been scroungers and will always be scroungers. So they should be punished through sanctions.



As opposed to mooching off of their father-in-law, like he does.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'a make do and mend' attitude that we all need to consider' says the rich head of a marketing company who has made his money by persuading people to buy stuff they don't need.
> 
> He says it seemingly without a hint of irony.
> 
> This is a process of normalising austerity. Whatever she was, Jack is now part of the problem.



This isn't merely the normalisation of austerity, it's the *commodification* of austerity.


----------



## xenon (Dec 8, 2013)

Nice one said:


> because you would have to get into bed with the likes of these fellas
> 
> DCD Publishing
> 
> ...



If anyone else clicked that link too, you might want to do a malware / tracking cookies scan. I got an AVG alert, blackhat SEO junk. 

Wankers. (The site operators.)


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> As opposed to mooching off of their father-in-law, like he does.


Wait didn't he try and make some pathetic justification why he wasn't really mooching off his in-laws, that it was to help them out or some such shit?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 8, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> well I can only speculate but if you are plugged into the right networks from the get go you probably don't require an agent



I have some experience of dealing with agents. Unless you're _extremely_ famous, an agent is going to be very useful to you. They work for you by showing your stuff around, knowing who to show it to, what to charge for it, etc. They act as a first filter for the bigger publishers who will normally only deal directly with agents - so they get your stuff considered. Without an agent, you're not even in the game in many areas. They sort out contracts and chase payment. They do lots of the boring stuff most people hate doing.

There are more and less classy agents, though, and this one seems very much a less classy one.

I don't think Jack is evil. I do think she is confused, though. Her politics is confused, her personal goals are confused, what she appears to want to achieve from her work is confused, the message she seems to want to put across from her personal experiences is confused. In signing up to this agent, she is pursuing a potentially very lucrative media career, one with any radical politics stripped away from it.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> This isn't merely the normalisation of austerity, it's the *commodification* of austerity.


Monetise your poverty.


----------



## love detective (Dec 8, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Someone told me today that her recipes are in Waitrose's supermarket magazine



She's in the same issue as the one Pippa Middleton is in giving advice on festive cocktails and canapes


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 8, 2013)

love detective said:


> She's in the same issue as the one Pippa Middleton is in giving advice on festive cocktails and canapes


It's all very New Labour. We're concerned about the poor, but intensely relaxed about the rich...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Wait didn't he try and make some pathetic justification why he wasn't really mooching off his in-laws, that it was to help them out or some such shit?



You mean the "we helped save daddy's £2 million house from dilapidation by living in it" _schtick_? 
As believable as everything else Dunked-in Shit has claimed!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Monetise your poverty.



Quite.  And if you can't or won't, that just goes to prove what a feckless fucker you are, obviously.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> You mean the "we helped save daddy's £2 million house from dilapidation by living in it" _schtick_?
> As believable as everything else Dunked-in Shit has claimed!


I never said I believed it - it was quite a crap justification if I remember correctly


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

love detective said:


> She's in the same issue as the one Pippa Middleton is in giving advice on festive cocktails and canapes



Who the fuck is Pippa Middleton when she's at home?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> I never said I believed it - it was quite a crap justification if I remember correctly



"Quite a crap justification"?  Typical Scots understatement, there!


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Who the fuck is Pippa Middleton when she's at home?




sister to bonny prince willz wife


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Who the fuck is Pippa Middleton when she's at home?


She's the hugely talented sister of someone or other. _Massively_ talented, she is.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's all very New Labour. We're concerned about the poor, but intensely relaxed about the rich...



Except that, as with most things scented with New Labourism, the concern might have been expressed, but was rarely acted on, except in ways that also conveniently helped capitalism - for example, tax credits.


----------



## xenon (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Who the fuck is Pippa Middleton when she's at home?



The one with the arse. Whatsname's sister.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> sister to bonny prince willz wife



Oh, the one who's supposed to have a nice arse, right?

^^^E2A: Snap!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 8, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Except that, as with most things scented with New Labourism, the concern might have been expressed, but was rarely acted on, except in ways that also conveniently helped capitalism - for example, tax credits.


Indeed, presiding over a period in which the gap between rich and poor continued to widen. Jack's cats are named Milliband and Harriet, lest we forget. She _believes in_ New Labour.  

Those good folk at Waitrose cater for rich and poor alike, though - there's money to be made from all income brackets. In fact, I can see them using Munroe to reposition themselves as the supermarket for everyone. They have a reputation as a shop for posh people - but they have their 'essentials' range that is much the same as those of other supermarkets. Jack Munroe will help them to bring poorer customers in...


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 8, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Wait didn't he try and make some pathetic justification why he wasn't really mooching off his in-laws, that it was to help them out or some such shit?


Oh god, surely not even the toffs deserve IDS turning up on their doorstep offering help.

Perhaps he's accompanied by Nick Knowles and Julia Bradbury or Dawn Porter.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 8, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Oh god, surely not even the toffs deserve IDS turning up on their doorstep offering help.
> 
> Perhaps he's accompanied by Nick Knowles and Julia Bradbury or Dawn Porter.



Or Lowri fucking Turner!!!


----------



## chilango (Dec 9, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> she is pursuing a potentially very lucrative media career, one with any radical politics stripped away from it.



Which is fair enough. Good luck to her.

More fool anyone placing their hopes in individual bloggers/writers/personalities.

There are no shortcuts.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Or Lowri fucking Turner!!!


Speak not her name, childe!

Having not watched the Wright Stuff in years I'd forgotten her existence.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 9, 2013)

I always get Lowri confused with Sarah Teather. Possibly because they both have strident voices


----------



## Nice one (Dec 9, 2013)

Thing is she signed up for dcd publishing _*"monetized social media" *_a good 2 months before this thread was started so basically this thread is really a discussion on the success or otherwise of dcd's marketing strategy.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 9, 2013)

All smiles with workfare supporting Rachel 'I'll be tougher than Iain Duncan Smith' Reeves at Parliament today


----------



## bamalama (Dec 9, 2013)

smokedout said:


> All smiles with workfare supporting Rachel 'I'll be tougher than Iain Duncan Smith' Reeves at Parliament today



watch it smoked,the fan club'll be back stamping their feet and calling ye childish...frankly


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

is she right or wrong?


----------



## treelover (Dec 9, 2013)

smokedout said:


> All smiles with workfare supporting Rachel 'I'll be tougher than Iain Duncan Smith' Reeves at Parliament today



She should monetize those tea cosy hats, unique!


----------



## smokedout (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> is she right or wrong?




what poverty is horrible, the internet is brilliant, tories are horrible, nelson mandela was brilliant, the daily mail is horrible, sign my petition because I'm brilliant

and she doesn't care if you're upper class, Blair would be proud

no, I'm not blown away


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

smokedout said:


> what poverty is horrible, the internet is brilliant, tories are horrible, nelson mandela was brilliant, the daily mail is horrible, sign my petition because I'm brilliant
> 
> and she doesn't care if you're upper class, Blair would be proud
> 
> no, I'm not blown away



So you'd have preferred it if she hadn't done anything at all then?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 9, 2013)

yes


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

BTW some of the posts trying to depict criticism of the politics of this as some kinda creepy obsession was bang out of order IMO. very similiar to the sorta stuff that Laurie Penny was saying about this board that was rightfully taken to task.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes


This makes no sense. You are acting as if she's secretly David Cameron and that she would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you pesky kids. 

Have you asked her why she has signed up with some crappy media branding outfit? Have you engaged with her at all, or is this just about your hatred of anything and anyone to do with Labour?

You seem to be implying that it's bad for more people to say the same thing: poverty bad, tories bad. Surely we want as many people as possible saying this? 

"sign my peition because I'm brilliant"

Seriously? A bit childish don't you think?


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Have you asked her why she has signed up with some crappy media branding outfit? Have you engaged with her at all, or is this just about your hatred of anything and anyone to do with Labour?



If someones ranting on about poverty in benefits and is part of the labour party which brought in vast amounts of the policy that causes this then it is right that they be called out on that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 9, 2013)

yeah but has she allied herself with the vanishingly small left section of the labour party or the me-too r/w section that holds sway?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> BTW some of the posts trying to depict criticism of the politics of this as some kinda creepy obsession was bang out of order IMO. very similiar to the sorta stuff that Laurie Penny was saying about this board that was rightfully taken to task.


So posting a massive picture of her and then slagging her off assuming that she must be in favour of workfare because the petition she started (regardless of what it achieves or doesn't achieve) is being handed over by Rachel Reeves and one of the Eagles (though not Don Henley, sadly) isn't a bit creepy? Continuing to slag her off without actually hearing her out isn't a bit creepy?

Come on, this is getting nasty IMO.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Come on, this is getting nasty IMO.



Agreed. it is pretty nasty to imply someone is  creep for making political arguments on this thread.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> yeah but has she allied herself with the vanishingly small left section of the labour party or the me-too r/w section that holds sway?


what do you mean by allied? So she's a labour activist. We have yet to establish just what that means here. There are other Labour activists who are decent enough. For example I think John McDonnell is a decent guy - or does he have some dark secret too?

This is all starting to sound like the Littlejohn piece, quite frankly. She's just someone making her point, rightly or wrongly. I see no evidence that she thinks of herself as 'brilliant' or that she's some kind of diva. At worst, IMO, she's naive and perhaps uninformed. But until her critics are able to find out the facts and present them then it does seem creepy.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> Agreed. it is pretty nasty to imply someone is  creep for making political arguments on this thread.


What does this mean? You're trying to paint me as the bad guy now? Because I'm not prepared to jump on this bandwagon? If you can show me some actual evidence that she's dodgy then do so, otherwise I'm prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt. Does that make me a workfare supporter? Does that mean I approve of sanctions because this is getting prety ridiculous. Sorry, but that's how I feel. If that's uninformed then too bad.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> what do you mean by allied? So she's a labour activist. We have yet to establish just what that means here. There are other Labour activists who are decent enough. For example I think John McDonnell is a decent guy - or does he have some dark secret too?
> 
> This is all starting to sound like the Littlejohn piece, quite frankly. She's just someone making her point, rightly or wrongly. I see no evidence that she thinks of herself as 'brilliant' or that she's some kind of diva. At worst, IMO, she's naive and perhaps uninformed. But until her critics are able to find out the facts and present them then it does seem creepy.



allied has a simple meaning.

I'm still undecided tbf. Recipes are absolute shit.

But if she wants to do an Owen and shill for an illusory labour left chance then much like my decision on him I have to say that its bollocks. Labour left is gone, nada, nothing. Few brave people remaining but otherwise just bust


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> What does this mean? You're trying to paint me as the bad guy now? Because I'm not prepared to jump on this bandwagon? If you can show me some actual evidence that she's dodgy then do so, otherwise I'm prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt. Does that make me a workfare supporter? Does that mean I approve of sanctions because this is getting prety ridiculous. Sorry, but that's how I feel. If that's uninformed then too bad.



Nothing to do with jumping on or off this bandwagon or any of those other things you've said. Just calling someone a creep is whats out of order.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> Nothing to do with jumping on or off this bandwagon or any of those other things you've said. Just calling someone a creep is whats out of order.


I didn't call anyone a creep, I said the behaviour was creepy. Big difference. 

I think what's more out of order is refusing to engage with Monroe, when it clearly obviusly concerns people enough to constantly post her failings, and have a dialogue. To then imply she's somehow duplicitous isn't nice surely? You don't find that creepy? You don't find that out of order? I'm no defending her naivete, working with grubby sales/marketing people (i follow Bill Hicks' advice on that one), but she's just another fucked up human in this fucked up society. Surely give her a chance?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 9, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> allied has a simple meaning.
> 
> I'm still undecided tbf. Recipes are absolute shit.
> 
> But if she wants to do an Owen and shill for an illusory labour left chance then much like my decision on him I have to say that its bollocks. Labour left is gone, nada, nothing. Few brave people remaining but otherwise just bust


Is she shilling? 

That clip, afaik, was from a people's assembly meeting in south london. I liked what she was saying, seemed pretty powerful talking about her experiences. Of course it could be those experiences are fictitious, and yes quoting Mandela is pure cheese, but so what? I don't think she's looking for a career in after dinner speaking.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> I didn't call anyone a creep, I said the behaviour was creepy. Big difference.



Fair enough, my bad. but i think you should be a bit more careful with how you label a behaviour trait, as in the case above that inference is very easy to make.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I always get Lowri confused with Sarah Teather. Possibly because they both have strident voices



They're both also petite and slightly plump, and have short hair, so...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> This makes no sense. You are acting as if she's secretly David Cameron and that she would have gotten away with it if it weren't for you pesky kids.
> 
> Have you asked her why she has signed up with some crappy media branding outfit? Have you engaged with her at all, or is this just about your hatred of anything and anyone to do with Labour?
> 
> ...



Kind of depends on your perspective.
If you're a fan of/accepting of reformist ameliorationism, then I suppose that Ms Monroe's perspective has utility.

Me, I'm a bitter old bastard, and I don't want people to be gulled into voting Labour again, whether that's because nice Jack or nice Owen say "vote Labour with no illusions", or because dead Ed makes pledges that he won't keep.  I'd rather see political chaos than continue to see those cunts at Westminster continue to stick a pineapple up the collective arse of "the people", while telling us it'll only hurt for a little while...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 9, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> yeah but has she allied herself with the vanishingly small left section of the labour party or the me-too r/w section that holds sway?



Well, that's the question, isn't it?
If she's observed any of the majority of Labour MPs in their habitat, she'll be well aware that if one wishes to advance up through the party ranks, one needs to play one's cards close to your chest, and to be ready to do u-turns on your cherished convictions at the drop of a hat.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 9, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> To then imply she's somehow duplicitous isn't nice surely? You don't find that creepy? You don't find that out of order? I'm no defending her naivete, working with grubby sales/marketing people (i follow Bill Hicks' advice on that one), but she's just another fucked up human in this fucked up society. Surely give her a chance?



That's very forgiving to call her naive. TBH from the start there have been aspects of her story that haven't added up. I don't doubt the core truth, but she's exaggerating for effect. She's also massively self-righteous in a way that is damaging to the cause of fighting austerity, and an active New Labourite believer (not like Owen Jones, btw, who is a socialist who thinks he can work with Labour - Monroe is no socialist). Plus she's a fucking puritan who believes in the moral virtue of her thrift.

_She_'s set herself up here as the example to be followed. And she is now making money out of her story. That story deserves to be scrutinised.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

For me most of my poverty striken times during benefits was during new labour era. The DSS were pretty trigger happy with sanctions then, and labour were revelling in the rhetoric of 'hard working families' when carrying out their responsibilisation agenda. So thats cause for me to be bitter towards labour activists who give a bit of 'grass roots' credibility to party political attacks on tories welfare policy. Back then also, the idea that one could live on a tenner a week to feed oneself and ones kids would have been laughed outta town, and this was when benefits where pegged to inflation and food prices were far lower. So yeah, its hard not to think, wanker when one sees this shit unfold.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 9, 2013)

As for her 'this also happens to nice girls like me' schtick, well she can fuck right off, frankly. One of the reasons she's come through this laughing will be because she's a 'nice girl'. Well you know what some people don't come from nice families. Some people have terrible baggage. Some people smoke and drink and take drugs when they shouldn't to help them get through. Some people are chaotic and find that the pointless hoop-jumping of claiming benefits defeats them. Some people fuck up, and have been fucked up themselves. 

Her message is poisonous.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As for her 'this also happens to nice girls like me' schtick, well she can fuck right off, frankly. One of the reasons she's come through this laughing will be because she's a 'nice girl'. Well you know what some people don't come from nice families. Some people have terrible baggage. Some people smoke and drink and take drugs when they shouldn't to help them get through. Some people are chaotic and find that the pointless hoop-jumping of claiming benefits defeats them. Some people fuck up, and have been fucked up themselves.
> 
> Her message is poisonous.



This.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 9, 2013)

Christmas is always a hard time on benefits, especially without crisis loans these days...


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Kind of depends on your perspective.
> If you're a fan of/accepting of reformist ameliorationism, then I suppose that Ms Monroe's perspective has utility.
> 
> Me, I'm a bitter old bastard, and I don't want people to be gulled into voting Labour again, whether that's because nice Jack or nice Owen say "vote Labour with no illusions", or because dead Ed makes pledges that he won't keep.  I'd rather see political chaos than continue to see those cunts at Westminster continue to stick a pineapple up the collective arse of "the people", while telling us it'll only hurt for a little while...



I understand that. 

While Owen and Jack may support Labour, piecemeal of completely (the problem is we don't know), that doesn't invalidate what good they do so, and if they say things that are 'stating the obvious' I don't really see the harm. Isn't it good that there's one more person doing so? It seems perverse to criticise her for pushing that message just because it's not original. 

If they are in favour of sanctions and workfare then we need evidence of this. Find that, show me where they or she supports these things, and I will certainly criticise her. For now i'm happy to give her the benefit of the doubt because the good seems to outweight the bad here.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's very forgiving to call her naive. TBH from the start there have been aspects of her story that haven't added up. I don't doubt the core truth, but she's exaggerating for effect. She's also massively self-righteous in a way that is damaging to the cause of fighting austerity, and an active New Labourite believer (not like Owen Jones, btw, who is a socialist who thinks he can work with Labour - Monroe is no socialist). Plus she's a fucking puritan who believes in the moral virtue of her thrift.
> 
> _She_'s set herself up here as the example to be followed. And she is now making money out of her story. That story deserves to be scrutinised.



It costs me nothing to call her nothing more than naive. I'm not sure what else you'd have me call her without evidence to back it up. Am I to become a product of the world the tories want for us where we suspect our neighbours of being scroungers, because that's the sort of thinking that's at work her.

I think your analysis of her character is off. You're sure she's exaggerating for effect? How? I don't get the impression she's smart enough to pull off such fakery. In fact I would go so far as to say she seems more introverted than anything; that she shows evidence of having a serious knock to her self esteem, even now she's speaking publicly etc. If that's an act then it's a very very good act. I'll give you that.

She's a Labour party activist, but again that doesn't have to mean she's pro workfare etc. So until you can show me evidence that she is in favour of all that nasty shit I just can't assume the worst about her. Doing so, especially without even bothering to ask her opinion (bulshit or otherwsie), seems a pretty shitty deal to me.

I have just sent her a tweet asking her what she thinks of rachel reeve's 'tougher thant he tories' stance. She may reply, or she may tell me to fuck off.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Read the thread. You are asking people to repeat things they've already said because you've not read the thread.


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

I'm not going to read the whole thread but in my very middle class, very white, safe Tory area of Cheshire the effect that Jack has had is that there's been a slight softening in the way that people see benefit claimants.

There's still a long way to go, but that's surely a good thing?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Mojofilter said:


> I'm not going to read the whole thread but in my very middle class, very white, safe Tory area of Cheshire the effect that Jack has had is that there's been a slight softening in the way that people see benefit claimants.


How do you know this?


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How do you know this?



From talking to people. 
Fair enough Its just sticking a finger in the air to measure the direction of the wind, but it's a reasonable ish indicator seeing as I'm not going to start conducting opinion polls. 

Most people round here don't personally know any claimants, so seeing one in the media that doesn't conform to their preconceptions perhaps challenges those preconceptions.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 10, 2013)

is this down to jack though?

the only time i ever hear anyone mention her is on here (and my mum was going on about a video she saw on facebook where you can heat your room with candles for 8p a day, is that to do with her?)


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

It's the same with most of these "personalities". Unless you hang around in an online left bubble (here, Twitter, Facebook etc.) or a dedicated Guardianista who thinks CIF comments are a barometer of the public mood, chances are that the likes of Jack, Laurie, Owen et al. are simply unknown. 

No one IRL has ever mentioned any of these folk in conversation to me. Not once. Ever.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 10, 2013)

Mojofilter said:


> Most people round here don't personally know any claimants


 
How do you know this? 

Loads of people claim HB, Child Benefit, or are unemployed. Or pensioners for that matter


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> is this down to jack though?
> 
> the only time i ever hear anyone mention her is on here (and my mum was going on about a video she saw on facebook where you can heat your room with candles for 8p a day, is that to do with her?)



Obviously it's impossible to say for sure but most people seem to have heard of her and are sympathetic to her plight.
People don't tend to have their opinions changed by a single thing, but by a combination of things.
I'm pretty confident that Jack would be one of those things.


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> How do you know this?
> 
> Loads of people claim HB, Child Benefit, or are unemployed. Or pensioners for that matter



Ok, my bad. I mean people that claim benefits because they can't or won't get a job.

I genuinely don't know anyone IRL that doesn't go to work / isn't in education that either isn't retired or just doesn't need to because their partner earns 6 figures.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 10, 2013)

Mojofilter said:


> Ok, my bad. I mean people that claim benefits because they can't or won't get a job.
> 
> I genuinely don't know anyone IRL that doesn't go to work / isn't in education that either isn't retired or just doesn't need to because their partner earns 6 figures.


 
Maybe they do though? have you asked all of them?

i actually find that hard to believe. Maybe you do but you don't realise it?
And you don't have to be out of work to get benefits you know?

if someone is looking after a disabled adult or child they can get disability benefits or carers' allowance?


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

Mojofilter said:


> Obviously it's impossible to say for sure but most people seem to have heard of her and are sympathetic to her plight.
> People don't tend to have their opinions changed by a single thing, but by a combination of things.
> I'm pretty confident that Jack would be one of those things.



No one I know has ever, ever mentioned her.

And, with all due respect, given your post about the sort of people you know, it looks like I meet people from a significantly broader range of society. From "friends of the Middletons" to struggling single mums and all in between.

Not one has ever mentioned jack in conversation.

...and spending much of my time hanging out with Mums discussing budgeting, childcare, cost of living you'd think she'd've come up in conversation if she was having any major impact.

She hasn't, and isn't. IME.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2013)

I've only heard of her in conversation because I brought her up and someone mentioned that they only knew about her because they'd seen her in a Waitrose magazine lol, maybe that's how the people of Wiltshire know of her too


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

I know you don't have to be out of work to get benefits.

No, I don't ask people about their personal finances, but I know what they do for a living and a bit about their personal circumstances.
I think it's fairly safe to assume that someone living in a 5 bedroom house with 2 reasonably new Mercedes parked on the drive and a husband that works isn't on Jobseekers (or at least shouldn't be).

I've already clarified to say that I'm only talking about people views on people claiming things like JSA.

This is all getting a bit off topic, but ultimately I've seen a softening of attitudes as the same time as people starting to know who Jack is.
That's all I came here to say, not to get pulled apart on a topic that I (admittedly) don't know a great deal about.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 10, 2013)

my family has some wealthy people in it, it also has some people in it who are/have been on benefits and are struggling

it's not unreasonable to think that even someone relatively well off might know people who are on benefits or might even have been on them in the past (or vice versa for that matter)


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

Double post


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> my family has some wealthy people in it, it also has some people in it who are/have been on benefits and are struggling
> 
> it's not unreasonable to think that even someone relatively well off might know people who are on benefits or might even have been on them in the past (or vice versa for that matter)



Exactly, a large number of graduate sprogs from comfortable middle-class families are on JSA simply because there is so little work. IME this has led to a few idiots who think that JSA is "generous" and they don't understand how people complain about it, forgetting that not everyone on JSA is a single person with no dependents, middle-class social connections and additional financial help from their families.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> It's the same with most of these "personalities". Unless you hang around in an online left bubble (here, Twitter, Facebook etc.) or a dedicated Guardianista who thinks CIF comments are a barometer of the public mood, chances are that the likes of Jack, Laurie, Owen et al. are simply unknown.
> 
> No one IRL has ever mentioned any of these folk in conversation to me. Not once. Ever.



Jack's getting far more exposure than LP/Owen ever have and in very different places - The Mirror, The People, ITV.  According to her twitter she's considering TV offers.  Labour obviously want her but I suspect she'll take the money now - shes the next Jamie Oliver basically

That doesn't mean people are talking about her, or that she'll ever be politically important, but would be wrong to see her as part of the radical/left media bubble because she's not trying to be (although she'll use it when it suits her for now) and she's not particularly left/radical

(and if that sounds cynical then remember she has now employed a marketing company to play exactly these kinds of games)


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2013)

Has anyone actually asked her what her opinion is on workfare?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

I've just tweeted to ask her what she thinks about labour being 'tougher than the tories'. She asked me for something to back that up. I sent her the guardian article. I don't mind being asked, as another anonymous twitterer, though on the face of it not knowing that Rachel Reeves said this seems a bit incredible.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 10, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Has anyone actually asked her what her opinion is on workfare?


Smokey refuses to engage because he doesn't want a row. Which reflects poorly on him, or it means he doesn't think Jack is capable of reacting reasonably to criticism.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Smokey refuses to engage because he doesn't want a row. Which reflects poorly on him, or it means he doesn't think Jack is capable of reacting reasonably to criticism.



I have nearly 5000 twitter followers, most of them claimants or involved in campaigns against welfare reforms, I dont think it would be a good idea to do this in public for lots of different reasons


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

Surely all you'd have to do is ask her what she thinks of workfare? Why would that be harmful to your profile?

E2A: she's just tweeted saying  "absolutely support the abolition of workfare".


----------



## TruXta (Dec 10, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I have nearly 5000 twitter followers, most of them claimants or involved in campaigns against welfare reforms, I dont think it would be a good idea to do this in public for lots of different reasons



Why? Are you unable to have a reasonable conversation with her about this? Or do you think she is with you?


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Jack's getting far more exposure than LP/Owen ever have and in very different places - The Mirror, The People, ITV.  According to her twitter she's considering TV offers.  Labour obviously want her but I suspect she'll take the money now - shes the next Jamie Oliver basically
> 
> That doesn't mean people are talking about her, or that she'll ever be politically important, but would be wrong to see her as part of the radical/left media bubble because she's not trying to be (although she'll use it when it suits her for now) and she's not particularly left/radical
> 
> (and if that sounds cynical then remember she has now employed a marketing company to play exactly these kinds of games)



No, not radical left, but liberal left. LP and OJ aren't part of any radical left bubble either, just the same social media(ted) careering brands. All grasping for the exposure and a more lucrative/secure gig in the collapsing world of media and journalism. And tbf who can blame them. It's tough out there in their chosen fields. 

Doesn't mean she has any import in wider world though.

Sure, she may be the next Jamie Oliver, she could just as easily be the next Thomasina Miers, briefly flavour of the moment and in the remainder bins a year later.

When the mums down the toddler group start dropping her name into conversation, then we'll see...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Why? Are you unable to have a reasonable conversation with her about this? Or do you think she is with you?




house divided etc


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Surely all you'd have to do is ask her what she thinks of workfare? Why would that be harmful to your profile?
> 
> E2A: she's just tweeted saying  "absolutely support the abolition of workfare".



but dodged the question of whether she will ask labour to end it

(labour support the abolition of workfare btw, because labour workfare isnt workfare)


----------



## TruXta (Dec 10, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> house divided etc


What house? Seems to me smokey and Jack are in two different countries. Bah.

Fuck this.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2013)

she needs to be asked if she will condemn labours jobs guarantee and whether she opposes benefit sanctions in all circumstances - as well as unpaid work experience schemes


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> she could just as easily be the next Thomasina Miers, briefly flavour of the moment and in the remainder bins a year later.


Yeah, with her chain of six restaurants, her book deals and her recently salsa range


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2013)

Mojofilter said:


> I'm not going to read the whole thread but in my very middle class, very white, safe Tory area of Cheshire the effect that Jack has had is that there's been a slight softening in the way that people see benefit claimants.
> 
> There's still a long way to go, but that's surely a good thing?



Cheadle?


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Yeah, with her chain of six restaurants, her book deals and her recently salsa range



...and zero societal influence.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> It's the same with most of these "personalities". Unless you hang around in an online left bubble (here, Twitter, Facebook etc.) or a dedicated Guardianista who thinks CIF comments are a barometer of the public mood, chances are that the likes of Jack, Laurie, Owen et al. are simply unknown.
> 
> No one IRL has ever mentioned any of these folk in conversation to me. Not once. Ever.



I think Owen Jones is reasonably well known outside the bubbles.


----------



## Mojofilter (Dec 10, 2013)

treelover said:


> Cheadle?



Close, Holmes Chapel.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2013)

Mojofilter said:


> Close, Holmes Chapel.


elementary


----------



## seventh bullet (Dec 10, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Yeah, with her chain of six restaurants, her book deals and her recently salsa range



Who?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As for her 'this also happens to nice girls like me' schtick, well she can fuck right off, frankly. One of the reasons she's come through this laughing will be because she's a 'nice girl'. Well you know what some people don't come from nice families. Some people have terrible baggage. Some people smoke and drink and take drugs when they shouldn't to help them get through. Some people are chaotic and find that the pointless hoop-jumping of claiming benefits defeats them. Some people fuck up, and have been fucked up themselves.
> 
> Her message is poisonous.



Is she portraying herself as a 'nice girl'? In the People's Assembly video she said that poverty had driven her to self-harm. At any rate, I don't see her message in the same way that you do. The usefulness of her own example is that it demonstrates that even if you are as frugal, prudent and responsible as you can possibly be on benefits it is not possible to live a dignified life on them. That is a powerful challenge to the government's insistence that their welfare reforms are only going to target the 'scroungers' and 'shirkers'. Raising this does not, in and of itself, mean that you have to subscribe to the deserving/undeserving poor binary or demonize those who for various socio-psychological reasons are not capable of conforming to stringent requirements of economic rationality.


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

treelover said:


> I think Owen Jones is reasonably well known outside the bubbles.



Not really.  Only to the handful of people with an interest in such matters. His face'll be familiar a to some newsnight viewers P'raps. 

Again, no one I know in real life ever mentions him...and I have his book on a shelf too.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Surely all you'd have to do is ask her what she thinks of workfare? Why would that be harmful to your profile?
> 
> E2A: she's just tweeted saying  "absolutely support the abolition of workfare".




well that is categorical, so back to the veracity of the light-bulbs story, etc,


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

This all reminds me of the discussion on here a while back about how much clout Clarkson has. 

The answer being not that much really despite being a genuine household name.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2013)

Its an urban in joke actually, but welcome to P/P


----------



## seventh bullet (Dec 10, 2013)

treelover said:


> I think Owen Jones is reasonably well known outside the bubbles.



Nobody I know.  Both PFWC and middle class.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> This all reminds me of the discussion on here a while back about how much clout Clarkson has.
> 
> The answer being not that much really despite being a genuine household name.




he has talked about running as an indy in wherever it is he lives, which would be like a mirror universe version of galloway if his political career took off


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> ...and zero societal influence.


Oh I agree. I don't think she's ever tried to have any has she? Your comment that she was in the remainder bin was, I thought, implying that she wasn't very successful in a wider context.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 10, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> he has talked about running as an indy in wherever it is he lives, which would be like a mirror universe version of galloway if his political career took off



I read one of his books. . . and was surprised to discover that he is an (apparently principled) opponent of the death penalty.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Is she portraying herself as a 'nice girl'?


In her reply to Richard Littlejohn, she was.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> I read one of his books. . . and was surprised to discover that he is an (apparently principled) opponent of the death penalty.




he deffo hams it up for lols- having said that there are plenty of trad r/w anti death penalty views.

That time he got pied and took it affably and cracked a joke cemented the idea that he's just troll for me. Can you imagine Frange or Cameron taking a pie to the face with good grace?


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 10, 2013)

despite some of his right wing views i don't think he's that bad. he's no jeremy kyle for instance


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> despite some of his right wing views i don't think he's that bad. he's no jeremy kyle for instance




because kyle never 'gets out of first gear mate  '


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Oh I agree. I don't think she's ever tried to have any has she? Your comment that she was in the remainder bin was, I thought, implying that she wasn't very successful in a wider context.



She was in the remainder bin! 

No, my point is that few "celebrity chefs" get to Jamie Oliver's status in society, it seems a fickle world to make a name in, and whilst the astute will get themselves set up for a decent career out of it, very few remain centre stage(with any wider influence that might give them) for long.

The issue at hand is not whether Jack can carve some sort of decent career out of all this. At least that shouldn't be the issue!

It's whether her position enables her to wield any influence, or be be used to wield influence, socially or politically.

My argument is that she's a long, long way from having that sort of prominence.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In her reply to Richard Littlejohn, she was.



So he defames her and she's not allowed to respond. Nice.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> She was in the remainder bin!
> 
> No, my point is that few "celebrity chefs" get to Jamie Oliver's status in society, it seems a fickle world to make a name in, and whilst the astute will get themselves set up for a decent career out of it, very few remain centre stage(with any wider influence that might give them) for long.
> 
> ...



Oh right. Yes I see what you mean. Yes, I think she's got a long way to go. Whether that's her ambition though is another thing altogether!


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Oh right. Yes I see what you mean. Yes, I think she's got a long way to go. Whether that's her ambition though is another thing altogether!



Agreed. 

I don't know, and don't care, whether she wants to be that influential because it almost certainly won't happen.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> So he defames her and she's not allowed to respond. Nice.


I didn't say that.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but dodged the question of whether she will ask labour to end it
> 
> (labour support the abolition of workfare btw, because labour workfare isnt workfare)


A question you could bother to ask her yourself, surely?

I'm not sure how you go from hearing that she's against workfare, which is surekly what you wanted, to what seems to be the complete opposite?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

chilango said:


> ...and zero societal influence.


I don't get why that matters.


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> I don't get why that matters.



Huh?


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Is she portraying herself as a 'nice girl'? In the People's Assembly video she said that poverty had driven her to self-harm. At any rate, I don't see her message in the same way that you do. The usefulness of her own example is that it demonstrates that even if you are as frugal, prudent and responsible as you can possibly be on benefits it is not possible to live a dignified life on them. That is a powerful challenge to the government's insistence that their welfare reforms are only going to target the 'scroungers' and 'shirkers'. Raising this does not, in and of itself, mean that you have to subscribe to the deserving/undeserving poor binary or demonize those who for various socio-psychological reasons are not capable of conforming to stringent requirements of economic rationality.



You must be kidding, the tenner a week book thing doesn't really seem to present a picture of the impossibility of living on benefits, something quite contrary. And then theres the going on about applying for hunners of jobs which seems to put some distance from the other jobseeker-citizens who don't turn job applications into a full time occupation. That distance is what seperates the deserving poor from the underserving poor. jeezo


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but dodged the question of whether she will ask labour to end it
> 
> (labour support the abolition of workfare btw, because labour workfare isnt workfare)


If she answers my question i will ask her. I'm not going to troll her on twitter however. Could you not ask her? It's a reasonable question.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> A question you could bother to ask her yourself, surely?
> 
> I'm not sure how you go from hearing that she's against workfare, which is surekly what you wanted, to what seems to be the complete opposite?



according the tories workfare doesnt exist, according to labour only the tories forced work schemes count as workfare, according to all three main parties internships are bad, but unpaid work experience is fabulous, the details are important and without them any statement is pretty meaningless


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> You must be kidding, the tenner a week book thing doesn't really seem to present a picture of the impossibility of living on benefits, something quite contrary. And then theres the going on about applying for hunners of jobs which seems to put some distance from the other jobseeker-citizens who don't turn job applications into a full time occupation. That distance is what seperates the deserving poor from the underserving poor. jeezo



I was thinking more about her comments about skipping meals, going to bed cold and hungry and selling most of her possessions - but you can be as cynically selective as you want. I know unemployed people for whom job hunting is practically a full time occupation, like my mate who's got a kid on the way. Its a reality for some people. You've simply imputed that by asserting that you're some how demonizing those that its not the case for.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

workfare was part and parcel of new deal which was one of the first things new labour brought in. not to mention parcelling out a lot of the former job club stuff to the likes of reed partnership, wise group, working links etc.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I was thinking more about her comments about skipping meals, going to bed cold and hungry and selling most of her possessions - but you can be a cynically selective as you want. I know unemployed people for whom job hunting is practically a full time occupation, like my mate who's got a kid on the way. Its a reality for some people. You've simply imputed that by asserting that you're some how demonizing those that its not the case for.



selective quoting like omitting the whole rationetre of the whole speil - about how to live on a tenner a week?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> selective quoting like omitting the whole rationetre of the whole speil - about how to live on a tenner a week?



It's called trying to survive - it doesn't mean glorifying, celebrating or excusing that state of affairs. She's explicitly repudiated the 'austerity chic' thing on a number of occasions.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's called trying to survive - it doesn't mean to glorifying, celebrating or excusing that state of affairs. She's explicitly repudiated the 'austerity chic' thing on a number of occasions.



yeah a book, guardian articles, and waitrose articles are great ways to repudiate the austerity chic.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> yeah a book, guardian articles, and waitrose articles are great ways to repudiate the austerity chic.



I suppose you, in some herculean act of morality, would turn down those offers and choose to live on the bread line instead?


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I suppose you, in some herculean act of morality, would turn down those offers and choose to live on the bread line instead?



its not the getting paid for those articles that matters, its the misrepresentation that it is possible to live on a tenner a week, which anybody who has spent any time on the dole would know is simply not possible. so in effect it is pimping the notion of austerity towards an audience that can suspend their disbelief to take that in (ie people who have never been on the dole for any length of time). if that isnt austerity chic, i dont know what is...

the fact that it is geared to _that _audience apparently from our experience is what makes it an insult to those of us who have been on the dole for a long time..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I suppose you, in some herculean act of morality, would turn down those offers and choose to live on the bread line instead?


The offers didn't come from nowhere. They came from her choosing to sign up to an agency that promised to bring her 360 degree brand development. 

Hopefully one day she'll wake up and feel rather embarrassed to still be being marketed on the back of a few months' hardship she endured a few years ago.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> its not the getting paid for those articles that matters, its the misrepresentation that it is possible to live on a tenner a week, which anybody who has spent any time on the dole would know is simply not possible. so in effect it is pimping the notion of austerity towards an audience that can suspend their disbelief to take that in (ie people who have never been on the dole for any length of time). if that isnt austerity chic, i dont know what is...
> 
> the fact that it is geared to _that _audience apparently from our experience is what makes it an insult to those of us who have been on the dole for a long time..



She said:



> I was a food bank user myself for six months, while unemployed, seeking work and surviving on just £10 a week for food for myself and my son...
> 
> He did not go hungry during that period – but I did, frequently, sobbing in bed at night in a freezing cold flat, suicidal, desperate, and alone – but adamantly clinging in for the sake of the then two year old boy fast asleep in his bed.



If you think that that's austerity chic I don't know what planet you're living on.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

the planet im coming from, pal, is someone who has spent more than half of my adult life on the dole as a carer and a father. a big part of which was in the new labour era (of which her dogs are named after) when food prices where a lot cheaper than they are now. Became a dab hand as it happens as a cook to survive, and yeah sometimes, if the wee one wasn't being a bit fussy with her food (as under 3 year olds are wont to do), we'd manage to get her adequate food - often involving tapping a 5er of the parents to get a nice long lecture about it. But in those instances, it would most definately not be something that would be presented in a kinda funky angle, towards an audience that have no experience of such matters, about a viable mechanism to live on the dole.

sure if one combs through all the verbage one can find quotes like what you just brought forward (creepy behaviour apparently), but its not going to drown out the unique selling point, that one can provide food on a tenner a week - which anybody who has been on the dole for a significant period knows to be utter bolloks.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Dec 10, 2013)

Favelado said:


> The American meaning of "moot"is "redundant" and the British meaning is "salient" isn't it? The American meaning seems to be catching on in UK bit by bit.


The British meaning of the word "moot" is _debatable_.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> If you think that that's austerity chic I don't know what planet you're living on.



In case anyone's forgotten how she's branding herself



> Adrian Sington, CEO, DCD Publishing, said: “Jack is a woman of our times – facing head-on the realities of recession-hit Britain and responding with a ‘make do and mend’ way of thinking that we all need to consider.


.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> If you think that that's austerity chic I don't know what planet you're living on.



I guess it boils down partly to who you think is more believable. Monroe, a rising media starlet pushing various products on the back of her story of woe (a story containing more than a few inconsistencies), or xslave here, a poster with no agenda or axe to grind. I know whose story rings true to me.


----------



## Favelado (Dec 10, 2013)

Hocus Eye. said:


> The British meaning of the word "moot" is _debatable_.



Ah yes. Well, I did mean salient as in "worthy of discussion" so forgive my vagueness but I was barking up the right tree.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> the planet im coming from, pal, is someone who has spent more than half of my adult life on the dole as a carer and a father. a big part of which was in the new labour era (of which her dogs are named after) when food prices where a lot cheaper than they are now. Became a dab hand as it happens as a cook to survive, and yeah sometimes, if the wee one wasn't being a bit fussy with her food (as under 3 year olds are wont to do), we'd manage to get her adequate food - often involving tapping a 5er of the parents to get a nice long lecture about it. But in those instances, it would most definately not be something that would be presented in a kinda funky angle, towards an audience that have no experience of such matters, about a viable mechanism to live on the dole.
> 
> sure if one combs through all the verbage one can find quotes like what you just brought forward (creepy behaviour apparently), but its not going to drown out the unique selling point, that one can provide food on a tenner a week - which anybody who has been on the dole for a significant period knows to be utter bolloks.



I didn't have to comb 'through all the verbiage' to get that quote, it was in one of the articles that saw her rise to prominence. Most of her opinion pieces contain similar sentiments. Clearly her writing is subject to different interpretations, the conversation does not end with her and she's part of a wider dialogue. But I see no point in either demonizing or deifying her - she's a flawed and contradictory human being like the rest of us. I do however think that a number of posters, including you, are guilty of giving the most mean-spirited and one-sided reading of her output.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

smokedout said:


> In case anyone's forgotten how she's branding herself
> 
> .



How _her agent_ is branding her, on a website that nobody other than other people in the media will ever read. It's not how she presents the situation in her articles.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I didn't have to comb 'through all the verbiage' to get that quote, it was in one of the articles that saw her rise to prominence. Most of her opinion pieces contain similar sentiments. Clearly her writing is subject to different interpretations, the conversation does not end with her and she's part of a wider dialogue. But I see no point in either demonizing or deifying her - she's a flawed and contradictory human being like the rest of us. I do however think that a number of posters, including you, are guilty of giving the most mean-spirited and one-sided reading of her output.



if by one sided reading of her output you mean by the subject position of someone on the dole for a long time and under the party that she supports then guilty as charged!


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> if by one sided reading of her output you mean by the subject position of someone on the dole for a long time and under the party that she supports then guilty as charged!



So what, I know people who've been stuck on the dole for long periods of time who entirely buy into the shirkers/strivers stuff and would probably think that Jack Monroe's output is too soft on the welfare state.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> So what, I know people who've been stuck on the dole for long periods of time who entirely buy into the shirkers/strivers stuff and would probably think that Jack Monroe's output is too soft on the welfare state.



that would be the shirkers and strivers rhetoric that would present the applying for hunners of jobs as signifier of the ideal job-seeker citizen in contrast  to those narsty others who maybe don't....

oh shit that _is _jacks output we  are talking about here!!


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> that would be the shirkers and strivers rhetoric that would present the applying for hunners of jobs as signifier of the ideal job-seeker citizen in contrast  to those narsty others who maybe don't....



Yet more insinuation.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Yet more insinuation.


I think you need to go back and read what she wrote in reply to Littlejohn.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think you need to go back and read what she wrote in reply to Littlejohn.



What is the offending statement?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> What is the offending statement?


Reread it and find out. It's in the thread.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> What is the offending statement?


It's pretending that people like littlejohn/daily mail types think only nasty people are ever on benefits. It does really need re-reading because it's a pathetic platform for someone to try and reconstruct their 'i am angry' credibility on. A malicious misreading.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Reread it and find out. It's in the thread.



I have read the reply in the Guardian. I failed to notice anything particularly nefarious.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I have read the reply in the Guardian. I failed to notice anything particularly nefarious.


She suggested that the class based stereotype that only nasty scrounging people go on benefits is wrong. Is that not enough?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 10, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> She suggested that the class based stereotype that only nasty scrounging people go on benefits is wrong. Is that not enough?



Apparently so!


----------



## TruXta (Dec 10, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> It's pretending that people like littlejohn/daily mail types think only nasty people are ever on benefits. It does really need re-reading because it's a pathetic platform for someone to try and reconstruct their 'i am angry' credibility on. A malicious misreading.


Sorry, who's doing the misreading? I'm a bit jetlagged.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

I think that'd be me :'(


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> the counter-definition of the person activly seeking work by futiley applying to 50 jobs a day is just as harmful as the stereotype of the feckless jermy kyle watcher imo.



still stand by that point.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> I think that'd be me :'(


No, little baby jesus.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 10, 2013)

Ah. Cheers.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2013)

This is the kind of thing I was talking about, as quoted up-thread:



> I had a £27 grand a year job. I've not been brought up on benefits and a tracksuit watching Jeremy Kyle. I'm a middle class, well educated young woman who fell a bit by the way side. You think it doesn't happen to normal people, and you think we are all scumbags, eating burgers and watching day time TV. It can happen to anyone.



She is comparing herself here to the stereotypical image of a 'chav'. By contrast, she is 'normal'.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is the kind of thing I was talking about, as quoted up-thread:
> 
> 
> 
> She is comparing herself here to the stereotypical image of a 'chav'. By contrast, she is 'normal'.


No, 'you think' and 'normal' are her suggesting what the anti-scroungers think. She's comparing their stereotypes to reality. It's simple. Total malicious reading and thin gruel.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

smokedout said:


> In case anyone's forgotten how she's branding herself
> 
> .


Is that how she's branding herself, or how she's being branded - knowingly or otherwise? 

Again, you could ask her about this.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> its not the getting paid for those articles that matters, its the misrepresentation that it is possible to live on a tenner a week, which anybody who has spent any time on the dole would know is simply not possible. so in effect it is pimping the notion of austerity towards an audience that can suspend their disbelief to take that in (ie people who have never been on the dole for any length of time). if that isnt austerity chic, i dont know what is...
> 
> the fact that it is geared to _that _audience apparently from our experience is what makes it an insult to those of us who have been on the dole for a long time..



Is it? Really? This report on the impact of welfare reform on social housing tenants says the average spend per person on food among their respondents is £2.10 per day. Average. Some of those people must be surviving on a tenner a week for the average to be £15 per week.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

I don't really understand this thread. I thought her whole point was that £10/week on food is pretty much impossible to survive on.


----------



## love detective (Dec 10, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Is it? Really? This report on the impact of welfare reform on social housing tenants says the average spend per person on food among their respondents is £2.10 per day. Average. Some of those people must be surviving on a tenner a week for the average to be £15 per week.


That's per person though, her claim was £10 a week for two people was it not?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 10, 2013)

woman with fuck all tries to make a bit of money, while drawing attention to real problems in society. Left shakes its fists in rage at her.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 10, 2013)

love detective said:


> That's per person though, her claim was £10 a week for two people was it not?



One of whom was a two year old and the adult often basically not eating. She's never made out that it's fun or desirable or healthy, just that the reality is that it happens. Jeff Robinson quoted it above but here it is again



> I was a food bank user myself for six months, while unemployed, seeking work and surviving on just £10 a week for food for myself and my son...
> 
> He did not go hungry during that period – but I did, frequently, sobbing in bed at night in a freezing cold flat, suicidal, desperate, and alone – but adamantly clinging in for the sake of the then two year old boy fast asleep in his bed.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Is it? Really? This report on the impact of welfare reform on social housing tenants says the average spend per person on food among their respondents is £2.10 per day. Average. Some of those people must be surviving on a tenner a week for the average to be £15 per week.



So we just bring down the average figure here by 33% to show how its possible to feed two people (albeit one less frequently than the other) to support your argument? Great whizzbangin with the figures there... Nevertheless, even if it is possible, it still doesn't negate the problem of presenting £10 a week for two people as a lifestyle possibility through a cook book really.... recipies in waitrose magazine ffs! Anyways, don't matter cause that was a gross misrepresentation of the figures to infer what is probably a very limited subset so its a moot point really.

Ian Duncan smith should take some lessons on how to massage the figures of this report to show how we can all meet this subset you've identified. Jack can provide the recipies!


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> woman with fuck all tries to make a bit of money, while drawing attention to real problems in society. Left shakes its fists in rage at her.



Not speaking as a leftie here. just someone with a bit of experience on the dole myself.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

I don't really get what her detractors want to achieve; they won't even engage with her. If you believe she's a bad influence then surely it would be in everyone's interest to try and persuade her otherwise?


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

I thought she was saying it's fucking impossible to live on a tenner a week for food. Which is why she didn't eat. But while she was that broke, she worked out some ways of potentially eating really cheaply and healthily which she's going to share with other people.
That's pretty much it, isn't it? She's not trying to make out she's the next Nelson Mandela afaics.

ETA: xslavearcx - my experience of living on income support probably isn't the same as yours. And yours probably isn't the same as someone else's.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

trashpony said:


> But while she was that broke, she worked out some ways of potentially eating really cheaply and healthily which she's going to share with other people.
> 
> ETA: xslavearcx - my experience of living on income support probably isn't the same as yours. And yours probably isn't the same as someone else's.



which brings us back to austerity chic once again..

And yeah, all experiences are different. Universalising an experience like that would be well dodge, like ehm publishin books and that. Thought what i've learned from the last couple of posts is that there is a possible way to reduce ones expenditure to provide for a tenner a week - that subset that was identified above. think a good name for that would perhaps be deserving poor?


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 10, 2013)

anyway im off to listen to heavy metal now.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 10, 2013)

oh my god


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

She's very sniffy about the Iceland food culture. But she's right that it doesn't have to be like that. We have an obesity crisis and the most obese are the poor. Should we ignore that? Standing by and saying 'oh well it's their choice' is just letting capitalism kill people off. It's not middle class hand-wringing to point out that it's shit that for most people its cheaper to fill their family with artery-clogging shite than proper food. If you accept that's okay, you're signing up to the companies that pump this crap out to the 'lower' classes. Why is that okay? Why is it okay for the poor to eat utter fucking pigswill?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> So we just bring down the average figure here by 33% to show how its possible to feed two people (albeit one less frequently than the other) to support your argument? Great whizzbangin with the figures there... Nevertheless, even if it is possible, it still doesn't negate the problem of presenting £10 a week for two people as a lifestyle possibility through a cook book really.... recipies in waitrose magazine ffs! Anyways, don't matter cause that was a gross misrepresentation of the figures to infer what is probably a very limited subset so its a moot point really.
> 
> Ian Duncan smith should take some lessons on how to massage the figures of this report to show how we can all meet this subset you've identified. Jack can provide the recipies!


Dude. Average. Means some higher some lower. Yeah?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 10, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> which brings us back to austerity chic once again..
> 
> And yeah, all experiences are different. Universalising an experience like that would be well dodge, like ehm publishin books and that. Thought what i've learned from the last couple of posts is that there is a possible way to reduce ones expenditure to provide for a tenner a week - that subset that was identified above. think a good name for that would perhaps be deserving poor?


So because some marketing cunts are happy to pimp austerity as the next big moneyspinner that means people can't speak publicly or post on blogs? Isn't this all rather self defeating? 

I don't know why she's happy to be represented by such cunts, but this is getting silly. She's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't it seems to me.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 10, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> So because some marketing cunts are happy to pimp austerity as the next big moneyspinner that means people can't speak publicly or post on blogs? Isn't this all rather self defeating?
> 
> I don't know why she's happy to be represented by such cunts, but this is getting silly. She's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't it seems to me.


afaics, her crime is that she dared to have an opinion about something she felt strongly about (food) without having thought about an entire political manifesto. urban up its own arse at it's finest imo


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

trashpony said:


> afaics, her crime is that she dared to have an opinion about something she felt strongly about (food) without having thought about an entire political manifesto. urban up its own arse at it's finest imo



perhaps she shouldn't have been the local labour party press secretary if she hadn't thought about the manifesto she was promoting


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

poor little wannabe politicians, being criticised for their politics on a politics forum, its so unfair


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> poor little wannabe politicians, being criticised for their politics on a politics forum, its so unfair


But she has said, emphatically, that she has no such aspiration. Now, that may be bollocks or it may well change in the future (which seems entirely reasonable). But if you're just going to twist everything she says then what's the point of this thread? 

And if she became a labour politician wouldn't that give her, even if slightly, more influence to put her views forward to a party that's very likely to be the next government? Or are you forever going to damn her regarldess? Is everyone in the labour party a complete scumbag in your opinione?

You're not even willing to engage.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> perhaps she shouldn't have been the local labour party press secretary if she hadn't thought about the manifesto she was promoting


Perhaps she shouldn't. People make mistakes, bad decisions and are sometimes ignorant. That's life.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 11, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> But she has said, emphatically, that she has no such aspiration. Now, that may be bollocks or it may well change in the future (which seems entirely reasonable). But if you're just going to twist everything she says then what's the point of this thread?
> 
> And if she became a labour politician wouldn't that give her, even if slightly, more influence to put her views forward to a party that's very likely to be the next government? Or are you forever going to damn her regarldess? Is everyone in the labour party a complete scumbag in your opinione?
> 
> You're not even willing to engage.


And you're not willing to read the whole thread...
50 odd posts since nov 26,most directed at smokedout and others,not in discussion, but for havin the blind cheek to question saint jacks agenda/motivation/trajectory.On a board discussin politics,on a thread about a media commentator.
Wee bit creepy i'd say,maybe a bit obsessive as well.(see what happened there?)
Saint jack is what she is,just like multi millionaire jamie oliver is what he is,or laurie penny is what she is,come to peace with it.
She can say what she likes,she can have whatever career she can carve out for herself,and people on here can discuss it and deconstruct her writing/ politricks if they want.
It doesn't make them malicious,creepy,obsessed or whatever other buzzword the saint jack footstamping club want to slight people with.


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

weepiper said:


> One of whom was a two year old and the adult often basically not eating.



As is the case for many people in the report you linked to, which still comes out with an average spend per person (meagre as that is) of 3 times what Jack promotes herself as getting 'by' on

And yes the figure in the report is an average which means some will be more and some will be less - but I doubt there will be massive variations around that average as the people surveyed were fairly homogeneous in terms of their income and (un)employment profile so there is not going to be that much scope for large variations around the average (or at least less scope than there would be for a survey population that was more diverse in terms of income and employment)


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Perhaps she shouldn't. People make mistakes, bad decisions and are sometimes ignorant. That's life.



you think she regrets it, you think that's why she was hanging out with Rachel Reeves yesterday, why shes been licking Prescott's arse on twitter all week, why even during her period of most extreme poverty she was working full time for the labour party for no money - who apparently didnt give a shit that her child was starving

is that you think of her, her very open and stated politics are worthless, she doesnt mean it, what can she know anyway, shes little more than a chav, there's some fucked up politics on this thread and they aint mine


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

and by the way, I dont think her response to dickhead in the daily mail is a good point of attack, its not how she defines herself compared to other claimants that winds me up, but how she presents herself as moral and good and this is how good little claimants behaved

Ive been in exactly her position, with a kid, with no money at christmas, unlike her I dont have rich grandparents, or friends who are local councillors, or anything like the social capital she had at the time

and I begged, borrowed and robbed to make sure my kid got a christmas present, and the flat was warm, and he had a nice time, because thats what decent people fucking do, they dont passively accept this shit, sell their kids toys, and all the stuff she claims to have done, they fucking fight to make sure that their kids are affected as little as possible, and if that ,means swallowing your pride and calling your dad to end it all thats what you do, because kids come first - she behaved like the worst fucking kind of crackhead and just lunched out and blindly accepted this shit (whilst blogging and working away for labour) and is now trying to pretend this is how you should behave - well fuck her I will fight die and steal for my kid and if she wont shes the one who needs to have a proper fucking think - spending her benefits on fuck knows what and even when she had two local newspaper columns and was running a small business she claims she couldnt afford to buy her kid a christmas present or put the heating on and had to use foodbanks - and throughout it all she was a full time  labour press secretary (according to her), doing charity sleep outs for the YMCA and winning local fucking do gooder of the year awards

why didnt she ask her rich grandparents for help - and dont give me the crap about being too embarrassed, this is a woman who when she had to resort to selling all her possession _and her kids toys_ decided to send a press release to the local paper telling them about it

(and as it happens I dont think shes a bad parent, I dont believe all of the above, I think shes a liar)


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

that might have been a bit much btw, the kitchen ceiling collapsed and theres water pissing into my flat and Im in quite a bad mood


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> As is the case for many people in the report you linked to, which still comes out with an average spend per person (meagre as that is) of 3 times what Jack promotes herself as getting 'by' on



You sure you're not getting total household spend mixed up with spend per person here? On p.11 of that report it says 



> In Round 1 people expressed concern about coping on reduced budgets and how this would impact on their food spending. Round two shows some significant changes. The average spend per household is now £32.94 per week.
> 
> As the participant households vary in size, average spend is also calculated on food spend per person per day. This has reduced by 36%, with the average spend now being £2.10 per person per day. This equates to £1.17 per person per day less being spent on food since July.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> that might have been a bit much btw, the kitchen ceiling collapsed and theres water pissing into my flat and Im in quite a bad mood



Personally, I blame the SWP.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> that might have been a bit much btw, the kitchen ceiling collapsed and theres water pissing into my flat and Im in quite a bad mood


 Jesus man, sorry to hear that!


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> You sure you're not getting total household spend mixed up with spend per person here? On p.11 of that report it says



no i wasn't - but either way the average in that report is three times higher than what Jack claims she got by on

it says:-

_the average spend now being £2.10 per person per day_

So around £15 per person per week

Jack's household was a family of two spending £10 a week on food so on average £5 pe person per week

therefore the average figure per person per week in the report is 3 times higher

on the household basis it says £32.94 per week per household compared to Jack's £10 per week per household

So three times higher whatever way you look at it


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> perhaps she shouldn't have been the local labour party press secretary if she hadn't thought about the manifesto she was promoting


what the frig do you think this entails 

Of course she shouldn't have been - but repeatedly pulling the curtain back to reveal _fuck all _isn't doing the act any favours.


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> that might have been a bit much btw, the kitchen ceiling collapsed and theres water pissing into my flat and Im in quite a bad mood



sorry to hear that mate - you want a hand with anything?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> anyway im off to listen to heavy metal now.


I wish i did likes.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> that might have been a bit much btw, the kitchen ceiling collapsed and theres water pissing into my flat and Im in quite a bad mood


Sorry to hear this, if you were local i could get some help sharpish - i have people i can ask in london if you want?


----------



## Smyz (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> You sure you're not getting total household spend mixed up with spend per person here? On p.11 of that report it says


£10 a week for two people is 70p a day. One third. Like he said.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> no i wasn't - but either way the average in that report is three times higher than what Jack claims she got by on
> 
> it says:-
> 
> ...



Err  I shouldn't be looking at sums this early *slaps self*

I looked at bit more closely at that report - it's a bit crap that they don't report the household composition (e2a size and ages) tbh as a 2 person household with a small child should probably spend a bit less on food I reckon? So I'm not sure how valid any generalisations based on these figures are. Also - these are "northern" households - what are the price differences from Southend where Jack lives to the areas they studied? That could go either way - could make Jack's figures more sus or less.


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

if you'd look even closer at the report you'd find a breakdown of household compositions on page 25

I'm not making any claim to how valid generalisations made from the report are, i was merely responding to weepiper who referenced the report in one of her posts above


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> if you'd look even closer at the report you'd find a breakdown of household compositions on page 25


 Thanks.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

Hmmm - shame they don't report the actual size of the households, altho I guess one could extrapolate from ONS figures and call it 1.7 children per household.


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

size of the households (in terms of proportions of the overall survey) are stated on page 25


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> size of the households (in terms of proportions of the overall survey) are stated on page 25
> 
> View attachment 44786



Doesn't tell us how big the household is tho - or am I 20 IQ points below normal here? No mention of how many children.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Doesn't tell us how big the household is tho - or am I 20 IQ points below normal here? No mention of how many children.


page 25


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Doesn't tell us how big the household is tho - or am I 20 IQ points below normal here? No mention of how many children.



true - but you can tell that the majority of the households in the survey don't have any children (which makes Jack's numbers even further away from the average)


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> true - but you can tell that the majority of the households in the survey don't have any children


Yeah I saw that. And in fact that makes Jack's figures even more extreme (or suspicious).


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> sorry to hear that mate - you want a hand with anything?



Nah, cheers though and Butchers, my landlord's dealing with it or isn't as the case may be, am past caring, have turned the power off and gone out


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> no i wasn't - but either way the average in that report is three times higher than what Jack claims she got by on
> 
> it says:-
> 
> ...



damn, wish i could do sums


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Doesn't tell us how big the household is tho - or am I 20 IQ points below normal here? No mention of how many children.



you managed to explain averages to me so its all good!


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> you managed to explain averages to me so its all good!


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> you think she regrets it, you think that's why she was hanging out with Rachel Reeves yesterday, why shes been licking Prescott's arse on twitter all week, why even during her period of most extreme poverty she was working full time for the labour party for no money - who apparently didnt give a shit that her child was starving
> 
> is that you think of her, her very open and stated politics are worthless, she doesnt mean it, what can she know anyway, shes little more than a chav, there's some fucked up politics on this thread and they aint mine



If you asked her you might have some answers.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Err  I shouldn't be looking at sums this early *slaps self*
> 
> I looked at bit more closely at that report - it's a bit crap that they don't report the household composition (e2a size and ages) tbh as a 2 person household with a small child should probably spend a bit less on food I reckon? So I'm not sure how valid any generalisations based on these figures are. Also - these are "northern" households - what are the price differences from Southend where Jack lives to the areas they studied? That could go either way - could make Jack's figures more sus or less.


But she wasn't feeding herself.


----------



## love detective (Dec 11, 2013)

why isn't she dead then?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2013)

Here we have one of the inconsistencies. In the story she is marketing herself under (and this thread only exists because of the effectiveness of that marketing), she tells of crying herself to sleep hungry and suicidal as she failed to feed herself and her child on £10 a week. This must have been before the epiphany that led her to see how she could not only live but thrive on such a budget, because in one of her (now numerous) Guardian interviews, she tells the interviewer that she is sticking to her £10 budget even though she has a little more money coming in, because she likes it.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> But she wasn't feeding herself.


Of course she was. Not enough perhaps, but she obviously ate as well.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

What a bizarre long winded way to fail to point out a "inconsistencies"? This boy will take you all down.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Dec 11, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here we have one of the inconsistencies. In the story she is marketing herself under (and this thread only exists because of the effectiveness of that marketing), she tells of crying herself to sleep hungry and suicidal as she failed to feed herself and her child on £10 a week. This must have been before the epiphany that led her to see how she could not only live but thrive on such a budget, because in one of her (now numerous) Guardian interviews, she tells the interviewer that she is sticking to her £10 budget even though she has a little more money coming in, because she likes it.




Yes, this and IME from engagement with people from online groups up and down the country this is what they are the most frustrated with. These very inconsistancies are the ones being exploited in the MSM to support the idea that the poor/unemployed can manage just fine and are just being greedy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 11, 2013)

you can eat on tenner a week, and your kid as well. You will be on starvation rations though. I recall reading a comment from a greek father about how 'I can go hungry but not my child'

really brought the whole austerity thing into perspective. They aren't just after robbing from young single males like me but they are after robbing kids as well- and I know it isn't proper to do equivalence, we should be all eat or none etc but somehow the idea of struggling to feed your kid and going hungry yourself already really angered me.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> you can eat on tenner a week, and your kid as well. You will be on starvation rations though. I recall reading a comment from a greek father about how 'I can go hungry but not my child'
> 
> really brought the whole austerity thing into perspective. They aren't just after robbing from young single males like me but they are after robbing kids as well- and I know it isn't proper to do equivalence, we should be all eat or none etc but somehow the idea of struggling to feed your kid and going hungry yourself already really angered me.


It's amazing how long you can live on potatoes and water. Not well, but you'll live.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here we have one of the inconsistencies. In the story she is marketing herself under (and this thread only exists because of the effectiveness of that marketing), she tells of crying herself to sleep hungry and suicidal as she failed to feed herself and her child on £10 a week. This must have been before the epiphany that led her to see how she could not only live but thrive on such a budget, because in one of her (now numerous) Guardian interviews, she tells the interviewer that she is sticking to her £10 budget even though she has a little more money coming in, because she likes it.


Where is the inconsistencies? It's the exact opposite. It's confirmation. Do you never bother reading stuff


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

Rutita1 said:


> Yes, this and IME from engagement with people from online groups up and down the country this is what they are the most frustrated with. These very inconsistancies are the ones being exploited in the MSM to support the idea that the poor/unemployed can manage just fine and are just being greedy.


What inconsistencies?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> why isn't she dead then?


I have no idea.

Honestly this thread has past the point of productivity. Without hearing what she has to say in answer to any of these questions - and she may refuse to answer - I've no idea where we go from here. She hasn't responded to my pointing her to the guardian's article on rachel reeves. I could infer from that she is avoding the issue or that she already knows and is secretly trying to undermine the poor, or that she thinks i'm a troll. Assuming that she's a fraud...so what? Where does that take us?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> It's amazing how long you can live on potatoes and water. Not well, but you'll live.


With lowered cognitive and physical capacity. Reduced energy and motivation.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> With lowered cognitive and physical capacity. Reduced energy and motivation.


Your point being?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> With lowered cognitive and physical capacity. Reduced energy and motivation.


What's your excuse then?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Your point being?


Clearly monroe says people should eat only spuds and water. On workfare and food banks and some other shit i've not properly researched.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Your point being?


Just providing a bit more precision to 'not well'. One of the big problems facing people who are so poor they cannot eat properly is that they can find themselves stuck in a vicious circle, their reduced capacities making it hard for them to help themselves.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 11, 2013)

love detective said:


> why isn't she dead then?



There's only one explanation.
Jack Monroe is a Breatharian.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

not far off

this is Jack's idea of a main meal for two

*onion* ½, chopped 
*red wine vinegar* 4 tbsp 
*mushrooms* 100g 
*chicken stock cube* 1 crumbled in 300ml boiling water
*fresh thyme or rosemary* 2 sprigs (or dried if unavailable)

what's that, about 50 calories for two people, the rest are not much more than that, you would become pretty seriously ill quite quickly on a diet like this


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not far off
> 
> this is Jack's idea of a main meal for two
> 
> ...


That's part of a weekly menu. Plenty of people fast or eat very little one or two days a week without wasting away. And if you look at the rest of that weekly menu you wouldn't starve, altho you might be less full than most people are accustomed to.

That said, on its own that dish is more than a bit skimpy.

e2a the criminal bit is where she asks us to TRIM OFF THE FAT off the bacon, in the Tuesday  recipe. I mean, COME ON.


----------



## LiamO (Dec 11, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> but somehow the idea of struggling to feed your kid and going hungry yourself already really angered me.



This would have been common enough in Britain (and certainly in Ireland) not that long ago.

I remember Alan Ball (captained Everton and England) saying how his dad always took the white of the one egg they had for breakfast so the (slightly built) Alan could have the yolk.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 11, 2013)

Now takin bets on the saint jack munroe new years diet plan..."eat like the poor to squeeze into those new jeans in just one week".


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

LiamO said:


> This would have been common enough in Britain (and certainly in Ireland) not that long ago.
> 
> I remember Alan Ball (captained Everton and England) saying how his dad always took the white of the one egg they had for breakfast so the (slightly built) Alan could have the yolk.


He would've been just as well off with the whites. Nice gesture of course, if misguided.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 11, 2013)

I do think she might have a bit of an eating disorder


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> That's part of a weekly menu. Plenty of people fast or eat very little one or two days a week without wasting away. And if you look at the rest of that weekly menu you wouldn't starve, altho you might be less full than most people are accustomed to.
> 
> That said, on its own that dish is more than a bit skimpy.
> 
> e2a the criminal bit is where she asks us to TRIM OFF THE FAT off the bacon, in the Tuesday  recipe. I mean, COME ON.



apart from the two bacon days, most of the rest look to be about 2-300 calories per meal - that's for two people, that's serious malnourishment - this shit should not be being promoted as being safe for children


----------



## weepiper (Dec 11, 2013)

trashpony said:


> I do think she might have a bit of an eating disorder



She's certainly a wee strip of a thing and her idea of what's enough calories won't match with a big bloke/teenager/anyone who has to spend a lot of time working outdoors etc etc.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> apart from the two bacon days, most of the rest look to be about 2-300 calories per meal - that's for two people, that's serious malnourishment - this shit should not be being promoted as being safe for children



Yeah, it's a fair criticism. That said, it's one of three meals a day - tho I've no idea what she's suggesting you eat for the other two.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 11, 2013)

her recipes are shite, her politics are shite and the only reason she has taken off is because she fits perfectly into the the liberal middle classes idea of "deserving poor" and provides a perfect face for Labour's mealy mouthed criticism of Tory policy.

Either she is an accidental stooge or a pretty smart operator and at this stage my money is on the latter.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 11, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She's certainly a wee strip of a thing and her idea of what's enough calories won't match with a big bloke/teenager/anyone who has to spend a lot of time working outdoors etc etc.


It's not being a wee strip of a thing in itself - it's more the fact that she seems to take pleasure in abstinence. Dunno - I could be wrong but there's something about the way she talks about food that reminds me of my sister before she plunged into fully fledged anorexia


----------



## bamalama (Dec 11, 2013)

revol68 said:


> her recipes are shite, her politics are shite and the only reason she has taken off is because she fits perfectly into the the liberal middle classes idea of "deserving poor" and provides a perfect face for Labour's mealy mouthed criticism of Tory policy.
> 
> Either she is an accidental stooge or a pretty smart operator and at this stage my money is on the latter.


But...but she's got tattoos


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Either she is an accidental stooge or a pretty smart operator



Yeah, I mean, what other choice is there?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Yeah, it's a fair criticism. That said, it's one of three meals a day - tho I've no idea what she's suggesting you eat for the other two.



not much, quick add up suggests shes got about a quid left, and thats not including the staples like the pasta, rice, oil, red wine vinegar (not sure thats a staple) and the herbs and spices


----------



## revol68 (Dec 11, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Yeah, I mean, what other choice is there?



I dunno, go ahead and suggest one, I'm all ears.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not much, quick add up suggests shes got about a quid left, and thats not including the staples like the pasta, rice, oil, red wine vinegar (not sure thats a staple) and the herbs and spices



I just noticed that the entire shop is detailed in the picture at the top of the article you linked to - the dots are the prices in case anyone else didn't clock it until now.  Looks like you'd be relying on some staples as you say.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 11, 2013)

revol68 said:


> I dunno, go ahead and suggest one, I'm all ears.



LOL


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not far off
> 
> this is Jack's idea of a main meal for two
> 
> ...


To be fair, that's a recipe for a vegetable-based soup which are in general quite low in calories.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

Anyway - how's your ceiling smokedout?


----------



## revol68 (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> LOL



honestly, look at her work, look at how she avoids taking the Labour Party to task over their "harder on the workshy" line, see her bigging up David Prescott and her all smiles photo op with Rachel Reeves.






You have to be very naive not to see what is going on.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 12, 2013)

And ffs she calls her cats after the Labour Party leadership, the woman is Labour scum through and through.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not much, quick add up suggests shes got about a quid left, and thats not including the staples like the pasta, rice, oil,* red wine vinegar (not sure thats a staple)* and the herbs and spices




top tip: replace your wine vinegar needs by just buying them god awful 2 for a fiver italian bottles of fresh 'wine' from the newsagent.


on that I did hear a scurrilous rumour surrounding the recent surge in ultra cheap italian wine surrounding some scam where they manage to get it past the bonders/hmrc by classing it as something else and shipping it in via less than scrupulous cash n carries. Could be a myth though. Its one of them ones where you want to believe it cos its funny but seriously, who really gets one over on HMRC except multinationals?


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Anyway - how's your ceiling smokedout?


Aye, d'ye get it sorted out?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

he patched it with cotton


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Anyway - how's your ceiling smokedout?



on the floor, but the waters stopped, went a bit hysterical and called out the fire brigade because no-one could get into the flat upstairs, everyone started taking it seriously then - cant fucking believe that so many people, including my landlord and theirs thought it was okay to leave a fucking river running down a residential building for two days, has caused loads of damage in my flat and the one downstairs

thank you for asking btw and bamalama


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> top tip: replace your wine vinegar needs by just buying them god awful 2 for a fiver italian bottles of fresh 'wine' from the newsagent.
> 
> 
> on that I did hear a scurrilous rumour surrounding the recent surge in ultra cheap italian wine surrounding some scam where they manage to get it past the bonders/hmrc by classing it as something else and shipping it in via less than scrupulous cash n carries. Could be a myth though. Its one of them ones where you want to believe it cos its funny but seriously, who really gets one over on HMRC except multinationals?



I always assumed that was what happened to the european wine lakes

dodgy pricing on that guardian piece, less than a quid for half a kilo of bacon


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> on the floor, but the waters stopped, went a bit hysterical and called out the fire brigade because no-one could get into the flat upstairs, everyone started taking it seriously then - cant fucking believe that so many people, including my landlord and theirs thought it was okay to leave a fucking river running down a residential building for two days, has caused loads of damage in my flat and the one downstairs
> 
> thank you for asking btw and bamalama



This is spectacularly shit, sorry to hear it.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

also four value yoghurts, a few apples and some value cornflakes and a pint of milk seems to be all thats left for other meals, you try keeping even a two year old close to satisfied with that, she didnt do this


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> on the floor, but the waters stopped, went a bit hysterical and called out the fire brigade because no-one could get into the flat upstairs, everyone started taking it seriously then - cant fucking believe that so many people, including my landlord and theirs thought it was okay to leave a fucking river running down a residential building for two days, has caused loads of damage in my flat and the one downstairs
> 
> thank you for asking btw and bamalama



Christ. Really sorry


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

nah its okay, only really hit the kitchen, think the flat downstairs came off worst in terms of important stuff trashed, could do without it though


----------



## revol68 (Dec 12, 2013)

there was a river in your building? wtf


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I always assumed that was what happened to the european wine lakes




well it has to go _somewhere_ right? I've worked at grunt level for a wine bottlers and security is quite tight. So if that is a scam going it reaches larger bods and involves lots of people.

sorry to hear of your watery woes also, I'm guessing as its a flat you weren't able to turn the water off at its source


----------



## Humberto (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> well it has to go _somewhere_ right? I've worked at grunt level for a wine bottlers and security is quite tight. So if that is a scam going it reaches larger bods and involves lots of people.



How did you get sacked?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

Humberto said:


> How did you get sacked?



long story but as agency I was 'no longer required' after a series of incidents involving me being proper bolshy.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> on the floor, but the waters stopped, went a bit hysterical and called out the fire brigade because no-one could get into the flat upstairs, everyone started taking it seriously then - cant fucking believe that so many people, including my landlord and theirs thought it was okay to leave a fucking river running down a residential building for two days, has caused loads of damage in my flat and the one downstairs
> 
> thank you for asking btw and bamalama


Even though your stressed out,try and write everything down with times etc and take plenty of photos in your flat,outside and upstairs if ye can.It'll stand ye in good sted if your landlord tries to shirk their responsibilities.If they're not maintaining their dwellings to a reasonable habitable standard,or putting the wellbeing of their tenants at risk they could be liable.This has all caused you udue stress and interfered with your life...
Wee bit of well placed sabotage and get a nice new decoratin job out of it 
Good luck


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

revol68 said:


> there was a river in your building? wtf



well, cracked stop cock upstairs, was weird cos it spread out under their laminate so it was like there was a reasonably heavy rain shower going on in my kitchen for two days, wish my kid had been here (dont really), but he'd of thought it was well funny that it was raining in the kitchen


----------



## _angel_ (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> well, cracked stop cock upstairs, was weird cos it spread out under their laminate so it was like there was a reasonably heavy rain shower going on in my kitchen for two days, wish my kid had been here (dont really), but he'd of thought it was well funny that it was raining in the kitchen


That sounds awful.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> also four value yoghurts, a few apples and some value cornflakes and a pint of milk seems to be all thats left for other meals, you try keeping even a two year old close to satisfied with that, she didnt do this



One of the things that has made me wonder is that even if one did take the tenner thing as possible, all it would take would be for one time for a 2 year old to be like, i'm not having that, and the whole weekly meal plan is fucked...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> That's part of a weekly menu. Plenty of people fast or eat very little one or two days a week without wasting away. And if you look at the rest of that weekly menu you wouldn't starve, altho you might be less full than most people are accustomed to.



Thing is, her recipes and recommendations, if pursued as a long-term "solution" to diet while poor, would cause malnutrition, because the low calorific value would eventually take its' toll.



> That said, on its own that dish is more than a bit skimpy.
> 
> e2a the criminal bit is where she asks us to TRIM OFF THE FAT off the bacon, in the Tuesday  recipe. I mean, COME ON.



Throwing away good calories, ffs!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Throwing away good calories, ffs!


Yep. Madness. If it's your only meat of the week, you should eat every single bit of the fat. 

I wouldn't last long on that diet. The food also sounds very bland. tbh she's publishing recipes but sounds like someone who doesn't really like eating much, which is why she's happy to live on such uninspiring food. 

I would also like to see the nutritional content of that diet. Tinned everything... hmmm. Long-term nutritional deficiencies ahoy. Also not good at all for small children to eat a diet solely of processed food.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

If she really wants to produce ideas for people on a budget, she shouldn't just tell us what she does. She should do some research. Work out a diet that is properly long-term nutritious and contains enough to keep a person doing energetic work going. Not someone like her, but a relatively large human with a fast metabolism. That might give some kind of bare minimum that everyone needs.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If she really wants to produce ideas for people on a budget, she shouldn't just tell us what she does. She should do some research. Work out a diet that is properly long-term nutritious and contains enough to keep a person doing energetic work going. Not someone like her, but a relatively large human with a fast metabolism. That might give some kind of bare minimum that everyone needs.


Didn't engage brain before posting. Me that is.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> There's plenty of research showing the caloric needs of average people, no need for her to do any original research.


I know. And a quick glance at her weekly plan suggests to me that it is under. But when you're talking about the minimum benefits needs to supply, average isn't the right measure. Two standard variations from the mean is more like it.

And not just calories, but micronutrients too.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

Thing is, I could forgive the emphasis put upon her recipe suggestions by the media - because let's make no bones about this: The media are the ones who are pushing her ideas. With her consent, it's true, but they're the motive force behind this - *if* her recommendations were nutritionally balanced and/or took account of the necessity for higher levels of some food groups and dietary trace elements and vitamins required by growing children, but there's very little such consideration, as far as I can see.
I really don't want to see the recurrence of the sort of shite we still saw in my childhood (Rickets was still a problem, for example), but I could see those problems (already an issue for some people in poverty) becoming a working class "staple" again if the powers-that-be are allowed to convince the "nice" people (people like Jack herself!) that Jack's recipes somehow form a template for a reasonable diet.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 12, 2013)

shes starting to annoy me too, which is a shame because i quite liked her stuff at the beginning.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I know. And a quick glance at her weekly plan suggests to me that it is under. But when you're talking about the minimum benefits needs to supply, average isn't the right measure. Two standard variations from the mean is more like it.
> 
> And not just calories, but micronutrients too.



Two SDs above or below? IIRC the daily caloric needs of an average bloke is about 2000 kcals a day, for women slightly less.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Two SDs above or below? IIRC the daily caloric needs of an average bloke is about 2000 kcals a day, for women slightly less.


above. That way you're covering 97 per cent of the population. Seems reasonable. And given that many of them will be presumed to be taking Norman Tebbit's advice to 'get on their bikes', giving enough to cover, say, 200 miles a week in the saddle.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> above. That way you're covering 97 per cent of the population. Seems reasonable. And given that many of them will be presumed to be taking Norman Tebbit's advice to 'get on their bikes', giving enough to cover, say, 200 miles a week in the saddle.



Well, the extra calories needed due to exercise is way overrated. Hard manual labor for 8-10 hours/day, now you're talking.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 12, 2013)

What do the people that have exposed Jack Monroe want out of all this? As far as I can tell it's just a few people on here. They may well be right. I don't have any way to prove them wrong, nor her right. But if they don't engage with her in the wider community, what's the point? She is due to speak in parliament, as a result of her petition. I doubt whether it will make a jot of difference, confronting the pigs at their trough, but surely it's something?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

Anyway - I posted a comment on one of her blog-posts asking if she'd thought about the caloric content of her recipes, let's see if she gets back to me. Didn't wanna do twitter as it's clearly linked to my ID, and I don't want you fuckers knowing that.  I'll keep the thread posted on any replies.


----------



## xenon (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Well, the extra calories needed due to exercise is way overrated. Hard manual labor for 8-10 hours/day, now you're talking.



Mental activity uses a fair bit too. Vegetable soup? That half an onion in some vlavoured water. FUck off. How's that gonna fuel your job search, training, activity etc, etc. Never mind stave off sercoming to hyperthermia and or illness if you're not using the heating.

Plus the "If that Jack woman can do it, why are there any overweight people on benefits."


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

xenon said:


> Mental activity uses a fair bit too. Vegetable soup? That half an onion in some vlavoured water. FUck off. How's that gonna fuel your job search, training, activity etc, etc. Never mind stave off sercoming to hyperthermia and or illness if you're not using the heating.
> 
> Plus the "If that Jack woman can do it, why are there any overweight people on benefits."



I don't think I'm disputing that these recipes are too low in calories. Besides, the daily average caloric needs calculation covers normal activities in a mostly sedentary life-style. So thinking hard is covered.

Fair point that last sentence of yours.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I don't think I'm disputing that these recipes are too low in calories. Besides, the daily average caloric needs calculation covers normal activities in a mostly sedentary life-style. So thinking hard is covered.


How about stress? Looking for work while skint and being turned away again and again is potentially very stressful. Stress also burns lots of calories.

In sum, any estimate of a reasonable minimum needs to be rounding upwards, not downwards.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How about stress? Looking for work while skint and being turned away again and again is potentially very stressful. Stress also burns lots of calories.
> 
> In sum, any estimate of a reasonable minimum needs to be rounding upwards, not downwards.



I think if you wanna get into specifics like that it's gonna be more harmful than helpful. Say you put the minimum needs at x kcals. Well, what about someone who gets those from McDs, sweets, crisps and soft drinks? Are we gonna rag their asses for that - eating shite that makes you obese and diabetic? Somehow I don't think that would be very popular either.

IMO as a society we should provide for people to be able to make reasonable choices about what they want to eat and how much - and of course part of that is giving them the means to do that (money and access to varied foods).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I think if you wanna get into specifics like that it's gonna be more harmful than helpful. Say you put the minimum needs at x kcals. Well, what about someone who gets those from McDs, sweets, crisps and soft drinks? Are we gonna rag their asses for that - eating shite that makes you obese and diabetic? Somehow I don't think that would be very popular either..


I've covered that by saying that the diet has to be balanced and healthy. Balanced and healthy and big enough.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've covered that by saying that the diet has to be balanced and healthy. Balanced and healthy and big enough.



And I'm saying that's not for anyone to say, unless you're suggesting we ban "bad food". By all means, educate people, protest the proliferation of junk food etc etc.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> And I'm saying that's not for anyone to say, unless you're suggesting we ban "bad food". By all means, educate people, protest the proliferation of junk food etc etc.


You're not understanding me. I'm not saying anyone should be told what to eat. Just that they should be given enough to be able to choose to eat healthily if they want, as a basic right.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're not understanding me. I'm not saying anyone should be told what to eat. Just that they should be given enough to be able to choose to eat healthily if they want, as a basic right.



OK, why are you on about balanced and healthy then?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> OK, why are you on about balanced and healthy then?


Because that's the diet you're working out rough costs for.  You've totally misunderstood what I've been saying here.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Because that's the diet you're working out rough costs for.  You've totally misunderstood what I've been saying here.



Perhaps because you went from saying Jack should work out a better diet plan to something much more nebulous?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Perhaps because you went from saying Jack should work out a better diet plan to something much more nebulous?


Ok, well if I've been unclear, let me try to be clear. I'm not advocating that anyone should be told what to eat. I am not even saying that benefits should be worked out in this 'legal minimum' way. As Orwell said, he was glad the poor were wasteful because they'd just be given even less if they weren't. I am merely saying that to work out some kind of mimimum spend per week on food, you need to use far better worked out parameters, which will give you a far higher figure than Monroe's reckoning.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ok, well if I've been unclear, let me try to be clear. I'm not advocating that anyone should be told what to eat. I am not even saying that benefits should be worked out in this 'legal minimum' way. As Orwell said, he was glad the poor were wasteful because they'd just be given even less if they weren't. I am merely saying that to work out some kind of mimimum spend per week on food, you need to use far better worked out parameters, which will give you a far higher figure than Monroe's reckoning.



I dunno that you need "far better worked out parameters" if the only issue is that people don't have enough money for food. I'm not entirely sure what a reasonable amount is, but let's say 50 quid per week per person for the sake of argument. Make sure people have that, then let them work out how to spend it themselves.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> e2a the criminal bit is where she asks us to TRIM OFF THE FAT off the bacon, in the Tuesday  recipe. I mean, COME ON.


 
I imagine without that bit it would never have made it into the Guardian.  This sort of thing is possibly why there are so few calories in many her meals.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> I imagine without that bit it would never have made it into the Guardian.  This sort of thing is possibly why there are so few calories in many her meals.


Nah, there's plenty of high-fat recipes from other foodie types there.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I dunno that you need "far better worked out parameters" if the only issue is that people don't have enough money for food. I'm not entirely sure what a reasonable amount is, but let's say 50 quid per week per person for the sake of argument. Make sure people have that, then let them work out how to spend it themselves.


 
50 quid per person per week for food?  Is it normal to spend that much?
Not that I'd have had a problem with that ration when I was on the dole...


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Nah, there's plenty of high-fat recipes from other foodie types there.


 
Not for the povs, though, dahling.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I dunno that you need "far better worked out parameters" if the only issue is that people don't have enough money for food. I'm not entirely sure what a reasonable amount is, but let's say 50 quid per week per person for the sake of argument. Make sure people have that, then let them work out how to spend it themselves.


Yep. I agree. In terms of working out how way off Monroe is and how much damage she might potentially be doing, though, you need to counter with a realistic minimum.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> 50 quid per person per week for food?  Is it normal to spend that much?
> Not that I'd have had a problem with that ration when I was on the dole...



I dunno! 50 quid might well be on the higher side.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. I agree. In terms of working out how way off Monroe is and how much damage she might potentially be doing, though, you need to counter with a realistic minimum.


A quick google has a Prof Saunders in the Beeb saying one can make do with 12 quid/week - IF you're handy in the kitchen. He also says "Theoretically it is possible to eat on £12 a week, but in practice it will be double that, because people don't have good cooking skills and the equipment they might need."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22065978


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I dunno! 50 quid might well be on the higher side.


 
I'm assuming you have decent cooking facilities, a fridge, and a freezer tbf.
And no teenagers.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> I'm assuming you have decent cooking facilities, a fridge, and a freezer tbf.
> And no teenagers.


Yes to all of that.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

I just tried to tot up more or less what we spend on food shops weekly - assuming we had all our meals at home. I'm gonna say that my household would spend approximately 60-70 quid per week on food - that's for two adults. No idea if that's average.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

I have a bit of a problem with the working out of 'minimums' for everything, esp. when done by the media on the Coalition's behalf.  I know some appreciation of budgeting and cost has to be done but I get a feeling that behind this there is the idea that people on benefits should be given *just* enough to stay alive and spend all their time looking for a job (or a better one in the case of the working poor).

Dignity, leisure and the ability to meaningfully participate in society aren't being mentioned much and there seems to be tacit consensus that being on benefits (and even just being skint) makes you a second-class citizen.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> I have a bit of a problem with the working out of 'minimums' for everything, esp. when done by the media on the Coalition's behalf.  I know some appreciation of budgeting and cost has to be done but I get a feeling that behind this there is the idea that people on benefits should be given *just* enough to stay alive and spend all their time looking for a job (or a better one in the case of the working poor).
> 
> Dignity, leisure and the ability to meaningfully participate in society aren't being mentioned much and there seems to be tacit consensus that being on benefits (and even just being skint) makes you a second-class citizen.


Totally. This govt has been particularly nasty in being open about despising the poor. Its attack on housing benefit, for instance, making out that people on benefits should not be allowed to live in 'nice' bits of town.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 12, 2013)

I'd say that with the exception of the two soups, the other main meals in the plan could be sufficiently high in calories for many people, provided that the other meals and snacks that day were also sufficient. They are generally pretty well nutritionally balanced, except that they don't have enough fat. Fat is a really important part of a balanced diet  - it provides high calories, fills you up and helps regulate body temperature. Vegetable oil is also pretty cheap, not sure why it doesn't feature more in her curries etc.


----------



## _angel_ (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Totally. This govt has been particularly nasty in being open about despising the poor. Its attack on housing benefit, for instance, making out that people on benefits should not be allowed to live in 'nice' bits of town.


It's also not enough to have a job, you have to have the right sort of job or jobs. Part timer on tax credits = should be looking for a "proper" job, not earning enough to pay income tax = not really a contributor to society, any public sector job at all (except politicians)= wrong as well as holding the country to ransom.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Totally. This govt has been particularly nasty in being open about despising the poor. Its attack on housing benefit, for instance, making out that people on benefits should not be allowed to live in 'nice' bits of town.


 
I think that's related, but is also driven in part by the desperate delusion that the property market can be a sustainable replacement for an actual economy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> They are generally pretty well nutritionally balanced


I cannot agree with this. Tinned fruit/vegetables ≠ same nutrition as fresh fruit/vegetables


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I cannot agree with this. Tinned fruit/vegetables ≠ same nutrition as fresh fruit/vegetables


 
Aside from some sodium and sugar issues and some very product-specific issues (eg. losing some nutrients from peel in some cases, and often some vitamin C loss), the nutritional deficits from canning are generally overstated.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> Aside from some sodium and sugar issues and some very product-specific issues (eg. losing some nutrients from peel in some cases, and often some vitamin C loss), the nutritional deficits from canning are generally overstated.


Indeed - in some cases, like frozen peas, they're mostly superior to "fresh" produce.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> Aside from some sodium and sugar issues and some very product-specific issues (eg. losing some nutrients from peel in some cases, and often some vitamin C loss), the nutritional deficits from canning are generally overstated.


You can also easily destroy nutrients in fresh food during storage and cooking. A mix is sensible, though, as only eating canned food is far from proven to be healthy. TBH a quick search shows a surprising lack of good research in this area, which again indicates that a mix is desirable.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You can also easily destroy nutrients in fresh food during storage and cooking. A mix is sensible, though, as only eating canned food is far from proven to be healthy. TBH a quick search shows a surprising lack of good research in this area, which again indicates that a mix is desirable.


 
I wasn't advocating only eating canned food, though I'm not sure what you specifically mean by 'only eating canned food is far from proven to be healthy'.  There was a scare a couple of years back about some epoxy compounds from the can coating having toxic effects, but that looks like another case of a 'lack of good research.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> I'd say that with the exception of the two soups, the other main meals in the plan could be sufficiently high in calories for many people, provided that the other meals and snacks that day were also sufficient. They are generally pretty well nutritionally balanced, except that they don't have enough fat. Fat is a really important part of a balanced diet  - it provides high calories, fills you up and helps regulate body temperature. Vegetable oil is also pretty cheap, not sure why it doesn't feature more in her curries etc.


This is why I think she's borderline anorexic.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> I wasn't advocating only eating canned food, though I'm not sure what you specifically mean by 'only eating canned food is far from proven to be healthy'.  There was a scare a couple of years back about some epoxy compounds from the can coating having toxic effects, but that looks like another case of a 'lack of good research.


The effect of canning on vitamin E is poorly understood. That would be an example.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> This is why I think she's borderline anorexic.


 
Do you think she has an ulterior motive to make people thin with her trojan-recipes?


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> Do you think she has an ulterior motive to make people thin with her trojan-recipes?


Quite possibly 

I do worry about her son though. One of my friends fed her daughter on very low calorie/low fat/high fiber diet when she was small. She ended up malnourished


----------



## xenon (Dec 12, 2013)

_angel_ said:


> It's also not enough to have a job, you have to have the right sort of job or jobs. Part timer on tax credits = should be looking for a "proper" job, not earning enough to pay income tax = not really a contributor to society, any public sector job at all (except politicians)= wrong as well as holding the country to ransom.



And if you do the economically prudent thing and don't jump at zero hour minimum wage, quite possibly temporary jobs, espe if you have dependants. (Because you can't save enough to cover any gap if you need to claim HB if they let you go.) You're also scum.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

first recipe I saw was some 4 bean burger and I immediately wrote that idea off. I imagine veggies might enjoy it but I hate tofu/veg/notmeat burgers


----------



## _angel_ (Dec 12, 2013)

xenon said:


> And if you do the economically prudent thing and don't jump at zero hour minimum wage, quite possibly temporary jobs, espe if you have dependants. (Because you can't save enough to cover any gap if you need to claim HB if they let you go.) You're also scum.


Remember Allegra Stratton, you're scum if you're a single mum who works fulltime and needs to claim housing benefit anyway because prices are so ridiculous.



DotCommunist said:


> first recipe I saw was some 4 bean burger and I immediately wrote that idea off. I imagine veggies might enjoy it but I hate tofu/veg/notmeat burgers



Beanburgers are fine actually, I'm veggie but hate tofu/quorn though.


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> first recipe I saw was some 4 bean burger and I immediately wrote that idea off. I imagine veggies might enjoy it but I hate tofu/veg/notmeat burgers


yeah, there's a few things on there that made me go ugh :/

On that note, i'm off to lidl for cooking bacon and red wine vinegar...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The effect of canning on vitamin E is poorly understood. That would be an example.


Just to add to this on canned veg. IME canned potatoes, carrots and mushrooms suffer from a lamentable lack of flavour compared to fresh versions, especially those in the saver range. I haven't researched this, but I strongly suspect that flavour and nutritious value are going to be pretty closely related. 'Fresh' veg that have been in storage for 6 months also tend to suffer from a flavour deficit, and such long-term storage has been shown to leach minerals from food.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Just to add to this on canned veg. IME canned potatoes, carrots and mushrooms suffer from a lamentable lack of flavour compared to fresh versions, especially those in the saver range. I haven't researched this, but I strongly suspect that flavour and nutritious value are going to be pretty closely related. 'Fresh' veg that have been in storage for 6 months also tend to suffer from a flavour deficit, and such long-term storage has been shown to leach minerals from food.



The same storage principles obviously don't apply though, so you can't draw conclusions about tinned veg on the basis of findings about the storage of fresh veg. There are pros and cons to both, a mix is best, but if you're struggling to afford fresh veg then cooking with tinned veg is a healthier and more affordable option than processed junk food. It goes without saying that it is an outrage and utterly unacceptable that anybody should ever be in a situation where they have to make such choices.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Just to add to this on canned veg. IME canned potatoes, carrots and mushrooms suffer from a lamentable lack of flavour compared to fresh versions, especially those in the saver range. I haven't researched this... <snip>


 
You've forgotten to mention their poor tesselation efficiency.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The same storage principles obviously don't apply though, so you can't draw conclusions about tinned veg on the basis of findings about the storage of fresh veg. There are pros and cons to both, a mix is best, but if you're struggling to afford fresh veg then cooking with tinned veg is a healthier and more affordable option than processed junk food. It goes without saying that it is an outrage and utterly unacceptable that anybody should ever be in a situation where they have to make such choices.


I don't have time to research this now, but as I said, the comparison was made based on flavours. I'm broadly in agreement with you, but the absence of fresh produce from Monroe's diet plan did strike me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> You've forgotten to mention their poor tesselation efficiency.



Using flavour as a guide to nutrition is not a bad heuristic, you know. Many animals do it.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Using flavour as a guide to nutrition is not a bad heuristic, you know. Many animals do it.


Snickers and icecream and crisps are flavoursome, but not really great for a balanced and healthy diet. It might work, somewhat, for caloric content (sweet = lots of sugary goodness).


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

best not eat that turd, it stinks.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> best not eat that turd, it stinks.


Tell that to dogs.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Using flavour as a guide to nutrition is not a bad heuristic, you know. Many animals do it.


 
You're a grown-up now - no one's going to make you eat the horrible tinned potatoes and carrots any more.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Two SDs above or below? IIRC the daily caloric needs of an average bloke is about 2000 kcals a day, for women slightly less.


No, for men it's 2500 calories a day and for women it's 2000, according to the NHS. This is what the tables on the back of food packets are based on.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> No, for men it's 2500 calories a day and for women it's 2000, according to the NHS. This is was the tables on the back of food packets are based on.



I've seen many many different figures, and I honestly don't think there's a single right answer. But sure, why not call it 2000/2500.


----------



## treelover (Dec 12, 2013)

_angel_ said:


> It's also not enough to have a job, you have to have the right sort of job or jobs. Part timer on tax credits = should be looking for a "proper" job, not earning enough to pay income tax = not really a contributor to society, any public sector job at all (except politicians)= wrong as well as holding the country to ransom.




Looks like G.P's have been added to the list, despite the money they get.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

BTW I got a very prompt reply to my question - here's the conversation in full.



> Trux says:
> December 12, 2013 at 12:10 pm
> Hi Jack!
> 
> ...



Re-reading that my OP is riddled with bad language.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> BTW I got a very prompt reply to my question - here's the conversation in full.
> 
> 
> 
> Re-reading that my OP is riddled with bad language.


Fair play to her for replying. It appears that she may be being misused by the media here.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Fair play to her for replying. It appears that she may be being misused by the media here.


I did add a comment to that effect - hasn't gone through moderation yet it seems. I'll quote it here anyways.



> Thanks for the prompt reply. I think there’s a danger in the coverage you’re getting that people think a £10/week diet will cover the costs of nutritious and calorically sufficient food, which as you say it won’t.
> 
> It’s getting a bit austerity chic IYSWIM. I’m not saying that’s your fault, but I hope this is something you’re aware of – otherwise you might get austeritarians going “look look! Jack could make do on ten quid a week, why can’t you lot?” – which surely isn’t what you’re saying at all?


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Fair play to her for replying. It appears that she may be being misused by the media here.


I think she is. I think she made the best of her extremely bad situation at the time and perhaps creating recipes out of virtually nothing helped keep her mind off how shit her situation was, helped her keep a positive outlook. As far as I can tell she's never actively pushed any of her recipes as a lifestyle. Yes, they've been published in the media but from her point of view I think it was 'look what I managed to create out of the few things I bought for £10'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> I think she is. I think she made the best of her extremely bad situation at the time and perhaps creating recipes out of virtually nothing helped keep her mind off how shit her situation was, helped her keep a positive outlook. As far as I can tell she's never actively pushed any of her recipes as a lifestyle. Yes, they've been published in the media but from her point of view I think it was 'look what I managed to create out of the few things I bought for £10'.


We'll see. I'm not at all sure how knowing she is in this process, given that she has an agent to place her in such articles, and continues to do so. Many mixed and confusing signals coming from her.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We'll see. I'm not at all sure how knowing she is in this process, given that she has an agent to place her in such articles, and continues to do so. Many mixed and confusing signals coming from her.


Maybe her agenda is to look after and provide for her son, bringing in as much money as she can so she's never that poor again.


----------



## astral (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We'll see. I'm not at all sure how knowing she is in this process, given that she has an agent to place her in such articles, and continues to do so. Many mixed and confusing signals coming from her.



I think the agent came after the blog went viral.  I am not disputing that she is incredibly media savvy, but I think she is smart girl who was in a shit situation and who made the best of what she had.  If, when I was struggling, someone offered me money for the crap I was writing on my blog and on twitter I would have jumped on it with both hands and held on for dear life; and it was just me that was struggling, I wasn't trying to support a small child or look after an ill partner.	I can not condone her for doing the same.

What's more, if I had done that, all of you would be judging me because I had a private education and better than average off parents.  It would have been seen as faux struggle.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

You mean condemn, yeah?


----------



## revol68 (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Maybe her agenda is to look after and provide for her son, bringing in as much money as she can so she's never that poor again.



No problem with her making money off her blog, just wish she'd fuck off with her Labour agenda.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

Well, quite a few posters have claimed she's monetizing austerity. Not sure if you are one of them in fairness . Revol


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Well, quite a few posters have claimed she's monetizing austerity. Not sure if you are one of them in fairness.


 
I guess that's true, in the sense that Sainsbury's are monetising starvation and British Gas are monetising hypothermia.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> One of the things that has made me wonder is that even if one did take the tenner thing as possible, all it would take would be for one time for a 2 year old to be like, i'm not having that, and the whole weekly meal plan is fucked...



Maybe this is total mean-spirited-intepretative-bulbness on my part, but in order for a message like that to be sustainable would rely on a subtext of extremely compliant kids. which kinda plays heavily into new-labours emphasis on early intrervention 'parenting classes' approaches to dealing with poverty; which makes one wonder if there should be a corresponding super-nanny parenting book to go with the cook book


----------



## revol68 (Dec 12, 2013)

Monetizing being a Labour shill who fits their and the medias narrative of deserving poor seems like a fairer criticism. Hope someone steals her cats and renames them Karl and Rosa.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 12, 2013)

_angel_ said:


> Remember Allegra Stratton


Never Forget


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> Do you think she has an ulterior motive to make people thin with her trojan-recipes?



If she actually *is* "borderline anorexic", then she'll see her recipes as utterly normal - as there being absolutely nothing wrong with them interms of fat content etc.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Quite possibly
> 
> I do worry about her son though. One of my friends fed her daughter on very low calorie/low fat/high fiber diet when she was small. She ended up malnourished



Had similar with the brother of a mate (I won't call the brother a mate, because frankly I dislike him) who attempted to bring his kids up as vegans, but thought it was more important to spend his money on cocaine, than on buying the littl'uns nutritional supplements to compensate for the vegan diet. In the end his mum basically smuggled supplements into their food whenever they visited her.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> first recipe I saw was some 4 bean burger and I immediately wrote that idea off. I imagine veggies might enjoy it but I hate tofu/veg/notmeat burgers



I'm not a veggie (haven't been for 25 years), but I've had some very nice beanburgers (usually a mix of legumes and pulses, with seasonings and sometimes spices too) over the years that were easily as tasty and satisfying as a meaty greaseburger.
Tofu though, I'm not a fan of, whether it's plain, processed or flavoured and textured to death.  Me. No. Like!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Tell that to dogs.


To a dog it doesn't stink, it merely smells "interesting".


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 12, 2013)

i've heard of people who tried to make their dogs and cats vegetarian


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

revol68 said:


> No problem with her making money off her blog, just wish she'd fuck off with her Labour agenda.


If this thread had just stuck with the Labour aspect, I'd have no problem with it. As it is, it properly pisses me off with the "you can't be properly poor with your _lightbulbs_ and _didn't quite sell everything so you're a shit parent_ and _you couldn't feed your kid properly for *long* enough, so you don't know what it's really like _ and _ you made a living from your blog, you traitor/fraud/[whatever], only those that stay on benefits without working can have a voice"_ etc etc.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

8ball said:


> You're a grown-up now - no one's going to make you eat the horrible tinned potatoes and carrots any more.



It were horrible being served up those mixed tinned peas and carrots at school mealtimes, and being expected to eat something with bugger all flavour and texture, that looked a bit like vom.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> i've heard of people who tried to make their dogs and cats vegetarian



The '80s musician Howard Jones did, and then wondered why the poor mutt's fur started falling out.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 12, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> The '80s musician Howard Jones did, and then wondered why the poor mutt's fur started falling out.



why would you do it though? so many things are a mystery to me


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> why would you do it though? so many things are a mystery to me



The only thing I can think of outside of sadism is well-intentioned stupidity.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We'll see. I'm not at all sure how knowing she is in this process, given that she has an agent to place her in such articles, and continues to do so. Many mixed and confusing signals coming from her.


Age old mass marketing technique,avoid nailin your colours for as long as possible,be all things to all people,draw 'em in


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Age old mass marketing technique,avoid nailin your colours for as long as possible,be all things to all people,draw 'em in



OFGS don't be such a conspiracy theorist. It's idiotic. She's a young woman raising a child alone. It's bloody hard work and developing a coherent political ideology is probably not high on her agenda.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> If this thread had just stuck with the Labour aspect, I'd have no problem with it. As it is, it properly pisses me off with the "you can't be properly poor with your _lightbulbs_ and _didn't quite sell everything so you're a shit parent_ and _you couldn't feed your kid properly for *long* enough, so you don't know what it's really like _ and _ you made a living from your blog, you traitor/fraud/[whatever], only those that stay on benefits without working can have a voice"_ etc etc.


Rubbish imo.Initial criticisms of saint jack of monroe were made within the framework of the op.The headlong charge of her footstampin fan club to silence any criticism at all and change the framework of the thread with language like "obsessed" "sexist" "creepy" "cowardly" "malicious" (exactly the same stunt laurie penny pulled on here) etc, and deliberately homing in on throw away comments about lightbulbs created the thread we have now.
Interestin watching the backflippin of some as the penny starts to slowly drop


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> OFGS don't be such a conspiracy theorist. It's idiotic. She's a young woman raising a child alone. It's bloody hard work and developing a coherent political ideology is probably not high on her agenda.


Heh,this is a new one...


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> If this thread had just stuck with the Labour aspect, I'd have no problem with it. As it is, it properly pisses me off with the "you can't be properly poor with your _lightbulbs_ and _didn't quite sell everything so you're a shit parent_ and _you couldn't feed your kid properly for *long* enough, so you don't know what it's really like _ and _ you made a living from your blog, you traitor/fraud/[whatever], only those that stay on benefits without working can have a voice"_ etc etc.


Totally this.


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'm not a veggie (haven't been for 25 years), but I've had some very nice beanburgers (usually a mix of legumes and pulses, with seasonings and sometimes spices too) over the years that were easily as tasty and satisfying as a meaty greaseburger.
> Tofu though, I'm not a fan of, whether it's plain, processed or flavoured and textured to death.  Me. No. Like!



there's a few ways to make it palatable IMO, but i've found that most suggestions on how to cook it tend towards the hair shirt school of vegan cookery where any mention of any oil to cook it in or flavouring that contains salt is deemed heretical. That body as holy temple attitude that can appear alongside vegan food and the steeper learning curve on how to make it palatable stops it being a realistic option for most people.



littlebabyjesus said:


> Fair play to her for replying. It appears that she may be being misused by the media here.



Hope/suspect so. i can cook cheap vegan food that is edible to my kids, but only cause I've got the kit to do that, the storecupboard and background knowledge that stops it being bland,  and when I taught myself how to cook it, i had enough money to bin the complete failures and go find pizza. and my kids are used to the food I cook so shit fits don't happen (regularly). if that's being presented as an option to save money by people who don't understand how few options people can have when they are really poor, then that's crap. i'[d like to hope the message from someone who has been there is 'it's possible, but this is how crappy it is' and this is how it is possible to get through some of the really bad times.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Rubbish imo.Initial criticisms of saint jack of monroe were made within the framework of the op.The headlong charge of her footstampin fan club to silence any criticism at all and change the framework of the thread with language like "obsessed" "sexist" "creepy" "cowardly" "malicious" (exactly the same stunt laurie penny pulled on here) etc, and deliberately homing in on throw away comments about lightbulbs created the thread we have now.
> Interestin watching the backflippin of some as the penny starts to slowly drop


People who have only lately come to this thread might want to look at some of the above poster's early contributions to it, for reference.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> People who have only lately come to this thread might want to look at some of the above poster's early contributions to it, for reference.


I'm very comfortable with that,people should read the whole thread.
Itchy fingers fwidgie?


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

yeah, taunting a mod to use the banhammer, that'll end well...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> People who have only lately come to this thread might want to look at some of the above poster's early contributions to it, for reference.


Hmmm. Posting on the same thread as both a contributor and a mod is never a great idea. That's a shit-stirring post.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 12, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> The '80s musician Howard Jones did, and then wondered why the poor mutt's fur started falling out.


Don't worry Howard, things can only get better


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> OFGS don't be such a conspiracy theorist. It's idiotic. She's a young woman raising a child alone. It's bloody hard work and developing a coherent political ideology is probably not high on her agenda.



she started her blog not to document poverty but for entirely political reasons, in response to a story in the local paper about something a local tory said about the town centre being full of single mums and druggies.  she talked early on about how she went obsessively to every council meeting, and worked full time for labour up until the 2012 local elections - in one of the early posts that talks about poverty she pointed out how shocking it is that someone like her, with friends who are local councillors and who managed to get the ear of ed miliband, can still be poor.  she was also doing lots of charity stuff, including amongst other things sleeping out for the YMCA, and she'd won some award for being a community activist or something.  the first time she mentioned eating on £10 a week was for some charity bollocks can you eat for a fiver a week thing, which she said she could and would do because shed had to do it when she first lost her job.  she also regularly wrote and had published letters in the local paper about local politics.

so I'd suggest politics is and has been very much on her agenda for a long time, and Id guess that the piece in the Labour supporting Sunday People, which was what really broke her in the media, was probably arranged through party contacts rather than falling out of the sky.  IMO the idea that shes too stupid to believe her poltical convictions, or to really understand politics, is far more offensive than saying her politics are shit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> OFGS don't be such a conspiracy theorist. It's idiotic. She's a young woman raising a child alone. It's bloody hard work and developing a coherent political ideology is probably not high on her agenda.


It's not conspiracy theory given that she has an agent marketing her stuff, and we quite probably only know about her at all because of the efforts of that agent, given that she was signed up before this thread started. Her public profile is not accidental.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

So she's a member of the labour party and trying to make a living by capitalising on the coverage her blog has got. So fucking what. I really don't get what the issue is. 
Most of you say that she's entirely unimportant and has no political resonance. Fine. So why have you talked about her obsessively for 63 pages?

And afaik, no mod here has ever sworn off having an opinion


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> And afaik, no mod here has ever sworn off having an opinion


This is a poster fm banned for a day on this thread. He's shit-stirring, with his mod hat on. 

And piss off with your 'obsessively' tag. That's a shite way to attempt to belittle others on here.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

tbf a large part of the length of this thread is people moaning that the other people musn't criticize her etc.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> So she's a member of the labour party and trying to make a living by capitalising on the coverage her blog has got. So fucking what. I really don't get what the issue is.
> Most of you say that she's entirely unimportant and has no political resonance. Fine. So why have you talked about her obsessively for 63 pages?
> 
> And afaik, no mod here has ever sworn off having an opinion



Exactly
Read the whole thread
So what's the problem?
why not?
Obsessively...


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

Out of interest, can anyone name me the last male public figure who ended up with their own thread?


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

That's only partly intended to be inflammatory, btw, I'm also generally a little bit curious.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Rubbish imo.Initial criticisms of saint jack of monroe were made within the framework of the op.The headlong charge of her footstampin fan club to silence any criticism at all and change the framework of the thread with language like "obsessed" "sexist" "creepy" "cowardly" "malicious" (exactly the same stunt laurie penny pulled on here) etc, and deliberately homing in on throw away comments about lightbulbs created the thread we have now.
> Interestin watching the backflippin of some as the penny starts to slowly drop




What's rubbish is to compare this woman's stint with being hard up with Laurie Penny & her private education and global grief tourism. Get a fucking grip


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

Michael Gove 8115


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Exactly
> Read the whole thread
> So what's the problem?
> why not?
> Obsessively...


Nice colours


----------



## Belushi (Dec 12, 2013)

It does sometimes feel that these threads end up as the internet equivalent of rifling through someones bins.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> yeah, taunting a mod to use the banhammer, that'll end well...



fridgy uncharacteristically banned him for little more than disagreeing with him earlier in the thread


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

8115 said:


> Out of interest, can anyone name me the last male public figure who ended up with their own thread?



Owen Jones had about three at one point

And of course Johan


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

Belushi said:


> It does sometimes feel that these threads end up as the internet equivalent of rifling through someones bins.


not so, when you rifle through someones bins you find useful things like apple cores, half smoked fags and paper where the person has only used one side, leaving one side perfectly usable


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Owen Jones had about three at one point
> 
> And of course Johan



quite a few popes as well


----------



## Belushi (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> not so, when you rifle through someones bins you find useful things like apple cores, half smoked fags and paper where the person has only used one side, leaving one side perfectly usable



You're like a character from Mark Twain


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

Belushi said:


> It does sometimes feel that these threads end up as the internet equivalent of rifling through someones bins.



perhaps thats something to do with the current commentariats habit of writing/tweeting endlessly about every last detail of their personal lives, they rifle their own bins, we just slag off their rubbish


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> What's rubbish is to compare this woman's stint with being hard up with Laurie Penny & her private education and global grief tourism. Get a fucking grip



the comparison isn't between those figures situations, the comparison has been about the mode of argumentation that people have engaged in, inferring all sorts of dodgy stuff like creepiness etc which was exactly the same kinda approach LP took on here. this is where the disengenous arises.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

8115 said:


> Out of interest, can anyone name me the last male public figure who ended up with their own thread?


There might be others, but multi millionaire jamie oliver had his own thread around the same time this one started and the two are connected


DotCommunist said:


> not so, when you rifle through someones bins you find useful things like apple cores, half smoked fags and paper where the person has only used one side, leaving one side perfectly usable


Bog paper?


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> the comparison isn't between those figures situations, the comparison has been about the mode of argumentation that people have engaged in, inferring all sorts of dodgy stuff like creepiness etc which was exactly the same kinda approach LP took on here. this is where the disengenous arises.


 You're rifling through her bins and you get accused of it being creepy. It is a bit bloody creepy


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> What's rubbish is to compare this woman's stint with being hard up with Laurie Penny & her private education and global grief tourism. Get a fucking grip


Aye get a grip because any criticism/questionin of saint jack can't be at all rational can it?


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Nice colours


Cheers, i like it


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> If this thread had just stuck with the Labour aspect, I'd have no problem with it. As it is, it properly pisses me off with the "you can't be properly poor with your _lightbulbs_ and _didn't quite sell everything so you're a shit parent_ and _you couldn't feed your kid properly for *long* enough, so you don't know what it's really like _ and _ you made a living from your blog, you traitor/fraud/[whatever], only those that stay on benefits without working can have a voice"_ etc etc.



Most of the boo-person criticisms on this thread have been made within the context of that broader point. However, within the context of this thread unfolding, claim have been met with counterclaim and thus posts have increasingly gone down to the minutea of which both sides have delved into. Its only really been from the not-boo-person standpoint though that all sorts of inferences about sexism, creepiness and so on that has taken place, despite indulging in the same minutae points.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> the comparison isn't between those figures situations, the comparison has been about the mode of argumentation that people have engaged in, inferring all sorts of dodgy stuff like creepiness etc which was exactly the same kinda approach LP took on here. this is where the disengenous arises.


Hmm. You're saying it's not off/weird to slag this woman off for not being poor enough for long enough?


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> Most of the boo-person criticisms on this thread have been made within the context of that broader point. However, within the context of this thread claim have been met with counterclaim and thus posts have increasingly gone down to the minutea of which both sides have delved into. Its only really been from the not-boo-person standpoint though that all sorts of inferences about sexism, creepiness and so on that has taken place, despite indulging in the same minutae points.


Fuck that. You've been joining in with slagging her off for not being poor enough for long enough.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> Hmm. You're saying it's not off/weird to slag this woman off for not being poor enough for long enough?



don't think that has happened. i can only speak for myself on that, but i sure haven't seen that from anyone else here.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> Fuck that. You've been joining in with slagging her off for not being poor enough for long enough.



Ok dokey.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

8115 said:


> Out of interest, can anyone name me the last male public figure who ended up with their own thread?



Iain Dunked-in Shit, I think, 2-3 days ago.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> Hmm. You're saying it's not off/weird to slag this woman off for not being poor enough for long enough?



she hasnt been slagged off for that, shes been slagged off for misrepresenting her circumstances, incidentally mostly by people who are in, or have been in the same kind of circumstances she describes - you have to have been as poor as jack to raise an eyebrow at some of what she says

its also been pointed out that a few months on the breadline only gives a very narrow definition of what poverty is, and that Jack being hailed by the media as the authentic and expert voice of the poor is a problem because of this

dont remember anyone saying she wasn't poor enough, or that her experience has no validity at all


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Owen Jones had about three at one point
> 
> And of course Johan



If only Johan had become a Krishna as part of his penance, then we could have had the headline "Hari: Krishna!" in the _Indie_.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> don't think that has happened. i can only speak for myself on that, but i sure haven't seen that from anyone else here.



Yes, it has. The criticism of the Labour aspect is fine, imo. But the rest of the shit on this thread, wtf. It's like the Daily Mail equivalent of the Left ffs.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> You're rifling through her bins and you get accused of it being creepy. It is a bit bloody creepy



any claim ive made about the plausability of the tenner a week thing has been based on my own life experience on the dole. that is ample enough to show its a well dodge claim without needing to go anywhere near a bin.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> Yes, it has. The criticism of the Labour aspect is fine, imo. But the rest of the shit on this thread, wtf. It's like the Daily Mail equivalent of the Left ffs.



If you can show one poster who has not made the broader point of which the detail is a bullet point part of it then fair enough. but i don't think that would be possible to accomplish.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she hasnt been slagged off for that, shes been slagged off for misrepresenting her circumstances, incidentally mostly by people who are in, or have been in the same kind of circumstances she describes - you have to have been as poor as jack to raise an eyebrow at some of what she says
> 
> its also been pointed out that a few months on the breadline only gives a very narrow definition of what poverty is, and that Jack being hailed by the media as the authentic and expert voice of the poor is a problem because of this
> 
> dont remember anyone saying she wasn't poor enough, or that her experience has no validity at all


No. You have concentrated your efforts on trying to expose her lightbulbs and not managing to sell every last possession and how bad she is as a parent and that she hasn't been poor enough for long enough for her views to be valid. I don't fucking care what the media have done with her. What you have done/are doing is to invalidate the year she struggled to feed her kid cos she didn't struggle enough. Plus substitute your own standards of poor enough for the govt's standards of poor enough. Really fucking pissed me off.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

and actually the detail is an important part to lending credibility to the dodgy new labour politics subtext of this shit. so its relevent.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she hasnt been slagged off for that, shes been slagged off for misrepresenting her circumstances, incidentally mostly by people who are in, or have been in the same kind of circumstances she describes - you have to have been as poor as jack to raise an eyebrow at some of what she says



You slagged her off for not selling her "thousand pound" guitar even though the odds of the guitar actually being worth anything close to that are more or less nil. You're the one who stretches reality and deliberately misrepresents so you can continue this nasty personal vendetta. Then when called out on your (deliberate, imo) mistake, rather than acknowledge you'd been caught out bullshitting to pursue this grudge, you simple simply shifted the goalposts and decided that she's a "cunt" who "doesn't deserve to have kids" because she sold her kids toys before her non-existant "thousand pound" guitar.

Calling a woman a cunt and they adding shouldn't be allowed to breed because they didn't sell enough of their possessions whilst unemployed to be sufficiently worthy of your respect is absolutely disgusting and you can go fuck yourself.

There's a few others on this thread who've tried in good faith to make political criticisms of her, which although I don't agree with I wouldn't call creepy or unusual, but your comments on this thread have been genuinely fucking disgusting, no better in any respect than Littlejohn or any other Daily Mail shit. The fact you're hiding this massive personal vendetta behind Labour party politics only works if you've got something genuinely interesting about her role in the Labour party to reveal, which you don't. Like butchers said you keep whipping away the curtain to reveal, er, that she's a minor member of the Labour party? Well fucking blow me down, turns out there's actually few unemployed/working class women in the Labour party, the bastards.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> No. You have concentrated your efforts on trying to expose her lightbulbs and not managing to sell every last possession and how bad she is as a parent and that she hasn't been poor enough for long enough for her views to be valid. I don't fucking care what the media have done with her. What you have done/are doing is to invalidate the year she struggled to feed her kid cos she didn't struggle enough. Plus substitute your own standards of poor enough for the govt's standards of poor enough. Really fucking pissed me off.



me too. A number of posters have gone for the 'fake poverty' angle and someone (I can't remember who now) even went so far as to say she can't have been 'properly poor' (whatever that means) because she'd never turned tricks for money. I mean WT actual F.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> tbf a large part of the length of this thread is people moaning that the other people musn't criticize her etc.



It's not - it's pointing out that a fair bit of the criticism was of the sort laid out by cesare, i.e. shit. I shan't speak for others, but as someone who's criticised smokey et al I've always made it clear that her politics is fair game, it's the whole "I'm prolier than thou" shit which leaves a bad taste in my mouth.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> me too. A number of posters have gone for the 'fake poverty' angle and someone (I can't remember who now) even went so far as to say she can't have been 'properly poor' (whatever that means) because she'd never turned tricks for money. I mean WT actual F.


Pretty sure that was Frances L.

Anyway, I still can't get why smokey or anyone else who's so het up about her evil wrong-doings in the service of evil wrong-doers can't muster the fucking balls to even attempt to communicate with her. It took what 10 minutes before she replied to a comment I made on her blog. You can use a made-up name like I did and not blow your other commitments if that's what you worry about. It's just piss poor.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> me too. A number of posters have gone for the 'fake poverty' angle and someone (I can't remember who now) even went so far as to say she can't have been 'properly poor' (whatever that means) because she'd never turned tricks for money. I mean WT actual F.


The Labour criticism is fair game and lots of posters started off in the Labour Party before jumping ship and developing their politics, so prodding her about it/discussing Labour's shit is fair enough.

But not poor enough not struggling enough is pure fucking liberal vitriol.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I did add a comment to that effect - hasn't gone through moderation yet it seems. I'll quote it here anyways.


Hmmm, it never made it onto the site. Might've got caught in the spam net, will try again.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> And you're not willing to read the whole thread...
> 50 odd posts since nov 26,most directed at smokedout and others,not in discussion, but for havin the blind cheek to question saint jacks agenda/motivation/trajectory.On a board discussin politics,on a thread about a media commentator.
> Wee bit creepy i'd say,maybe a bit obsessive as well.(see what happened there?)
> Saint jack is what she is,just like multi millionaire jamie oliver is what he is,or laurie penny is what she is,come to peace with it.
> ...


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

oh for fuck's sake can you not just fuck off with the 'footstamping fan club' bollocks.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> me too. A number of posters have gone for the 'fake poverty' angle and someone (I can't remember who now) even went so far as to say she can't have been 'properly poor' (whatever that means) because she'd never turned tricks for money. I mean WT actual F.


Really? 

And I know that people think I'm banging my own agenda here but there is no fucking way a man would be subject to this level of shit. 

There's also single parenting and single parenting. On another thread, a man who says he's a single parent happily admits that he's stopped contributing to his child's life because he's struggling a bit financially at the moment. 

However much I'm struggling financially, stopping feeding and clothing my child isn't an option. And it isn't for most mothers who generally are responsible for keeping children alive.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Hmmm, it never made it onto the site. Might've got caught in the spam net, will try again.


Maybe it's been "managed"?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

I've said elsewhere 'well meaning lauborite' in the mould of owen and others (politically, owens doing alright financially). Thats not evil, its a sad waste and the party machine will use them and spit them out but its not bad- I find  the lighbulb chat hilarious though. High point includes the discussion about bayonet vs screw. Politicals at it most alan


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> oh for fuck's sake can you not just fuck off with the 'footstamping fan club' bollocks.


Ditto


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> But not poor enough not struggling enough is pure fucking liberal vitriol.



saying not poor enough is one thing
questioning the claim that it is possible to live on food on a £10 a week budget informed by ones experiences of poverty is another thing.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Maybe it's been "managed"?


I tried reposting it. If that doesn't work I'll send her a DM on Twatter. Could've just as easily been sent to a spam-filter tho.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> No. You have concentrated your efforts on trying to expose her lightbulbs and not managing to sell every last possession and how bad she is as a parent and that she hasn't been poor enough for long enough for her views to be valid.



hang on, I stayed right out of the lightbulb thing, mentioning her guitar was probably a mistake, it was more about the fact she sold all her kids toys - as a parent I find that quite shocking, especially at a sale that raised three grand, toddlers toys arent expensive and they have no second hand value, did she really need that extra twenty quid?  Same with her diet, two apples, and four value yoghurts a week for her kid, one pint of milk for the week, no juice, no treats, no nothing - she said she did this for months on end, there is no conceivable reason unless shed been sanctioned why she had to and its verging on neglect, and thats not something I say lightly.  I also dont believe shes like that, I dont believe she lives in a social circle where things like that wouldnt have been flagged up, I find it completely implausible tbh, and since it comes alongside a whole host of other things that seem very unlikely to be true, then this raises big problems with her credibility

So I'm not saying she was never poor enough, I'm saying, perhaps clumsily at times, that her story is so ludicrously dickensian that I find it hard to take anything she says about poverty seriously because her experiences seem so out of kilter with what myself and all the other poor people Ive known, and I've known a lot, have experienced


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> saying not poor enough is one thing
> questioning the claim that it is possible to live on food on a £10 a week budget informed by ones experiences of poverty is another thing.


She's said (on a number of occasions) that she doesn't think it is. She was/is (I think) trying to help other people who are desperately trying to feed their families on really limited budgets. 

Obviously because she is a member of the labour party, this is just a massive political stunt


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> She's said (on a number of occasions) that she doesn't think it is. She was/is (I think) trying to help other people who are desperately trying to feed their families on really limited budgets.
> 
> Obviously because she is a member of the labour party, this is just a massive political stunt



She told me just earlier today that that tenner a week thing included going without and going to foodbanks and that it wasn't enough.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> saying not poor enough is one thing
> questioning the claim that it is possible to live on food on a £10 a week budget informed by ones experiences of poverty is another thing.


Just point me to where she said it's possible to live on food on a £10 a week budget - as opposed to giving some ideas of what to do when £10's all you've got. Go on


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fridgy uncharacteristically banned him for little more than disagreeing with him earlier in the thread


I know. I do read this thread.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I tried reposting it. If that doesn't work I'll send her a DM on Twatter. Could've just as easily been sent to a spam-filter tho.


I wouldn't hold your breath on this one


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> So I'm not saying she was never poor enough, I'm saying, perhaps clumsily at times, that her story is so ludicrously dickensian that I find it hard to take anything she says about poverty seriously



This sounds like mealy-mouthed backtracking shit me. 

You weren't being clumsy you were being deliberate and vicious. Nothing "clumsy" about these comments, just pure unadulterated bigotry.



smokedout said:


> if you'd sell your kids toys before you'd sell a guitar you're a cunt who doesnt deserve to be a parent


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Maybe it's been "managed"?


Tin foil hat?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> .


Please tell me again why you refuse to approach her with any of your misgivings when you can easily do so anonymously.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> This sounds like mealy-mouthed backtracking shit me.
> 
> You weren't being clumsy you were being deliberate and vicious. Nothing "clumsy" about these comments, just pure unadulterated bigotry.



I think I stand by that comment frankly, Im guessing you aren't a parent


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

Oh my God you're not actually pulling the 'speaking as a parent...' line are you


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Oh my God you're not actually pulling the 'speaking as a parent...' line are you



yes I am


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I think I stand by that comment frankly, Im guessing you aren't a parent



Any other categories of unemployed people you'd like to sterilise whilst we're here? Smokers perhaps? The overweight? 

The fact you've had the chance to reconsider or withdraw than remark but decided not to says it all.

Fuck off to the Telegraph comment section you worm.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> hang on, I stayed right out of the lightbulb thing, mentioning her guitar was probably a mistake, it was more about the fact she sold all her kids toys - as a parent I find that quite shocking, especially at a sale that raised three grand, toddlers toys arent expensive and they have no second hand value, did she really need that extra twenty quid?  Same with her diet, two apples, and four value yoghurts a week for her kid, one pint of milk for the week, no juice, no treats, no nothing - she said she did this for months on end, there is no conceivable reason unless shed been sanctioned why she had to and its verging on neglect, and thats not something I say lightly.  I also dont believe shes like that, I dont believe she lives in a social circle where things like that wouldnt have been flagged up, I find it completely implausible tbh, and since it comes alongside a whole host of other things that seem very unlikely to be true, then this raises big problems with her credibility
> 
> So I'm not saying she was never poor enough, I'm saying, perhaps clumsily at times, that her story is so ludicrously dickensian that I find it hard to take anything she says about poverty seriously because her experiences seem so out of kilter with what myself and all the other poor people Ive known, and I've known a lot, have experienced


This is it, you sound like every fucking person I've ever heard that slags off people on benefits. They go into one about the 42inch plasma when they're in a council house; you go into one about a fucking guitar instead of a telly screen.

You're doing exactly what they do. You also think your experiences are the benchmark for the norm, you measure her against your experience and find her wanting - but you're probably found wanting by people worse off than you, people that can't even claim benefits and live off grid. But they're not giving you grief for not living off grid - or maybe they are? Maybe you're benefits aristocracy as far as they're concerned. This is race to the bottom shit, why are you doing it ffs.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Oh my God you're not actually pulling the 'speaking as a parent...' line are you


It would appear so. 

I just don't know what the problem is with some people on this thread.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> This is it, you sound like every fucking person I've ever heard that slags off people on benefits. They go into one about the 42inch plasma when they're in a council house; you go into one about a fucking guitar instead of a telly screen.
> 
> You're doing exactly what they do. You also think your experiences are the benchmark for the norm, you measure her against your experience and find her wanting - but you're probably found wanting by people worse off than you, people that can't even claim benefits and live off grid. But they're not giving you grief for not living off grid - or maybe they are? Maybe you're benefits aristocracy as far as they're concerned. This is race to the bottom shit, why are you doing it ffs.



I wish I could "like" every word.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Tin foil hat?


You don't really understand the media do ye?
Nice use of colour though


----------



## trashpony (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You don't really understand the media do ye?
> Nice use of colour though


Yes I do. I just think you're talking shit.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> It would appear so.
> 
> I just don't know what the problem is with some people on this thread.


We're just obsessed creeps,nasty ,malicious,crazy people for questioning a media acolyte on a politics board. It's insanity i tell ye, pure evil insanity and it must be stamped out.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> We're just obsessed creeps,nasty ,malicious,crazy people for questioning a media acolyte on a politics board. It's insanity i tell ye, pure evil insanity and it must be stamped out.


Listen to yourself.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Yes I do. I just think you're talking shit.


That's more like it ,now we're getting somewhere


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> We're just obsessed creeps,nasty ,malicious,crazy people for questioning a media acolyte on a politics board. It's insanity i tell ye, pure evil insanity and it must be stamped out.


Get a grip


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> Yes, it has. The criticism of the Labour aspect is fine, imo. But the rest of the shit on this thread, wtf. It's like the Daily Mail equivalent of the Left ffs.



lightbulbgate......


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Listen to yourself.





equationgirl said:


> Get a grip


 See youse are still at it.
How can anyone who disagrees with us here be wise.Surely they can't be capable of sarcasm or a sense of humour,they're far too creepy...


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> This is it, you sound like every fucking person I've ever heard that slags off people on benefits. They go into one about the 42inch plasma when they're in a council house; you go into one about a fucking guitar instead of a telly screen.



bollocks am I.  I was condemning her for selling her kids toys, not for having them, or for having a guitar.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> See youse are still at it.
> How can anyone who disagrees with us here be wise.Surely they can't be capable of sarcasm or a sense of humour,they're far too creepy...


I think you're just looking a fight, you're not even discussing the thread topic anymore, you just want an argument,


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> media acolyte



Translation: low to middle ranking Labour party activist with a blog. 

Besides no-one's saying don't criticise her, but make it _political_ criticisms not this echoing of the Tory party line of "you're a scrounger, why haven't you sold your gold fillings, we shoudl sterilise the unemployed, cut their benefits off if they smoke" all this shit that smokedout's come out with. 

Anyway, we've really yet to see her take any position of influence in the Labour party off the back of this blog. We'll see of course in time but right now I don't see much of it.

And I don't particularly care if she does go on to have a career in the Labour party as a result of the success of this blog, dare I say it but if there were a few more Labour party people in positions of influence who actually experienced poverty (rather than go the private school - uni - intern - councillor - mp route into a career) it might actually be a very slightly better party for it. 

Of course if she then starts coming out with right-wing anti-welfare stuff as a result of this Labour party career then you'd be absolutely right to criticise, but at this point this is just fevered speculation, motivated by a variety of things other than sincere political debate and not good things but a sense of puritannical bitterness.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> See youse are still at it.
> How can anyone who disagrees with us here be wise.Surely they can't be capable of sarcasm or a sense of humour,they're far too creepy...



Ho ho ho you're a comedian aren't you?


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> We're just obsessed creeps,nasty ,malicious,crazy people for questioning a media acolyte on a politics board. It's insanity i tell ye, pure evil insanity and it must be stamped out.



That isn't what has been said at all, you are being disingenuous. 

It has been said many times by several posters now that criticising her politics is fair game.  But there have been some utterly daft comments on this thread that have made people look really fucking stupid. 

It is fucking daft when somebody tries to pull someone apart because the way they phrase changing a lightbulb is not the same as that person.  That's not questioning their politics, that makes someone look like a tit.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> bollocks am I.  I was condemning her for selling her kids toys, not for having them, or for having a guitar.



What the fuck right have you got to tell any unemployed person what they should or shouldn't sell to survive? 

You don't see something intrinsically wrong with this kind of preaching shit? Shit you'll see regularly with your pals in the Telegraph comments section?

What other criteria have you got for decided what unemployed people are allowed to breed?


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> bollocks am I.  I was condemning her for selling her kids toys, not for having them, or for having a guitar.


Food v toys, can't fault selling them for food. Needs must to eat.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

do people think its okay to sell all their kids toys for a few quid on top of three grand btw, is this beyond criticism for some reason?  thats why I brought up the parent thing, because I cant conceive of doing this.  if shed done if for drugs or booze fair enough, Id still judge it, but I understand addiction, but to pay a leccy bill and buy some picture frames for her new business, which is what she originally said*, is that just fine then?

*although now she says she did it to pay a deposit on a new flat


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

She didn't say '*all* her kid's toys'. You're embellishing again.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> I think you're just looking a fight, you're not even discussing the thread topic anymore, you just want an argument,


The thread topic hasn't been discussed properly for pages and pages,mainly because any attempt to discuss it has been met with endless accusations flung at the people who are trying to do just that


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Ho ho ho you're a comedian aren't you?


I thought you were holding your breath?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> Food v toys, can't fault selling them for food. Needs must to eat.



she made 3 grand at that yard sale (might have been two, cant be arsed to check, point stands, this wasnt to feed her kid)


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> bollocks am I.  I was condemning her for selling her kids toys, not for having them, or for having a guitar.



i think there's a fair few things that a lot of us don't think she did in an absolutely perfect way. unsupprising cause everyone has different options available to them and different ways of coping. the level of vitriol because of some of the choices she made are disgusting


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

purenarcotic said:


> That isn't what has been said at all, you are being disingenuous.
> 
> It has been said many times by several posters now that criticising her politics is fair game.  But there have been some utterly daft comments on this thread that have made people look really fucking stupid.
> 
> It is fucking daft when somebody tries to pull someone apart because the way they phrase changing a lightbulb is not the same as that person.  That's not questioning their politics, that makes someone look like a tit.


That's exactly what's been said continuously...for pages and pages


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> do people think its okay to sell all their kids toys for a few quid on top of three grand btw, is this beyond criticism for some reason?  thats why I brought up the parent thing, because I cant conceive of doing this.



Since when did the unemployed have to meet your personal standard of suffering and misery before their experiences are considered valid?

Your just a fucking bully. Do one.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

Im 39 and can count on one finger the only time Ive ever had more than two grand in my hand, and she still sold her kids toys


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

She said 'all the things she'd chosen for him'. He has a father and grandparents and she didn't say she sold anything he'd been given.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 12, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> What other criteria have you got for decided what unemployed people are allowed to breed?



Stop comparing unemployed people to animals. Makes you look like a bit of a cunt.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Im 39 and can count on one finger the only time Ive ever had more than two grand in my hand, and she still sold her kids toys



You fucking horrible judgmental piece of shit. This is exactly the sort of logic the Tories use to bully the unemployed and you're using it here on this thread so you can indulge in bullying her. 

You're a human cesspit, fuck off.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

You just reek of moral superiority smokedout.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

Can everyone just take a fucking breath and calm the FUCK DOWN.


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she made 3 grand at that yard sale (might have been two, cant be arsed to check, point stands, this wasnt to feed her kid)



so she had a fucking yard sale and some of the stuff at that was kids toys. shall we line up every parent flogging off used kids toys at car boot sales now so you can have a go at them as well. i even used money from doing that to go towards my uni fees. 

i shall now bow my head and prepare for the 3 minute hate.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> Im 39 and can count on one finger the only time Ive ever had more than two grand in my hand, and she still sold her kids toys


Why don't you ask her on Twitter if she sold her kid's toys?


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Why don't you ask her on Twitter if she sold her kid's toys?



And then call her a cunt and tell her she doesn't deserve to be a parent for good measure.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

I was just going back and looking at the first dozen or so pages of this thread and it's basically the same shit. It's okay up to about page 6 or so but after that....


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She didn't say '*all* her kid's toys'. You're embellishing again.





> “Jonny’s toys, that was quite hard, to see all the things I’d chosen for him go. I had to tell him that mummy had had a tidy-up,” she says.



http://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle...ddle-class-recipe-for-kale-pesto-8932248.html



> You sell the meagre DVD collection for an even more meagre sum, your sons toys, everything you own.


http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/06/...nroe-in-the-houses-of-parliament-3-june-2013/
http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/06/...nroe-in-the-houses-of-parliament-3-june-2013/


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> And then call her a cunt and tell her she doesn't deserve to be a parent for good measure.


I'll be the one to say it,see in as the footstampin fan club don't seem concerned...what about easing up a wee bit,get a grip etc


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> do people think its okay to sell all their kids toys for a few quid on top of three grand btw, is this beyond criticism for some reason?  thats why I brought up the parent thing, because I cant conceive of doing this.  if shed done if for drugs or booze fair enough, Id still judge it, but I understand addiction, but to pay a leccy bill and buy some picture frames for her new business, which is what she originally said*, is that just fine then?
> 
> *although now she says she did it to pay a deposit on a new flat



fwiw, and this is speculation here, clearly, I think she may have fallen into what can be an easy trap when you're turning your life into a fixed story on the page. It is very easy when doing that not to say exactly what happened, but instead something that could have happened (even what you tell yourself _should have_ happened) - because it makes for a neater narrative. And you can even end up half-believing these little distortions yourself if you tell the story often enough. 

It's invariably a mistake to embellish like that, but I caught myself doing it in the past over things that are not even important. I had to make a conscious effort _not to_. The embellishing can be due to nothing more than a bit of insecurity and feeling a need to come across as someone/thing a little bit more than what really happened. She's of a similar age to the age I was when I used to catch myself adding a little to my stories. She _is_ still young.


----------



## purenarcotic (Dec 12, 2013)

Surely the point, smokedout is how appalling the situation is that people feel the need / have to sell so much of their lives in order to house, clothe or feed themselves, not that she's some awful cunt.

Some people cannot afford to buy their children any toys at all.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Can everyone just take a fucking breath and calm the FUCK DOWN.



no, there must be increasing levels of vitriol until someone has an anuerism. Thats the rules.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> do people think its okay to sell all their kids toys for a few quid on top of three grand btw, is this beyond criticism for some reason?  thats why I brought up the parent thing, because I cant conceive of doing this.  if shed done if for drugs or booze fair enough, Id still judge it, but I understand addiction, but to pay a leccy bill and buy some picture frames for her new business, which is what she originally said*, is that just fine then?
> 
> *although now she says she did it to pay a deposit on a new flat


My parents sold whatever they could when I was a kid and I don't think any the worse for them for doing it. There were a couple of loved toys that didn't move on but the rest were in/out and that's the fucking nature of kid's toys - they're momentary/developmental -in and out. Stop! You're not accusing her here of anything that parents don't do whatever the circumstances. Selling kids toys is not a bad thing to do.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

purenarcotic said:


> Surely the point, smokedout is how appalling the situation is that people feel the need / have to sell so much of their lives in order to house, clothe or feed themselves, not that she's some awful cunt.
> 
> Some people cannot afford to buy their children any toys at all.


Well yes, fucking exactly this


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I was just going back and looking at the first dozen or so pages of this thread and it's basically the same shit. It's okay up to about page 6 or so but after that....


Why don't you share with the class why you think that is fridge?


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> My parents sold whatever they could when I was a kid and I don't think any the worse for them for doing it. There were a couple of loved toys that didn't move on but the rest were in/out and that's the fucking nature of kid's toys - they're momentary/developmental -in and out. Stop! You're not accusing her here of anything that parents don't do whatever the circumstances. Selling kids toys is not a bad thing to do.



what she did, selling toys when you're shit broke, and moving to a smaller place where you might well not have room to store stuff (or money to afford to move everything) makes a lot of sence tbh. cause the alternative is probably giving it away or chucking it.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 12, 2013)

Fucking hell. Only caught bits of this. Is someone in the media claiming to be skint? Reminds me of when Donald Trump pointed to a homeless guy and bragged that although he was begging, he had millions more than Trump did owing to Trumps bankruptcy.

Unsurprisingly Trump bounced back. I wonder if the homeless guy did? It's not just about the wedge in your pocket, it's about social position also. I doubt the homeless guy was offered a column in The People fwiw. Trump could get one. But it's beneath him.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> My parents sold whatever they could when I was a kid and I don't think any the worse for them for doing it.



My paternal grandmother sold my great-grandad's war medals in the 50's due to extreme poverty. Should she not have been allowed to have kids either?

My maternal grandparents never gave my mother or any of her brothers and sisters birthday presents because they needed what little money they had for rent.* Should they not have been allowed to have children?

Should we just ask smokedout to provide a list of who should/shouldn't be allowed to have children based on if they're the deserving or undeserving poor, then we can go through it and see which members of our own families should never have been born according to him?

Eugenics of the marketplace this, only the wealthy should be allowed children. That's what he's advocating in this thread, something infinitely more vile and indefensible than being a member of the fucking Labour party.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> no, there must be increasing levels of vitriol until someone has an anuerism. Thats the rules.


All I can say is I won't be the one having an aneurysm.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Why don't you share with the class why you think that is fridge?


You seriously think you have any say here, given your previous utter batshittery? I was quite surprised you turned up again at all.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> All I can say is I won't be the one having an aneurysm.



nor I, the NHS waiting lists for recovery are a joke.

but someone has to have one or else its not a P&P thread. Bring me my goading prod.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> My parents sold whatever they could when I was a kid and I don't think any the worse for them for doing it. There were a couple of loved toys that didn't move on but the rest were in/out and that's the fucking nature of kid's toys - they're momentary/developmental -in and out. Stop! You're not accusing her here of anything that parents don't do whatever the circumstances. Selling kids toys is not a bad thing to do.




but this is just one thing, and I suppose thats the problem with this thread, youve got to read her story in full, I was reading her blog as Ive said before she was famous, and theres dozens of things like this to the point that eventually I just thought this is bollocks.  when Ive mentioned a few it then gets into an endless debate over details, and people giving her the benefit of the doubt, which I did at first, but then you keep coming across stuff that just seems quite outlandish, you stop giving the benefit of the doubt.  like this.



> “He just gets told, ‘Mummy hasn’t got the money.’ He knows those words quite well now.” Jackie earns £250 a month, receives £80 child benefit and £490 housing benefit – total income £820.  She pays £675 a month in rent plus an average £83 for gas and electricity, £15 for water, up to £20 for toiletries and cleaning products. Her spend on food rarely exceeds £40.
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/young-mum-turns-off-heating-so-she-can-1502710#ixzz2nJ0Jgo4H



where's her tax credits/IS?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but this is just one thing, and I suppose thats the problem with this thread, youve got to read her story in full, I was reading her blog as Ive said before she was famous, and theres dozens of things like this to the point that eventually I just thought this is bollocks.  when Ive mentioned a few it then gets into an endless debate over details, and people giving her the benefit of the doubt, which I did at first, but then you keep coming across stuff that just seems quite outlandish, you stop giving the benefit of the doubt.  like this.
> 
> 
> 
> where's her tax credits/IS?


For the last time - why not engage her in an anonymous manner?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> not far off
> 
> this is Jack's idea of a main meal for two
> 
> ...



Scran it back lad, scran it back. Hang on where's the actual scran? That's a "meal" made out of some onions/mushrooms and some seasoning - There's no actual food in it, that wouldn't nourish a sparrow. At least have some potatoes or rice or something that'll stick to yer ribs.


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> My paternal grandmother sold my great-grandad's war medals in the 50's due to extreme poverty. Should she not have been allowed to have kids either?
> 
> My paternal grandparents never gave my mother or any of her brothers and sisters birthday presents because they needed what little money they had for rent.* Should they not have been allowed to have children?
> 
> ...



more of a demand for perfection, according to his, and only his standards. no one should make choices as a parent that aren't on his approved list.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> For the last time - why not engage her in an anonymous manner?



Because he's not interesting in doing any "engaging" he's interesting in "exposing" her as a fraud because he's a bully with a personal vendetta.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Because he's not interesting in doing any "engaging" he's interesting in "exposing" her as a fraud because he's a bully with a personal vendetta.


I appreciate the effort but I didn't ask you did I?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Because he's not interesting in doing any "engaging" he's interesting in "exposing" her as a fraud because *he's a bully with a personal vendetta*.


See this is absurd. Jack Monroe is not here. But she has decided to market her life story - whatever you think of her, you cannot deny that. Smokedout is not bullying her in any sense. He is picking holes in her life story, and yes passing judgement on it. But that is neither bullying or a personal vendetta.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I appreciate the effort but I didn't ask you did I?



And yet I answered! 

It's almost as if we were on some kind of online forum...


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> See this is absurd. Jack Monroe is not here. But she has decided to market her life story - whatever you think of her, you cannot deny that. Smokedout is not bullying her in any sense.



So calling her a cunt and saying she shouldn't be allowed to have children because she failed to meet his personal definition of what counts as the deserving poor isn't bullying by your standards?

I presume when Richard Littlejohn does the exact same thing you'll be leaping to his defence too?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> See this is absurd. Jack Monroe is not here. But she has decided to market her life story - whatever you think of her, you cannot deny that. Smokedout is not bullying her in any sense. He is picking holes in her life story, and yes passing judgement on it. But that is neither bullying or a personal vendetta.


She's not here, but it's a public forum, whether or not smokedout is bullying or criticising.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> lightbulbgate......



Hows about blagstagate? 
So you can leave it.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but this is just one thing, and I suppose thats the problem with this thread, youve got to read her story in full, I was reading her blog as Ive said before she was famous, and theres dozens of things like this to the point that eventually I just thought this is bollocks.  when Ive mentioned a few it then gets into an endless debate over details, and people giving her the benefit of the doubt, which I did at first, but then you keep coming across stuff that just seems quite outlandish, you stop giving the benefit of the doubt.  like this.
> 
> 
> 
> where's her tax credits/IS?


You know the sort of thing that makes people distrust your posts?

Here's an example - http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...-time-for-action.314399/page-49#post-12748008 you say "I thought this quote was telling: "I sometimes describe my job, or what I do, as a publicly elected post." What's her job? And who fucking elected her?" But _in the next sentence from the one you quote_ she answers it:


> You, my readers, did. You read my musings and ramblings, shared my recipes, gently nagged me to write them in a book. And every single day I am thankful for all of you – even the criticism, the differing opinions, that keep me grounded and challenged and analytical. Even Richard Littlejohn, who gifted me 7,000 extra followers on Twitter by accident…


Now that may be a bit sick-making but you know wtf. You tried to use a sentence to imply she thought she was an elected official and in the next damn sentence in the same paragraph she makes it absurdly clear. Then you went on about it for a few more pages. There's just no excuse there, sorry.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:
			
		

> For the last time - why not engage her in an anonymous manner?



If it's anonymous, why don't you ask her pretending that you're smokedout in your own head?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You know the sort of thing that makes people distrust your posts?
> 
> Here's an example - http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...-time-for-action.314399/page-49#post-12748008 you say "I thought this quote was telling: "I sometimes describe my job, or what I do, as a publicly elected post." What's her job? And who fucking elected her?" But _in the next sentence from the one you quote_ she answers it:
> 
> Now that may be a bit sick-making but you know wtf. You tried to use a sentence to imply she thought she was an elected official and in the next damn sentence in the same paragraph she makes it absurdly clear. Then you went on about it for a few more pages. There's just no excuse there, sorry.



no I didnt, i think the second paragraph makes it worse


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she made 3 grand at that yard sale (might have been two, cant be arsed to check, point stands, this wasnt to feed her kid)


I think it was to pay her rent.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You seriously think you have any say here, given your previous utter batshittery? I was quite surprised you turned up again at all.


On the sauce again,i see


----------



## toggle (Dec 12, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Hows about blagstagate?
> So you can leave it.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> If it's anonymous, why don't you ask her pretending that you're smokedout in your own head?


Seriously?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Why don't you share with the class why you think that is fridge?



Coz he can't. Coz he's not very clever. Whatever joke of a minor fee paying school(that no fucker's even heard of) that he went to hasn't imbued him with the ability to do so.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> no I didnt, i think the second paragraph makes it worse


It's all one paragraph. And how does it make it worse?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's all one paragraph. And how does it make it worse?


It is vomit-inducing, tbf. She probably didn't mean it to come across like that, but it sounds very self-righteous to me.


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> but this is just one thing, and I suppose thats the problem with this thread, youve got to read her story in full, I was reading her blog as Ive said before she was famous, and theres dozens of things like this to the point that eventually I just thought this is bollocks.  when Ive mentioned a few it then gets into an endless debate over details, and people giving her the benefit of the doubt, which I did at first, but then you keep coming across stuff that just seems quite outlandish, you stop giving the benefit of the doubt.  like this.
> 
> 
> 
> where's her tax credits/IS?


I really fucking, *really* fucking hate people that decide what is or isn't poverty. I really fucking hate it.

As far as I'm concerned, we do what we have to do make ends meet and we don't expect that everyone had/has the same resources. Not everyone can manage without help. But I'd much rather fucking hate the haves than the have nots; and I really don't want to waste fucking time graduating the degrees of nothing ffs, and comparing those without much against those with not much more - there's nothing to be gained from that.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is vomit-inducing, tbf. She probably didn't mean it to come across like that, but it sounds very self-righteous to me.


It specifically answers everything smokedout queried.

It was the most dishonest quote I've seen on Urban.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 12, 2013)

TruXta said:
			
		

> Seriously?



I fucking hate missing a fight.


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> I fucking hate missing a fight.


It's all over bar the shouting now.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It specifically answers everything smokedout queried.
> 
> It was the most dishonest quote I've seen on Urban.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


> .


In case you're still interested, b, my resubmitted comment is still "awaiting moderation". On the first try it just vanished after about 5-10 minutes, so could easily have been a technical hiccup.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

8115 said:


> It's all over bar the shouting now.


This is urban. What is there bar the shouting?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

bamalama said:


>


Yours don't count.


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is urban. What is there bar the shouting?


People getting genuinely het up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

8115 said:


> People getting genuinely het up.


Fair enough. There is that too.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Yours don't count.


Aww i'm flattered


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

cesare said:


> I really fucking, *really* fucking hate people that decide what is or isn't poverty. I really fucking hate it.
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, we do what we have to do make ends meet and we don't expect that everyone had/has the same resources. Not everyone can manage without help. But I'd much rather fucking hate the haves than the have nots; and I really don't want to waste fucking time graduating the degrees of nothing ffs, and comparing those without much against those with not much more - there's nothing to be gained from that.



I'm not fucking doing that, I agree with every word you say.  I think Jack is embellishing things - heavily, I'm not saying that doesnt mean she was poor, or saying she wasnt poor enough, I think what she says cant be trusted, I think that is worth pointing out in a fairly closed environment where there are people I often discuss politics with, because she now has a political role, admittedly of limited influence, but it is likely to become larger

its got fuck all to do with whether she is really poor or not


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> where's her tax credits/IS?


Tax Credits are paid by your previous tax year's income, not your current circumstances. She was earning too much.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 12, 2013)




----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It specifically answers everything smokedout queried.
> 
> It was the most dishonest quote I've seen on Urban.



of course it was, for fucks sake


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Tax Credits are paid by your previous tax year's income, not your current circumstances. She was earning too much.



Also loads of people don't know they can claim benefits or are not claiming the full amount of them - that's why there are so many unclaimed benefits every year


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

> *Only a year ago *Jackie, from Southend, Essex, was dressing up to go for nights out in London clubs and buying a new outfit every weekend. But she struggled to fit childcare around her shift work and the 40-mile return commute to Brentwood took its toll.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> of course it was, for fucks sake


I stated pretty clearly how and why I thought what you posted was a joke. You're quite at liberty to not reply to that, obviously. We can just trade insults if you want.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 12, 2013)

In honour of this thread (and to distract myself) I just installed a game aptly named _Fallout._


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Tax Credits are paid by your previous tax year's income, not your current circumstances. She was earning too much.



I'm not doing an in-work benefits calculation now, but believe me, a lone parent on £250 a month would be looking at about close to about £120 a week on top of that (under estimation) in child tax credits and income support


----------



## bamalama (Dec 12, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I stated pretty clearly how and why I thought what you posted was a joke. You're quite at liberty to not reply to that, obviously. We can just trade insults if you want.


That seems to be your m.o this thread.Why quit now?


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I'm not doing an in-work benefits calculation now, but believe me, a lone parent on £250 a month would be looking at about close to about £120 a week on top of that (under estimation) in child tax credits and income support


One of her big problems was that her housing benefit stopped and was recalculated, leaving her short I think. This is fairly common especially in the private rented sector.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 12, 2013)

there are loads of people who aren't claiming benefits or not the right amount, there are billions of pounds which go unclaimed every year.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> Also loads of people don't know they can claim benefits or are not claiming the full amount of them - that's why there are so many unclaimed benefits every year



if she wasnt on income support/child tax credits after she lost her job then that send things in a very different and quite unusual direction


----------



## smokedout (Dec 12, 2013)

8115 said:


> One of her big problems was that her housing benefit stopped and was recalculated, leaving her short I think. This is fairly common especially in the private rented sector.



yes, thats clear from the piece, it doesnt explain why she wasnt claiming the benefits she was due - which given she was on housing/council tax benefit seems incredibly strange


----------



## cesare (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I'm not fucking doing that, I agree with every word you say.  I think Jack is embellishing things - heavily, I'm not saying that doesnt mean she was poor, or saying she wasnt poor enough, I think what she says cant be trusted, I think that is worth pointing out in a fairly closed environment where there are people I often discuss politics with, because she now has a political role, admittedly of limited influence, but it is likely to become larger
> 
> its got fuck all to do with whether she is really poor or not


You are doing it though mate, you really are. It's doing my fucking head in, wtf are you saying. Can't you leave the personal life living numbers to one side (and let her earn a living that way)  and focus on the Labour party stuff if that's your main problem?


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes, thats clear from the piece, it doesnt explain why she wasnt claiming the benefits she was due - which given she was on housing/council tax benefit seems incredibly strange


Is it a newspaper article? Journalists like to keep things simple, it probably doesn't reflect the truth if so because of that.


----------



## 8115 (Dec 12, 2013)

I don't know why I am even engaging with this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2013)

smokedout said:


> if she wasnt on income support/child tax credits after she lost her job then that send things in a very different and quite unusual direction


It's the journalist saying this, though, not her directly. She has already effectively corrected how the Guardian has portrayed her to TruXta.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 12, 2013)

She was under 25 so would only have been eligible for £56.80 a week IS, but she was earning £57 quid-odd a week so wouldn't have got all of that even if there wasn't some other reason she wasn't claiming it. Also, you hold the fucking egg this way Grandma, do you know how bloody patronising you're being? You forget I've been dependent on tax credits/housing benefit/IS for years too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

8115 said:


> Is it a newspaper article? Journalists like to keep things simple.


And can also be extremely lax and lazy. Especially with the details.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

8115 said:


> Is it a newspaper article? Journalists like to keep things simple, it probably doesn't reflect the truth if so because of that.



significant though, I hadnt seen it before, only financial justification of the tenner a week thing that I've seen - and tbh that is the biggest discrepency, why would someone entitled to around £150 in benefits (plus HB) a week if she was out of work, and more including wages if she was in work, have to live on a tenner a week for over a year, even if there was a housing benefit gap.  now I'm not one to say things are great at the moment for claimants, and I am a claimant, but they arent that bad yet thank fuck


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

Don't engage with anything you've already said, or anything.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She was under 25 so would only have been eligible for £56.80 a week IS, but she was earning £57 quid-odd a week so wouldn't have got all of that even if there wasn't some other reason she wasn't claiming it. Also, you hold the fucking egg this way Grandma, do you know how bloody patronising you're being? You forget I've been dependent on tax credits/housing benefit/IS for years too.


Are you saying she somehow got an extra 20p a week. bamalama what's the verdict, eh, 20p too much?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She was under 25 so would only have been eligible for £56.80 a week IS, but she was earning £57 quid-odd a week so wouldn't have got all of that even if there wasn't some other reason she wasn't claiming it. Also, you hold the fucking egg this way Grandma, do you know how bloody patronising you're being? You forget I've been dependent on tax credits/housing benefit/IS for years too.



she'd still have got child tax credits, depends she might have been under the limit for wtc, depends on her hours and when the cut came in, she should have had some IS top up on that as well, you can earn £20 a week before its touched


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Don't engage with anything you've already said, or anything.


She a pal of yours fridge?Why the blind loyalty,misrepresentation of other posters?
Hardly behaviour befitting a moderator is it?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

so yeah fair enough, I'd have to check on any WTC, and I assume she was self-employed cos she had two newspaper columns when she wrote that piece, but possibly bottom end she was only underclaiming by about 90/100 a week


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> significant though, I hadnt seen it before, only financial justification of the tenner a week thing that I've seen - and tbh that is the biggest discrepency, why would someone entitled to around £150 in benefits (plus HB) a week if she was out of work, and more including wages if she was in work, have to live on a tenner a week for over a year, even if there was a housing benefit gap.  now I'm not one to say things are great at the moment for claimants, and I am a claimant, but they arent that bad yet thank fuck


I 'm not sure if she 's confused or you are.


Who is entitled to what, explain it.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she'd still have got child tax credits, depends she might have been under the limit for wtc, depends on her hours and when the cut came in, she should have had some IS top up on that as well, you can earn £20 a week before its touched



Not according to the calculator on HMRC's website which I've just run through. Unless she was working more than 16 hours a week she wouldn't get WTC and although it says 'eligible for child tax credits' the amount it gives is £0.00 per week. She was earning too much the previous year.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Are you saying she somehow got an extra 20p a week. bamalama what's the verdict, eh, 20p too much?


I've been pretty clear what my own view of saint jack and her irrelevance is since about page ten.
Course ye'd have to pull your fingers out of your ears to hear it...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> so yeah fair enough, I'd have to check on any WTC, and I assume she was self-employed cos she had two newspaper columns when she wrote that piece, but possibly bottom end she was only underclaiming by about 90/100 a week


Correction. She didn't write that piece. That does matter. 

I've claimed hb while self-employed, btw. It's a nightmare if the work is coming in fitfully. You don't fit easily into their boxes. Within a couple of months, I'd built up a mountain of stupid letters from them, and they stopped my benefit wrongly a couple of times.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she'd still have got child tax credits, depends she might have been under the limit for wtc, depends on her hours and when the cut came in, she should have had some IS top up on that as well, you can earn £20 a week before its touched


Are you vaping?

Is your/the kid back in your supervision yet?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Not according to the calculator on HMRC's website which I've just run through. Unless she was working more than 16 hours a week she wouldn't get WTC and although it says 'eligible for child tax credits' the amount it gives is £0.00 per week. She was earning too much the previous year.



ok, I will check this tomorrow, but I think shed still get CTC, or she'd get income support for the kid, which is the same rate I think, there may be a hole here, but Ive never heard of it before, Id be quite surprised if it was the case


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> I've been pretty clear what my own view of saint jack and her irrelevance is since about page ten.
> Course ye'd have to pull your fingers out of your ears to hear it...


I don't really care about what you say about this woman at this moment in time.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> ok, I will check this tomorrow, but I think shed still get CTC, or she'd get income support for the kid, which is the same rate I think, there may be a hole here, but Ive never heard of it before, Id be quite surprised if it was the case


You've dodged everything I've said here because you don't have an answer.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Are you vaping?
> 
> Is your/the kid back in your supervision yet?



what the fuck is this?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

She couldn't get tax credits because she was earning too much the previous year. She possibly couldn't get IS if she was working too many hours or was unable to prove income easily and you can't get WTC and IS at the same time. And claiming Housing Benefit if you're not getting IS and have to prove income is a fucking nightmare as anyone who remembers my thread about it will know. She's not fucking lying.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

Maybe she weighed less than a duck.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She couldn't get tax credits because she was earning too much the previous year. She possibly couldn't get IS if she was working too many hours or was unable to prove income easily and you can't get WTC and IS at the same time. And claiming Housing Benefit if you're not getting IS and have to prove income is a fucking nightmare as anyone who remembers my thread about it will know. She's not fucking lying.



she was claiming HB, it said in the piece, hang on am doing an in-work calculation because id be genuinely astonished if she wasnt entitled to anything


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> ok, I will check this tomorrow, but I think shed still get CTC, or she'd get income support for the kid, which is the same rate I think, there may be a hole here, but Ive never heard of it before, Id be quite surprised if it was the case


Don't be jumpin through hoops here smoked,the whole point of this stuff is to bring the onus back on you instead of saint jack of monroe where it should be.
You can do as much research here as ye like,the goal posts'll shift again after a few pages of name callin and you'll be back to square 1.Ye can't debate with a fan club,they need to find their own way


----------



## Humberto (Dec 13, 2013)

I've read about 5 pages and I'm still non the wiser as to what this is about.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was claiming HB, it said in the piece, hang on am doing an in-work calculation because id be genuinely astonished if she wasnt entitled to anything



Yes, she was _claiming_ it, but they surprise surprise delayed paying it for months. This happened to me too. 3 months I had to cover my rent myself despite having at that point fuck all money as I was paying the remaining 30% of private nursery fees that tax credits weren't covering for two children out of my £136 weekly wages


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> she was claiming HB, it said in the piece, hang on am doing an in-work calculation because id be genuinely astonished if she wasnt entitled to anything


Can't reply to my point eh

I know you can't.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> ok, I will check this tomorrow, but I think shed still get CTC, or she'd get income support for the kid, which is the same rate I think, there may be a hole here, but Ive never heard of it before, Id be quite surprised if it was the case


Do you really think she didn't claim everything she was entitled to? 

Listen to weepiper, she knows how painfully difficult it is to claim, and what the entitlements are.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

Humberto said:


> I've read about 5 pages and I'm still non the wiser as to what this is about.


5 random pages will get you nowhere lad.


----------



## 8115 (Dec 13, 2013)

Are people seriously saying, food poverty is not an issue for people on benefits? I don't know much about how having kids affects things, but speaking as a single person, if I lost my job £10-20/ week on food would be my initial realistic budget and that's without even starting to worry about the housing benefit cap.  I can't imagine things are that much rosier for people with kids to be honest.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Maybe she weighed less than a duck.


Lying fridge lying,not flying...you ok?


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Maybe she weighed less than a duck.




A lying duck on benefits  What are we reduced to


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> A lying duck on benefits  What are we reduced to


Lightbulb-gate was worse than this.


----------



## Humberto (Dec 13, 2013)

TruXta said:


> 5 random pages will get you nowhere lad.



Thats outrageous. See me in my office.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

so do I, I was under in my original post

Income Support £34.01 per week 
Child Tax Credit £62.72 per week


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

8115 said:


> Are people seriously saying, food poverty is not an issue for people on benefits? I don't know much about how having kids affects things, but speaking as a single person, if I lost my job £10-20/ week on food would be my initial realistic budget and that's without even starting to worry about the housing benefit cap.  I can't imagine things are that much rosier for people with kids to be honest.


No...No. they. are. not.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Yes, she was _claiming_ it, but they surprise surprise delayed paying it for months. This happened to me too. 3 months I had to cover my rent myself despite having at that point fuck all money as I was paying the remaining 30% of private nursery fees that tax credits weren't covering for two children out of my £136 weekly wages



that piece is December 2012, she'd been claiming a year then and around the same time put a post on her blog saying how her benefits were all sorted out now


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> so do I, I was under in my original post
> 
> Income Support £34.01 per week
> Child Tax Credit £62.72 per week


How did you get that?


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> A lying duck on benefits  What are we reduced to


Fickle media personality worship?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> that piece is December 2012, she'd been claiming a year then and around the same time put a post on her blog saying how her benefits were all sorted out now


Still can't do it can you?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Yes, she was _claiming_ it, but they surprise surprise delayed paying it for months. This happened to me too. 3 months I had to cover my rent myself despite having at that point fuck all money as I was paying the remaining 30% of private nursery fees that tax credits weren't covering for two children out of my £136 weekly wages


Yeah, this is the reality. I was lucky that I had a landlord who was prepared to wait. I was earning £200 one week, then maybe 100 then next, then maybe nothing the next two weeks, and never knew when I'd have work. Everything kept being calculated based on me earning something every week, always based on some mad calculation based on my 'big' weeks, despite my repeatedly telling them the situation. And if I did a full week for maybe 400 quid! Well, that was the end of my claim, clearly.  This continued for me, with miscalculation after miscalculation. I think they then gave me too much one month. They never really got their heads round it - they clearly didn't have a place in their system for someone like me. I got it all in the end. In the end...


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Don't be jumpin through hoops here smoked,the whole point of this stuff is to bring the onus back on you instead of saint jack of monroe where it should be.
> You can do as much research here as ye like,the goal posts'll shift again after a few pages of name callin and you'll be back to square 1.Ye can't debate with a fan club,they need to find their own way



I actually love smokedout to bits and have had his back for fucking years, whether I agree with him or not. I don't know who the fuck you are but you're on the back step here, neither betwixt nor between and no-one knows who you are.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Lightbulb-gate was worse than this.



this is very different as it goes, this is like someone on the dole saying the doles shit, ive only got a tenner a week, then finding out they havent yet claimed the dole.

theres lots of reasons that might happen, but it places a very different perspective on things if someone is criticising the benefits system in the national press and is then found to be under-claiming by nearly a hundred pounds a week.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I actually love smokedout to bits and have had his back for fucking years, whether I agree with him or not. I don't know who the fuck you are but you're on the back step here, neither betwixt nor between and no-one knows who you are.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

Seriously you've pulled that tax credits figure out your arse. I've just been through the HMRC one again with her and her son's approximate date of birth, saying self employed, did it twice with once under 16 hours a week and once over and put her previous year's income as £27k and both times it comes up with £0.00 eligibility 'based on your previous year's income'.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> How did you get that?



DWP benefit calculator,I gave her a previous years income of £22k.  come on weepiper you must know this, you dont just get single persons jsa rates if you lose your job or work for jsa rates and youve got a kid

https://www.gov.uk/benefits-adviser


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> this is very different as it goes, this is like someone on the dole saying the doles shit, ive only got a tenner a week, then finding out they havent yet claimed the dole.
> 
> theres lots of reasons that might happen, but it places a very different perspective on things if someone is criticising the benefits system in the national press and is then found to be under-claiming by nearly a hundred pounds a week.


Why did you respond to this post of mine and not the ones asking why you refuse to engage Jack directly?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Seriously you've pulled that tax credits figure out your arse. I've just been through the HMRC one again with her and her son's approximate date of birth, saying self employed, did it twice with once under 16 hours a week and once over and put her previous year's income as £27k and both times it comes up with £0.00 eligibility 'based on your previous year's income'.



you need to use the dwp site, HMRC only calculates entitlement to WTC


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Seriously you've pulled that tax credits figure out your arse. I've just been through the HMRC one again with her and her son's approximate date of birth, saying self employed, did it twice with once under 16 hours a week and once over and put her previous year's income as £27k and both times it comes up with £0.00 eligibility 'based on your previous year's income'.


What a shocking system.  So what, we're all putting stuff aside this year in case we lose our job next year?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> DWP benefit calculator,I gave her a previous years income of £22k.  come on weepiper you must know this, you dont just get single persons jsa rates if you lose your job or work for jsa rates and youve got a kid
> 
> https://www.gov.uk/benefits-adviser


well you've only fucking underestimated her income by 5 grand, don't you even read these articles you post up?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Why did you respond to this post of mine and not the ones asking why you refuse to engage Jack directly?



because I dont fucking want to, and you repeatedly telling me I should doesnt make me want to anymore, what you want me to tweet and call her a liar, in public, what would that achieve


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> because I dont fucking want to, and you repeatedly telling me I should doesnt make me want to anymore, what you want me to tweet and call her a liar, in public, what would that achieve


Oh, do one. I've already explained how you can POST ON HER BLOG ANONYMOUSLY.

Coward.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

weepiper said:


> well you've only fucking underestimated her income by 5 grand, don't you even read these articles you post up?



she was only working april - nov the previous year, I thought that was generous, but previous years income doesnt make any difference anyway, try it, put in 50 grand


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I actually love smokedout to bits and have had his back for fucking years, whether I agree with him or not. I don't know who the fuck you are but you're on the back step here, neither betwixt nor between *and no-one knows who you are.*



TBF why the fuck should that matter? 

And I'm saying fuck all about the fully paid-up member of the commentariat that is our Jack coz I've made my feelings known already. But fuck knows why you see fit to make an issue of how long bamalam's been posting here or how well known he is.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> TBF why the fuck should that matter?
> 
> And I'm saying fuck all about the fully paid-up member of the commentariat that is our Jack coz I've made my feelings known already. But fuck knows why you see fit to make an issue of how long bamalam's been posting here or how well known he is.


You really have made an absurd dick of yourself on this thread a while ago and should probably not carry on.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You really have made an absurd dick of yourself on this thread a while ago and should probably not carry on.



In the absence of having an argument, call someone a dick. I like your style mate. I've resorted to it myself on occasion.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


>


I don't even know who you are ffs, never met you before, who are you? Are you one of the ones that went into a multi page meltdown over a rock band no-one knows about?


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> TBF why the fuck should that matter?
> 
> And I'm saying fuck all about the fully paid-up member of the commentariat that is our Jack coz I've made my feelings known already. But fuck knows why you see fit to make an issue of how long bamalam's been posting here or how well known he is.


Check out the amount of name callin that's been goin on now for pages frances,but the recipients aren't bitin,so cesares trying a different tack.Remember this is all because some people have committed the cardinal sin of questioning a media acolyte(that's right delroy) on a politics forum on a thread about said acolyte...on an open forum...


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I don't even know who you are ffs, never met you before who are you? Are you one of the ones that went into a multi page meltdown over a rock band no-one knows about?


You'd like me if you knew me 
Meltdown


----------



## weepiper (Dec 13, 2013)

bollocks to this, I'm going to bed.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

me too


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

So am I. Who else is having a wank? _About Jack?_


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You really have made an absurd dick of yourself on this thread a while ago and should probably not carry on.


Are you in competition with yourself to see how many fellow posters you can insult tonight...as a moderator...


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> So am I. Who else is having a wank? _About Jack?_


 ffs francés


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

toggle said:


>



I was sad to see the back of a decent poster even though I seldom saw eye to eye with him. Nice one for your part in driving him from the boards though. Well done you.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


>


Oh. smokedout has this cunt properly got your back or has he just wandered in oblivious? X


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> ffs francés



I thought that was funny. Was I wrong?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> I was sad to see the back of a decent poster even though I seldom saw eye to eye with him. Nice one for your part in driving him from the boards though. Well done you.


Will you fucking stop with the cross-thread beef and your poor jokes on this thread?


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Will you fucking stop with the cross-thread beef and your *poor* jokes on this thread?



Class-prejudice twat.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Oh. smokedout has this cunt properly got your back or has he just wandered in oblivious? X


Back to the name calling then...well done


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Back to the name calling then...well done



If there's one thing that pisses me off massively it's giving more/less respect to posters according to how long they've been here/how well heard of they are. Sorry cesare  I've lost a massive amount of respect for you coz of that. Not that you will/should give a toss.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


>


You can roll your eyes at me till the cows come home. No-one cares. No-one knows who you are and you can roll your eyes til the cows come home and no-one fucking cares, no-one. 

And smokedout knows I've had his back for years so I'm not just disagreeing for the sake of it.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> If there's one thing that pisses me off massively it's giving more/less respect to posters according to how long they've been here/how well heard of they are. Sorry cesare  I've lost a massive amount of respect for you coz of that. Not that you will/should give a toss.


It's a last resort tactic mate,pull it out when you've got nothin else...sow suspicion,raise question marks...on a thread about a media hack,on a public forum.I have to admit i'm a wee bit disappointed in cesare here,but ye live ye learn...


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Oh. smokedout has this cunt properly got your back or has he just wandered in oblivious? X



I have no idea who he is, but he's on my side on a thread where Im getting loads of shit, its hard not to warm to that

am really going to bed now, I got your back too, and Jack's tbh a bit, Im just a bit disappointed, I dont really blame her for over-exaggerating tbh, Id probably have done the same at her age, but I wish she'd embed herself a bit more within what people on benefits are doing or saying, and keep it honest, and drop labour, or at the very least use the influence she now has to try and do some fucking good within the party and haul them over the coals for their social security policies.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> You can roll your eyes at me till the cows come home. No-one cares. No-one knows who you are and you can roll your eyes til the cows come home and no-one fucking cares, no-one.
> 
> And smokedout knows I've had his back for years so I'm not just disagreeing for the sake of it.


Get over yourself and cop on


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> You'd like me if you knew me
> Meltdown


Possibly I would. But at the moment no- one knows who the fuck you are, so no-one's taking any notice.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Possibly I would. But at the moment no- one knows who the fuck you are, so no-one's taking any notice.


Well you are and that's good enough for me,thanks


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Possibly I would. But at the moment no- one knows who the fuck you are, so no-one's taking any notice.



Why are you so obsessed over who he is? It's a messageboard - By definition it doesn't matter who he is.

From your last few posts AFAIC you're a clown and not to be taken seriously. There you go though.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I have no idea who he is, but he's on my side on a thread where Im getting loads of shit, its hard not to warm to that
> 
> am really going to bed now, I got your back too, and Jack's tbh a bit, Im just a bit disappointed, I dont really blame her for over-exaggerating tbh, Id probably have done the same at her age, but I wish she'd embed herself a bit more within what people on benefits are doing or saying, and keep it honest, and drop labour, or at the very least use the influence she now has to try and do some fucking good within the party and haul them over the coals for their social security policies.


I'm fucking knackered tbh, maybe catch up tomorrow.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Why are you so obsessed over who he is? It's a messageboard - By definition it doesn't matter who he is.
> 
> From your last few posts AFAIC you're a clown and not to be taken seriously. There you go though.


I'm not obsessed  I couldn't give a toss about bananalama bloke (was he you ?) 

My loves not with the banned shits but the people I have played with in the death of the night , for years love*


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

friedaweed 

You've toyed with me for ten years. We spent the first four playing unearthly games at unearthly hours. Admit it.  You're relying that some glitter-freckled angel is about to parachute you from the wheeliebin of guardian life. Or that you could love me an despair


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 13, 2013)

can i just say


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Why are you so obsessed over who he is? It's a messageboard - By definition it doesn't matter who he is.
> 
> From your last few posts AFAIC you're a clown and not to be taken seriously. There you go though.


I've been playing with frieda for over 10years, don't tell me what to do you cunt.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I've been playing with frieda for over 10years, don't tell me what to do you cunt.


Frieda you bastard, are you above years of fucking about at dead of night?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Frieda you bastard, are you above years of fucking about at dead of night?


 Schkol!


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

Oh

Yea ok frieda can have lot 1 

Good luck babe lol


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2013)

mjollnir has fallen twice!


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2013)

I wish their were more mythical hammers I could reference to look clever.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I wish their were more mythical hammers I could reference to look clever.


Frances is totally homing in on normal shit


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 13, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I wish their were more mythical hammers I could reference to look clever.



_Enoch_ not good enough for ya?


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Why are you so obsessed over who he is? It's a messageboard - By definition it doesn't matter who he is.



Hey, maybe cesare is anonymous and smokedout is anonymous which places the anonymous bamalama on the same footing, yeah?

Lol.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 13, 2013)

The Kim jock un purges continue through the night.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 13, 2013)

fucks all this then


----------



## LiamO (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You really have made an absurd dick of yourself on this thread a while ago and should probably not carry on.



FridgeMagnet gives himself some good advice... then promptly ignores it by banning, not one but two posters, for basically having the temerity disagree with a long-time poster...

*this is a local forum for local people*

cesare... your posts last night are a _long_ way away from your usual quality.

Too much Yuletide Spirits and not enough Christmas spirit, I reckon.


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> friedaweed
> 
> You've toyed with me for ten years. We spent the first four playing unearthly games at unearthly hours. Admit it.  You're relying that some glitter-freckled angel is about to parachute you from the wheeliebin of guardian life. Or that you could love me an despair


Are you making me an indecent proposal here C?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 13, 2013)

You know, that particular instance was completely unfair and I've lifted the bans. It's too tempting sometimes. This thread is still utter rubbish though.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> so I'd suggest politics is and has been very much on her agenda for a long time, and Id guess that the piece in the Labour supporting Sunday People, which was what really broke her in the media, was probably arranged through party contacts rather than falling out of the sky.  IMO the idea that shes too stupid to believe her poltical convictions, or to really understand politics, is far more offensive than saying her politics are shit.


Do you think people should sign (or have signed, i think it's closed now) her petition? It seems tohave got her a platform to speak in Parliament.

Though saying that, why didn't the WoW petition receive as much support and success as quickly?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 13, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not conspiracy theory given that she has an agent marketing her stuff, and we quite probably only know about her at all because of the efforts of that agent, given that she was signed up before this thread started. Her public profile is not accidental.


retracted.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You know, that particular instance was completely unfair and I've lifted the bans. It's too tempting sometimes. This thread is still utter rubbish though.


You're right it's rubbish, because that's what the saint jack fan club have made it,that's what youse want.
It's no where near as rubbish as your partisan moddin though,well done...again


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I'm not obsessed  I couldn't give a toss about bananalama bloke (was he you ?)
> 
> My loves not with the banned shits but the people I have played with in the death of the night , for years love*


Get a hold of yourself


----------



## trashpony (Dec 13, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> This agent thing is concerning. I can't really imagine why she would need one. She's just a blogger that wrote a book and appears on the odd tv show. Why on earth would that require extra help?
> 
> Also she would have had to have chosen the person to represent her. Were DCD the only ones available? Did the Labour party choose them? Are they labour donors or something?


Maybe she wants to build a career out of it. I don't see what's so fucking weird about it


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Maybe she wants to build a career out of it. I don't see what's so fucking weird about it


There's nothing "weird" about it,it's what she is...


----------



## trashpony (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> There's nothing "weird" about it,it's what she is...


So what?


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> So what?


Exactly


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Maybe she wants to build a career out of it. I don't see what's so fucking weird about it


THis thread's gotten a bit weird, i retract the above statement. I'm not a fan of sales and marketing types. I have no problem if she wants to be in the media or write cookery books, it's just sad that's the price one has to pay to do so. 

Just so long as she doesn't end up on a sofa with andrew neill and portillo!


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You know, that particular instance was completely unfair and I've lifted the bans. It's too tempting sometimes. This thread is still utter rubbish though.


You should have just binned the thread, so we could start again criticising her politics not measuring how poor she is.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

LiamO said:


> FridgeMagnet gives himself some good advice... then promptly ignores it by banning, not one but two posters, for basically having the temerity disagree with a long-time poster...
> 
> *this is a local forum for local people*
> 
> ...


Oh, fuck off Liam


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> You know, that particular instance was completely unfair and I've lifted the bans. It's too tempting sometimes. This thread is still utter rubbish though.


You were spoiling for a fight last night. How's about you contribute or mod on a thread, but not both. Where you're contributing, leave the modding to others, eh?


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You were spoiling for a fight last night. How's about you contribute or mod on a thread, but not both. Where you're contributing, leave the modding to others, eh?


What's wrong with a fight?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> What's wrong with a fight?


Nothing.  But mod-helmets should be against the rules.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nothing.  But mod-helmets should be against the rules.


You can't be a baby eating anarchist clutching a rule book


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> You should have just binned the thread, so we could start again criticising her politics not measuring how poor she is.


Why?Just cos ye made a wee bit of a tit out of yourself last night?Or because your trying to censor legitimate criticism of saint jack of monroe?Should we bin all the other threads about media types on here?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> You can't be a baby eating anarchist clutching a rule book


AKA the Hatboy paradox.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Why?Just cos ye made a wee bit of a tit out of yourself last night?Or because your trying to censor legitimate criticism of saint jack of monroe?Should we bin all the other threads about media types on here?


I might be rubbish at trying to get threads binned, but at least I don't spend my fucking time having a go at people for not being poor enough. Your specious comparison of this woman to Laurie Penny with her private education is a real eye-opener into your politics.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> AKA the Hatboy paradox.


Hatboy was before my time, what was it that he did?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Hatboy was before my time, what was it that he did?


And mine, tbh. I've heard stories - a mod who changed other people's posts.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And mine, tbh. I've heard stories - a mod who changed other people's posts.


Post editing's had a resurgence recently


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I might be rubbish at trying to get threads binned, but at least I don't spend my fucking time having a go at people for not being poor enough. Your specious comparison of this woman to Laurie Penny with her private education is a real eye-opener into your politics.


More disingenuous crap pull your fingers out of your lugs and listen to what people say.Havin my politics judged by an anarchist trying to sensor threads,that's a good one


----------



## Belushi (Dec 13, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And mine, tbh. I've heard stories - a mod who changed other people's posts.


 
He used to refer to it as 'tidying them up' iirc


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> More disingenuous crap pull your fingers out of your lugs and listen to what people say.Havin my politics judged by an anarchist trying to sensor threads,that's a good one


I'm not an anarchist


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 13, 2013)

Could someone summarise the 73 pages of this thread in one sentence please? I'm curious as to whether I missed out on a bunfight or something having not been on board at the beginning.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I'm not an anarchist


Well that's that line of defence fucked then


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Well that's that line of defence fucked then


I don't need a defence *at all*. I couldn't give a flying fuck what you think of me, and right now whatever criticism you throw my way in an attempt to distract people from your shit politics is making me smile.


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 13, 2013)

what a fucking joke this thread is.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> Could someone summarise the 73 pages of this thread in one sentence please? I'm curious as to whether I missed out on a bunfight or something having not been on board at the beginning.


Aye, nobody's allowed to question the relevance/honesty/politicks/media presence/motivation/trajectory of saint jack of monroe,under threat of bein head charged/misrepresented/slandered/name called/banned by her footstampin fan club.It's all a wee bit curious...


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I don't need a defence *at all*. I couldn't give a flying fuck what you think of me, and right now whatever criticism you throw my way in an attempt to distract people from your shit politics is making me smile.


I was talking about me 
Pull those fingers out cesare


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I don't need a defence *at all*. I couldn't give a flying fuck what you think of me, and right now whatever criticism you throw my way in an attempt to distract people from your shit politics is making me smile.


Maybe,just maybe, if you can create some personal beef here we can lose the subject of the thread in another few pages of name calling?Good luck with that...


----------



## trashpony (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Aye, nobody's allowed to question the relevance/honesty/politicks/media presence/motivation/trajectory of saint jack of monroe,under threat of bein head charged/misrepresented/slandered/name called/banned by her footstampin fan club.It's all a wee bit curious...



You're absolutely allowed to question it. But some of the accusations levelled at her on this thread are bizarre. And people aren't usually all good or all bad but a tad more nuanced and complex which is something you seem utterly unable to understand.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> what a fucking joke this thread is.


Should be retitled the "not poor enough" thread imo


----------



## bi0boy (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Aye, nobody's allowed to question the relevance/honesty/politicks/media presence/motivation/trajectory of saint jack of monroe,under threat of bein head charged/misrepresented/slandered/name called/banned by her footstampin fan club.It's all a wee bit curious...



You what?


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

bi0boy said:


> You what?


Like i said it's all a wee bit curious


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> You're absolutely allowed to question it. But some of the accusations levelled at her on this thread are bizarre. And people aren't usually all good or all bad but a tad more nuanced and complex which is something you seem utterly unable to understand.


Are we reading the same thread?You've seen the last ten odd pages of name calling/arbitrary bans.Odd's a good word for it


----------



## prunus (Dec 13, 2013)

bamalama said:


> Maybe,just maybe, if you can create some personal beef here we can lose the subject of the thread in another few pages of name calling?Good luck with that...



Mmmmmmmm, personal beef..... <drools>


----------



## xenon (Dec 13, 2013)

Fuck me this is boring now. Really, really boring. I'm not agin Jack. I just have concerns her message is all to readily appropriated into anti claimant rhetoric and I think her onion soup is shit. At least put some home brand noodles in it.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

FWIW that last comment of mine on her blog is still awaiting moderation. And good to see that bamalama and Frances are unbanned, even if bamalama still has his/her head up their arse.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

TruXta said:


> It's not - it's pointing out that a fair bit of the criticism was of the sort laid out by cesare, i.e. shit. I shan't speak for others, but as someone who's criticised smokey et al I've always made it clear that her politics is fair game, it's the whole "I'm prolier than thou" shit which leaves a bad taste in my mouth.



I'd say that the class aspect *does* need to be examined (it gives an indication of Ms. Monroe's perspective and relative expectations, if nothing else), but that it isn't absolutely necessary for the interlocutor to establish that they're "considerably more class-conscious than yow!"


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I'd say that the class aspect *does* need to be examined (it gives an indication of Ms. Monroe's perspective and relative expectations, if nothing else), but that it isn't absolutely necessary for the interlocutor to establish that they're "considerably more class-conscious than yow!"



Class aspects are often rewarding aspects of inquiry, indeed.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Should be retitled the "not poor enough" thread imo



I can't be arsed going round in circles on this, but that is a complete strawman

No-one has said she isn't poor enough, quite the opposite, she is too poor, so poor in fact its suspicious, and since we found out that the only way she could make her tenner a week thing work on paper is by under-claiming nearly £100 a week of benefits.  that raises big questions, because she must have known about Income Support/Child Tax Credit, she must have been claiming it when she was out of work completely, so why did she close her claim when she got fifty quid a weeks worth of work - or is the whole tenner a week thing a complete fabrication dreamed up by Jack and the Sunday People?

none of that means she wasnt poor, or is criticising her on a prolier than thou basis, its questioning her honesty because the facts either don't stack up or are very strange


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Really?
> 
> And I know that people think I'm banging my own agenda here but there is no fucking way a man would be subject to this level of shit.



There's no agenda to that other than pointing up something that's sadly accurate.  A bloke would get (and does get  ) patted on the back often enough to deform his spine, if he's a single parent and does an other-than-bad job of it, let alone going through any trials and tribulations _a la_ Ms. Monroe.  



> There's also single parenting and single parenting. On another thread, a man who says he's a single parent happily admits that he's stopped contributing to his child's life because he's struggling a bit financially at the moment.



TBF, that was with his ex's consent, but I take your point.



> However much I'm struggling financially, stopping feeding and clothing my child isn't an option. And it isn't for most mothers who generally are responsible for keeping children alive.



And there's the rub - *because* you do what's socially-expected of you *and what you expect from yourself as a decent person and mother*, you're pretty much condemned to that division of gender labour, because it's assumed to be "normal".  Just another of the 1001 ways that patriarchy can asymmetrically affect women.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I've said elsewhere 'well meaning lauborite' in the mould of owen and others (politically, owens doing alright financially). Thats not evil, its a sad waste and the party machine will use them and spit them out but its not bad...



Not just the party machine, though.  Let's be clear that part of the worry on this thread is about the use to which *the media* have or still may put her ideas - as representative of the ability of a pov to cope on thruppence ha'penny rather than the generous welfare payments most of us get.  It doesn't matter that rational people and even Ms. Monroe herself state that what her £10 a week thing shows is that you *can't* manage, the media are still able to spin their tale *and* have it believed by the gullible, the malicious and the intellectually lazy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> She's said (on a number of occasions) that she doesn't think it is. She was/is (I think) trying to help other people who are desperately trying to feed their families on really limited budgets.
> 
> Obviously because she is a member of the labour party, this is just a massive political stunt



Nah, but because she's a member *and* a party activist, she has left herself open to such claims, whether they're accurate or not.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes I am



Identity politics of the worst sort! Next you'll be boasting about how often you check your privilege!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes, thats clear from the piece, it doesnt explain why she wasnt claiming the benefits she was due - which given she was on housing/council tax benefit seems incredibly strange



I don't know about "incredibly strange". It's pretty much a feature of the system that unless you have professional benefits advice, you'll miss something or other, and that's the way the state likes it - minimised expenditure due to having a labyrinthine system.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I can't be arsed going round in circles on this, but that is a complete strawman
> 
> No-one has said she isn't poor enough, quite the opposite, she is too poor, so poor in fact its suspicious, and since we found out that the only way she could make her tenner a week thing work on paper is by under-claiming nearly £100 a week of benefits.  that raises big questions, because she must have known about Income Support/Child Tax Credit, she must have been claiming it when she was out of work completely, so why did she close her claim when she got fifty quid a weeks worth of work - or is the whole tenner a week thing a complete fabrication dreamed up by Jack and the Sunday People?
> 
> none of that means she wasnt poor, or is criticising her on a prolier than thou basis, its questioning her honesty because the facts either don't stack up or are very strange


Under claiming? given how easily claims go awry these days isn't it more likely the system fucked her about? Are you seriously suggesting the engineered this situation by underclaiming in this way? How would that even be possible?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> TBF why the fuck should that matter?



Because she's pointing out that there's nothing personal to her disagreement with smokedout, however much bamalama implies that there is, and that cesare is a member of Ms. Monroe's "fanclub", you dweeb.

Really, Lengel. Must do better! See me in my office for a thrashing!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I wish their were more mythical hammers I could reference to look clever.



There's always John Henry's hammer.  A decent reference from a worker's pov.


----------



## 8115 (Dec 13, 2013)

The implication is that she lived on lobster tails and milk vodka whilst unemployed, but one week didn't quite have enough for the gas bill so had to feed herself for £10, from whence she has spun a media career telling poor people how to live.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Hatboy was before my time, what was it that he did?



He used to edit people's posts, and not for spelling or grammar reasons.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 13, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Under claiming? given how easily claims go awry these days isn't it more likely the system fucked her about? Are you seriously suggesting the engineered this situation by underclaiming in this way? How would that even be possible?



Obviously I have no idea what happened in this case.  (or about most of what's going on with this thread)

And yes it is possible that the system fucked her about.

But when I worked in benefits (and that was 20 years ago with a less convoluted system and staff who were generally more co-operative rather than under targets to behave like cunts) it was by no means uncommon to find people who were eligible for things they weren't claiming, in some cases because they had no idea that a particular benefit existed, or because they mistakenly thought they wouldn't be eligible for it (a common one here is people who have mistakenly got the message that housing benefit is only for "people on benefits" and don't realise you can claim if you're working but on a low income.)

The housing benefits section I worked for then had a principle that we would tell people that they may be eligible for [whatever] and offer advice on how / where to claim it (I think we kept a stock of DSS claim forms for most things which we could give to people.)

Then there are some people who may be eligible for something but won't claim either because they are too proud, "don't want a hand-out", confused beyond redemption by the system, or just can't face the shit that the DWP now hands out as well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> I'm not an anarchist



That's always been a great disappointment to me.
Still, for a red, you're decent enough.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I don't know about "incredibly strange". It's pretty much a feature of the system that unless you have professional benefits advice, you'll miss something or other, and that's the way the state likes it - minimised expenditure due to having a labyrinthine system.



For sure, but this is like missing jobseekers allowance if youre unemployed and she must have been claiming IS/CTC at some point so she must have known about them, and if she was using foodbanks she'd have been told about.  It's implausible she didnt know or certainly far less plausible than the tenner a week thing being cooked up by her and  tabloud


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> That's always been a great disappointment to me.
> Still, for a red, you're decent enough.


Well you know as well as I do that saying "I'm not an anarchist" means as much/little as saying "I am an anarchist"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> Well you know as well as I do that saying "I'm not an anarchist" means as much/little as saying "I am an anarchist"



True!
I often ask "who are you calling an anarchist?" when someone trots out the old "this is an anarchist board, innit?" trope.  Almost as often as I ask "who you calling a leftie, you cunt?".


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 13, 2013)

to be honest, i'm starting to have that reaction when someone says i'm a leftie


----------



## xenon (Dec 13, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Obviously I have no idea what happened in this case.  (or about most of what's going on with this thread)
> 
> And yes it is possible that the system fucked her about.
> 
> ...



Certainly when I had to claim JSA a few years ago, I wasn't told / didn't know about the disability premium, thus didn't get it. Fortunately I was only out of work for a couple of months then. Different on both accounts now.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

smokedout said:


> For sure, but this is like missing jobseekers allowance if youre unemployed and she must have been claiming IS/CTC at some point so she must have known about them, and if she was using foodbanks she'd have been told about.  It's implausible she didnt know or certainly far less plausible than the tenner a week thing being cooked up by her and  tabloud



With regard to the benefits thing, in my (unfortunately fairly geographically-broad) experience, everything boils down to two issues - whether your local jobcentreplus has staff that give a fuck, and whether you have local access to decent advice.  If you have either of those, you stand a chance of claiming the appropriate benefits to which you're entitled, but if you happen to live somewhere where that isn't the case (whether that's because your local system is overwhelmed, or because local advice and decent jc+ workers don't exist in your area) then you may be lucky to claim anything, let alone the benefits appropriate to your situation. I've helped people as far afield as Manchester, Norwich, Cardiff and Dover with claims and appeals because they couldn't access local advice or DWP workers who gave a fuck, so I'm never surprised, even when someone's narration about their travails seem implausible.

There's also the issue that once you start a media narrative, it's easier to continue down the path, than to say "whoa, I misrepresented my situation a bit there/I forgot about this or that", especially when you know there'll be people ready and willing to jump on you for the slightest inconsistency.


----------



## chilango (Dec 13, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> to be honest, i'm starting to have that reaction when someone says i'm a leftie



Nobody says I'm a leftie these days .


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> to be honest, i'm starting to have that reaction when someone says i'm a leftie



I don't mind defining myself as a "leftie", because *I* know what I mean by it, but when someone else says it, particularly someone from the centre or the right, I'm generally unimpressed with the implications "leftie" has when coming from them, IYSWIM?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I don't mind defining myself as a "leftie", because *I* know what I mean by it, but when someone else says it, particularly someone from the centre or the right, I'm generally unimpressed with the implications "leftie" has when coming from them, IYSWIM?


Yep. I'm exactly the same.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> With regard to the benefits thing, in my (unfortunately fairly geographically-broad) experience, everything boils down to two issues - whether your local jobcentreplus has staff that give a fuck, and whether you have local access to decent advice.  If you have either of those, you stand a chance of claiming the appropriate benefits to which you're entitled, but if you happen to live somewhere where that isn't the case (whether that's because your local system is overwhelmed, or because local advice and decent jc+ workers don't exist in your area) then you may be lucky to claim anything, let alone the benefits appropriate to your situation. I've helped people as far afield as Manchester, Norwich, Cardiff and Dover with claims and appeals because they couldn't access local advice or DWP workers who gave a fuck, so I'm never surprised, even when someone's narration about their travails seem implausible.
> 
> There's also the issue that once you start a media narrative, it's easier to continue down the path, than to say "whoa, I misrepresented my situation a bit there/I forgot about this or that", especially when you know there'll be people ready and willing to jump on you for the slightest inconsistency.



It's a pretty big inconsistency, she did have two newspaper columns when she did that interview, there is a certain onus on her to get this shit right

I suspect yourr second paragraph is what happened and she was probably manipulated by the People - go on, do it for Ed - but if you accept the tenner a week thing is not that helpful then if it turns out to be based on a lie that's pretty damning imo


----------



## treelover (Dec 13, 2013)

LiamO said:


> This would have been common enough in Britain (and certainly in Ireland) not that long ago.
> 
> I remember Alan Ball (captained Everton and England) saying how his dad always took the white of the one egg they had for breakfast so the (slightly built) Alan could have the yolk.




Wasn't Ball a Tory?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2013)

treelover said:


> Wasn't Ball a Tory?


Some people from poor backgrounds become tories. He was probably talking about the years of rationing. My mum has many similar stories from that time. Eggs were pretty precious things.


----------



## treelover (Dec 13, 2013)

trashpony said:


> It's not being a wee strip of a thing in itself - it's more the fact that she seems to take pleasure in abstinence. Dunno - I could be wrong but there's something about the way she talks about food that reminds me of my sister before she plunged into fully fledged anorexia




its incredible how we are all speculating in public about the private issues of an individual, even if she is in the public eye.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 13, 2013)

treelover said:


> its incredible how we are all speculating in public about the private issues of an individual, even if she is in the public eye.


It's more than fair to discuss private issues that she herself has publicised openly.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> I don't mind defining myself as a "leftie", because *I* know what I mean by it, but when someone else says it, particularly someone from the centre or the right, I'm generally unimpressed with the implications "leftie" has when coming from them, IYSWIM?



They think you're Rick off The Young Ones but you think Rick is a cunt as well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 13, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> They think you're Rick off The Young Ones but you think Rick is a cunt as well.



Pretty much.


----------



## cesare (Dec 13, 2013)

treelover said:


> its incredible how we are all speculating in public about the private issues of an individual, even if she is in the public eye.


The only reason she's in the public eye is because she's been publicising her private matters


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 13, 2013)

Well she never replied to my tweet regarding Reeves' comments. No reason she should reply to me at all, I guess. Who the fuck am I? But it would have been nice to see a dialogue form from that as those comments are hard to deny and hard to justify from any point of view.


----------



## treelover (Dec 13, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Not just the party machine, though.  Let's be clear that part of the worry on this thread is about the use to which *the media* have or still may put her ideas - as representative of the ability of a pov to cope on thruppence ha'penny rather than the generous welfare payments most of us get.  It doesn't matter that rational people and even Ms. Monroe herself state that what her £10 a week thing shows is that you *can't* manage, the media are still able to spin their tale *and* have it believed by the gullible, the malicious and the intellectually lazy.



wait till her book comes out, it will be more visible and will be used as ammunition by the right.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2013)

some cunt like delingpole or littlewit will aim a dig at it or three but I really don't see it as something that the right media bubble can use anyway. Might be wrong though, I frequently am.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 13, 2013)

treelover said:


> wait till her book comes out, it will be more visible and will be used as ammunition by the right.


What's in it? Can you identify any other uses of her stuff by the right? Set the scene for us.


----------



## bamalama (Dec 13, 2013)

cesare said:


> The only reason she's in the public eye is because she's been publicising her private matters


10 outta 10 for consistency there cesare


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 14, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> <snip>
> Really, Lengel. Must do better! *See me in my office for a thrashing!*



Christmas has come early this year.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 14, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Christmas has come early this year.



And so have you, by the sound of it!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 14, 2013)




----------



## TruXta (Dec 14, 2013)

Seems my second comment wasn't deemed appropriate for her blog. Hmmmm.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

Does seem like she doesn't like the difficult questions. If she intends to continue speaking public she'll have to change her mind.


----------



## Balbi (Dec 15, 2013)

Liz Jones has compared her casserole recipe to apartheid today. No, seriously.

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/12/...-my-chicken-casserole-recipe-to-er-apartheid/


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

I once compared a biscuit to the minimum wage. It was a nice biscuit though.

Clearly the feverish right in the media are getting a bit rattled by people like (or perhaps just) Jack.

The article is so stupid it doesn't really bear closer examination. It's just an attack piece.


----------



## Nylock (Dec 15, 2013)

heh, nice riposte to the mail article


----------



## treelover (Dec 15, 2013)

Its such a difficult one this, if she was a 'useful idiot' for the Tories, the Austerians, the bigots, etc, then why is the Daily Mail, etc so viciously attacking her, she must be getting under their skin, or is it they can see she may become a even more 'useful idiot' for the L/P and must be smeared?


Nb, I don't think she is an idiot of any kind.


----------



## xenon (Dec 15, 2013)

Liz Jones LOL.
.


----------



## treelover (Dec 15, 2013)

> How very dare Liz jones suggest that you are of the I’m all right Jack mentality, when she spends such fortunes on beauty treatments and designer clothes trying to make herself attractive, which of course will never work with her extremely ugly personality. Where you jack give your spare cash to charity and spread joy and love with what you do. The hope and insiration you spread through your recepie and blogs have helped me immeasurably all Liz jones does is depresses herself and those around her.
> 
> Reply




comments on her blog

Not sneering but Jack really is developing a devoted following.


----------



## treelover (Dec 15, 2013)

> Dear Mr Monroe,
> 
> WITHOUT PREJUDICE
> 
> ...




Looks like Jack is going to get sued for using a jpeg of a Tesco's Chicken which was in the screen shot she used from the D/M, better watch what we post on here!


----------



## The Pale King (Dec 15, 2013)

It seems that Jack is to succeed Jamie Oliver in the J Sainsbury adverts:

http://www.theguardian.com/business...sainsburys-campaign-leftovers-love-your-roast

Monroe said she was thrilled to have been approached by Sainsbury's for her first commercial collaboration, after turning down a succession of other offers from its high street rivals, understood to have included the middle-class magnet Waitrose. "Sainsbury's is where I've always shopped as it's at the end of my road. I've had approaches from all the other major supermarkets but it would not have felt right or honest to have worked with them. I know Sainsbury's Basic range like the back of my hand and I like their ethical policies. There's been some give and take – I only use free-range meat, for example – and it's a brave move of Sainsbury's to take me on. I'm not a cheeky chappy like Jamie – I am a tattooed, gobby single mum."


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

> I am a tattooed, gobby single mum."



Tottooed single mum, in 2013, edgy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2013)

doubt she'll get the same wedge as olliver, he did his stint wit ole J sainz when he was on tele all the time, bare books out, chatshows the works.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

The Pale King said:


> It seems that Jack is to succeed Jamie Oliver in the J Sainsbury adverts:
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/business...sainsburys-campaign-leftovers-love-your-roast
> 
> Monroe said she was thrilled to have been approached by Sainsbury's for her first commercial collaboration, after turning down a succession of other offers from its high street rivals, understood to have included the middle-class magnet Waitrose. "Sainsbury's is where I've always shopped as it's at the end of my road. I've had approaches from all the other major supermarkets but it would not have felt right or honest to have worked with them. I know Sainsbury's Basic range like the back of my hand and I like their ethical policies. There's been some give and take – I only use free-range meat, for example – and it's a brave move of Sainsbury's to take me on. I'm not a cheeky chappy like Jamie – I am a tattooed, gobby single mum."



Another 20 pages?


----------



## 8115 (Dec 15, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> Another 20 pages?


70


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 15, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> Another 20 pages?



More like 200.

Worth mentioning that Progress (right-wing Labour party faction) is funded by Sainsbury's at this point?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 15, 2013)

At least Sainsbury's isn't currently using workfare, so that's something..


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

8115 said:


> 70



fair doos - im still a noob so my predictions are probably a bit off ...


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> More like 200.
> 
> Worth mentioning that Progress (right-wing Labour party faction) is funded by Sainsbury's at this point?



Must resist conspiraloon phrase - "join the dots"!!!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2013)

So her agent's organised a bidding war for her between supermarkets, and she's presenting the result of that bidding war as some kind of noble choice. 

She's smooth. I'm sure Sainsbury's will be pleased to hear her saying that guff.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

You'd think living on next to nothing and shopping at your local Sainsburys would have fostered a degree of resentment. 

Or maybe they won the bidding war cos they have cctv of her shoplifting a six pack of Special Brew and a couple of potnoodles.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 15, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Or maybe they won the bidding war cos they have cctv of her shoplifting a six pack of Special Brew and a couple of potnoodles.



A sad part of me wants this to be true.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 15, 2013)

The Pale King said:


> It seems that Jack is to succeed Jamie Oliver in the J Sainsbury adverts:
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/business...sainsburys-campaign-leftovers-love-your-roast
> 
> Monroe said she was thrilled to have been approached by Sainsbury's for her first commercial collaboration, after turning down a succession of other offers from its high street rivals, understood to have included the middle-class magnet Waitrose. "Sainsbury's is where I've always shopped as it's at the end of my road. I've had approaches from all the other major supermarkets but it would not have felt right or honest to have worked with them. I know Sainsbury's Basic range like the back of my hand and I like their ethical policies. There's been some give and take – I only use free-range meat, for example – and it's a brave move of Sainsbury's to take me on. I'm not a cheeky chappy like Jamie – I am a tattooed, gobby single mum."



Sainsbury's basic's the worst ever Worse than tesco's essentials or whatever they're called, worse even than asda smartprice- Every product comes with a written proviso that essentially says "Yeah, this is a bit shit...but _you're_ buying it". Sainsbury's basics line is a walking pisstake. (Iif it could walk).

Come on, let's have it right - I know I've probably made a dick of myself earlier in this thread with the lightbulb thing and such, but all I was really getting at was that Jack's whole shtick is angling after a paid gig in the commentariat/labour party - And that's without even mentioning the way her gig can be twisted by the deserving/undeserving poor wallahs. And now here she is. Getting a paid gig. With Saino's.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

Would being involved in an advertising campaingn put paid to being involved in frontline politics?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2013)

She's said she's not interested in standing for any party just now. And she's taken a paid appearance for Sainsbury's, so what? She's got bills to pay like anyone else


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 15, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> Would being involved in an advertising career put paid to being involved in frontline politics?



Well taking an advertising butty from sainsbury's would/should preclude a person from  selling themselves as the voice of impoverished benefit claimants up and down the land. IMO.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She's said she's not interested in standing for any party just now. And she's taken a paid appearance for Sainsbury's, so what? She's got bills to pay like anyone else



But she is interested in attacking the coalition on her blog but no interest in commenting on Labour's record.

She's a labour wanker and I have no idea why you feel the need to defend her so much.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 15, 2013)

revol68 said:


> You'd think living on next to nothing and shopping at your local Sainsburys would have fostered a degree of resentment.


?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2013)

revol68 said:


> She's a labour wanker and I have no idea why you feel the need to defend her so much.


Because it fucking winds you and others like you up.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

and sorry weepiper but everyone has bills to pay, most of us don't market ourselves as the face of austerity cooking, lick the arse of the Labour Party and then sign up to advertise Sainsburys shitty basics range.


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 15, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Well taking an advertising butty from sainsbury's would/should preclude a person from  selling themselves as the voice of impoverished benefit claimants up and down the land. IMO.



Tbf she's pointed out that she's no longer an impoverished benefit claimant herself.

I think that's the nicest thing I can say about this though.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

revol68 said:


> and sorry weepiper but everyone has bills to pay, most of us don't market ourselves as the face of austerity cooking, lick the arse of the Labour Party and then sign up to advertise Sainsburys shitty basics range.



now the marketing can be passed over to sainsburys to show how much important corportate social responsibility to them is. so it is good in a kinda big society kinda way...


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Because it fucking winds you and others like you up.



it doesn't wind me up at all, it just baffles me how someone with socialist politics has anytime for her.


----------



## Delroy Booth (Dec 15, 2013)

weepiper said:


> She's said she's not interested in standing for any party just now. And she's taken a paid appearance for Sainsbury's, so what? She's got bills to pay like anyone else



I think my worry is that come 2015 and we've got Prime Minister Miliband that she'll end up being the public face of nice friendly Labour austerity policies.

But really there isn't a huge amount of evidence to suggest she's aiming for a big political role, she's probably trying to make a bit of coin off the back of her blog which is perfectly understandable. We'll have to wait and see how it all develops.


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 15, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Because it fucking winds you and others like you up.



Nice one for being honest anyway. I always felt a bit of a twat slagging Jack off to you, coz you're a poster I've got a fair bit of respect for, but if you're only defending her for a wind-up, well I can get behind that. Nice one


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> ?



god, you're such a liberal.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 15, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Sainsbury's basic's the worst ever Worse than tesco's essentials or whatever they're called, worse even than asda smartprice- Every product comes with a written proviso that essentially says "Yeah, this is a bit shit...but _you're_ buying it". Sainsbury's basics line is a walking pisstake. (Iif it could walk).


It's exactly the same.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Nice one for being honest anyway. I always felt a bit of a twat slagging Jack off to you, coz you're a poster I've got a fair bit of respect for, but if you're only defending her for a wind-up, well I can get behind that. Nice one



I'm not only defending her for a windup but I can't deny I take pleasure in going against the tide sometimes.


----------



## Belushi (Dec 15, 2013)

I've lived off Sainsburys basics before now but I refuse to believe you can make anything nice from them.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

revol68 said:


> it doesn't wind me up at all, it just baffles me how someone with socialist politics has anytime for her.



what do you reckon sainsburys for  christmas will donate stuff to foodbanks as part of that compaign?

alan hansen kicking the ball about in the homeless world cup etc


----------



## Belushi (Dec 15, 2013)

Actually tbf the basics butter is okay.


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 15, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> Sainsbury's basic's the worst ever Worse than tesco's essentials or whatever they're called, worse even than asda smartprice- Every product comes with a written proviso that essentially says "Yeah, this is a bit shit...but _you're_ buying it". Sainsbury's basics line is a walking pisstake. (Iif it could walk).



I use quite a lot of their basics range and find them pretty good..........don't give a fuck what's written on the side if the stuff does it's job


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2013)

Well it clears up a question for me. The way she's fallen in line to push a strong message about believing in Sainsbury's shows me one thing: she is not being used by the media; she's cynically and effectively marketing herself and her story to corporations for the highest price she can get for it.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 15, 2013)

Looks like she is doing sponsored tweets for Wilkinson's too https://twitter.com/MsJackMonroe/status/412251588867403776


----------



## Frances Lengel (Dec 15, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's exactly the same.



It isn't - there's not much to choose, I'll give you that, but have you seeen saino's cheap chocolate digestives? With that writing that says "Yeah, there's less chocolate on these. In fact these biscuits are shite really", no other supermarket economy/basics range has crap like that written on them. Saino's take the piss like no other.

Anyway, my thoughts on Jack have been made clear ages ago, so I'm sacking this thread off now - If I post again on this thread quote me here and say "You're not a  man of your word".


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well it clears up a question for me. The way she's fallen in line to push a strong message about believing in Sainsbury's shows me one thing: she is not being used by the media; she's cynically and effectively marketing herself and her story to corporations for the highest price she can get for it.



of course she was, it was patronising borderline sexist shite to imagine it any other way, she is no naive waif.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 15, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> It isn't - there's not much to choose, I'll give you that, but have you seeen saino's cheap chocolate digestives? With that writing that says "Yeah, there's less chocolate on these. In fact these biscuits are shite really", no other supermarket economy/basics range has crap like that written on them. Saino's take the piss like no other.



http://toys.usvsth3m.com/sainsburys-basics-blurb/


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 15, 2013)

mentalchik said:


> I use quite a lot of their basics range and find them pretty good..........don't give a fuck what's written on the side if the stuff does it's job


yup, this. 
actually, I think packagingwise I prefer sainsburys value stuff to morrisons - maybe I just like being patronised by words *and* pictures instead of just looking for a cartoony squiggle of colour


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 15, 2013)

if they could bring out a non-brand-name budget cola, that actually tastes like brand-name cola that would be heaven...


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

xslavearcx said:


> if they could bring out a non-brand-name budget cola, that actually tastes like brand-name cola that would be heaven...



Tesco finest was better than any other cola and still cheaper.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2013)

My nearest supermarket is a Sainsbury's but only one of those little Tesco Metro type ones. It's more expensive than the Waitrose further up the hill.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

yeah the marks and spencers in town is cheaper than the tesco express beside me.


----------



## Belushi (Dec 15, 2013)

I do way too much shopping at Tesco Express. But its right next to my flat and so easy to pop in after work..


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 15, 2013)

My nearest supermarkets are lidl in one direction, and a middling-sized sainsburys in the other (ie town, which means a tesco, a morrisons, a little waitrose, and at least two sainsbury locals within a few minutes of each other - ace for reduced section afternoon sprees).
Still like the market best though 

edit: there ends today's incisive political commentary.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 15, 2013)

I go to Asda now I've got a car again but for a long time when I was without the Waitrose was the only option. It's actually possible to shop there for a reasonableish cost if you don't buy anything branded. And it noises the other customers right up if you go in with torn trainers and a baby in an umbrella buggy.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

I think it's kinda sad she (seemingly) thinks this is how things should be.

Hawking cheap cuts of turkey for Basic Christmas Sandwiches? Kinda leaves me cold here.

Sorry.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> I think it's kinda sad she (seemingly) thinks this is how things should be.
> 
> Hawking cheap cuts of turkey for Basic Christmas Sandwiches? Kinda leaves me cold here.
> 
> Sorry.



If she'd any self respect she'd have stole from the Sainsburys Taste The Difference range instead.



> It is immoral to use private property in order to alleviate the horrible evils that result from the institution of private property.



As Stephen Fry once said.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

Not sure I get that quote, but he's smarter than me...not that it stops him appearing in ads (iirc).


----------



## smokedout (Dec 15, 2013)

*A Girl Called Jack* ‏@*MsJackMonroe*  1h
@*dylanorchard* Would you rather they chose someone dishonest, non-campaigning, to lie to people? Wow. At least with me you know what you get.

aww, she's doing it for us, god bless her

and its not like sainsbury play any role in the causes of food poverty after all


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

That's a stunningly naive thing for her to say: does she think they won't tell her what to say? She's not famed for her improvisational acting skills. They'll give her a script and set the scene and she'll go along with it. Bizarre comment.


----------



## Belushi (Dec 15, 2013)

I'm interested in seeing what the ad's are gong to be like. Is she going to be whipping up amazing tasty dishes using the basics line or is it going to be more honest 'Basics - they'll keep you alive'.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

And this is a story in the Guardian, how?

Does everyone get a mention in the national press when they sell out to big business now?


----------



## revol68 (Dec 15, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Not sure I get that quote, but he's smarter than me...not that it stops him appearing in ads (iirc).



sorry was a shit joke based on the act Stephen Fry has managed to pass himself off as Oscar Wilde for years now.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

Is their Basic range (Jack loves that word, no wonder they love Jack) notorious in any way? Is it filled with horse? Soylent Green? Malk (Simpsons reference - 10pts to Slytherin)


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 15, 2013)

revol68 said:


> sorry was a shit joke based on the act Stephen Fry has managed to pass himself off as Oscar Wilde for years now.


oh ok 

TBH as smart as he is, I have up on Fry years ago.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 15, 2013)

Sainsburys basic range - _because we deserve it_


----------



## tufty79 (Dec 15, 2013)

Nice one said:


> Sainsburys basic range - _because we deserve it_


----------



## The Pale King (Dec 15, 2013)

Frances Lengel said:


> It isn't - there's not much to choose, I'll give you that, but have you seeen saino's cheap chocolate digestives? With that writing that says "Yeah, there's less chocolate on these. In fact these biscuits are shite really", no other supermarket economy/basics range has crap like that written on them. Saino's take the piss like no other.
> 
> Anyway, my thoughts on Jack have been made clear ages ago, so I'm sacking this thread off now - If I post again on this thread quote me here and say "You're not a  man of your word".



You're not wrong on the basics range, Frances. The oven chips just _will fucking not _get crispy, nor turn any colour other than a ghostly white.
But your point about the ideology on the packets is spot on. Bag of carrots "A bit mis-shapen, just like you" style of thing. It's fucking weird. They also have a big sign behind the tills at my local one featuring pictures of rolling farmland overlayed with jolly cartoon people, all in their distinctive typeface and orange livery, "Our values make us different". No further explanation given. We fill in the blanks ourselves (Jack likes their ethics too). There's a lot of ideology going on in Sainsbury's...


----------



## Belushi (Dec 15, 2013)

> "A bit mis-shapen, just like you"


----------



## bamalama (Dec 16, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Because it fucking winds you and others like you up.


Seems to me the only one your winding up here is yourself


----------



## bamalama (Dec 16, 2013)

weepiper said:


> I'm not only defending her for a windup but I can't deny I take pleasure in going against the tide sometimes.


Penny...slowly...dropping


----------



## bamalama (Dec 16, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's exactly the same.


Aye, like you'd know


----------



## bamalama (Dec 16, 2013)

"...it's a brave move  of sainsburys to take me on.I'm not a cheeky chappy like (multi millionaire) jamie - i am a tattooed gobby single mum."

yeah


----------



## bamalama (Dec 16, 2013)

> And it noises the other customers right up if you go in with torn trainers and a baby in an umbrella buggy.



yeah


----------



## fiannanahalba (Dec 16, 2013)

This whole thing has been hilarious. Those who questioned her story and supposed poverty are fully vindicated. GIRFUY.


----------



## xenon (Dec 16, 2013)

What's GIRFUY?

The focussed examination and vitriol is a bit puzzling TBH. It only makes sense, so far as I can make out, if she was supposed to be the new voice of the left. See also Russel Brand.


----------



## Dexter Deadwood (Dec 16, 2013)

xenon said:


> What's GIRFUY?



It's this;
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=GIRFUY#


----------



## xenon (Dec 16, 2013)

OH. Less interesting than I might have hoped.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 16, 2013)

xenon said:


> What's GIRFUY?
> 
> The focussed examination and vitriol is a bit puzzling TBH. It only makes sense, so far as I can make out, if she was supposed to be the new voice of the left. See also Russel Brand.



on the contrary she copped shit for being the nice Islington liberal approved benefit claimant and being a labour party gimp.

Russel Brand for all his shortcomings doesn't pimp the labour party.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 16, 2013)

Belushi said:


> I'm interested in seeing what the ad's are gong to be like. Is she going to be whipping up amazing tasty dishes using the basics line or is it going to be more honest 'Basics - they'll keep you alive'.


"These Turky sandwiches will keep you going well into January! Proper pukka, and Duncan Smith's policies are killing people and forcing them to use foodbanks!"


----------



## weepiper (Dec 16, 2013)

bamalama said:


> yeah


yeah fucking what?


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 16, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:
			
		

> And this is a story in the Guardian, how?
> 
> Does everyone get a mention in the national press when they sell out to big business now?



Depends if you've got a multi-million pound PR machine behind you pulling the strings.


----------



## chilango (Dec 16, 2013)

Isn't time to put this thread to bed now?

Jack is well on the way to carving some sort of living out as the latest cookery darling of the metropolitan liberal Sunday Supplement set. Which, frankly is fair enough, and of no real concern to us.

The point where she can credibly present herself/be presented as "one of us" is gone.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 16, 2013)

revol68 said:


> on the contrary she copped shit for being the nice Islington liberal approved benefit claimant and being a labour party gimp.
> 
> Russel Brand for all his shortcomings doesn't pimp the labour party.



Just Alex Jones and David Icke....


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 16, 2013)

and hare krishna.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 16, 2013)

chilango said:


> The point where she can credibly present herself/be presented as "one of us" is gone.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> Depends if you've got a multi-million pound PR machine behind you pulling the strings.


Or the Guardian "in praise of IDS" thinks you represent actual poverty.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 16, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


>


She got that award in May and blogged about it then. I don't think she ever has pretended to be 'one of us' (whatever the fuck that means) - she's a single parent trying to make a living.

I'm sorry some of you are disappointed she isn't who you thought she was but I think that construct was largely in your heads.


----------



## Greebo (Dec 16, 2013)

chilango said:


> <snip>Jack is well on the way to carving some sort of living out as the latest cookery darling of the metropolitan liberal Sunday Supplement set. Which, frankly is fair enough, and of no real concern to us.<snip>


On Woman's Hour tomorrow (Tuesday).


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 16, 2013)

chilango said:


> Isn't time to put this thread to bed now?
> 
> Jack is well on the way to carving some sort of living out as the latest cookery darling of the metropolitan liberal Sunday Supplement set. Which, frankly is fair enough, and of no real concern to us.
> 
> The point where she can credibly present herself/be presented as "one of us" is gone.



good for another page of gloating by Team not Jack, then it'll die imo


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 16, 2013)

trashpony said:


> She got that award in May and blogged about it then. I don't think she ever has pretended to be 'one of us' (whatever the fuck that means) - she's a single parent trying to make a living.


She's a person trying to get rich, prepared to dissemble and talk utter fawning shite about a big corporation if they pay her enough.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 16, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> She's a person trying to get rich, prepared to dissemble and talk utter fawning shite about a big corporation if they pay her enough.


Yep. And she was long before this thread was started.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 16, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Yep. And she was long before this thread was started.


Yes, indeed.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 16, 2013)

Where's this dissembling then?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 16, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Where's this dissembling then?


'it would not have been honest to have advertised for anyone else'. 

bull fucking shit.


----------



## trashpony (Dec 16, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'it would not have been honest to have advertised for anyone else'.
> 
> bull fucking shit.


You think she's making up having been approached by other supermarkets?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 16, 2013)

trashpony said:


> I'm sorry some of you are disappointed she isn't who you thought she was but I think that construct was largely in your heads.


Perhaps it was. 
Perhaps you're right.



DotCommunist said:


> good for another page of gloating by Team not Jack, then it'll die imo


I'm certainly not gloating. I feel sorry for her in a way because she's opened herself to a metric bollock load of criticism from the left and the right. If she's happy with that, then fine. It's her life. I gave her the benefit of the doubt.

FWIW.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 16, 2013)

trashpony said:


> You think she's making up having been approached by other supermarkets?


No, I think she's misrepresenting the result of a bidding war set up by her agent.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 16, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No, I think she's misrepresenting the result of a bidding war set up by her agent.


So in reality you're making shit up and parading it as the honest to God truth. Why? There's plenty to rake her over the coals with, where's the need to make shit up?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 16, 2013)

TruXta said:


> So in reality you're making shit up and parading it as the honest to God truth. Why? There's plenty to rake her over the coals with, where's the need to make shit up?


Nope. I'm just not completely gullible. If you cannot see the dissembling in that statement about Sainsbury's, you're really a very credulous person.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 16, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nope. I'm just not completely gullible. If you cannot see the dissembling in that statement about Sainsbury's, you're really a very credulous person.


----------



## treelover (Dec 16, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> "These Turky sandwiches will keep you going well into January! Proper pukka, and Duncan Smith's policies are killing people and forcing them to use foodbanks!"



You can bet there will be much less 'political output' from Jack from now on


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 16, 2013)

i have difficulty giving a shit either way


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

*A Girl Called Jack* ‏@*MsJackMonroe*  9h
I'm just sad that people think I've let them down, and look for conspiracy in everything. Today I am sad about some human nature.

its human nature that's the problem, that's why we can't all see that Jack is bravely working for Sainsburys for us, not for the money

ffs she really is objectionable, selling out to a supermarket is one thing, pretending you've done it as some great fucking humanitarian gesture is pathetic, I'd have more respect for her if she was on twitter cackling and waving a wad of fifty pound notes in peoples faces


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 16, 2013)

She truly is history's greatest monster


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> She truly is history's greatest monster



nah, she's the kind of servile, self-serving shites that end up working for history's greatest monsters though


----------



## Nice one (Dec 16, 2013)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> She truly is history's greatest monster



second only to laurie penny


----------



## 8115 (Dec 16, 2013)

xenon said:


> What's GIRFUY?
> 
> The focussed examination and vitriol is a bit puzzling TBH. It only makes sense, so far as I can make out, if she was supposed to be the new voice of the left. See also Russel Brand.


No, no Russel Brand is amazing, remember.  He's a breath of fresh air, etc etc.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 16, 2013)

Brendan O'Neill is a nasty waste of space, makes me want to automatically leap to Jack's defence altho some of this rings true... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/b...k-monroe-the-guardians-favourite-poor-person/


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Dec 16, 2013)

Should be an interesting  Parliamentary discussion on Wednesday generated by someone doing something as objectional as promoting a petition. Theres also an earlier meeting there, where those affected by poverty will feed into those speaking at the debate. I'm bringing a few folk along who probably dont have the current advantages of Jack, or a lot of the posters on this thread, but want to speak out directly. I directed one of them to this thread and she just shook her head saying 'Really, is this what really pisses people off', naturally we had to use the library as neither of us have computers or internet...


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

Ed and Jack will save us, tomorrow, sponsored by Sainsbury's, exclusive to the The Guardian and featuring real poor people, how they must laugh at us.


----------



## killer b (Dec 16, 2013)

AKA pseudonym said:


> I directed one of them to this thread and she just shook her head saying 'Really, is this what really pisses people off', naturally we had to use the library as neither of us have computers or internet...


it's possible to be pissed off by more than one thing at a time tbf. I don't think this is the only politics the people on the thread do.


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)

The Pale King said:


> You're not wrong on the basics range, Frances. The oven chips just _will fucking not _get crispy, nor turn any colour other than a ghostly white.
> But your point about the ideology on the packets is spot on. Bag of carrots "A bit mis-shapen, just like you" style of thing. It's fucking weird. They also have a big sign behind the tills at my local one featuring pictures of rolling farmland overlayed with jolly cartoon people, all in their distinctive typeface and orange livery, "Our values make us different". No further explanation given. We fill in the blanks ourselves (Jack likes their ethics too). There's a lot of ideology going on in Sainsbury's...



I'll give you the oven chips they are pretty rank..................think you are exaggerating the blurb on the packets.........i buy their basics stuff a lot and it's never struck me like that at all.............


----------



## weepiper (Dec 16, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Brendan O'Neill is a nasty waste of space, makes me want to automatically leap to Jack's defence altho some of this rings true... http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/b...k-monroe-the-guardians-favourite-poor-person/





> She is possibly the most atypical working-class person in Britain



That tells us all we need to know about Brendan O'Neill.


----------



## treelover (Dec 16, 2013)

AKA pseudonym said:


> Should be an interesting  Parliamentary discussion on Wednesday generated by someone doing something as objectional as promoting a petition. Theres also an earlier meeting there, where those affected by poverty will feed into those speaking at the debate. I'm bringing a few folk along who probably dont have the current advantages of Jack, or a lot of the posters on this thread, but want to speak out directly. I directed one of them to this thread and she just shook her head saying 'Really, is this what really pisses people off', naturally we had to use the library as neither of us have computers or internet...




Do you have a link?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

mentalchik said:


> I'll give you the oven chips they are pretty rank..................think you are exaggerating the blurb on the packets.........i buy their basics stuff a lot and it's never struck me like that at all.............



some of the Basic/Value stuff is rank though, the tinned stuff is half water and the non-food stuff like washing up liquid and nappies probably cost more in the long run than using better stuff


----------



## TruXta (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> washing up liquid and nappies probably cost more in the long run than using better stuff



That goes for so so many other things too. Clothes, beds - you name it.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 16, 2013)

weepiper said:


> That tells us all we need to know about Brendan O'Neill.



Yeah as usual he lets himself down there(see also his comments about Owen Jones Chavs), though there are plenty of fair points in it aside from that. 

The problem with Spiked and its line on middle class liberals patronising the working class is that it in sticking two fingers up at the Fabian pricks it actively embraces some crass stereotypes of working class people.


He should have just said she was a poster girl for Islington liberals idea of deserving poor.


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> some of the Basic/Value stuff is rank though, the tinned stuff is half water and the non-food stuff like washing up liquid and nappies probably cost more in the long run than using better stuff




Actually the basic large 6 pack of toilet rolls are the best and longest lasting i've tried, 29p for a large bottle of bleach goes a long way in my household, basics cream cleaner and washing powder are all perfectly fine.........................and yes i do use them regularly


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

the washing powder's only fine if your clothes weren't dirty, it doesn't really matter what the stuff you pour down your toilet is like, except if its not thick bleach its a complete waste of time, dont know about the cream cleaner, the bog paper's alright but your arse'll be crying out for an andrex after a couple of months

some of the value stuff is okay, but you have to know what you're doing, tesco value teabags leave grey slime in the bottom of the cup.  people have affection for it because its cheap, and dont the supermarkets know it, but its cheap because its shit.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 16, 2013)

What do you know, mentalchik? Your opinion is invalid.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 16, 2013)

For our demands most moderate are, we only want The Finest range!


----------



## revol68 (Dec 16, 2013)

Value washing up liquid is a scam, Fairy all the way!


----------



## killer b (Dec 16, 2013)

i've got waitrose basics washing up liquid atm. snobby _and _frugal


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

weepiper said:


> What do you know, mentalchik? Your opinion is invalid.



how dare anyone disagree on a politics forum


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Value washing up liquid is a scam, Fairy all the way!



fuck that, I want a dish washer, with some of them fancy tablets that are blue and white


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> the washing powder's only fine if your clothes weren't dirty, it doesn't really matter what the stuff you pour down your toilet is like, except if its not thick bleach its a complete waste of time, dont know about the cream cleaner, the bog paper's alright but your arse'll be crying out for an andrex after a couple of months



rubbish, rubbish................oh and rubbish...........................ime (but after all what do i know)



sounds suspiciously like brand snobbery to me


----------



## TruXta (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> fuck that, I want a dish washer, with some of them fancy tablets that are blue and white


Nonononono, the fancy ones are red and yellow. Blue and white ffs.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

I don't believe they make red and yellow dish washer tablets


----------



## TruXta (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I don't believe they make red and yellow dish washer tablets


They don't sell them to your kind.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

mentalchik said:


> sounds suspiciously like brand snobbery to me



and you sound like my nan, who shot me a look of venom that I never even knew she had in her when I mildly criticised Poundstretcher last christmas


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> and you sound like my nan, who shot me a look of venom that I never even knew she had in her when I mildly criticised Poundstretcher last christmas


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 16, 2013)

revol68 said:


> Value washing up liquid is a scam, Fairy all the way!


nah you just need a bit of elbow grease and non scrawny arms so obviously you can't use it

Still never forget working class women's lived experience is not comparable to the well read theory of lefty blokes.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 16, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> nah you just need a bit of elbow grease and non scrawny arms so obviously you can't use it
> 
> Still never forget working class women's lived experience is not comparable to the well read theory of lefty blokes.



Teh sexist assuming washing up is done by working class women.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

men have no right to talk about cleaning products it seems


----------



## weepiper (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> men have no right to talk about cleaning products it seems


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> men have no right to talk about cleaning products it seems




oh please.....thought we were only 'disagreeing' ?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

I was responding to Spanky, flippantly


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)




----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

meh, my kitchen got flooded this week and the ceiling collapsed, I have no sense of humour about cleaning products at the moment


----------



## mentalchik (Dec 16, 2013)

smokedout said:


> meh, my kitchen got flooded this week and the ceiling collapsed, I have no sense of humour about cleaning products at the moment


----------



## smokedout (Dec 16, 2013)

yeah, you trying cleaning up a flood with a Tesco value jay cloth or a mop from the poundshop


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 16, 2013)

The worst thing about cheap bog roll is with the slightest bit of moisture your finger ends up in your arsehole.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> The worst thing about cheap bog roll is with the slightest bit of moisture your finger ends up in your arsehole.




Rogets Proffanisuarus has that as 'Breaching the hull'


----------



## Favelado (Dec 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> The worst thing about cheap bog roll is with the slightest bit of moisture your finger ends up in your arsehole.



Also true without the bog roll?


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> The worst thing about cheap bog roll is with the slightest bit of moisture your finger ends up in your arsehole.


You love it


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 16, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> You love it



I do. As well as the sexual element it forces me to finish the job the muslim way, a multi-cultured multi-sexual toilet visit. A leftie's wet dream.


----------



## Frankie Jack (Dec 16, 2013)




----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 16, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> I do. As well as the sexual element it forces me to finish the job the muslim way, a multi-cultured multi-sexual toilet visit. A leftie's wet dream.


It's the intersection between your finger and your arsehole


----------



## AKA pseudonym (Dec 17, 2013)

treelover said:


> Do you have a link?


came from email...


> On Wednesday 18 December there will be a debate in parliament on the rocketing growth in foodbank use and we want you to come along.
> 
> As many of you will know, since April 2013 The Trussell Trust foodbank network has had to feed 500,000 people – this is shameful in the world's seventh richest country.
> 
> ...



btw: I'm no fan of the Trussell trust... 
*The well-trousered philanthropists: Tory party chums and food parcels for the poor*


----------



## TruXta (Dec 17, 2013)

Jack replies to people accusing her of selling out http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/17/jack-monroe-sainsburys-advert-blog


----------



## smokedout (Dec 17, 2013)

anti-food poverty campaigners takes money to advertise one of the companies responsible for food poverty and is shocked that she's accused of selling out.  you couldn't make it up!!!


----------



## peterkro (Dec 17, 2013)

While no worse than the rest of the wankers out there in the media,giving money to an "African Food Project" and the "local food bank" then writing about it in the Guardian shows a fairly self serving attitude.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 17, 2013)




----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 17, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Jack replies to people accusing her of selling out http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/17/jack-monroe-sainsburys-advert-blog


FFS Does she own shares in the newspaper?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2013)

> As for the accusations that everybody has a price? Mine is £1,653 for six weeks' work. My actual fee is higher, identical to what the other three bloggers in the campaign are being paid, but I am keeping £1,653 to myself – the equivalent of the living wage for the six weeks that the campaign will run for. The rest is going into the tax pot; to a food project in Africa that I am visiting with Oxfam in January; and to my local food bank and homeless shelter.



can't argue with that


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 17, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> poptastic!


----------



## TruXta (Dec 17, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> can't argue with that


I did idly wonder is that gross or net profit for her?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 17, 2013)

TruXta said:


> I did idly wonder is that gross or net profit for her?


Will she be earning from other sources during those 6 weeks? Such as writing for the G?


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 17, 2013)

Well, Brendan O'Neill doesn't like her.


> Over the past year, Ms Monroe has become the Guardian’s favourite poor person. The paper actually christened her “the face of modern poverty”. It isn’t hard to see why. She is possibly the most atypical working-class person in Britain, often coming across more like a Guardian editorial made flesh than a member of Britain’s down-at-heel communities. Unlike the gruffer sections of the working classes, who drink lots of booze and eat chips, Ms Monroe is well-educated and articulate (she went to a posh grammar school) and regularly spouts the kind of prejudices that fill the Guardian’s pages: she’s anti-factory farming, deeply concerned about the food industry, only eats free-range meat, and is worried that poor people aren’t well-educated enough to know which foods and nutritious and which aren’t.
> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/b...k-monroe-the-guardians-favourite-poor-person/



This from the hack who claimed that poverty was a 'left-wing conspiracy' (I kid you not).


----------



## 8ball (Dec 17, 2013)

nino_savatte said:


> Well, Brendan O'Neill doesn't like her.


 
Maybe I'll start up a 'pov food blog' just for him, based largely around a diet of Special Brew and half-eaten kebabs filched from bins.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 17, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Will she be earning from other sources during those 6 weeks? Such as writing for the G?


Presumably she gets paid for her CiF pieces.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 17, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Presumably she gets paid for her CiF pieces.


 
Fucking bitch!!


----------



## frogwoman (Dec 17, 2013)

i really have trouble caring about this tbh


----------



## emanymton (Dec 17, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Jack replies to people accusing her of selling out http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/17/jack-monroe-sainsburys-advert-blog


With an article in the guardian 


' Those who know me know that I am painfully introverted, the one with my back to the wall at awards ceremonies,'

I experience we can all relate to, I am sure.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 17, 2013)

nino_savatte said:


> Well, Brendan O'Neill doesn't like her.
> 
> 
> This from the hack who claimed that poverty was a 'left-wing conspiracy' (I kid you not).


He's a cunt. I don't care what he thinks. I do care that people don't see the naivete in jack's reasoning. She just doesn't seem to get that she's supporting people who are part of the problem.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 17, 2013)

At least the conversation is about her politics now.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 17, 2013)

I'm very interested to see her performance in parliament tomorrow. Will that be on the parliament tv website?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 17, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> can't argue with that



that's how you manage a brand.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 18, 2013)

And supporting charities for the impoverished is a massive blow to the man.


----------



## FNG (Dec 18, 2013)

"As for the accusations that everybody has a price? Mine is £1,653 for six weeks' work. My actual fee is higher, identical to what the other three bloggers in the campaign are being paid, but I am keeping £1,653 to myself – the equivalent of the living wage for the six weeks that the campaign will run for. The rest is going into the tax pot; to a food project in Africa that I am visiting with Oxfam in January; and to my local food bank and homeless shelter."


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> At least the conversation is about her politics now.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

The WoW petition was set up a long time before Jack's. Both are worthy causes, and yet Jack's petition seems to have secured a day in parliament in a fraction of the time WOW has been running. Am I wrong? Has WOW got its own day in parliament (if so I must have missed it)? Ed Miliband secured this day's debate. I guess Francesca Martinez lacked Jack's connections.


----------



## Spanky Longhorn (Dec 18, 2013)

peterkro said:


> While no worse than the rest of the wankers out there in the media,giving money to an "African Food Project" and the "local food bank" then writing about it in the Guardian shows a fairly self serving attitude.


Uppity woman in defending herself from accusations shock


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> The WoW petition was set up a long time before Jack's. Both are worthy causes, and yet Jack's petition seems to have secured a day in parliament in a fraction of the time WOW has been running. Am I wrong? Has WOW got its own day in parliament (if so I must have missed it)? Ed Miliband secured this day's debate. I guess Francesca Martinez lacked Jack's connections.



I think there will be a debate on the WOW Petition sometime next year, but it lost a lot of prominence, mostly because Jack and Labour launched their petition a couple of days after it hit its target so the media ended up largely ignoring it and following the Labour narrative about cost of living rather than actually discussing benefit cuts.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

I wonder if Jack signed the WOW petition.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

her debate should be coming up soon. At present there's bugger all people there for other business (though Pickles makes it look otherwsie).


----------



## 8ball (Dec 18, 2013)

Spanky Longhorn said:


> Uppity woman in defending herself from accusations shock


 
I don't agree with peterkro's sentiment either but I didn't see any obvious sexist intent there.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Dec 18, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> He's a cunt. I don't care what he thinks. I do care that people don't see the naivete in jack's reasoning. She just doesn't seem to get that she's supporting people who are part of the problem.



Indeed, and Sainsbury's and the big supermarkets are part of the problem. The amount of perfectly edible and freezable food they throw away every single day is an outrage, particularly in the context of growing hunger.


----------



## treelover (Dec 18, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


>



liked it for its own humour, not related to jack.


----------



## treelover (Dec 18, 2013)

> They tell me I've earned it, to keep it, to squirrel it away – but if I was in it for the money I'd have leapt at the first advertising deal offered to me almost a year ago for an upmarket butter brand, and all the 50 or so since then. I didn't. Am I guilty of selling out? Hardly.




This is very interesting, nearly fifty other offers, she is popular and nice but I'm surprised she got that many offers, how would they 'market' her?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

treelover said:


> This is very interesting, nearly fifty other offers, she is popular and nice but I'm surprised she got that many offers, how would they 'market' her?


Much the same way Sainsburys will. They're all the same.


----------



## xslavearcx (Dec 18, 2013)

treelover said:


> This is very interesting, nearly fifty other offers, she is popular and nice but I'm surprised she got that many offers, how would they 'market' her?



In the guardian article about this, it was talking about the low cost places like lidl getting a significantly greater market share of supermarkets. so i guess they are all chomping at the bit to position to that market, and i guess austerity chic will be the main marketing strategy...


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

Her debate is going now.

And speaking for the opposition is Cruella McVey.

E2A: Ye gods, the archdaemon himself is present! Avert your eyes children!


----------



## weepiper (Dec 18, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> I wonder if Jack signed the WOW petition.



She certainly tweeted in support of it (from November)

https://twitter.com/MsJackMonroe/status/403294831986110464


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 18, 2013)

are people really disparaging charitable donations now? yeah sure its a stcking plaster solution but on a personal ethics thing she's not doing it for adulation, not the loud giver at the temple. Didn't even mention it until doing an article in defense of her ad gig


----------



## peterkro (Dec 18, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> are people really disparaging charitable donations now? yeah sure its a stcking plaster solution but on a personal ethics thing she's not doing it for adulation, not the loud giver at the temple. Didn't even mention it until doing an article in defense of her ad gig


I wasn't but I do find it strange that she would mention it in public.As for the "Ad Gig" I hadn't heard of it until she wrote about her defence of it.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

Ye gods, the archdaemon himself is present! Avert your ey


weepiper said:


> She certainly tweeted in support of it (from November)
> 
> https://twitter.com/MsJackMonroe/status/403294831986110464


And sadly it's been overshadowed by her own petition which has produced one of the most foetid and disingenuous debates (from the tory side at least) i have ever heard. A complete waste of time - as if the tories were ever going to stop taking the piss.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> are people really disparaging charitable donations now? yeah sure its a stcking plaster solution but on a personal ethics thing she's not doing it for adulation, not the loud giver at the temple. Didn't even mention it until doing an article in defense of her ad gig


Then why mention it at all?

That implies she wants people to think it makes up for a bad decision. It doesn't, nice gesture though it is (and of course it's easy to donate several grand to a charity when you HAVE several grand thanks to accepting money from big business in return for your image and reputation).


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> are people really disparaging charitable donations now? yeah sure its a stcking plaster solution but on a personal ethics thing she's not doing it for adulation, not the loud giver at the temple. Didn't even mention it until doing an article in defense of her ad gig



she didn't even mention it until she mentioned it, loudly, in a national newspaper



> As for the accusations that everybody has a price? Mine is £1,653 for six weeks' work.



I'm pretty sure it doesn't take six weeks to shoot an advert, I suspect it's more like an afternoon.  So she's getting £1,653 for half a day's work, from one of the companies responsible for food poverty, and has pledged an undisclosed sum to charity to offset the damage to her ethical brand that this has caused - and she got a column out of it, for which she will have been paid.  Sounds like good business to me.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 18, 2013)

its a six week run- can you shoot six weeks worth of ads in one afternoon? I am presuming they aren't just going to repeat the same one for six weeks.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 18, 2013)

and nobody is denying that she's having an earner off it, but she's pledged a workers wage- quibbling over that seems to be a bit lightbulb chattish. The more serious critiscisms such as normalising austerity and being used as the 'good' claimant vs the feckless tin swilling claimant, being part of labour agenda etc- these I think are more important questions. Those are what I am undecided on. Crit for taking a cheque from a business for a few weeks work, well fuck it I'd do the same and I'd have to be reminded to give some of it away too cos I'm selfish.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 18, 2013)

> she didn't even mention it until she mentioned it, loudly, in a national newspaper



in defence at sellout accusations. If she'd mentioned it prior she'd also have got stick and it would have been loud giving.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> its a six week run- can you shoot six weeks worth of ads in one afternoon? I am presuming they aren't just going to repeat the same one for six weeks.


She's one of a group of food bloggers. They would have filmed one ad apiece over the course of a few days and run the ads over 6 weeks.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 18, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> in defence at sellout accusations.



There is no defence.

Once you sell your reputation you're done.

She's made that mistake.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> a Crit for taking a cheque from a business for a few weeks work, well fuck it I'd do the same and I'd have to be reminded to give some of it away too cos I'm selfish.



it's who she's taken a cheque from that is relevant and I find it pretty shocking people seem to think this is okay.  This is like Campaign Against The Arms Trade taking a cheque from BAE or Boycott Workfare accepting a donation from A4e, she's been bought off, her message has been bought off, she's being paid to show that cuddly Sainsburys play no part in people going hungry.  Its fucking staggering that people are just shrugging and thinking she can carry on as normal, is this what campaigning is under neo-liberalism, turn your politics into a personal brand and then flog it off to the highest bidder, whoever they are.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 18, 2013)

may or may not interest people but jack monroe actually signed with penguin's michael joseph imprint which by its own admission "publishes highly commercial, popular fiction and non-fiction, principally interested in publishing Top Ten Bestsellers". Same publishers as jamie oliver who used to front sainsburys ad campaign.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 18, 2013)

Nice one said:


> may or may not interest people but jack monroe actually signed with penguin's michael joseph imprint which by its own admission "publishes highly commercial, popular fiction and non-fiction, principally interested in publishing Top Ten Bestsellers". Same publishers as jamie oliver who used to front sainsburys ad campaign.


What, did you think she was gonna go with Verso or something?


----------



## Nice one (Dec 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> What, did you think she was gonna go with Verso or something?



well michael joseph as a publishers has a very specific remit - books in the top ten best sellers list. Good luck  to her for having the ambition to go top ten, but you're right these are not piddly little happy go lucky we'll see what happens kind of publishers, they'll want a big return, presumably for a big investment.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

Nice one said:


> publishes highly commercial, popular fiction



sounds right up her street


----------



## TruXta (Dec 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> sounds right up her street


Honest question: have you actually caught her in a lie yet? I mean, you've made a LOT of claims about her, but have you actually proven a lie on her part?


----------



## LiamO (Dec 18, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> The worst thing about cheap bog roll is with the slightest bit of moisture your finger ends up in your arsehole.



True. My big luxury is using baby wipes on me arse - never had proper ring-sting since I started... just after the youngest was born and I thought 'If they're good enough for her...'

Don't recommend you flush them though. Long term there is a price to pay.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

yes, the budget she used in the Sunday People to justify the tenner a week thing was under by nearly £100 a week.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 18, 2013)

LiamO said:


> True. My big luxury is using baby wipes on me arse - never had proper ring-sting since I started... just after the youngest was born and I thought 'If they're good enough for her...'
> 
> Don't recommend you flush them though. Long term there is a price to pay.


You should consider investing in a bidet. Or just have a little hose installed, same job.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes, the budget she used in the Sunday People to justify the tenner a week thing was under by nearly £100 a week.



IIRC a few posters weren't so sure about that?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 18, 2013)

TruXta said:


> Honest question: have you actually caught her in a lie yet? I mean, you've made a LOT of claims about her, but have you actually proven a lie on her part?


I can answer that one - no.


----------



## toggle (Dec 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> yes, the budget she used in the Sunday People to justify the tenner a week thing was under by nearly £100 a week.



and you have her bank statements to proove this?


----------



## TruXta (Dec 18, 2013)

Gods, why did I ask.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

toggle said:


> and you have her bank statements to proove this?



well if she was not claiming income support and child tax credit then given she is being critical of the benefit system not explaining why she would do this is a lie by omission given it has formed the basis of several newspaper columns


----------



## toggle (Dec 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> well if she was not claiming income support and child tax credit then given she is being critical of the benefit system not explaining why she would do this is a lie by omission given it has formed the basis of several newspaper columns



so you don't have any actual proof of your assumptions, but are claiming that your assumptions are proof she is lying.

ok.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 18, 2013)

So before she was too poor to be credible and now she's taken too much blood money to be credible. Anyone would think she couldn't win here or something.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

toggle said:


> so you don't have any actual proof of your assumptions, but are claiming that your assumptions are proof she is lying.
> 
> ok.



if someone was writing about being unemployed and how the benefits system left them with just a quid a day and in poverty, and then you found out they weren't actually claiming the dole, then wouldn't that require an explanation?

that's what we know, based on what Jack's told us.  Her not claiming is very unusual, especially as she must have been claiming IS/CTC before she got her two newspaper columns for which she said her earnings were just over £50 a week.  She would have had to deliberately given up her claim, and yet for some reason still maintained a housing benefit claim, which was not meeting her rent and is why she says she only had a tenner a week.  Now that is exceptional and highly unusual behavior. So unusual and coming from a newspaper columnist writing about her experience of being on benefits that it demands an explanation.  She's either lying, or there's something big she's not telling us which puts an entirely different perspective on her story.  That is dishonest.

Anyway I'm not going on about this all night, but her story doesn't stand up as it has been told.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> well if she was not claiming income support and child tax credit then given she is being critical of the benefit system not explaining why she would do this is a lie by omission given it has formed the basis of several newspaper columns


For the record I've stopped recommending your blog based on this sort of wank. Like you care, very obviously.

I really wish you'd work it out but you show no signs of doing so.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

no I don't care, but you wont find stories like Jacks that don't add up on my blog because the first thing I'd have asked her is why she wasnt claiming child tax credit and if she didn't want to give an answer, which would have been more than fair enough, then there wouldn't be a story there I'm afraid.

people seem to think this half made up shit about benefits, and there's been a lot of it floating around recently, is useful as long as the propaganda points in the right direction.  It's really not.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 18, 2013)

smokedout said:


> well if she was not claiming income support and child tax credit then given she is being critical of the benefit system not explaining why she would do this is a lie by omission given it has formed the basis of several newspaper columns


Did it ever occur to you she might not have been eligible to claim the dole? In her first article she wrote about how she left her job - she resigned because she couldn't make childcare fit around her job - so she wasn't able to claim dole.

Give the woman a break. She's a single parent trying to do her best for her son.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 18, 2013)

LiamO said:


> True. My big luxury is using baby wipes on me arse - never had proper ring-sting since I started... just after the youngest was born and I thought 'If they're good enough for her...'
> 
> Don't recommend you flush them though. Long term there is a price to pay.



short term the bog bin is full of your curry and lager shite used rags. All in all I'll stick with the normal stuff. Untill we get bogside arsehoses like what they have in indonesia


----------



## smokedout (Dec 18, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Did it ever occur to you she might not have been eligible to claim the dole? In her first article she wrote about how she left her job - she resigned because she couldn't make childcare fit around her job - so she wasn't able to claim dole.



disallowances don't apply to people with kids under five so she would have gone straight on income support, and she did, the piece in the People was published a year after she lost her job

and we're all trying to do the best for our kids, that doesn't give you a free political pass


----------



## toggle (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> if someone was writing about being unemployed and how the benefits system left them with just a quid a day and in poverty, and then you found out they weren't actually claiming the dole, then wouldn't that require an explanation?
> 
> that's what we know, based on what Jack's told us.  Her not claiming is very unusual, especially as she must have been claiming IS/CTC before she got her two newspaper columns for which she said her earnings were just over £50 a week.  She would have had to deliberately given up her claim, and yet for some reason still maintained a housing benefit claim, which was not meeting her rent and is why she says she only had a tenner a week.  Now that is exceptional and highly unusual behavior. So unusual and coming from a newspaper columnist writing about her experience of being on benefits that it demands an explanation.  She's either lying, or there's something big she's not telling us which puts an entirely different perspective on her story.  That is dishonest.
> 
> Anyway I'm not going on about this all night, but her story doesn't stand up as it has been told.



income works out at £57 per week. not £50. this is over the 18-25 rate of IS. 

housing benefit claims - capped at local rate. what is the local rate in her area for the accommodation she was entitled to? I could well believe that she was living somewhere that Hb didn't cover her whole rent. she then had to supplement this. this is not exceptional. or highly unusual. I've done this. 

Living in private accommodation, claiming income support would not have increased her HB. and she has also clearly stated that there were mistakes made in her benefit payments at this time. that isn't exceptional either. I've experienced this.

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/08/28/i-didnt-need-a-hug-jamie-i-needed-a-fiver-the-independent/


and it is entirely possible to claim HB and not claim IS. that is hardly exceptional. HB is not solely an out of work benefit. I've done this. 


So exactly what is astoundingly unusual here that requires explanation?

what exactly is dishonest, other than your claims that the above bullshit is somehow proof of anyhting you have claimed?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

toggle said:


> Living in private accommodation, claiming income support would not have increased her HB. and she has also clearly stated that there were mistakes made in her benefit payments at this time. that isn't exceptional either. I've experienced this.
> 
> http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/08/28/i-didnt-need-a-hug-jamie-i-needed-a-fiver-the-independent/
> 
> ...



the interview posted in the sunday people, which was her first big public exposure (and is linked to quoted and discussed earlier in the thread), was months after her housing benefit problems and is the first time the ten pound a week thing received wide attention

in this she gave a break down of her budget which didnt include income support and child tax credit, both of which she must have been entitled to unless theres something shes not telling us - like a big wad of savings.  this budget was used to justify the tenner a week claim.  read the thread eh before you attack me, I wouldnt say this stuff lightly


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

tbh the savings thing is a red herring because that would have knocked out her IS/CTC claim she must have had before she got work


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> the interview posted in the sunday people, which was her first big public exposure (and is linked to quoted and discussed earlier in the thread), was months after her housing benefit problems and is the first time the ten pound a week thing received wide attention
> 
> in this she gave a break down of her budget which didnt include income support and child tax credit, both of which she must have been entitled to unless theres something shes not telling us - like a big wad of savings.  this budget was used to justify the tenner a week claim.  read the thread eh before you attack me, I wouldnt say this stuff lightly


She was claiming child tax credit and income support according to this article in the BIg Issue, 9 August 2013:



> Last summer, after an unexpected and unexplained cut to my housing benefit left me £100 short on my rent, I found myself with no money left to feed myself and my three-year-old son. My relationship with my landlord as a privately renting tenant was a tenuous one, as I had previously been late with my rent due to a delay in getting the housing benefit paid in the first place.
> 
> I used my child tax credit and income support money to top my rent up with. I had previously been employed, with a good salary, but suddenly I was going to bed hungry, feeding my son all that was left in the cupboard. My story isn’t an unusual one,  as parents up and down the country are doing the same, putting their children’s nutritional needs before their own.


http://www.bigissue.com/features/2830/jack-monroe-going-bed-hungry-difficult-forget

She also makes it clear that she's talking about a situation at least a year previously, and how she coped until everything was sorted out. She has since stated that she stopped claiming all benefits apart from CTC once she found a new job. She was unemployed for 18 months in total.

I'm not talking about giving her a free political pass by the way, I'm talking about making what she's doing into a massive issue when it simply isn't one. You can't even get your facts straight.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> She was claiming child tax credit and income support according to this article in the BIg Issue, 9 August 2013:



So she lied when in December 2012 she gave an interview to the sunday people talking about living on a tenner a week in which a budget was included which didn't include IS/CTC. My facts are perfectly straight, read the thread.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> So she lied when in December 2012 she gave an interview to the sunday people talking about living on a tenner a week in which a budget was included which didn't include IS/CTC. My facts are perfectly straight, read the thread.


I have read the thread thanks, and the articles in the links. Maybe you should too.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 19, 2013)

'Not as poor as she says she was. She's a liar, it wasn't that bad.' You should be writing for the Daily Mail with that attitude. You disgust me.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> So she lied when in December 2012 she gave an interview to the sunday people talking about living on a tenner a week in which a budget was included which didn't include IS/CTC. My facts are perfectly straight, read the thread.



That article references her receiving CTC (Child benefit). It doesn't mention IS but that doesn't mean she wasn't claiming it. It's just not mentioned.


> Jackie earns £250 a month, *receives £80 child benefit *and £490 housing benefit – total income £820



http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/young-mum-turns-off-heating-so-she-can-1502710

Your facts aren't straight at all. You clearly haven't read the article properly.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> That article references her receiving CTC (Child benefit). It doesn't mention IS but that doesn't mean she wasn't claiming it. It's just not mentioned.
> 
> 
> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/young-mum-turns-off-heating-so-she-can-1502710
> ...



CTC is not child benefit.  get your facts straight, really, if you want to argue with me about benefits.


----------



## equationgirl (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> CTC is not child benefit.  get your facts straight, really, if you want to argue with me about benefits.


Ok, I'll give you that one, but my main point still stands - it's not mentioned, doesn't mean she wasn't claiming it.

What's your point with all this again? She's not proper poor, she's too poor, what?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Ok, I'll give you that one, but my main point still stands - it's not mentioned, doesn't mean she wasn't claiming it.



but it means her tenner a week budget is bollocks if she was


> What's your point with all this again? She's not proper poor, she's too poor, what?



neither, my wider point is about her politics and uncritical support for labour and how she has been used by the media and labour as a celebrity claimant to guide the debate in a non-threatening direction.  Selling out to Sainsburys was just the icing on the cake and should be the end of her as someone with any political credibility as an 'anti-poverty campaigner', but astonishingly even on here, it isnt.

I also believe she has misrepresented her situation, which has led to the tenner a week meme, which I think is toxic - for the reasons Ive given on this thread.  I haven't made that claim lightly, I've read every post on her blog, and all her interviews, I've done the calculations and seen the huge amount of inconsistencies, and could, if I could be arsed. log them all (at which point I'd no doubt be accused of being stalky or something). Ive thought long and hard about whether I should write about it and having done the research I think I can prove she's a bull-shitter - although I dont think it would be helpful to anyone to launch into a full on public attack.  How much of a bull-shitter is open to debate, but her story doesnt stand up, and I dont think it has been helpful.  I'm sorry if people think I'm disgusting for thinking that, its not the main thrust of my criticism of her, but it is worthy of note so I'm not going to pretend that side of it doesn't exist.

ffs I'd have loved to have got behind her, I'd of forgiven loads, even the labour stuff if she was labour left at least, I'd rather her than Owen, but on balance, I think shes doing more harm than good and is only in it for herself


----------



## toggle (Dec 19, 2013)

equationgirl said:


> Ok, I'll give you that one, but my main point still stands - it's not mentioned, doesn't mean she wasn't claiming it.
> 
> What's your point with all this again? She's not proper poor, she's too poor, what?



had a quick scan through the comments on the mirror article.




> his nursery is outstanding. The fees are covered by the tax credits I am eligible for due to working, both the childcare element that covers 70% of the childcare cost, and the 'child ' element from which I pay the remaining 30% of the fees.



and



> I disclosed that to the journalist. I'm guessing they were omitted from the article because they pay for my childcare costs, which makes the end calculations no different


----------



## revol68 (Dec 19, 2013)

weepiper said:


> 'Not as poor as she says she was. She's a liar, it wasn't that bad.' You should be writing for the Daily Mail with that attitude. You disgust me.



The argument seems to be she is just talking shit, the fact that the DailyMail might claim the same does not make it automatically wrong or an unfair comment, anymore than them reporting on say the brutality of the North Korean regime.

Personally I have neither the time or arsedness to look into such matters, I just hate her as a middle class labour piece of shit making money/political capital off her poverty tourism.


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

Is this ^ (smokedout 's most recent post) left wing journalism? If someone puts their head above the parapet by writing a blog about subsistence-ish fare and why they had to do it - that the left wing journalism's approach is to pick apart everything they've ever said with the aim of demonstrating that they're not and never have been poor enough to qualify to have written what they did in the first place.

This kind of picking apart of the life of someone that was hard up for 12 - 18 months and wrote about it; is fucking toxic. Left to my own devices, I possibly would have independently come to the conclusion that Jack Munroe's a pain in the arse. But at the moment I find myself distracted from her (possibly naive? Still not sure there)  Labourite neoliberal politics by the wealth of vitriol surrounding her lightbulbs, her parenting, the endless nitpicking over how many pence it takes on benefits to qualify for left wing journalism's stamp of fucking "proper poor" approval.

So why don't these critics do it closer to home? Why aren't they across urban75 like a rash, working out who is and isn't poor and directly saying this stuff to people that are posting their experiences publicly? There's enough neoliberal postings on urban to keep the likes of smokedout and Nice one etcetc (just examples off the top of my head) until the cows come home. But no. They won't do that, will they. Their aim isn't to talk about and challenge neoliberal politics on a day to day basis; they're just fixated on those whose views somehow get picked up on by the neoliberal media.

So what's wrong with that? Why shouldn't these critics/journalists focus their attentions on the people that get famous rather than the people that just live this shit and just quietly post about it on fb, and/or their own blogs and/or urban and/or [wherever]. What's wrong with only having a go at the people that get noticed?

I suggest that there's nothing inherently wrong with taking out (or trying to take out) those who put their heads above the parapet if you don't agree with them. But what are you trying to do here? Is the message don't get famous? And if you get famous, don't do a left-journalism un-approved job? Wtf are you going to gain from this shambolic attempt at forensic benefits accounting?


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

revol68 said:


> The argument seems to be she is just talking shit, the fact that the DailyMail might claim the same does not make it automatically wrong or an unfair comment, anymore than them reporting on say the brutality of the North Korean regime.
> 
> Personally I have neither the time or arsedness to look into such matters, I just hate her as a middle class labour piece of shit making money/political capital off her poverty tourism.


Perhaps if you could set out your conditions for being credible, it'd be helpful. Explain the benchmark.


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

revol68 said:


> The argument seems to be she is just talking shit, the fact that the DailyMail might claim the same does not make it automatically wrong or an unfair comment, anymore than them reporting on say the brutality of the North Korean regime.
> 
> Personally I have neither the time or arsedness to look into such matters, I just hate her as a middle class labour piece of shit making money/political capital off her poverty tourism.


Oh. And actually set out why you think she's middle class.


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

Forensic benefits accounting. Started by the Labour Party; continued by "the Left".


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Dec 19, 2013)

I think IBS may have had to leave the debate for either pissing himself laughing, or shooting his load in ecstasy. Either way, we paid for the pants.

Beyond that, the evidence is mounting that malnutrition is policy at a level on the spectrum between default and intent that I ain't fully figured yet.


----------



## emanymton (Dec 19, 2013)

TruXta said:


> You should consider investing in a bidet. Or just have a little hose installed, same job.


I just misread that as horse, the image it brought to mind was... well just wrong!


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 19, 2013)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I think IBS may have had to leave the debate for either pissing himself laughing, or shooting his load in ecstasy. Either way, we paid for the pants.
> 
> Beyond that, the evidence is mounting that malnutrition is policy at a level on the spectrum between default and intent that I ain't fully figured yet.


Prior to walking out (probably had a dinner date with Lord Hanningfield) he just slouched in his seat with a dumb grin on his face while going "yeeaar" over and over (a slovenly way of saying 'hear hear' everytime McVey shat out lies). The guy is wretched. 

The whole thing was a joke; sickening moronic and depressing.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> may or may not interest people but jack monroe actually signed with penguin's michael joseph imprint which by its own admission "publishes highly commercial, popular fiction and non-fiction, principally interested in publishing Top Ten Bestsellers". Same publishers as jamie oliver who used to front sainsburys ad campaign.


I have no problem with her selling a book of recipes. Hopefully the publisher isn't a bunch of cunts, but the book is how she got out of austerity as i understand it. For that I attach no criticism. That's a different from taking money from sainsurys to use your reputation to sell product.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 19, 2013)

cesare said:


> Is this ^ (smokedout 's most recent post) left wing journalism? If someone puts their head above the parapet by writing a blog about subsistence-ish fare and why they had to do it - that the left wing journalism's approach is to pick apart everything they've ever said with the aim of demonstrating that they're not and never have been poor enough to qualify to have written what they did in the first place.
> 
> This kind of picking apart of the life of someone that was hard up for 12 - 18 months and wrote about it; is fucking toxic. Left to my own devices, I possibly would have independently come to the conclusion that Jack Munroe's a pain in the arse. But at the moment I find myself distracted from her (possibly naive? Still not sure there)  Labourite neoliberal politics by the wealth of vitriol surrounding her lightbulbs, her parenting, the endless nitpicking over how many pence it takes on benefits to qualify for left wing journalism's stamp of fucking "proper poor" approval.
> 
> ...



me  But yeah go on then post up an example. Off the top of your head. 

BTW try replacing jack monroe with the words laurie penny and have a think about what you wrote.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> BTW try replacing jack monroe with the words laurie penny


 
It's that old chestnut, the virgin/media whore dichotomy.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 19, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> It's that old chestnut, the virgin/media whore dichotomy.



two women in the public eye, writing books.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> two women in the public eye, writing books.


Two people writing books. Why bring her gender into this?


----------



## Nice one (Dec 19, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Two people writing books. Why bring her gender into this?



because both laurie penny and jack monroe are women.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> me  But yeah go on then post up an example. Off the top of your head.
> 
> BTW try replacing jack monroe with the words laurie penny and have a think about what you wrote.



see there you've got a point



Nice one said:


> two women in the public eye, writing books.



but there you dont.  I'd say there are three celebrities that have emerged out of austerity, Owen, Laurie and Jack, they all have threads


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2013)

For fucks sake. 

The more worked up people here are getting the more credence Jack (or Laurie or Owen or whoever) have about being the voice of the poor/the left/a generation etc.

If, as I would argue, they can't speak for us then frankly we need to take them a lot less seriously.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> I'd say there are three celebrities that have emerged out of austerity, Owen, Laurie and Jack, they all have threads


 
I'd agree with that.  Can't say I can muster any real animosity for any of them.  One does leftism-lite, one does recipes, one angrily refuses to tidy her room.  Ho hum.


----------



## chilango (Dec 19, 2013)

8ball said:


> I'd agree with that.  Can't say I can muster any real animosity for any of them.  One does leftism-lite, one does recipes, one angrily refuses to tidy her room.  Ho hum.



nail on head.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 19, 2013)

8ball said:
			
		

> I'd agree with that.  Can't say I can muster any real animosity for any of them.  One does leftism-lite, one does recipes, one angrily refuses to tidy her room.  Ho hum.



But they're university (and in at least one case, privately) educated and occupying the space where the genuinely impoverished should have a voice. And what they all have in common is that they've managed to land a gig in the media. Which isn't representative of what happens to poverty stricken people by any stretch of the imagination.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 19, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> But they're university (and in at least one case, privately) educated and occupying the space where the genuinely impoverished should have a voice. And what they all have in common is that they've managed to land a gig in the media. Which isn't representative of what happens to poverty stricken people by any stretch of the imagination.


Has Jack been to uni?


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> me  But yeah go on then post up an example. Off the top of your head.
> 
> BTW try replacing jack monroe with the words laurie penny and have a think about what you wrote.


You don't see the difference between her and Laurie Penny, seriously?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 19, 2013)

cesare said:


> Is this ^ (smokedout 's most recent post) left wing journalism?



no, this is not left-wing journalism, it is an internet conversation where some people pointed out that elements of Jack's story didn't ring true, and were then aggressively asked to back that up by Jack's supporters and then slagged off for backing it up.

the fact shes blagging the tenner a day thing is a footnote in the criticism of Jack that has got out of hand because of an argument, and some people's insistence that she be beyond criticism.  but its an important footnote, because it hints at her now very obvious ambition, and it suggests she is likely to stretch the truth if she continues as a journalist or in politics, which if shes got any sense she wont because theres more money to be made in shilling for supermarkets


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> no, this is not left-wing journalism, it is an internet conversation where some people pointed out that elements of Jack's story didn't ring true, and were then aggressively asked to back that up by Jack's supporters and then slagged off for backing it up.
> 
> the fact shes blagging the tenner a day thing is a footnote in the criticism of Jack that has got out of hand because of an argument, and some people's insistence that she be beyond criticism.  but its an important footnote, because it hints at her now very obvious ambition, and it suggests she is likely to stretch the truth if she continues as a journalist or in politics, which if shes got any sense she wont because theres more money to be made in shilling for supermarkets


If you'd stuck to criticising her politics instead of her parenting skills, I'd listen to this. But you didn't.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 19, 2013)

TruXta said:
			
		

> Has Jack been to uni?



Fair dos I don't actually know. In fact there's very little info out there about her so we're left with taking her at face value. What I do know, though, is getting columns in a national is hard enough with a degree so if she's managed it without that level of education then fair play to her. Would be interesting to know her background though.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 19, 2013)

cesare said:


> You don't see the difference between her and Laurie Penny, seriously?



well we haven't had the 'punch jack monroe in the face' fantasy yet so i guess that's something. But yes i find it equally weird people pouring over jack monroe's lightbulb habits as i do people pouring over laurie penny's bedroom furnishings. I'm just wondering why one is acceptable to you whereas the other isn't?


----------



## cesare (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> well we haven't had the 'punch jack monroe in the face' fantasy yet so i guess that's something. But yes i find it equally weird people pouring over jack monroe's lightbulb habits as i do pouring over laurie penny's bedroom furnishings. I'm just wondering why one is acceptable to you whereas the other isn't?


I had a go about the weird poring over Laurie Penny's bedroom furnishings too. Get your fucking facts straight.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 19, 2013)

cesare said:


> I had a go about the weird poring over Laurie Penny's bedroom furnishings too. Get your fucking facts straight.



you did, fair play.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 19, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> Fair dos I don't actually know. In fact there's very little info out there about her so we're left with taking her at face value. What I do know, though, is getting columns in a national is hard enough with a degree so if she's managed it without that level of education then fair play to her. Would be interesting to know her background though.


IIRC she dropped out of school at age 16. I could be wrong on that.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Dec 19, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Prior to walking out (probably had a dinner date with Lord Hanningfield) he just slouched in his seat with a dumb grin on his face while going "yeeaar" over and over (a slovenly way of saying 'hear hear' everytime McVey shat out lies). The guy is wretched.
> 
> The whole thing was a joke; sickening moronic and depressing.



I expect he fancies McVey. It's all too sordid.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 19, 2013)

smokedout said:


> see there you've got a point
> 
> 
> 
> but there you dont.  I'd say there are three celebrities that have emerged out of austerity, Owen, Laurie and Jack, they all have threads


Why do you hate Owen Jones? I don't get all the criticism he gets; didn't he give IDS a whuppin' on Questim Time a while back? He's not that bad surely?


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 19, 2013)

I think I'd like Owen Jones more if he could play the guitar and sing sad songs about adolescent rejection.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 19, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> Why do you hate Owen Jones? I don't get all the criticism he gets; didn't he give IDS a whuppin' on Questim Time a while back? He's not that bad surely?


He's a Labourite - need more be said?


----------



## weepiper (Dec 19, 2013)

Citizen66 said:


> Fair dos I don't actually know. In fact there's very little info out there about her so we're left with taking her at face value. What I do know, though, is getting columns in a national is hard enough with a degree so if she's managed it without that level of education then fair play to her. Would be interesting to know her background though.


State grammar school, left with a few gcse's, got a job in a chip shop, later got a job in the control room in the fire service. She's not Laurie Penny.


----------



## toggle (Dec 19, 2013)

Nice one said:


> because both laurie penny and jack monroe are women.



and can you show exactly how you want them to be compared, for reasons other than their gender?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 19, 2013)

I think that people have forgotten just how odious and dishonest a person Laurie Penny is if they think that a girl called Jack is like her.


----------



## toggle (Dec 19, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I think that people have forgotten just how odious and dishonest a person Laurie Penny is if they think that a girl called Jack is like her.



she may well turn out like laurie, IDK, but she certainly isn't there atm.

I do some bar work, mostly middle class tory-light people in there and I have heard her stuff used, successfully, to attack the rhetoric that everyone on benefit is a scrounger. She is actually getting through to people who wouldn't take any notice of anything more politically aware, which in and of itself is not a bad thing. it doesn't do anything about the overall scrounger rhetoric, and I do think ti's too easy to present her as 'one of the good guys', but that there is a good guy does hit the gvt idea that there are NONE. that everyone claiming anyhting is a lazy fucker. I'm not sure she is aware enough to be achieving this deliberately though.

that's what worries me. she's being noticed, and it is having a small positive impact against the scrounger propaganda, and if I knew she was doing that intentionally, and that was the aim of the game, then I'd know she was a non entity. but if she does get more of a clue, then IDK where this will go. but I'd prefer to wait and see rather than attacking someone because they might take a direction I find unpalatable in the future. 

and attacking someone because the actions of one woman commentator seems to now have poisoned the well for all others is, quite frankly, bizarre and disgusting.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2013)

toggle said:


> ...I'd prefer to wait and see rather than attacking someone because they might take a direction I find unpalatable in the future. and attacking someone because the actions of one woman commentator seems to now have poisoned the well for all others is, quite frankly, bizarre and disgusting.


 
Drawing some kind of comparison purely because they are both women seems bizarre, though.  She has more parallels with Jamie Oliver than LP ffs!


----------



## toggle (Dec 19, 2013)

8ball said:


> Drawing some kind of comparison purely because they are both women seems bizarre, though.  She has more parallels with Jamie Oliver than LP ffs!




it is. 

but it isn't uncommon to see spurious comparisons made between members of women or minority groups, that are made solely based on their gender/race rather than any actual supportable evidence for comparison.

I'm a woman writing a book ffs. wonder if they want to add slagging me off to the list?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2013)

toggle said:


> I'm a woman writing a book ffs. wonder if they want to add slagging me off to the list?


 
Yeah go on.  Chuck in JK Rowling too...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2013)

8ball said:


> Drawing some kind of comparison purely because they are both women seems bizarre, though.  She has more parallels with Jamie Oliver than LP ffs!


It's bizarre and wrong to criticise her in this way. It's also wrong to criticise criticisms of her by implying that the criticisms are coming her way because of her gender. Without something else to back that up, it's a cheap trick.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 19, 2013)

weepiper said:
			
		

> State grammar school, left with a few gcse's, got a job in a chip shop, later got a job in the control room in the fire service. She's not Laurie Penny.



Where is this info?


----------



## Nice one (Dec 19, 2013)

8ball said:


> Drawing some kind of comparison purely because they are both women seems bizarre, though.  She has more parallels with Jamie Oliver than LP ffs!



it's this bit where the parallels get drawn:  The creepy and weird forensic dissection of her words and putative actions/lifestyle in order to cut her down to size.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 19, 2013)

Citizen66 said:
			
		

> Where is this info?



Found it in a telegraph article.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 19, 2013)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's bizarre and wrong to criticise her in this way. It's also wrong to criticise criticisms of her by implying that the criticisms are coming her way because of her gender. Without something else to back that up, it's a cheap trick.


FFS you can do better than that.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 19, 2013)

TruXta said:


> He's a Labourite - need more be said?


what do you mean specifically by labourite?
Is he 100% pro Milibland and 'tougher tha n the tories' Reeves?

Or is he more like jeremy Corbyn of John McDonnell who seem like decent types to me.


----------



## TruXta (Dec 19, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> what do you mean specifically by labourite?
> Is he 100% pro Milibland and 'tougher tha n the tories' Reeves?
> 
> Or is he more like jeremy Corbyn of John McDonnell who seem like decent types to me.


Other people will know more about this, but IIRC he's of the opinion that he and others like him - a very small number of people it seems - can push the party leftwards from within. It's complete fantasy of course.


----------



## revol68 (Dec 19, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:


> what do you mean specifically by labourite?
> Is he 100% pro Milibland and 'tougher tha n the tories' Reeves?
> 
> Or is he more like jeremy Corbyn of John McDonnell who seem like decent types to me.



how may angels can fit on the head of a pin?


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 19, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:
			
		

> what do you mean specifically by labourite?
> Is he 100% pro Milibland and 'tougher tha n the tories' Reeves?
> 
> Or is he more like jeremy Corbyn of John McDonnell who seem like decent types to me.



He's at the helm of the 'people's assembly' that every man and his dog knows is a back door to labour; who are a party who actually support the cuts.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Dec 19, 2013)

revol68 said:


> how may angels can fit on the head of a pin?


I don't know what you mean.



Citizen66 said:


> He's at the helm of the 'people's assembly' that every man and his dog knows is a back door to labour; who are a party who actually support the cuts.



Yes i've heard of the Labour party.

I'm not sure it's entirely fair, given that the PA is a grassroots organisation. Certainly it's not perfect, but this sounds a bit melodramatic.


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 20, 2013)

Awesome Wells said:
			
		

> I'm not sure it's entirely fair, given that the PA is a grassroots organisation. Certainly it's not perfect, but this sounds a bit melodramatic.



Ah, one of those grassroots organisations that is really just the unions with a celeb backer or two.


----------



## LiamO (Dec 20, 2013)

weepiper said:


> State grammar school, left with a few gcse's, got a job in a chip shop, later got a job in the control room in the fire service. She's not Laurie Penny.



Yeah but... no but... I bet if she _had_ gone to Uni... and let's face it she _looks_ like someone who went to Uni... she would have turned into Laurie Penny... or something.... or maybe not... but I can't stand her... fucking do-gooder/do-badder/not-me cunt.


----------



## richwill72 (Dec 21, 2013)

LiamO said:


> (Note to mods... this thread is as political as you can get... please do not feel tempted to move it somewhere lifestyley)
> 
> http://agirlcalledjack.com/
> 
> ...


The point may already have been made, but bears repeating: the reference to  smashing up Sainburys in the first post in this thread  has now replaced most standard definitions of 'ironic'.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 21, 2013)

LiamO said:


> Yeah but... no but... I bet if she _had_ gone to Uni... and let's face it *she looks like someone who went to Uni*... she would have turned into Laurie Penny... or something.... or maybe not... but I can't stand her... fucking do-gooder/do-badder/not-me cunt.



What next, beatings for speccies 'cos they look "intellectual, you daft cunt?


----------



## Citizen66 (Dec 21, 2013)

Absolutely.


----------



## weepiper (Dec 21, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> What next, beatings for speccies 'cos they look "intellectual, you daft cunt?


He's taking the piss, VP.


----------



## juice_terry (Jan 2, 2014)

See she's on a nice little earner starring in the sainsbury's adverts


----------



## TruXta (Jan 2, 2014)

juice_terry said:


> See she's on a nice little earner starring in the sainsbury's adverts


She did post up exactly what she stands to make from it IIRC. Check a few pages back or google it. Wasn't as much as many might think.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 3, 2014)

juice_terry said:


> See she's on a nice little earner starring in the sainsbury's adverts


Are they on air? I'm curious to see what they are like.


----------



## LiamO (Jan 3, 2014)

ViolentPanda said:


> What next, beatings for speccies 'cos they look "intellectual, you daft cunt?



Jeez, ViolentPanda. 

What weepiper said.


----------



## xslavearcx (Jan 4, 2014)

surprised nobody has posted youtube videos of those adverts yet haha


----------



## smokedout (Jan 4, 2014)

*Jack Monroe* ‏@*MsJackMonroe*  1 Jan
What would I need a publicist for? To advise me not to tweet pics of my kitchen? :/

https://twitter.com/MsJackMonroe/status/418492594579329024

she probably just forgot that she had a deal with a publicist, or perhaps the publicist didn't tell her, or maybe its just okay cos shes jack monroe, and anyway I'm sure she'll give all the money to charity or something


----------



## weepiper (Jan 4, 2014)

aren't you bored with this yet? Today this cunt announced he's evicting all his tenants on Housing Benefit and refusing to take any more, but yeah Jack Monroe got some money from Sainsbury's and might become a Labour councillor someday, the bitch.


----------



## Corax (Jan 4, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's bizarre and wrong to criticise her in this way. It's also wrong to criticise criticisms of her by implying that the criticisms are coming her way because of her gender. Without something else to back that up, it's a cheap trick.


No, if anything it's what you've done there that's the 'cheap trick'.  I doubt it's intentional, but it was your choice of phrase so I'm just bouncing it back at you.  What you're suggesting isn't what's happening.

1) Purely by dint of her gender and her 'leftie political commentator' label she is drawing comparisons with Penny Dreadful.
2) Lots of people consider Penny to be dishonest.
3) An association is made between Jack, and Penny's dishonesty.  She becomes damned not even by association, but just by being a female in the media with a perceived left-wing stance.

Arguing that the above is what's taking place, is nothing like claiming that she's just being attacked because she's a woman.


----------



## Corax (Jan 4, 2014)

juice_terry said:


> See she's on a nice little earner starring in the sainsbury's adverts


I'm confused.  Are Sainsbury's funding ukip now or something?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 4, 2014)

Corax said:


> No, if anything it's what you've done there that's the 'cheap trick'.  I doubt it's intentional, but it was your choice of phrase so I'm just bouncing it back at you.  What you're suggesting isn't what's happening.
> 
> 1) Purely by dint of her gender and her 'leftie political commentator' label she is drawing comparisons with Penny Dreadful.
> 2) Lots of people consider Penny to be dishonest.
> ...


I don't think you got my point, which was aimed at posters _on here_, nobody else, some of whom have implied or even stated openly that other posters _on here _are directing criticism towards Monroe in part at least because of her gender. That, imo, is a cheap trick.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 4, 2014)

weepiper said:


> aren't you bored with this yet? Today this cunt announced he's evicting all his tenants on Housing Benefit and refusing to take any more, but yeah Jack Monroe got some money from Sainsbury's and might become a Labour councillor someday, the bitch.



yes, all I care about is Jack Monroe, thats why Ive made a two sentence post about her, on an internet thread about her, and I never write about anything else at all


----------



## Corax (Jan 4, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think you got my point, which was aimed at posters _on here_, nobody else, some of whom have implied or even stated openly that other posters _on here _are directing criticism towards Monroe in part at least because of her gender. That, imo, is a cheap trick.


You may be right.  I've not read the thread that way, but to be fair I've skimmed a fair bit of it.  The two claims are certainly different though, and whilst what you're describing probably does qualify as a 'cheap trick' the one I outlined is completely valid IMO.


----------



## weepiper (Jan 4, 2014)

smokedout said:


> yes, all I care about is Jack Monroe, thats why Ive made a two sentence post about her, on an internet thread about her, and I never write about anything else at all


out of your last twenty posts on here seventeen have been on this thread


----------



## smokedout (Jan 4, 2014)

And i'll probably post about her again because she's at the heart of the Mirror/UNITE drive to rehabilitate Labour's position on welfare and mislead people about their policies so when she lies outright I think its worth pointing out


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 4, 2014)

I don't think Labour has any welfare policies yet. We all pretty much know what they stand for; they aren't secretive about it. Perhaps their pledge to repeal the Bedroom Tax will be a barefaced lie, but, call me naive, I don't see it because that would be fucking suicide (even in power). Whether it will be misdirection for some other horrible scheme. 

On the other hand, their jobs guarantee is blatantly workfare.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 4, 2014)

Corax said:


> I'm confused.  Are Sainsbury's funding ukip now or something?



Sainsbury's have already funded far worse politics than UKIP's


----------



## maya (Jan 6, 2014)

Fun fact: "Jack Monroe" (also known as "Jack Munro," "Jackie Monroe," "Jack-A-Roe," "Jackaroe," "Jackaro," "Jackie Frazier," "Jack the Sailor," "Jack Went A-Sailing," "The Love of Polly and Jack Monroe") is a traditional folk song ballad (presumably of british origin) about a girl who after being refused by her father to see her loved soldier/sailor, resorts to crossdressing to see him (disguised as a man, she enlists under the name Jack Monroe). When her loved is wounded, she nurses him. She reveals her identity, they are married, the end. A bit of a digression I know, but I thought of this when reading Jack's blog ages ago where she wrote that her parents didn't name her Jack, it is a name she chose for herself. (No idea whether she's ever heard of the ballad, though!)


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 6, 2014)

judge for yourselves


----------



## fiannanahalba (Jan 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> judge for yourselves



Its great to see poor people getting on in the world after overcoming so much adversity.


----------



## juice_terry (Jan 6, 2014)

That wasn't leftovers used it was fresh off the chicken 

This is more like it : http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...out-modernday-working-class-life-9035273.html



> Meanwhile his wife Mary Doll (Elaine C. Smith) had styled herself as a ‘Girl Called Jack’-style benefits chef, creating dubious-sounding recipes, including ‘crispy fried rat’ and ‘bin-lid tempura’. Not being a “street philosopher” like her husband, Mary’s motivations were a little more prosaic; she wanted to scrape together enough cash to pay for their granddaughter Peaches to go on her school trip.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 6, 2014)

fiannanahalba said:


> Its great to see poor people getting on in the world after overcoming so much adversity.


I just find it sad that overcoming adveristy = selling out to big business like sainsburys.


----------



## fiannanahalba (Jan 6, 2014)

Yes but Jack is the embodiment of new socialism.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2014)

fiannanahalba said:


> Yes but Jack is the embodiment of new socialism.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 6, 2014)

If her recipe is something people in poverty can afford then I'm Bilbo Baggins. Click on the sainsburys 'buy the ingredients' link and it comes to eleven quid!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> If her recipe is something people in poverty can afford then I'm Bilbo Baggins. Click on the sainsburys 'buy the ingredients' link and it comes to eleven quid!


 
The proles know how to use a mouse now - man the barricades!


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 6, 2014)

8ball said:


> The proles know how to use a mouse now - man the barricades!


Sainsburys probably sell them too. Fair trade computer mouse.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 6, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Sainsburys probably sell them too. Fair trade computer mouse.


 
Tbf was the eleven quid including the Sunday roast?


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 6, 2014)

Not according to the 'recipe analyser' on their website.


----------



## smokedout (Jan 6, 2014)

they werent going to have her flogging the Basics range, the whole point of stigma marketing is that it doesnt come with a celebrity endorsement


----------



## TruXta (Jan 7, 2014)

All the things she's got up to in the year that was, in this post here - http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/12/31/a-pretty-good-year-reflections-on-2013/

It's a shit-load of stuff really, will be interesting to see where she's at in a year's time.


----------



## revol68 (Jan 7, 2014)

TruXta said:


> All the things she's got up to in the year that was, in this post here - http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/12/31/a-pretty-good-year-reflections-on-2013/
> 
> It's a shit-load of stuff really, will be interesting to see where she's at in a year's time.



OD'd on the Taste The Difference Range after failing to cope with celebrity culture.


----------



## Edie (Jan 7, 2014)

TruXta said:


> All the things she's got up to in the year that was, in this post here - http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/12/31/a-pretty-good-year-reflections-on-2013/
> 
> It's a shit-load of stuff really, will be interesting to see where she's at in a year's time.


Wow! Not read thread cos sure it'll just be people slagging off one of our own for doing well, but fuckin good on her, amazing achievements


----------



## chilango (Jan 7, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> judge for yourselves




Nice big kitchen. Looks like a grassy garden too!

Presumably not her house but a studio/set/hired location?


----------



## revol68 (Jan 7, 2014)

Edie said:


> Wow! Not read thread cos sure it'll just be people slagging off one of our own for doing well, but fuckin good on her, amazing achievements


labour party mouthpiece is not "one of my own" thank you very much.


----------



## Edie (Jan 7, 2014)

revol68 said:


> labour party mouthpiece is not "one of my own" thank you very much.


Good god, your own are probably some tiny breakaway anarchist group with 6 people who hate the tiny breakaway anarchist group in the next town more than the Tories


----------



## revol68 (Jan 7, 2014)

Edie said:


> Good god, your own are probably some tiny breakaway anarchist group with 6 people who hate the tiny breakaway anarchist group in the next town more than the Tories



no , considerably wider than that but not wide enough to accept Labour (explcitly new labour gobshites at that).


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 7, 2014)

chilango said:


> Nice big kitchen. Looks like a grassy garden too!
> 
> Presumably not her house but a studio/set/hired location?


Either is possible. I've no idea what her home looks like. However noone who makes ads doesn't have control over the backdrop for obvious reasons. Sainsburys (or indeed anyone) aren't going to want to sell their products in some filthy broken old kitchen.


----------



## chilango (Jan 7, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Either is possible. I've no idea what her home looks like. However noone who makes ads doesn't have control over the backdrop for obvious reasons. Sainsburys (or indeed anyone) aren't going to want to sell their products in some filthy broken old kitchen.



There you go.

The whole thing in a nutshell.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 7, 2014)

TruXta said:


> All the things she's got up to in the year that was, in this post here - http://agirlcalledjack.com/2013/12/31/a-pretty-good-year-reflections-on-2013/
> 
> It's a shit-load of stuff really, will be interesting to see where she's at in a year's time.



Fair enough. I don't begrudge her being successful, but, and with respect to her former horrible existence in poverty, she's had some lucky breaks there. How many poverty food bloogers come to the attention of the media enough to get a foothold in that career to then write, untrained as it were, for all the big papers? That's a hell of a thing! 

I'm sure that sounds like jealousy - and to be honest some of it is. I like writing (don't like spellcheckers though!), but there's no fucking way Xanthe Clay is going to want to let me cook for her (unless she likes undercooked chicken or cheese sandwiches).

Her's is a very unusual success story. Lucky isn't really a very fair way of putting it, but you can't deny what has happened is most certainly not the norm and can't be used as representative of anything. Did her contacts in Labour help with this? Did they get her in touch with Xanthe Clay? How does that then lead to a career in journalism that others would kill for given her success?

It's just sad that she allows her image to be bought by big business, celebrity, and the Labour party to whom, with the likes of Rachel Reeves and Milibland, she is very ignorant. She never did respond when I pointed out to her on Twitter, Rachel Reeves plans to be tougher than the tories. But then why should she; she doesn't owe me an explanation.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 7, 2014)

I'd imagine the agency she's got working for her has had a large hand in getting her some of these gigs and gongs. As for luck - well, no, that'd be odd wouldn't it.

I do think, partly based on my own experience interacting with her, that she'll become less and less open to criticisms of her own activities and those of her Labour mates, such as Reeves. Maybe partly that's a consequence of the undoubtedly humongous amounts of vile crap she's been handed through social media as well as proper media, but also, and perhaps more importantly, a sense of of burgeoning options for her within the commentariat, or maybe even politics, and with that a reluctance to criticise the hands that feed her.


----------



## N_igma (Jan 7, 2014)

Her book costs more than a weekly shop fucking ridiculous


----------



## 8ball (Jan 7, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Not according to the 'recipe analyser' on their website.


 
Hmmm, not a great money-saver then, I'd agree.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 7, 2014)

TruXta said:


> I'd imagine the agency she's got working for her has had a large hand in getting her some of these gigs and gongs. As for luck - well, no, that'd be odd wouldn't it.
> 
> I do think, partly based on my own experience interacting with her, that she'll become less and less open to criticisms of her own activities and those of her Labour mates, such as Reeves. Maybe partly that's a consequence of the undoubtedly humongous amounts of vile crap she's been handed through social media as well as proper media, but also, and perhaps more importantly, a sense of of burgeoning options for her within the commentariat, or maybe even politics, and with that a reluctance to criticise the hands that feed her.


Well there's criticism and there's vile crap and the latter is inexcusable. No criticism of her politics or choices to sell out to sainsburys justifies the shit people like Littlejohn dish out.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 7, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Well there's criticism and there's vile crap and the latter is inexcusable. No criticism of her politics or choices to sell out to sainsburys justifies the shit people like Littlejohn dish out.


Of course, but I can see how one can become loathe to sift through the barrage of stuff she's getting in order to reply to warranted criticism. Also, she's a single working mother, she's not got time to reply to any and all people even with the best of intentions - I suppose in that situation it can be tempting to just gloss over problems and inconsistencies in her own thoughts and actions.


----------



## youngian (Jan 7, 2014)

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...out-modernday-working-class-life-9035273.html


> Meanwhile his (Rab's) wife Mary Doll (Elaine C. Smith) had styled herself as a ‘Girl Called Jack’-style benefits chef, creating dubious-sounding recipes, including ‘crispy fried rat’ and ‘bin-lid tempura’. Not being a “street philosopher” like her husband, Mary’s motivations were a little more prosaic; she wanted to scrape together enough cash to pay for their granddaughter Peaches to go on her school trip.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 7, 2014)

TruXta said:


> Of course, but I can see how one can become loathe to sift through the barrage of stuff she's getting in order to reply to warranted criticism. Also, she's a single working mother, she's not got time to reply to any and all people even with the best of intentions - I suppose in that situation it can be tempting to just gloss over problems and inconsistencies in her own thoughts and actions.


Indeed. Which is why I said she doesn't owe me an explanation. I don't know how she really feels about Reeves's comments and I would be interested to know, but that's up to her. She is putting herself out as a campaigner for social justice and one can only hope she is aware of the reality of the Labour party. For all I know she could have had a massive argument with her about it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 7, 2014)

Awesome Wells said:


> Indeed. Which is why I said she doesn't owe me an explanation. I don't know how she really feels about Reeves's comments and I would be interested to know, but that's up to her. She is putting herself out as a campaigner for social justice and one can only hope she is aware of the reality of the Labour party. For all I know she could have had a massive argument with her about it.


 
It's a good point - Urban does have the default assumption of assuming the worst about everyone.

The sad part is how often Urban is right.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 7, 2014)

don't think you could be aware of the reality of the Labour party and still shill for it though.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 7, 2014)

It's the slightly lesser of two evils. I will likely vote Labour in 2015 simply to avoid another Coalition or a Tory majroity because, in that situation, we have to get the Tories out and we have to send them a message (they think Labour is all socialist lefties). I understand fully what I'm saying, but splitting the left vote would be too risky.


----------



## revol68 (Jan 8, 2014)

Lesser of two evils, ughh


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 8, 2014)

Give me an alternative then. 

If I don't vote or spoil my paper then we head toward a hung parliament which will mean another coalition and quitepossibly the continuation of the current one.

Locally the vote here was either Libdem or Tory. Look how that worked out. Labour has never stood much of a chance locally and the last independent candidate to stand was Katie Hopkins!

I want change but I think 2015 is a unique case and that while the differences betwen labour and tory are scant, they are enough to do two things: get this coalition out and send a message to the toffs that they aren't welcome nor wanted.

And hopefully wipe out the libdems.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 26, 2014)

She's quite annoying in those Sainsbury's adverts


----------



## Awesome Wells (Jan 27, 2014)

all advertising is annoying. I can't watch it. The neurodiverse person in my head screams at them and sees red. 
It's fundamentally dishonest, so I don't get what she thought she was achieving. Was it just about making some money?

Last I heard she was off to Africa.


----------



## weepiper (Feb 4, 2014)

So have we all seen this?

http://agirlcalledjack.com/2014/02/...good-for-you-as-it-was-for-me-bigbenefitsrow/

For those who didn't watch it, she was on the Channel 5 show 'Big Benefits Row' last night, on the same panel as Edwina Currie, when it was her turn to speak she laid into Currie about some of the things she's said about food banks lately, but almost immediately Currie started on about her grandfather being wealthy, getting increasingly personal.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Feb 4, 2014)

I feel I should watch the show, but I know I will get angry and feel powerless. Shouting at that stupid Currie cunt won't make me feel better in the long term. We need solutions, we need action, and we need to effect real change to take power away from vicious cancerous scum like her.

This reply of hers is an open wound; it shows, similar to the Littlejohn incident, that these right wingers have gotten to her. That's how they win. Piece by piece their poison seeps into the wound and debilitates you increasingly and inexorably. It's no answer.


----------



## treelover (Feb 5, 2014)

Just been reading the responses to Jack being on Wrights, "The Great Benefits Row", she has received enormous sympathy for posters and in some case, adoration,  and its clear(at least to me) that she is changing opinion on claimants to a degree, though again it does seem to be the 'deserving ones'


----------



## TruXta (Feb 22, 2014)

Busking in Camden with Billy Bragg.


----------



## seventh bullet (Feb 22, 2014)

lol


----------



## cesare (Feb 22, 2014)

Wtf


----------



## TruXta (Feb 22, 2014)

Check out the zombie lurking behind the window.


----------



## cesare (Feb 22, 2014)

TruXta said:


> Check out the zombie lurking behind the window.


Where do you find that pic? Fuck's sake


----------



## TruXta (Feb 22, 2014)

cesare said:


> Where do you find that pic? Fuck's sake


The internet sees all.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Feb 22, 2014)

TruXta said:


> Busking in Camden with Billy Bragg.



Back to basics indeed.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Feb 22, 2014)

"Waiting for the great leak casserole!"


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Feb 22, 2014)

sometimes this place disturbs me a bit.


----------



## tufty79 (Feb 22, 2014)

Paulie Tandoori said:


> sometimes this place disturbs me a bit.


only sometimes?


----------



## Paulie Tandoori (Feb 22, 2014)

tufty79 said:


> only sometimes?


ok, always


----------



## panpete (Feb 22, 2014)

TruXta said:


> Check out the zombie lurking behind the window.


Photobomb.


----------



## treelover (Feb 23, 2014)

TruXta said:


> Check out the zombie lurking behind the window.



Maybe he is a 'window licker'

btw, the busking maybe part of Oxjam , nothing weird.


----------



## Awesome Wells (Feb 26, 2014)

Another petition:

https://www.change.org/petitions/ge...campaign=49694&alert_id=BiPAGyMXud_oelsOlSyDy

She's game, no doubt about it. BUt has about as much chance of seeing Osborne 'end hunger' with his budget as you have of seeing me streak the commons during it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 26, 2014)

Bragg suits a beard. Takes some of the gormless cock look off him.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2014)

> *Poverty has left me unable to open my own front door*
> When I gave evidence about my time on the breadline to the parliamentary inquiry on hunger and food poverty, I was unprepared for the trauma of reliving it, says Jack Monroe
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/society/...n-front-door-food-banks-parliamentary-inquiry




Anyone who thinks Jack Monroe was 'playing at poverty' should read this,

then again, it could all be for effect...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2014)

The first two books by her to come up on amazon have sales ranks of 1000 and 400. They qualify as best-sellers.

I don't begrudge her her success, but it seems odd not to mention it.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2014)

Yeah, you totally sound like you don't begrudge her.

The whole point of the article was that despite her relative success she still has old wounds of various types that came from when she was poor - that being poor isn't just a strictly temporally defined period. That's one of the basic things about living in or growing up poor. That literally is the point of that piece. To say in response, _well you're not poor now _is to miss the point by so far that it does suggest that you're begrudging her. And in a way that i've not actually seen you do with people who didn't have to go through poverty. It's little bit _widescreen tv?_


----------



## JTG (Dec 10, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The first two books by her to come up on amazon have sales ranks of 1000 and 400. They qualify as best-sellers.
> 
> I don't begrudge her her success, but it seems odd not to mention it.


Success totally nullifies past traumatic experiences


----------



## trabuquera (Dec 10, 2014)

She was great on C4 news this week, refusing to participate in porridgegate and insisting, calmly and clearly, that people should pay attentions to the findings of the new report on foodbanks and understand the problem is MONEY and most often benefits shambles, not whether or not someone "knows how to cook".


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The first two books by her to come up on amazon have sales ranks of 1000 and 400. They qualify as best-sellers.
> 
> I don't begrudge her her success, but it seems odd not to mention it.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, you totally sound like you don't begrudge her.
> 
> It's little bit _widescreen tv?_



They had some public phone-in on Radio 4 about the foodbanks/people feeling the squeeze yesterday.  Among the callers (none of who seemed to have endured particular hardship) you had such claims as (to paraphrase a bit) _"people are going to foodbanks yet you still see them fighting over televisions in Asda on Black Friday. Why do they need a new television? They already have a television. I can't afford a new television"  _and more along those lines.  Divide-and-rule in full effect.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2014)

Dogsauce said:


> They had some public phone-in on Radio 4 about the foodbanks/people feeling the squeeze yesterday.  Among the callers (none of who seemed to have endured particular hardship) you had such claims as (to paraphrase a bit) _"people are going to foodbanks yet you still see them fighting over televisions in Asda on Black Friday. Why do they need a new television? They already have a television. I can't afford a new television"  _and more along those lines.  Divide-and-rule in full effect.


Yes, horrible stuff and doubly damaging as it takes each person mouthing this rubbish directly out of our ranks.


----------



## nino_savatte (Dec 10, 2014)

trabuquera said:


> She was great on C4 news this week, refusing to participate in porridgegate and insisting, calmly and clearly, that people should pay attentions to the findings of the new report on foodbanks and understand the problem is MONEY and most often benefits shambles, not whether or not someone "knows how to cook".


She kicked Tim Wilcox's arse on the BBC News Channel too. 

Wilcox is intimately involved with Sophie 'BICOM' Long btw.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2014)

no criticism that she's running round plugging a report led by Frank Field and two Tories which calls for foodbanks to be made a part of the welfare state and endorses sanctions?  no concern that of the 100s of people invited to give evidence, then alongside one unnamed food bank user, Jack Monroe - a long term Labour activist who works for Sainsburys, was the only person to represent claimants and even given space in the house of commons to do so?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2014)

smokedout said:


> no criticism that she's running round plugging a report led by Frank Field and two Tories which calls for foodbanks to be made a part of the welfare state and endorses sanctions?  no concern that of the 100s of people invited to give evidence, then alongside one unnamed food bank user, Jack Monroe - a long term Labour activist who works for Sainsburys, was the only person to represent claimants and even given space in the house of commons to do so?


That's simply not true - literally hundreds of other people gave evidence representing claimants - and many of them in sessions art the commons. Just look at the evidence review (pdf). Whether these are the right people to represent claimants (and Monroe is not labelled as such in the reports at all) is a different question - and one that involves pointing the finger at far more people and interests than her.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2014)

I looked, all charity workers, no claimants, I meant representing claimants as in actually being having been a claimant, rather than 'representing' on their behalf.  I presume that Jack was asked as a former foodbank user, I don't see what other expertise she has.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2014)

and i am, I'm pointing the finger at Frank fucking Field, but she's allowed herself to be used by him and is currently singing the praises of his toxic report.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2014)

smokedout said:


> I looked, all charity workers, no claimants, I meant representing claimants as in actually being having been a claimant, rather than 'representing' on their behalf.  I presume that Jack was asked as a former foodbank user, I don't see what other expertise she has.


You don't think the hundreds of food banks who gave evidence to the inquiry were there representing any claimants/food bank users?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2014)

smokedout said:


> and i am, I'm pointing the finger at Frank fucking Field, but she's allowed herself to be used by him and is currently singing the praises of his toxic report.


I'm not on about Frank Field - i'm on about the 250+ other people/projects who gave evidence in one for form or another. Every single one of them should get the same criticisms right? The citizens advice bureau, joseph rowntree foundation, food aid, cpag etc


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2014)

smokedout said:


> no criticism that she's running round plugging a report led by Frank Field and two Tories which calls for foodbanks to be made a part of the welfare state and endorses sanctions?  no concern that of the 100s of people invited to give evidence, then alongside one unnamed food bank user, Jack Monroe - a long term Labour activist who works for Sainsburys, was the only person to represent claimants and even given space in the house of commons to do so?



You are usually right on the ball, but although no friend of Field on that you are wrong, in the Guardian today Field completely negates the idea of institutionalising F/B's*, his other ideas are right wing and dangerous though

*read it in café, can't finds the article, I think was in Society.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2014)

> When the government says food banks are "absolutely not a part of the welfare system because we have other means of supporting people" many people today will say 'think again'. The Trussell Trust runs a network of over 400 food banks and our daily experience tells us otherwise
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2014/mar/18/dwp-jobcentres-food-banks-gaps





Article by CEO of Tressell Trust, its incredible that the Gov't can say that, its well known that Smith and the DWP released funds to the trust as early as 2010, as they knew what impact their welfare reforms would have.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2014)

> My mother remembers only too well the days prior to the introduction of the modern Welfare State and the way her parents had to beg for help from charities.
> Those that ran the charities were well-meaning but insisted that to benefit you had to demonstrate that followed their mores and beliefs. Mum still describes them as being like missionaries doling out help to the poor natives
> The shame and feeling of degradation from having to beg still lives with her at the age of 90. She is despondent that we have got there again, so quickly



Posted on CIF, I sincerely hope we don't go back to this, but a Tory win will ensure it does.


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2014)

treelover said:


> You are usually right on the ball, but although no friend of Field on that you are wrong, in the Guardian today Field completely negates the idea of institutionalising F/B's*, his other ideas are right wing and dangerous though
> 
> *read it in café, can't finds the article, I think was in Society.



have you read his report?


----------



## smokedout (Dec 10, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> I'm not on about Frank Field - i'm on about the 250+ other people/projects who gave evidence in one for form or another. Every single one of them should get the same criticisms right? The citizens advice bureau, joseph rowntree foundation, food aid, cpag etc



I'm criticising her for endorsing this report.  I'm criticising the reports authors, Field, a Bishop, a Baroness, a Labour non-entity and two Tories for not speaking to any actually current or former foodbank users other than Jack Monroe, who for all her outrage is a safe pair of hands when it comes to this stuff.


----------



## BigTom (Dec 10, 2014)

treelover said:


> Posted on CIF, I sincerely hope we don't go back to this, but a Tory win will ensure it does.



My grandmother* was in the workhouse as a child, she carried the shame of it for the whole of her life, fucking disgusting, and something we have to fight tooth and nail against, why it's important to argue against charity and for social security. don't matter if it's tory or labour, neoliberals both of them, and neo-liberals love charity, we'll keep moving this way after 2015 regardless.

*paternal grandmother for those also reading the mansion tax thread, it was my maternal grandparents who had the £2m house


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2014)

> *Inequality is killing pensioners like me. We must keep up the good fight*
> As a 92-year-old activist I’m appalled at the prospect of returning to 1930s levels of poverty. But together, we can win
> 
> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/10/inequality-pensioners-1930s-poverty




My great grandmother died in the Liverpool(Kensington i think) workhouse infirmary, I think its why I've always been passionate about poverty/inequality issues,

anyway, and the other end of the age scale from Jack we need more like this guy.


----------



## treelover (Dec 10, 2014)

> The government and the “big six” energy suppliers may point out that this figure is lower than previous years’ statistics, but no one should be dying because they can’t afford heating or electricity, as in the tragic case of David Clapson, who died when the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) sanctioned him and he could not afford to top up his pre-payment meter to keep his insulin refrigerated.



Never heard of this, disgraceful.


----------



## Nice one (Dec 11, 2014)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, you totally sound like you don't begrudge her.
> 
> The whole point of the article was that despite her relative success she still has old wounds of various types that came from when she was poor - that being poor isn't just a strictly temporally defined period. That's one of the basic things about living in or growing up poor. That literally is the point of that piece. To say in response, _well you're not poor now _is to miss the point by so far that it does suggest that you're begrudging her. And in a way that i've not actually seen you do with people who didn't have to go through poverty. It's little bit _widescreen tv?_



It's not though is it. Literally. The article is her explaining that her time being poor was real because the emotional impact it had on her was real. And the memory of that emotional impact still reverberates within her. She tells it with a great deal of integrity and it is a well written piece.

But it's a piece written from the perspective of how becoming poor transformed her existence, changed  everything - loss of social confidence, personal insecurity, lack of access to basic amenities, deterioration of the physical self and social invisibility; fear and dread as state of daily expectation - things she hadn't encountered before.

In her own words she went from being "the girl who was always the lead in the school play [shades of the smartest girl there], to a woman who can’t open her own front door".

It's the transformation that she is documenting.

For those of us born in poor working class environments and continue to live our lives as poor working class people there is no sudden jolt over the descent into poverty. This is it. Life as we know it. The every day, the normal, what it's always been. The key element here is there is no way out for us, all the changes she documents and remembers are permanent fixtures carried with us like a dead weight, day in day out, from the cradle to the grave. Because it's all we've ever known.

Jack Monroe's story, heartbreaking as it is, is written from someone who has the skill and ability to articulate a previous period in her life, to look back at the hardship she suffered and remember.

Being poor _is_ a strictly temporally defined period.  She wasn't poor before, she became poor for a period, she is no longer poor (poor in this context is simply a financial consideration).

What probably would have been nice was to end the article saying thousands of working class women continue to go through what she went through (indeed for most it's the only existence they will know), instead of carrying on trying to authenticate her own experience in the eyes of non-believers.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2014)

Back in September, she did acknowledge her good fortune. 

This thriftiness-as-a-virtue puritan stuff doesn't sit well with me though. It's not morally wrong to buy a lobster if you want it and can afford it. 



> I learned to cook and eat well without spending an awful lot of money, and I stick to those principles. You won’t catch me putting lobster in my mac’n’cheese, at any rate.


----------



## tbtommyb (Dec 11, 2014)

smokedout said:


> no criticism that she's running round plugging a report led by Frank Field and two Tories which calls for foodbanks to be made a part of the welfare state and endorses sanctions?  no concern that of the 100s of people invited to give evidence, then alongside one unnamed food bank user, Jack Monroe - a long term Labour activist who works for Sainsburys, was the only person to represent claimants and even given space in the house of commons to do so?


what's wrong with her being a labour activist? she's never hidden it. i'd far rather the labour party had more people like her, who know what live is actually like for many people, rather than miliband clones.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 11, 2014)

tbtommyb said:


> what's wrong with her being a labour activist? she's never hidden it. i'd far rather the labour party had more people like her, who know what live is actually like for many people, rather than miliband clones.



What's wrong with being an activist for a neoliberal party?

I don't rate the chances of such activists very highly in terms of actually getting the Labour party as a whole to roll back the neoliberal agenda. My understanding is that the internal levers of power have been deliberately placed out of the reach of their like.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2014)

tbtommyb said:


> what's wrong with her being a labour activist? she's never hidden it. i'd far rather the labour party had more people like her, who know what live is actually like for many people, rather than miliband clones.


if i had 10p for every time someone had said 'if only the labour party had some socialists in it' or similar i'd be able to buy a 1 bed flat in knightsbridge.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2014)

Labour still have good people in their ranks. The test for me will be if Labour win the next election and Monroe is called to help out in some capacity with their 'sensible cuts', which she very well may be.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 11, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Labour still have good people in their ranks. The test for me will be if Labour win the next election and Monroe is called to help out in some capacity with their 'sensible cuts', which she very well may be.



Either that or she'll be ignored, like all the other decent people in the Labour rank and file. Except when they're being pandered to for votes.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 11, 2014)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Labour still have good people in their ranks. The test for me will be if Labour win the next election and Monroe is called to help out in some capacity with their 'sensible cuts', which she very well may be.



Same thing has occurred to me about the '999 Call for the NHS' and the Peoples' Assembly, both of whom have been happy to lend support to and carry the bags of right-wing Labour politicians.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 12, 2014)

Tbf labour have a chance at power actually making a real diffrence to peoples lives postively.
 The swp or some other more crrect socialist party will achieve what exactly?
 Go on name something concrete that the UK left has  achieved comrade?


----------



## BigTom (Dec 12, 2014)

The Tories have a chance at power too, so do ukip, not the lib dens anymore 

 You wouldn't substitute any of those parties for labour in that sentence I don't think, so labour shouldn't be there either.

They are all neo liberal parties, and the electoral system is a dead end right now.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 13, 2014)

If its a choice of being arse fucked  with lube or without lube I'll take the lube
   As the alternative is a mirage advertised by people I wouldnt let babysit my kids


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 17, 2015)

I think this makes smokedout and others right - and me wrong.

_— Jack Monroe (@MsJackMonroe)March 17, 2015

Nice to see how quickly some Labour knives stick in after 10 years campaigning for them and staunch defence. With friends like these, etc._


----------



## chilango (Mar 17, 2015)

https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/...er/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## smokedout (Mar 17, 2015)

never trust a hippy


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 18, 2015)

Just half caught a conversation on fb that she is mates with a director of the ripper museum and that she's throwing around legal threats. Anyone know any more about this?


----------



## Belushi (Aug 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Just half caught a conversation on fb that she is mates with a director of the ripper museum and that she's throwing around legal threats. Anyone know any more about this?



She was getting accused of being a shareholder in the ripper museum on twitter yesterday which she was strongly denying. As far as I could tell she just knows the founder.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Just half caught a conversation on fb that she is mates with a director of the ripper museum and that she's throwing around legal threats. Anyone know any more about this?


found via google


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 18, 2015)

She's also calling herself "Dr". She's got an_ honorary _doctorate ffs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> She's also calling herself "Dr". She's got an_ honorary _doctorate ffs.


so her and "dr" leroy logan mbe. should be a thread for this sort of offender.


----------



## Belushi (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> She's also calling herself "Dr". She's got an_ honorary _doctorate ffs.



My Mum has a PhD and doesn't call herself doctor


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 18, 2015)

Belushi said:


> My Mum has a PhD and doesn't call herself doctor


When I get my PhD, I _will_ call myself "doctor".


----------



## cesare (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> She's also calling herself "Dr". She's got an_ honorary _doctorate ffs.


 Really? Kinell.


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 18, 2015)

cesare said:


> Really? Kinell.


Aye.


----------



## cesare (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Aye.



Oh dear oh dear.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 18, 2015)

I don't do Twitter. It just looks like the world's most confusing argument.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 18, 2015)

I have to say, I'd always just assumed that Twitter handle was ironic. I'm not really a lord, either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> When I get my PhD, I _will_ call myself "doctor".


so will i


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

Lord Camomile said:


> I have to say, I'd always just assumed that Twitter handle was ironic. I'm not really a lord, either.


yeh but you do have same effect as camomile


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 18, 2015)

Lord Camomile said:


> I have to say, I'd always just assumed that Twitter handle was ironic. I'm not really a lord, either.



And I'm not a long-dead, bearded Russian anarchist, either, come to think of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

Lord Camomile said:


> I have to say, I'd always just assumed that Twitter handle was ironic. I'm not really a lord, either.


i am a model tho


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> When I get my PhD, I _will_ call myself "doctor".



And then you will realise that you should have been a _proper _doctor.


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> i am a model tho


----------



## Rob Ray (Aug 18, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> And I'm not a long-dead, bearded Russian anarchist, either, come to think of it.



Drat, I quite liked the idea of Bakunin reincarnated as an Ace Rimmer lookalike and posting regularly on leftie bulletin boards.


----------



## nino_savatte (Aug 18, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> And then you will realise that you should have been a _proper _doctor.


What? Like a physician, you mean? They're not _proper_ doctors.


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 18, 2015)

Rob Ray said:


> Drat, I quite liked the idea of Bakunin reincarnated as an Ace Rimmer lookalike and posting regularly on leftie bulletin boards.



That's the power of reincarnation for you. I can see it now, old Mikhail on his deathbed saying:

"Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast..."


----------



## Greebo (Aug 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but you do have same effect as camomile


Soothing, lightening, alleviating pain, and reducing inflammation?


----------



## Greebo (Aug 18, 2015)

Belushi said:


> My Mum has a PhD and doesn't call herself doctor


Neither does the woman in the next block from here, unless it's directly relevant to the situation.


----------



## 8den (Aug 18, 2015)

1st rule  be suspicious of anyone who calls themselves Dr who isn't a MD


----------



## 8den (Aug 18, 2015)

The exception is my mate who was a doctor of sonic arts. Which was cool. It was better when he was a master of sonic arts a title that should come with a cape rocket boots and a nuclear powered synth.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 18, 2015)

....or just...



8den said:


> ....be suspicious of anyone who calls themselves Dr who....


----------



## Favelado (Aug 18, 2015)

Knock knock.


----------



## The Boy (Aug 18, 2015)

Who's there?


----------



## Favelado (Aug 18, 2015)

I can't go through with it. I'm sorry.


----------



## Santino (Aug 18, 2015)

I-can't-go-through-with-it-I'm-sorry who?


----------



## Dan U (Aug 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> Just half caught a conversation on fb that she is mates with a director of the ripper museum and that she's throwing around legal threats. Anyone know any more about this?


Being accused by firky, no less.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 18, 2015)

Dan U said:


> Being accused by firky, no less.



It's like Raoul Moat all over again.


----------



## Dan U (Aug 18, 2015)

Citizen66 said:


> It's like Raoul Moat all over again.


Actually I just read back and it was someone else before. He just waded in as well. 

The doctor thing is pretty crap as well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2015)

8den said:


> 1st rule  be suspicious of anyone who calls themselves Dr who isn't a MD



Unless you're in Germany, where they're a bit obsessive about making sure they've nailed your academic and social credentials spot-on.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 18, 2015)

8den said:


> ...a cape rocket boots and a nuclear powered synth.



Sounds suspiciously like Rick Wakeman.


----------



## 8den (Aug 18, 2015)

hot air baboon said:


> ....or just...



My hatred of Katherine Tate was vindicated when she admitted on the buzzcocks Dr Who special that she thought the Doctors name was Doctor Who, like he was called Mr Who before he got his Doctorate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

8den said:


> My hatred of Katherine Tate was vindicated when she admitted on the buzzcocks Dr Who special that she thought the Doctors name was Doctor Who, like he was called Mr Who before he got his Doctorate.


katherine tate is an academick at brown university, providence, ri. do you mean catherine tate?


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 18, 2015)




----------



## xslavearcx (Aug 18, 2015)

I heard that she is a Clapton fc supporter...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2015)

nino_savatte said:


> Aye.




What if it can be solved, but only by difficult, dangerous and extremely expensive means?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> What if it can be solved, but only by difficult, dangerous and extremely expensive means?


it can still be solved.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

xslavearcx said:


> I heard that she is a Clapton fc supporter...


say it's not so


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> it can still be solved.



Yes, but there's still cause to worry in the meantime isn't there?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yes, but there's still cause to worry in the meantime isn't there?


you're a glass half empty man aren't you?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> you're a glass half empty man aren't you?



I'm a calls 'em like I sees 'em man.

Don't worry everyone, all we need to do is run across this rickety rope bridge over this pool of molten lava while fighting off that legion of orcs that's running towards and us dodging all those falling boulders from the roof of this cavern that's going to come down altogether any second now. Then all we need to do is get through to the right branch of virgin media's customer service call centre on the first try. 

_Don't worry. _Fuck off don't worry. If we didn't worry we'd have all been eaten by leopards before we made it down from the trees.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2015)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm a calls 'em like I sees 'em man.
> 
> Don't worry everyone, all we need to do is run across this rickety rope bridge over this pool of molten lava while fighting off that legion of orcs that's running towards and us dodging all those falling boulders from the roof of this cavern that's going to come down altogether any second now. Then all we need to do is get through to the right branch of virgin media's customer service call centre on the first try.
> 
> _Don't worry. _Fuck off don't worry. If we didn't worry we'd have all been eaten by leopards before we made it down from the trees.


how would we have survived to make it up into the trees


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> how would we have survived to make it up into the trees



We got chased up them by leopards. Then some cunt said, don't worry lads, we're away and clear. When he should've been worried about the fact that leopards can also climb trees.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 18, 2015)

I think what most people mean by "don't worry" is "don't needlessly tear yourself up about things you have no control over" rather than "don't bother thinking about any way to solve problems".

Or at least that's what *I* mean when I say "don't worry".


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 18, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> katherine tate is an academick at brown university, providence, ri. do you mean catherine tate?


FFS Pickman's


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 18, 2015)

ViolentPanda said:


> Sounds suspiciously like Rick Wakeman.



Cue an endless, interminably tedious and repetitive solo using multiple keyboards, possibly while dressed as a wizard, for fuck's sake.

Not as if Wakeman could ever hold a candle to Jon Lord anyway.


----------



## cesare (Aug 18, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> FFS Pickman's


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2015)

NoXion said:


> I think what most people mean by "don't worry" is "don't needlessly tear yourself up about things you have no control over" rather than "don't bother thinking about any way to solve problems".
> 
> Or at least that's what *I* mean when I say "don't worry".


I think what most people mean by inane aphorisms is " no need to actually think about stuff"


----------



## Favelado (Aug 19, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> Cue an endless, interminably tedious and repetitive solo using multiple keyboards, possibly while dressed as a wizard, for fuck's sake.
> 
> Not as if Wakeman could ever hold a candle to Jon Lord anyway.



Didn't he once eat a curry whilst on stage during a very long guitar solo?


----------



## NoXion (Aug 19, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think what most people mean by inane aphorisms is " no need to actually think about stuff"



But you got to admit that not all thinking is productive or comforting. It's one thing to rationally consider one's options; it's another thing entirely to stew in one's own juices, obsessing over failures and mistakes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 19, 2015)

NoXion said:


> But you got to admit that not all thinking is productive or comforting. It's one thing to rationally consider one's options; it's another thing entirely to stew in one's own juices, obsessing over failures and mistakes.


Hmmm.

I've never read anything by the Dalia Lama that I've not read previously/thought myself before, tbh. 

I don't need instruction from an exiled feudal lord.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> FFS Pickman's


ffs pickman's _sir_


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2015)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm.
> 
> I've never read anything by the Dalia Lama that I've not read previously/thought myself before, tbh.
> 
> I don't need instruction from an exiled feudal lord.


pity you post like you do then


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 19, 2015)

Pickman's model said:


> ffs pickman's _sir_


I'll "sir" you, you wee bollix, with the toe of me boot.

"Sir" indeed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2015)

Idris2002 said:


> I'll "sir" you, you wee bollix, with the toe of me boot.
> 
> "Sir" indeed.


so you say


----------



## Bakunin (Aug 19, 2015)

Favelado said:


> Didn't he once eat a curry whilst on stage during a very long guitar solo?



Yes, the others spent so long noodling away that he had one delivered.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Aug 19, 2015)

Bakunin said:


> Yes, the others spent so long noodling away that he had one delivered.


I hope it was a Chinese one to go with the noodles.


----------



## killer b (Apr 19, 2016)

Just a heads up that radio 4 appear to have made a radio dramatisation of the jack Monroe story, starring Jaime winstone. 

I don't think I can add anything to that.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Apr 19, 2016)

killer b said:


> Just a heads up that radio 4 appear to have made a radio dramatisation of the jack Monroe story, starring Jaime winstone.
> 
> I don't think I can add anything to that.


IT'S THE RADIO EVENT OF THE YEAR


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 19, 2016)

killer b said:


> Just a heads up that radio 4 appear to have made a radio dramatisation of the jack Monroe story, starring Jaime winstone.
> 
> I don't think I can add anything to that.



BBC Radio 4 to air drama based on Jack Monroe book


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2016)

Rutita1 said:


> BBC Radio 4 to air drama based on Jack Monroe book


What's 'from our home correspondent', mentioned further down the article?


----------



## twentythreedom (Apr 19, 2016)

Anyone got a synopsis?


----------



## purenarcotic (Apr 19, 2016)

I don't really understand why this is happening.


----------



## newharper (Apr 19, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> What's 'from our home correspondent', mentioned further down the article?



5 rather than 6?


----------



## YouSir (Apr 19, 2016)

purenarcotic said:


> I don't really understand why this is happening.



Because Radio 4 are on the cutting edge of contemporary issues which effect the toiling masses, or at least they can find someone who is in the Guardian. And they also have Marcus Brigstocke so you can learn to hate them too.


----------



## killer b (Apr 19, 2016)

twentythreedom said:


> Anyone got a synopsis?


they played a key scene from it in the trailer, Monroe says to her gran (I paraphprase):

_The local paper says this town has been ruined by junkies, scum and single mums! I'm not scum and I'm not going to take it anymore! I'm going to fight back - Online!_


----------



## YouSir (Apr 19, 2016)

killer b said:


> they played a key scene from it in the trailer, Monroe says to her gran (I paraphprase):
> 
> _The local paper says this town has been ruined by junkies, scum and single mums! I'm not scum and I'm not going to take it anymore! I'm going to fight back - Online!_



Bullshit, must be a hell of a paraphrase because even Radio 4 writers wouldn't go that Rik from the Young Ones. Would they?


----------



## killer b (Apr 19, 2016)

I'll see if I can find it, gimme a minute.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Apr 19, 2016)

I heard a clip tonight...summary...
Grandmother : 'Well why didn't you come to me before you telling all and sundry (newpapers)'
Jack : 'Because.......'


----------



## rutabowa (Apr 19, 2016)

radio 4 dramas trigger terrible depression for me.


----------



## killer b (Apr 19, 2016)

Just after 1 hour 30 on this: 19/04/2016, Today - BBC Radio 4


----------



## twentythreedom (Apr 19, 2016)

> Anyone got a synopsis?





purenarcotic said:


> I don't really understand why this is happening.


Cheers


----------



## xenon (Apr 19, 2016)

Is prob painful cliche patronising worthy shite.

HTH


----------



## treelover (Jul 24, 2016)

> Jack Monroe: ‘I want to be treated as a person, not as a woman or a man’
> 
> She was the poster girl for austerity Britain, a famous food writer and poverty campaigner, and then she suffered a breakdown. Jack Monroe talks politics, party frocks and being transgender



JM interview


----------



## treelover (Jul 24, 2016)

> *It’s the night of Jeremy Corbyn’s rally in Parliament Square and she is leading the charge against him; fighty and combative and taking on allcomers*, telling the world she’s “an absolutely devastated frustrated furious howling wreck”. And then: “My God I’m starting to worry I’ve forgotten how to actually sleep.”



Not a JC supporter then.


----------



## keybored (Jul 24, 2016)

treelover said:


> Not a JC supporter then.


Not if The Guardian gave her column inches.


----------



## treelover (Jul 24, 2016)

> But she wanted to come home. She loved living in London but she’d gone almost straight from being a single mother living on benefits in Southend to living it up on the London media scene and seems to have had a growing sense of unease about it. “I would have dinner parties at home and it would be full of media and celeb friends, and a couple of glasses of wine down them *they’d all be taking the piss out of how I spoke or the fact that I didn’t go to university.*”



Rebel supporters?


----------



## treelover (Jul 24, 2016)

keybored said:


> Not if The Guardian gave her column inches.



She lost her Guardian gig and her Sainsburys one when she commented on Camerons disabled son, Ivan, I think she was right though, he cuts DLA and then uses his son's tragedy to promote himself.


----------



## cantsin (Jul 24, 2016)

"It’s the night of Jeremy Corbyn’s rally in Parliament Square and she is leading the charge against him; fighty and combative and taking on allcomers, *telling the world she’s “an absolutely devastated frustrated furious howling wreck”. And then: “My God I’m starting to worry I’ve forgotten how to actually sleep.”*

That’s it, I think, and go to bed. The interview is never going to happen. But the next morning, bright and early, there’s an email confirming our meeting spot. And when I turn up at Southend station, she’s smiling and chatty and perfectly unflustered. She moved back there after splitting up with McEvedy in the aftermath of her breakdown and we head off to a local pub for lunch and she orders a full three courses and a bottle of wine and *she couldn’t be more relaxed. I thought you were cracking up, I say. “My bark is far, far worse than my bite.”
*
Just endless bullshit .All of it .


----------



## ska invita (Jul 24, 2016)

*Would you consider standing for parliament? “Yes. I’ve always skirted around that one, saying ‘I really want to wait until my son is a bit older.’*

...something to look forward to


----------



## Authentic (Jul 24, 2016)

killer b said:


> they played a key scene from it in the trailer, Monroe says to her gran (I paraphprase):
> 
> _The local paper says this town has been ruined by junkies, scum and single mums! I'm not scum and I'm not going to take it anymore! I'm going to fight back - Online!_


Safest way to "fight back" imo.

So, is she a junkie and a single mum then?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 24, 2016)

twentythreedom said:


> Anyone got a synopsis?



Episode 1:
We find out why Grandma isn't talking to Jack and why soda bread is her favourite recipe.

Episode 2:
Jack meets one of Southend's few on-off vegetarians, while her Grandma despairs of her granddaughter ever settling down.

HTH

Episode 1, A Girl Called Jack, 15 Minute Drama - BBC Radio 4


----------



## The Boy (Jul 24, 2016)

She was on Eurosport earlier trying to sell me some sort of Samsung device.  Not quite john cooper-clarke selling me chips...


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jul 25, 2016)

DaveCinzano said:


> Episode 1:
> We find out why Grandma isn't talking to Jack and why soda bread is her favourite recipe.
> 
> Episode 2:
> ...


Jesus I thought you were taking the piss until the link at the bottom of your post came rolling into view


----------



## Biscuitician (Jul 25, 2016)

treelover said:


> She lost her Guardian gig and her Sainsburys one when she commented on Camerons disabled son, Ivan, I think she was right though, he cuts DLA and then uses his son's tragedy to promote himself.


Is that actually the reason?


----------



## pengaleng (Jul 25, 2016)

is this the real life? or is this just fantasy? caught in a landslide no escape from reality


----------



## Biscuitician (Jul 26, 2016)

The Boy said:


> She was on Eurosport earlier trying to sell me some sort of Samsung device.  Not quite john cooper-clarke selling me chips...


What should she be doing?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 26, 2016)

Biscuitician said:


> What should she be doing?


Lentil dhal.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 26, 2016)

_Dhal Mmm For Meejah_


----------



## emanymton (Aug 6, 2016)

The Boy said:


> She was on Eurosport earlier trying to sell me some sort of Samsung device.  Not quite john cooper-clarke selling me chips...


Doing adverts for them now.

Samsung Galaxy TabPro S Presents, The Food Blogger TV Advert 2016

Or is that what you meant?


----------



## The Boy (Aug 6, 2016)

emanymton said:


> Or is that what you meant?



It was


----------



## Gromit (Aug 7, 2016)

So do we retitle the thread... A time to sell out?


----------



## DaveCinzano (Aug 7, 2016)

"I'm Alright" - Jack


----------



## Celyn (Aug 7, 2016)

emanymton said:


> Doing adverts for them now.
> 
> Samsung Galaxy TabPro S Presents, The Food Blogger TV Advert 2016
> 
> Or is that what you meant?


What a weird advert! I don't get it at all. Is the idea that she can take this very portable thingy along when buying food?  Sort of a bit like bringing along an even more portable shopping list on a bit of paper?

I just looked, and the thing costs about £800.  What?   

And the advert tells us nothing whatsoever about the machine itself, absolutely nothing.  So are they only selling it on the grounds of "this will look dead cool when you go to the greengrocer?


----------



## emanymton (Aug 7, 2016)

Celyn said:


> What a weird advert! I don't get it at all. Is the idea that she can take this very portable thingy along when buying food?  Sort of a bit like bringing along an even more portable shopping list on a bit of paper?
> 
> I just looked, and the thing costs about £800.  What?
> 
> And the advert tells us nothing whatsoever about the machine itself, absolutely nothing.  So are they only selling it on the grounds of "this will look dead cool when you go to the greengrocer?


I know, who the fuck uses their table when shopping. But you are supposed to buy the £800 tablet because she uses one and is cool.


----------



## keybored (Aug 7, 2016)

emanymton said:


> I know, who the fuck uses their table when shopping.



I must admit, I do use Notes on my phone (and I suppose it is a bit of a "phablet") for shopping lists because my short-term memory is woeful (and as for my handwriting, even _I_ can't decipher it). So I am that person who keeps having to check a device in the supermarket. I always hope people don't assume I'm looking at recipes or some calorie counting app.


----------



## emanymton (Aug 7, 2016)

keybored said:


> I must admit, I do use Notes on my phone (and I suppose it is a bit of a "phablet") for shopping lists because my short-term memory is woeful (and as for my handwriting, even _I_ can't decipher it). So I am that person who keeps having to check a device in the supermarket. I always hope people don't assume I'm looking at recipes or some calorie counting app.


No, a phones OK,  if I needed to do a list I'd probably use my phone. Phoes fit in your pocked and you will normally have it with you anyway. But that's a full size 10 inch tablet from the looks of it.


----------



## keybored (Aug 7, 2016)

emanymton said:


> But that's a full size 10 inch tablet from the looks of it.


I only just watched the clip. Moses would be proud of that thing  Just checked and my screen is a mere 5.1 inches so I think I'm alright there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2016)

keybored said:


> I must admit, I do use Notes on my phone (and I suppose it is a bit of a "phablet") for shopping lists because my short-term memory is woeful (and as for my handwriting, even _I_ can't decipher it). So I am that person who keeps having to check a device in the supermarket. I always hope people don't assume I'm looking at recipes or some calorie counting app.


Taking pictures of other people's feet for your own salacious purposes


----------



## Celyn (Aug 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> Taking pictures of other people's feet for your own salacious purposes


Oh no!     Now there will be people putting stuff on Youtube and writing blogs on the subject of "toes I have seen today".

Suddenly that Pokemon game seem almost sensible.


----------



## Egg & Anchoiade (Oct 15, 2021)

smokedout said:


> but it means her tenner a week budget is bollocks if she was
> 
> 
> neither, my wider point is about her politics and uncritical support for labour and how she has been used by the media and labour as a celebrity claimant to guide the debate in a non-threatening direction.  Selling out to Sainsburys was just the icing on the cake and should be the end of her as someone with any political credibility as an 'anti-poverty campaigner', but astonishingly even on here, it isnt.
> ...




Thought you might be interested to know that you acquired a new fan base 8 years on.  😎

Jack Monroe #150 Haven’t you got peas to discuss?

Jack Monroe Gossip Forum


----------



## mango5 (Jan 23, 2022)

Hmm looks like someone tried to kick off some kind of scuffle with that
Tattle place.  Very poor effort 1/10

Anyways, there are nearly 250 threads about Jack Monroe on there. They don't give a shit about the odd post on here.


----------



## seeformiles (Jan 23, 2022)

I’ve read the odd Jack Monroe article. My reaction has invariably been “I could do that better and cheaper”. Oh well.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 23, 2022)

seeformiles said:


> I’ve read the odd Jack Monroe article. My reaction has invariably been “I could do that better and cheaper”. Oh well.



That sounds like a possible career opportunity.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

I see she's found someone else to sue and is going on about it buying her a house. I think she is one of those people where you can say she does a lot of good work and is on the right side of history but also seems well a bit tiresome (based on her public persona).


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> is going on about it buying her a house.


link us up to this


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> I see she's found someone else to sue and is going on about it buying her a house. I think she is one of those people where you can say she does a lot of good work and is on the right side of history but also seems well a bit tiresome (based on her public persona).



She's suing a tory cunt MP. Good. All efforts to make the lives of rightwing scum worse must always be celebrated. 









						Jack Monroe to sue MP after he says ‘she makes fortune from the poor’
					

Food writer and activist, who won a libel suit against the Daily Mail’s Katie Hopkins, takes action against Tory Lee Anderson




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> link us up to this



she deleted the tweet - edit no she didn't. she seems to delete a lot of tweets.

just the begging for money via patreon, twitter etc despite having done branded ads, books. not a crime just a bit tiresome as I said.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> she deleted the tweet. she seems to delete a lot of tweets.
> 
> just the begging for money via patreon, twitter etc despite having done branded ads, books. not a crime just a bit tiresome as I said.


did no-one get screenshots?


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

oh no, it's here


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

ah, so a lighthearted reply to someone on twitter that you wouldn't see unless you followed both people or actively went looking for it = 'going on'. gotcha.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

That's being ironic, surely.

I'm no fan, but that's not really anything at all.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> oh no, it's here



a lot of humour just passes you by, doesn't it


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> she deleted the tweet - edit no she didn't. she seems to delete a lot of tweets.


or you seem to make a lot of mistakes. my money's on the mistakes tbh


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

each to their own. just seems a tiresome grifter.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> each to their own.


Not really - she's taking the piss there, obviously. You'd have to work really hard to imagine there's any other meaning to that tweet.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

well maybe but would you say publicly that ahead of a libel case when your whole thing is helping out people on the poverty line? not sure I would.  but I didn't mean to suggest that tweet had formed the entirety of my opinion on her. just whenever she crops up in the news or on social, she just seems very hard to like despite on the surface doing a lot of good. that was where I came into the thread to gauge other opinions.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

I mean, I'm sure there's a whole ecosystem of right-wing politics posters on twitter putting in that work right now, which I guess is the _each to their own _you're talking about.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> well maybe but would you say publicly that ahead of a libel case when your whole thing is helping out people on the poverty line? not sure I would.  but I didn't mean to suggest that tweet had formed the entirety of my opinion on her. just whenever she crops up in the news or on social, she just seems very hard to like despite on the surface doing a lot of good. that was where I came into the thread to gauge other opinions.


She was obviously being ironic, but being ironic on the internet is usually a bad idea (as you are demonstrating), hence she quickly deleted it. 

That's all.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

killer b eh? I despise 'right-wing twitter' and try to never even see it.

have you got any thoughts on Jack or?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

fwiw I don't have a problem with people deleting tweets. More people should delete tweets. You can set them up to self-destruct as well. No problem with that either.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> have you got any thoughts on Jack or?


she's a useful weathervane - people who wilfully misunderstand stuff she says on social media are generally wrong 'uns.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

thanks for joining in.


----------



## platinumsage (May 16, 2022)

Why is this 92 pages? What was the bunfight about? I read a few posts implying she didn't have sufficient class consciousness.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> thanks for joining in.


Not sure who that's aimed at, but you bumped a thread on which I said a whole load of shit nine years ago. So I can perhaps say the same about you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Why is this 92 pages? What was the bunfight about? I read a few posts implying she didn't have sufficient class consciousness.


It was nine years ago. Who cares?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Why is this 92 pages? What was the bunfight about? I read a few posts implying she didn't have sufficient class consciousness.


read the fucking thread and then you'll see why it's 92 pages


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not sure who that's aimed at, but you bumped a thread on which I said a whole load of shit nine years ago. So I can perhaps say the same about you.


wasn't aimed at you, was aimed at killerb

I thought keeping things on one thread was the idea and this is the one that came up


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> wasn't aimed at you, was aimed at killerb
> 
> I thought keeping things on one thread was the idea and this is the one that came up


you didn't think that after nine years the auld thread would be worn out and need replacing then


----------



## Diamond (May 16, 2022)

Just took a quick look at the facts and I think she's pulled the trigger too early on litigation here.

Her 2017 libel case was a strong one (in her favour).  Katie Hopkins, who libelled her then, was quite clearly in the wrong (mistaken identity compounded by follow up allegations).  Hopkins should have settled long before it got to court.  This is atypical of libel, as far as I am aware (usually defendants are not so stupid), and so she may have been left with a less than useful impression of how the law works in this area.

This time around, I don't think she has a very strong case.  They may even be able to argue justification - i.e. what was said is technically true - which would be an embarrassing result for her to obtain at court.  But all of it looks like fair comment to me - i.e. that they were sharing opinions, fairly made, rather than facts.

The fact of the matter is that she does profit commercially from her work.  That's totally fine, obviously, but taking offence at someone who points that out is not strong ground to launch a libel action from.  If she was doing all of it in the context of non-profit stuff, she would be on firmer ground.

There's also a glimpse here into a potential future for British defamation law that is not very appealing.  What's really at stake here?  To me, it just looks like political debate.  Calling in a referee in the form of defamation law is (i) not what defamation is for, (ii) bad for debate and free discussion, (iii) an unworkable approach vis-a-vis the ridiculously overworked court system, and (iv) a remedy, and therefore a system of speech regulation, only available to the wealthy celebrity, such as Jack Monroe.

I think it's part of a wider problem that flows from, believe it or not, human rights law.  That we understand the things at stake in what we call human rights law to be actionable rights (rather than, say, ethical or political ideas) - I think that is making us all far too lawyerly.  Generally speaking, as a lawyer, I would say that, unless you practice law for a job, you want as little of our type of thinking in your life as possible.  It makes you aggressive, cynical, and adversarial - none of these are very pleasant qualities.  Human rights law has made us all a bit like that - desperate to assert our rights (fundamentally an adversarial thing), without asking whether there might be a better way of working...


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> thanks for joining in.


I'm not sure my opinion on Jack Monroe has changed much in the last 10 years tbh, though I've barely thought of her in most of that time. Effective campaigner and basically a good egg, sometimes a bit careless with stuff she says. A more detailed breakdown of what I thought when I was paying more attention to her can be found in the earlier pages of this thread.


----------



## bellaozzydog (May 16, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> I see she's found someone else to sue and is going on about it buying her a house. I think she is one of those people where you can say she does a lot of good work and is on the right side of history but also seems well a bit tiresome (based on her public persona).


This post probably says more about you than her


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

Here's a link to the story.


Jack Monroe to sue MP after he says ‘she makes fortune from the poor’

fwiw I agree with Diamond (god help me). This tory MP is a nasty cunt, but he is surely just expressing his opinion here, however unpleasant the opinion may be. I have no idea what Monroe does with her earnings, but she has now published a series of best-selling cook books aimed at people with no money, and those books will have made her several million pounds in royalties.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

Just noticed her lawyer is that Mark Lewis guy, who's spent a lot of time over the last few years harassing leftwingers on twitter - gives me more pause than anything else I've heard from Monroe


----------



## platinumsage (May 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> Just noticed her lawyer is that Mark Lewis guy, who's spent a lot of time over the last few years harassing leftwingers on twitter - gives me more pause than anything else I've heard from Monroe



That's who she used to sue Katie Hopkins 🤷


----------



## ska invita (May 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> but she has now published a series of best-selling cook books aimed at people with no money, and those books will have made her several million pounds in royalties.


You'd think.... Then there was that time not long ago she was bragging how the Groucho Club must be struggling now she's stopped buying up the bar there, whilst crowdfunding for her rent. Something doesn't add up to me.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> That's who she used to sue Katie Hopkins 🤷


I saw. It doesn't make him any less of an odious crank.


----------



## platinumsage (May 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> I saw. It doesn't make him any less of an odious crank.



He's a lawyer she's using for a purpose, one that was presumably recommended to her several years ago. Do you care what your GP posts on Twitter, or who your plumber voted for?


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> He's a lawyer she's using for a purpose, one that was presumably recommended to her several years ago. Do you care what your GP posts on Twitter, or who your plumber voted for?


If my GP was calling people I consider comrades racists on twitter and threatening to sue them so imagined infractions, I'd probably consider changing GPs yeah.


----------



## platinumsage (May 16, 2022)

But she's not you is she? She probably doesn't know your comrades on twitter or what her lawyer has or hasn't said to them. And why would she?


----------



## rubbershoes (May 16, 2022)

Diamond said:


> Just took a quick look at the facts and I think she's pulled the trigger too early on litigation here.
> 
> Her 2017 libel case was a strong one (in her favour).  Katie Hopkins, who libelled her then, was quite clearly in the wrong (mistaken identity compounded by follow up allegations).  Hopkins should have settled long before it got to court.  This is atypical of libel, as far as I am aware (usually defendants are not so stupid), and so she may have been left with a less than useful impression of how the law works in this area.
> 
> ...




If that's correct, her lawyer Mark Stephens will put her right


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> But she's not you is she? She probably doesn't know your comrades on twitter or what her lawyer has or hasn't said to them. And why would she?


What? You were asking me to imagine myself in her position, which I was doing - many of the people this crank spends his spare time shrieking at and threatening to sue are people she probably does consider comrades, or should.


----------



## Spandex (May 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> those books will have made her several million pounds in royalties.


Are you sure about that? I think you might be over-estimating how much the average author makes. She's not exactly in the top league of best selling cookbook writers. She's certainly not in the Steven King/Stieg Larsson league of mega-selling authors. She's probably made enough to live comfortably on the books, but it's being a media personality - newspaper columns, TV appearances, whatever - that'll make her a good chunk of her money.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

Spandex said:


> Are you sure about that? I think you might be over-estimating how much the average author makes. She's not exactly in the top league of best selling cookbook writers. She's certainly not in the Steven King/Stieg Larsson league of mega-selling authors. She's probably ma enough to live comfortably on the books, but it's being a media personality - newspaper columns, TV appearances, whatever - that'll make her a good chunk of her money.


Yeah, I am. If you look at her sales rank and the number of reviews, you can be confident that her books have sold millions in total. She is very far from an average author. She's a best-selling author. 

As an indicator, if you can keep your book in the top 1,000 best-sellers on Amazon for a few years, that means you've sold millions of copies in total. Her latest book is currently at 500 four years after publication. 

That's not a guess, btw. I have tracked a few books over the years that I've been involved in making - none for which I got royalties, sadly.


----------



## platinumsage (May 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> What? You were asking me to imagine myself in her position, which I was doing - many of the people this crank spends his spare time shrieking at and threatening to sue are people she probably does consider comrades, or should.



Yeah imagine you were her, not imagine you were you. You seem keen for her to do what you would do in that situation, but why would she? She doesn't have your politics or Twitter comrades, and might not even be aware of what he does or doesn't say to people on social media, let alone who those people are.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 16, 2022)

Spandex said:


> Are you sure about that? I think you might be over-estimating how much the average author makes. She's not exactly in the top league of best selling cookbook writers. She's certainly not in the Steven King/Stieg Larsson league of mega-selling authors. She's probably made enough to live comfortably on the books, but it's being a media personality - newspaper columns, TV appearances, whatever - that'll make her a good chunk of her money.



A quick google suggests she’s worth £3M. Not to be sniffed at but also not really the kind of backing for libel. She could easily spunk all of that if she loses.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Yeah imagine you were her, not imagine you were you. You seem keen for her to do what you would do in that situation, but why would she? She doesn't have your politics or Twitter comrades, and might not even be aware of what he does or doesn't say to people on social media, let alone who those people are.


I'm not keen for her to do what I'd do in that situation what the fuck are you on about? I'm just judging her for associating professionally with a notorious maniac.


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, I am. If you look at her sales rank and the number of reviews, you can be confident that her books have sold millions in total. She is very far from an average author. She's a best-selling author.
> 
> As an indicator, if you can keep your book in the top 1,000 best-sellers on Amazon for a few years, that means you've sold millions of copies in total. Her latest book is currently at 500 four years after publication.
> 
> That's not a guess, btw. I have tracked a few books over the years that I've been involved in making - none for which I got royalties, sadly.



It’s tough being successful when being the plucky poor person is your USP.


----------



## Santino (May 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> A quick google suggests she’s worth £3M. Not to be sniffed at but also not really the kind of backing for libel. She could easily spunk all of that if she loses.


No, she's worth £100k-£1M, or $230 million, depending on which bullshit website you visit.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 16, 2022)

Fair enough.


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

Santino said:


> No, she's worth £100k-£1M, or $230 million, depending on which bullshit website you visit.



<checks exchange rate…>


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

8ball said:


> It’s tough being successful when being the plucky poor person is your USP.


It's similar to the dilemma a lot of stand-ups have. DVD sales of their live shows - nowadays it's sales of the live show to Netflix - can  net you several hundred thousand pounds each year.


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's similar to the dilemma a lot of stand-ups have. DVD sales of their live shows - nowadays it's sales of the live show to Netflix - can  net you several hundred thousand pounds each year.



Are stand-ups meant to be plucky poor people?


----------



## Edie (May 16, 2022)

Wow this is a really bad move by her as he’s essentially saying the truth and what a lot of people think. And I’ve no problem with her making a lot of money, or advocating for those on the breadline. Even if I can’t stand her.


----------



## Thora (May 16, 2022)

Aren't Jack's pronouns he now?  Or they maybe?


----------



## pbsmooth (May 16, 2022)

I mean she seems to be getting at the very least £2500 per month from her Patreon (likely more). and the basic tier seems to give you... a discount for her website. 

as I said when I came in, just because you agree with her general outlook and what she's trying doesn't mean you can't clock when it seems to be a bit of a grift.


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

Thora said:


> Aren't Jack's pronouns he now?  Or they maybe?



Guardian and Southend Echo seem  not to think so.
Indy and Pink News seem to think maybe.

Wiki says fem or neut pronouns both fine.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

Edie said:


> Wow this is a really bad move by her as he’s essentially saying the truth and what a lot of people think. And I’ve no problem with her making a lot of money, or advocating for those on the breadline. Even if I can’t stand her.


Yep. Hopkins told an outright lie about her. At worst, this is a nasty opinion expressed taking a particular view of what she does and with nasty motives, but it's not a lie.


----------



## Edie (May 16, 2022)

Thora said:


> Aren't Jack's pronouns he now?  Or they maybe?


Probably


----------



## keybored (May 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> did no-one get screenshots?


I've a feeling the site linked to in #2714 will have screenshots of everything she's ever tweeted.


----------



## platinumsage (May 16, 2022)

killer b said:


> I'm not keen for her to do what I'd do in that situation what the fuck are you on about? I'm just judging her for associating professionally with a notorious maniac.



Maniac? Seriously?

She's indicated that she might re-use a famous lawyer to sue a Tory having employed him in 2015 to sue a notorious right-wing cunt, but this gives you "more pause than anything else I've heard from her" because said layer has, in the intervening period, harangued your comrades on Twitter.


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

I think it's ok to judge people by the company they keep, so I'll carry on doing that. I've got no problem whatsoever with you doing things differently though, so crack on. x


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

Is this some People’s Front Of Judea thing?


----------



## killer b (May 16, 2022)

no.


----------



## planetgeli (May 16, 2022)

Santino said:


> No, she's worth £100k-£1M, or $230 million, depending on which bullshit website you visit.



Or all those on the same day if using bitcoin.


----------



## strung out (May 16, 2022)

ska invita said:


> You'd think.... Then there was that time not long ago she was bragging how the Groucho Club must be struggling now she's stopped buying up the bar there, whilst crowdfunding for her rent. Something doesn't add up to me.


Is there more on this? I know she's got a Patreon, but that's basically just a very normal way for writers, artists, content creators etc. to make a living now. 

The way you've put it makes it sound like something dishonest though, so maybe there's more to it I'm not getting.


----------



## ska invita (May 16, 2022)

strung out said:


> Is there more on this? I know she's got a Patreon, but that's basically just a very normal way for writers, artists, content creators etc. to make a living now.
> 
> The way you've put it makes it sound like something dishonest though, so maybe there's more to it I'm not getting.


based on an interview she gave for the Standard








						Urban v's the Commentariat
					

except to people who are completely blind to such things :)




					www.urban75.net
				





> " I had to crowdfund my rent this month. "? WTF? She was famous with a bestselling book out by that point (thats from 2017 btw)
> she goes on to say
> " The Groucho rang me last week to find out if I was OK because I hadn’t been in. I was like, ‘Are your profits suffering?’” "


----------



## trashpony (May 16, 2022)

She pleads poverty constantly. It’s bollocks. How can she be poor when she’s written several best selling books, presented a programme on bbc last year and has done promos with loads of brands? If doesn’t make sense.

If she’s made a lot of money doing what she does, great! I’m totally behind her.  

But if she’s got fuck all money when she should have loads, she probably shouldn’t be advising people who are actually poor.


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

Maybe rich people are bad at budgeting..


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 16, 2022)

I suppose it could be argued that Ken Loach has made money off the back of poor people with I, Daniel Blake. But he doesn’t appear to get the same flak for it.


----------



## 8ball (May 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I suppose it could be argued that Ken Loach has made money off the back of poor people with I, Daniel Blake. But he doesn’t appear to get the same flak for it.



Bet he does in Tory circles.


----------



## smokedout (May 16, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, I am. If you look at her sales rank and the number of reviews, you can be confident that her books have sold millions in total. She is very far from an average author. She's a best-selling author.
> 
> As an indicator, if you can keep your book in the top 1,000 best-sellers on Amazon for a few years, that means you've sold millions of copies in total. Her latest book is currently at 500 four years after publication.
> 
> That's not a guess, btw. I have tracked a few books over the years that I've been involved in making - none for which I got royalties, sadly.



How does this work when this list shows that in 2018 the UK's best selling book sold under a million copies, and those on the lower end of the top one hundred best sellers only sold around 90,000?  Writers generally make about a quid a book and Jack's not on that list despite publishing possibly her most successful book that year.


----------



## ska invita (May 16, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I suppose it could be argued that Ken Loach has made money off the back of poor people with I, Daniel Blake. But he doesn’t appear to get the same flak for it.


If he was drinking regularly at the Groucho whilst crowdfunding his rent I suspect he would


----------



## Doctor Carrot (May 16, 2022)

I don't think Jack's made millions but there's no way they can be skint unless they're really, really bad at budgeting and/or just pissed money away frivolously.

Something definitely doesn't add up though. I remember thinking it a bit odd when reading their tweets about being so pleased about Asda smart price being back in and how they were stocking up on them. The tweet actually said something like 'I don't just buy these things for coming up with new recipes I buy then to save too because someday I do actually want to own my own house with my partner' I remember wondering how come they didn't already with all those book sales, columns, libel victory and media appearances?


----------



## scifisam (May 16, 2022)

Thora said:


> Aren't Jack's pronouns he now?  Or they maybe?



No, they or she, so she's fine.

I am but confused about her finances though - I knew she was still apparently broke, so thought maybe the books' profits went to charity, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

If she has made a pretty good living from her books then the MP is going to succeed, which is a shame, but just because I don't like Tories doesn't mean they should automatically lose every court case.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 16, 2022)

smokedout said:


> How does this work when this list shows that in 2018 the UK's best selling book sold under a million copies, and those on the lower end of the top one hundred best sellers only sold around 90,000?  Writers generally make about a quid a book and Jack's not on that list despite publishing possibly her most successful book that year.


I'm sceptical of bestseller lists like that as they exclude various titles for spurious reasons. It's not actually a list of the books that sold the most in that year. It's a curated list with the riffraff taken out. That said, Monroe's book is the kind that would be likely to be included in that type of list. The book was published in August, a fair way through the year. And some books are growers - they sell over the course of years, not months.


----------



## smokedout (May 17, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm sceptical of bestseller lists like that as they exclude various titles for spurious reasons. It's not actually a list of the books that sold the most in that year. It's a curated list with the riffraff taken out. That said, Monroe's book is the kind that would be likely to be included in that type of list. The book was published in August, a fair way through the year. And some books are growers - they sell over the course of years, not months.



Doesn't matter, you said she'd made millions, for her to have even made 2 million she'd have to have in or close to the top ten bestselling books in  the UK consistently since she started publishing in 2014. No other non fiction books sell that well, not even the Guinness Book of Records. She's clearly sold nowhere near that amount and tbh I'd be surprised if she'd cleared 20 or 30 thousand a book.  Non fiction books don't sell that well and she's clearly aiming at a niche audience who are perhaps best distinguished by the fact they can't afford to buy books.


----------



## strung out (May 17, 2022)

smokedout said:


> Doesn't matter, you said she'd made millions, for her to have even made 2 million she'd have to have in or close to the top ten bestselling books in  the UK consistently since she started publishing in 2014. No other non fiction books sell that well, not even the Guinness Book of Records. She's clearly sold nowhere near that amount and tbh I'd be surprised if she'd cleared 20 or 30 thousand a book.  Non fiction books don't sell that well and she's clearly aiming at a niche audience who are perhaps best distinguished by the fact they can't afford to buy books.


I don't have access to Nielsen BookScan, but according to this article, at the start of 2019 her most popular book had sold just under 100,000 copies in its first year. That doesn't include various additional sources of sales like e-books, libraries, direct sales etc. 

Her debut book had also sold 65,000 copies and she's released another three books since then, so while maybe not a million copies in total, perhaps heading towards that figure. 









						Jack Monroe releases cook book for food bank users
					

Celebrated food writer Jack Monroe is set to release a cook book for food bank users to help those on a shoestring budget maintain a nutritious,




					www.thelondoneconomic.com


----------



## Edie (May 17, 2022)

smokedout said:


> Doesn't matter, you said she'd made millions, for her to have even made 2 million she'd have to have in or close to the top ten bestselling books in  the UK consistently since she started publishing in 2014. No other non fiction books sell that well, not even the Guinness Book of Records. She's clearly sold nowhere near that amount and tbh I'd be surprised if she'd cleared 20 or 30 thousand a book.  Non fiction books don't sell that well and she's clearly aiming at a niche audience who are perhaps best distinguished by the fact they can't afford to buy books.


That totally isn’t her audience at all. No poor person ever has bought her book


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 17, 2022)

strung out said:


> I don't have access to Nielsen BookScan, but according to this article, at the start of 2019 her most popular book had sold just under 100,000 copies in its first year. That doesn't include various additional sources of sales like e-books, libraries, direct sales etc.
> 
> Her debut book had also sold 65,000 copies and she's released another three books since then, so while maybe not a million copies in total, perhaps heading towards that figure.
> 
> ...




About 600000 if we're taking up to 30% standard royalties for it and assuming the full 20 quid for the books

As someone who bought the book for 99p via kindle that's a stretch. Royalties are highly variable being probably much lower while prices of the books plummet after first few months.


----------



## planetgeli (May 17, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> About 600000 if we're taking up to 30% standard royalties for it and assuming the full 20 quid for the books



You don't get 30% royalties. The actual figure is closer to 10%.


----------



## killer b (May 17, 2022)

to summarise, no-one has a fucking clue how much money she's made


----------



## platinumsage (May 17, 2022)

yet people on here, and Tory MPs, are judging her for it anyway.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 17, 2022)

I’m always surprised when successful authors, writers, musicians and artists reveal they earn far less than you’d assume. But I guess I shouldn’t be because  something something capitalism.


----------



## onenameshelley (May 17, 2022)

Edie said:


> That totally isn’t her audience at all. No poor person ever has bought her book


When I was really skint, I borrowed it from the library. I still make her salmon paste pasta from time to time. 👍


----------



## Edie (May 17, 2022)

onenameshelley said:


> When I was really skint, I borrowed it from the library. I still make her salmon paste pasta from time to time. 👍


I stand corrected  (kinda, as you didn’t buy it, because who would when they are skint??)


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 17, 2022)

planetgeli said:


> You don't get 30% royalties. The actual figure is closer to 10%.



Yes which is why I said



Artaxerxes said:


> . Royalties are highly variable being probably much lower while prices of the books plummet after first few months.



The rate varies - a very tired morning google had up to 30% but at that level your probably like Stephen King level famous. Idk.


----------



## bellaozzydog (May 17, 2022)

There seems to be a lot of dislike for them personally. I kind of get that,(I’ve previously muted them on Twitter)  they are somewhat clunky/gauche occasionally histrionic and can seem to play the victim card

However there is a net gain for society as they are visible, prominent and pushing issues into view and discussion

The vast majority of push back against them is from the right and if the right/establishment are trying to discredit them I know who’s team i’m on

Sometimes you have to look passed your immediate emotions (dislike in this case) and just accept that you should be on the same team

For such a supposedly stoic stiff upper lip society we seem to dance a jig to what ever emotional levers the fuckers fire at to us

Remember who to be fucking angry at

This is classic divide and conquer, culture wars playbook stuff


----------



## 8ball (May 17, 2022)

Edie said:


> No poor person ever has bought her book



A bold claim.
Prob not far off tbf, though.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

I only know her from this thread. I’ve never read anything by her that wasn’t linked here.  I doubt very much anyone who isn’t a Guardian reader has heard of her.


----------



## Gromit (May 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> yet people on here, and Tory MPs, are judging her for it anyway.


When she makes as much money as Tory MPs do from the poor I might judge her.

I believe Wonga paid them loads just for starters.


----------



## Brainaddict (May 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> I only know her from this thread. I’ve never read anything by her that wasn’t linked here.  I doubt very much anyone who isn’t a Guardian reader has heard of her.


She's a bit better known than that - potted history here Jack Monroe: The Chef Who Changed the Lives of Millions


----------



## Doctor Carrot (May 17, 2022)

How much, if anything,do people get paid for media appearances? Say if the BBC news channel have Jack Monroe on a panel discussion how much would they be paid for that? I've always wondered how that works for anyone, not just Jack.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

Brainaddict said:


> She's a bit better known than that - potted history here Jack Monroe: The Chef Who Changed the Lives of Millions


OK, Telegraph then.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 17, 2022)

Doctor Carrot said:


> How much, if anything,do people get paid for media appearances? Say if the BBC news channel have Jack Monroe on a panel discussion how much would they be paid for that? I've always wondered how that works for anyone, not just Jack.



Depends, it's not a huge amount if your not an A lister. There's no standard rate, all negotiated via agents.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (May 17, 2022)

Artaxerxes said:


> Depends, it's not a huge amount if your not an A lister. There's no standard rate, all negotiated via agents.


So there is some sort of payment then? Is that the case even for an interview on the news? I'm guessing it goes with the job if you're an academic or a politician.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

Doctor Carrot said:


> So there is some sort of payment then? Is that the case even for an interview on the news? I'm guessing it goes with the job if you're an academic or a politician.


No, you don’t get paid to be interviewed by the news. I was once on Newsnight. I wasn’t paid.


----------



## scifisam (May 17, 2022)

planetgeli said:


> You don't get 30% royalties. The actual figure is closer to 10%.



I think it's even lower for cookbooks.

So it's maybe £200,000 over nearly a decade, assuming she's sold a million books (which would mean her other books sold several times as much as her most popular book), and assuming they were all full price at £20 (which is highly unlikely) and assuming she doesn't have an agent who takes a cut (she might not, but probably does).

It's not really sounding anything like a fortune, TBH.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 17, 2022)

you can actually see her patreon money though Jack Monroe is creating recipes, essays, books, photography, art, poetry, features, mess | Patreon

724 patrons minimum 3.50, on average, presumably some pay more. and those people paying 3.50 get get a discount for her book store and whatever else she posts on patreon.


----------



## Santino (May 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No, you don’t get paid to be interviewed by the news. I was once on Newsnight. I wasn’t paid.


You can get paid for it. I know an academic who's lined up to speak to the BBC in the event of certain newsworthy things happening and they'll be paid for that.


----------



## Sue (May 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No, you don’t get paid to be interviewed by the news. I was once on Newsnight. I wasn’t paid.


You need a better agent.


----------



## Santino (May 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No, you don’t get paid to be interviewed by the news. I was once on Newsnight. I wasn’t paid.


And as long as I'm correcting you, Jack Monroe had also featured quite heavily on the BBC.


----------



## scifisam (May 17, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> you can actually see her patreon money though Jack Monroe is creating recipes, essays, books, photography, art, poetry, features, mess | Patreon
> 
> 724 patrons minimum 3.50, on average, presumably some pay more. and those people paying 3.50 get get a discount for her book store and whatever else she posts on patreon.



That's less than three grand. A fortune, I tell ya!


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

Santino said:


> You can get paid for it. I know an academic who's lined up to speak to the BBC in the event of certain newsworthy things happening and they'll be paid for that.


Yeah, if you’re John Curtice you get paid.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> No, you don’t get paid to be interviewed by the news. I was once on Newsnight. I wasn’t paid.



Sorry to hear that but it's a pleasure to finally meet Guy Goma


----------



## rubbershoes (May 17, 2022)

Going along the road in Exeter where Katie Hopkins had the house that she had to sell always raises a smile


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

Santino said:


> And as long as I'm correcting you, Jack Monroe had also featured quite heavily on the BBC.


Fair enough. And to be honest I still don’t understand how influencers get famous or earn money. Despite knowing the theory. But if she’s on daytime tv and stuff, people will have heard of her.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 17, 2022)

scifisam said:


> I think it's even lower for cookbooks.
> 
> So it's maybe £100,000 over nearly a decade, assuming she's sold a million books (which would mean her other books sold several times as much as her most popular book), and assuming they were all full price at £20 (which is highly unlikely) and assuming she doesn't have an agent who takes a cut (she might not, but probably does).
> 
> It's not really sounding anything like a fortune, TBH.


I don't really want to argue this too much more, but it's way more than £10k a year. Currently she has five books out in the uk. One is around 500 in the Amazon sales rank, another 2,000, two more around 5,000 and the last at 10,000. All of that some years after publication. Those are very decent rankings, particularly the 500. They're selling well. Together, those books will have sales of well over a million. Plus she has been published in the US as well.

But let's assume a million. She will get a lot more than 10p a book, particularly for the ones retailing for a tenner. From all her books together, she'll be getting in the hundreds of thousands per year right now. Sure she'll have an agent, so lop off 20%. It's still a lot.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

Just asked my younger daughter (22) if she’d heard of Jack Monroe and she had. So I concede she’s more famous than I realised.


----------



## DaphneM (May 17, 2022)

scifisam said:


> That's less than three grand. A fortune, I tell ya!


every month though, it mounts up


----------



## ska invita (May 17, 2022)

danny la rouge said:


> Just asked my younger daughter (22) if she’d heard of Jack Monroe and she had. So I concede she’s more famous than I realised.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)




----------



## smokedout (May 17, 2022)

strung out said:


> I don't have access to Nielsen BookScan, but according to this article, at the start of 2019 her most popular book had sold just under 100,000 copies in its first year. That doesn't include various additional sources of sales like e-books, libraries, direct sales etc.
> 
> Her debut book had also sold 65,000 copies and she's released another three books since then, so while maybe not a million copies in total, perhaps heading towards that figure.
> 
> ...



Fair enough she's done better than I thought, but even if her other three boooks sold 100,000 copies each (they didn't) that's still less than half a million over 9 years.  So about 50k a year at the most generous estimate, minus agent fees and any other expenses, she's hardly a multi millionaire, there are probably people posting on this thread who earn more.


----------



## tommers (May 17, 2022)

Im sure this will all be clarified when she goes to court.


----------



## Elpenor (May 17, 2022)

I wonder (as this thread definitely needs more idle speculation from ill informed posters  ) if Jack may have had issues with a tax bill or similar due to. Being self employed which is what they are surely can be quite cyclical in terms of income and if they didn’t put the money aside for the tax then that may be a reason 

Hardly a thing to judge a person for, anyway I’ve enjoyed the forensic accountancy skills on display upthread


----------



## keybored (May 17, 2022)

DaphneM said:


> every month though, it mounts up


Apparently not if you're chucking it behind the bar at The Groucho.


----------



## killer b (May 17, 2022)

It's a moral obligation for people who've lived in poverty who suddenly find themselves in possession of a bit of cash to only spend it on hair shirts, it's true.


----------



## ska invita (May 17, 2022)

Is it okay to be drinking by her own account regularly in a swanky and expensive soho members bar whilst again by her own account crowdfunding money for rent? Id say 100% no.


----------



## Elpenor (May 17, 2022)

Is it expensive? Someone I know has invited me there at the weekend, I’m not mad about going if it means I can’t wear shorts


----------



## 8ball (May 17, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> Is it expensive? Someone I know has invited me there at the weekend, I’m not mad about going if it means I can’t wear shorts



You can wear shorts if you’re Lily Allen.


----------



## killer b (May 17, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Is it okay to be drinking by her own account regularly in a swanky and expensive soho members bar whilst again by her own account crowdfunding money for rent? Id say 100% no.


Wasn't this when she gave up drinking, so she was contrasting these things to show how her drinking had spiralled out of control at that point though?


----------



## Elpenor (May 17, 2022)

8ball said:


> You can wear shorts if you’re Lily Allen.


I guess that’s rules me out


----------



## 8ball (May 17, 2022)

killer b said:


> Wasn't this when she gave up drinking, so she was contrasting these things to show how her drinking had spiralled out of control at that point though?



This is the sort of talk that leads the the kind of thinking that leads to looking up facts.

Facts kill threads.  Dead.


----------



## 8ball (May 17, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> I guess that’s rules me out



Nah, there’s no dress code at the Groucho.


----------



## Edie (May 17, 2022)

What _is_ the Groucho?


----------



## ska invita (May 17, 2022)

killer b said:


> Wasn't this when she gave up drinking, so she was contrasting these things to show how her drinking had spiralled out of control at that point though?


Yes she said she was giving up drinking to the point that the Groucho called her up as they were worried she wasnt there !
I've got nothing against her, i hope she wins her court case, for good measure fuck the Standard who did that interview too.... and if people want to give her money, so be it. But it doesnt add up to me that she was crowdfunding her rent at the time of giving the interview, considering what else she said.


----------



## Elpenor (May 17, 2022)

Edie said:


> What _is_ the Groucho?


I’d quite like to know too, I’m the least likely person to go to somewhere flashy so if I end up going it will be an experience. If I see Jack there they can buy me a drink with their patreon loot


----------



## ska invita (May 17, 2022)

Edie said:


> What _is_ the Groucho?


a private members club in soho, central london (visited particularly by people in the arts + journalists?)

you cant go in if you are not a member


----------



## danny la rouge (May 17, 2022)

Edie said:


> What _is_ the Groucho?











						Groucho Club - Wikipedia
					






					en.m.wikipedia.org


----------



## Edie (May 17, 2022)

ska invita said:


> a private members club in soho, central london (visited particularly by people in the arts + journalists?)
> 
> you cant go in if you are not a member


Is it like one of those old rich man clubs that serve dinner in libraries, or like a bar that you can only go to if your a member tho?


----------



## ska invita (May 17, 2022)

Private members club in Soho, London - Groucho Club
					

Groucho Club is a private members club in Soho in Central London: exclusive club only open to members and their guests with fully appointed bedrooms, events and much more.




					www.thegrouchoclub.com


----------



## Edie (May 17, 2022)

Ah I see from Danny’s link it’s got bars and restaurants.


----------



## 8ball (May 17, 2022)

Set up by a group largely made up of women as an alternative to the stuffy “gentleman’s clubs” of the time.

Fancies itself as a bit bohemian.


----------



## killer b (May 17, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Private members club in Soho, London - Groucho Club
> 
> 
> Groucho Club is a private members club in Soho in Central London: exclusive club only open to members and their guests with fully appointed bedrooms, events and much more.
> ...


I'd eat most of that, sounds lush


----------



## 8ball (May 17, 2022)

It’s pretty good value for that London.
Just need Spy or Suplex to sign you in.


----------



## strung out (May 17, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Is it okay to be drinking by her own account regularly in a swanky and expensive soho members bar whilst again by her own account crowdfunding money for rent? Id say 100% no.


What killer b said, but also, depends on what she means by crowdfunding. If she just means using Patreon or similar as her way of earning a salary like thousands of other content creators, then who cares? People usually use a salary to pay rent.


----------



## Edie (May 17, 2022)

I’d love to spend my money getting pissed in a private members club. I think urban should set one up.


----------



## platinumsage (May 17, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Yes she said she was giving up drinking to the point that the Groucho called her up as they were worried she wasnt there !
> I've got nothing against her, i hope she wins her court case, for good measure fuck the Standard who did that interview too.... and if people want to give her money, so be it. But it doesnt add up to me that she was crowdfunding her rent at the time of giving the interview, considering what else she said.



Do you have any evidence she was crowdfunding her rent other than those few words in that shit Evening Standard article?

I had a look and all I found was this:



			https://gogetfunding.com/help-jack-monroe-jack-deserves-it/


----------



## strung out (May 17, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Do you have any evidence she was crowdfunding her rent other than those few words in that shit Evening Standard article?
> 
> I had a look and all I found was this:
> 
> ...


She did a Kickstarter to crowdfund a book in 2016, so I'm guessing she might be referring to that. Again, completely normal for people who want/need to go outside the usual channels to get stuff commissioned and pay their rent.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 17, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> Is it expensive? Someone I know has invited me there at the weekend, I’m not mad about going if it means I can’t wear shorts


Depends on what you consider expensive. Central London is expensive and then this is a celebrity haunt that prices the riff raff out.


----------



## platinumsage (May 18, 2022)

Didn’t she win a Maverick award at the Groucho and wouldn’t this have given her free membership?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 18, 2022)

rubbershoes said:


> Going along the road in Exeter where Katie Hopkins had the house that she had to sell always raises a smile



Which road is it?


----------



## rubbershoes (May 18, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which road is it?



Can't remember the name but it's in St Leonards


----------



## ChrisD (May 18, 2022)

SpookyFrank said:


> Which road is it?


Opposite my opticians on Magdelan road at junction with Wonford Road.  Now in new ownership.


----------



## A380 (May 18, 2022)

This thread is the a perfect example of why we have Tory governments when they get 35-40% of the vote and the revolutionary left consists of 356 crap newspapers with a circulation of seven…


----------



## bellaozzydog (May 18, 2022)

A380 said:


> This thread is the a perfect example of why we have Tory governments when they get 35-40% of the vote and the revolutionary left consists of 356 crap newspapers with a circulation of seven…


So does the country need less left wing newspapers?


----------



## 8ball (May 18, 2022)

bellaozzydog said:


> So does the country need less left wing newspapers?



Fewer.


----------



## A380 (May 18, 2022)

bellaozzydog said:


> So does the country need less left wing newspapers?


I think it needs A decent left wing newspaper. 

Me and a mate started one but he disagrees with me slightly about something that was written in a leaflet in 1972 so he’s obviously more fascist than Hitler so now we have a paper each.


----------



## A380 (May 18, 2022)

8ball said:


> Fewer.


Although they might possibly be uncountable…


----------



## story (May 18, 2022)

> Ah I see from Danny’s link it’s got bars and restaurants.



Edie 


And private dining rooms and meeting rooms and discreet bedrooms and so forth. Different bars and restaurant areas have different moods and atmospheres, so you can eat in a bistro type space or a more opulent space. Someone might take prospective or existing clients for a business lunch, go for an afternoon photo shoot in an upstairs space afterwards and later meet their lover or friends for supper, get wasted, stay overnight and then have a reviving breakfast before heading home or to the airport. Or just nip in for a working breakfast before a long day at the daily grind, or conversely work a long day and then drop in for a quick bite before meeting your date elsewhere.

Staff may gossip between themselves and no doubt at home too but the place stands and falls on it’s reputation for discretion privacy and confidentiality. Most members are generally anonymous, only recognised by others in their trade, but others (actors etc) who want to eat out without being looked at by the public will go there too.

It’s not about pricing out the hoi palloi (there are more pricey places and far more pricey clubs too) it’s about gangs tribes and cliques, and the boundaries between them.

I worked there in the late 80s (when a lot of the members were famously hell-raisers) and I never graduated to evening/night staff (in those days you didn’t get those shifts unless you were KNOWN to be discreet) before being sacked mid-shift by a rookie manager for treating a famous person as if he was normal... (he was consequentially dragged over the coals, I was not reinstated). And have been as a guest several times. I liked working there for the most part (had much worse comparable jobs) and I love going as a guest (not least because I was sacked).


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 28, 2022)

For those interested she dun a thread:


----------



## tommers (May 30, 2022)

I'm sorry but I can't help myself. Her maths is wrong, the average of those book prices is about 17 - 18p. So to make a pound she needs to sell 6 books tops, so 6 million to make £million. 

I think she's halved her payout for some reason, maybe I've missed something. 

Of course if she does go to court then her earnings will be picked over in minute detail so I'm sure everybody can make whatever conclusions they want to then.


----------



## steeplejack (May 30, 2022)

What does "Time for Action" even mean?


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2022)

steeplejack said:


> What does "Time for Action" even mean?


The OP was proposing we all eat value beans as a radical political act IIRC


----------



## steeplejack (May 30, 2022)

oh


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 30, 2022)

Christ I don’t give a fuck how much she’s earned from her books and it’s irrelevant


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2022)

Your fucklessness duly noted 👍


----------



## platinumsage (May 30, 2022)

tommers said:


> I'm sorry but I can't help myself. Her maths is wrong, the average of those book prices is about 17 - 18p. So to make a pound she needs to sell 6 books tops, so 6 million to make £million.
> 
> I think she's halved her payout for some reason, maybe I've missed something.
> 
> Of course if she does go to court then her earnings will be picked over in minute detail so I'm sure everybody can make whatever conclusions they want to then.



What's clear is that people on this thread claiming she made several quid per book or 30% of the cover price were so wrong it's funny.


----------



## Elpenor (May 30, 2022)

tommers said:


> I'm sorry but I can't help myself. Her maths is wrong, the average of those book prices is about 17 - 18p. So to make a pound she needs to sell 6 books tops, so 6 million to make £million.
> 
> I think she's halved her payout for some reason, maybe I've missed something.
> 
> Of course if she does go to court then her earnings will be picked over in minute detail so I'm sure everybody can make whatever conclusions they want to then.


Missed out an allowance for tax perhaps?


----------



## Petcha (May 30, 2022)

ska invita said:


> a private members club in soho, central london (visited particularly by people in the arts + journalists?)
> 
> you cant go in if you are not a member



You can if you book one of the hotel rooms. Which are very nice btw and not at the upper end of the hotel price scale in london.


----------



## editor (May 30, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> What's clear is that people on this thread claiming she made several quid per book or 30% of the cover price were so wrong it's funny.


I got nowhere near a quid a book for mine (which was published through  a major publisher and distributed worldwide). Book deals are like the old school record deals - some bands have great deals but most have fairly shitty ones, and you certainly can't apply a 'one size fts all' template to them.


----------



## pinkmonkey (May 30, 2022)

I hope she wins, I have a friend who is a food stylist for a living and also has written (and ghost written) cookbooks, yes, she makes a living but she's not loaded and lives onboard like I do. I really hate this 'hair shirt vs. champagne socialist ' thing that the Tories do, to attack the left  it's as old as the hills and it sucks every time they pull it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2022)

editor said:


> I got nowhere near a quid a book for mine (which was published through  a major publisher and distributed worldwide). Book deals are like the old school record deals - some bands have great deals but most have fairly shitty ones, and you certainly can't apply a 'one size fts all' template to them.


8% of the cover price is pretty standard, so for some of those books a quid a book is about right. And she's now published six books, five of which have sold (and are still selling) very well here in the UK, plus she has separate deals in the US and Australia.

She's a 'name', so will be able to negotiate a good deal. Having a 'brand' (ugh) makes a massive difference to the deals you can get, and she's both big online and now on the telly. If she hasn't been getting sizeable advances plus a decent royalty %age, her agent's been doing it wrong. 

This tory cunt is vile and saying vile things for vile reasons. But unlike the Hopkins case, I don't see what Monroe's grounds are for suing here.


----------



## platinumsage (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 8% of the cover price is pretty standard, so for some of those books a quid a book is about right.



Did you bother reading what she said or do you think she's lying?


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 8% of the cover price is pretty standard,


Not according to the thread she posted, where she claims it's more like 1.5% of the cover price. I guess she probably has a better handle on the figures than you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2022)

killer b said:


> Not according to the thread she posted, where she claims it's more like 1.5% of the cover price. I guess she probably has a better handle on the figures than you.


Ok, I missed that. If she's going down a genuinely cooperative route, then good for her.


----------



## Petcha (May 30, 2022)

I just saw her being interviewed on the BBC and she seemed quite lovely. Quite shy and nervous if anything and seemed to really care. I don't know anything about her tbh but that's my 2 pence.


----------



## trashpony (May 30, 2022)

Wonder how much she’s getting paid for her tie in with Superdrug?


----------



## scifisam (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 8% of the cover price is pretty standard, so for some of those books a quid a book is about right. And she's now published six books, five of which have sold (and are still selling) very well here in the UK, plus she has separate deals in the US and Australia.
> 
> She's a 'name', so will be able to negotiate a good deal. Having a 'brand' (ugh) makes a massive difference to the deals you can get, and she's both big online and now on the telly. If she hasn't been getting sizeable advances plus a decent royalty %age, her agent's been doing it wrong.
> 
> This tory cunt is vile and saying vile things for vile reasons. But unlike the Hopkins case, I don't see what Monroe's grounds are for suing here.



She actually gets 10%, but it's 10% of what the retailer pays, not 10% of the cover price. It says that in the very very short Twitter thread. We don't actually need to imagine how much she makes per book when she's actually told us the exact figures.


----------



## ska invita (May 30, 2022)

For the record (as opposed to spite her) these figures she has given are wrong , not based on a royalties slip she could look at but on some conjectures she has made. 
For a start her saying this is wrong: "the price that the retailer paid to purchase each copy (which is around 30% of the RRP)."  No, the retailer pays 60-70% of the RRP, they get 30%-40% discount OFF the RRP. 
Also if people really want to know how much she earns from books the bigger question is how big the advance was, which with celebrities can often be way bigger than any sales, meaning in some cases you get paid an advance and never really see royalties beyond that.


----------



## editor (May 30, 2022)

ska invita said:


> Also if people really want to know how much she earns from books the bigger question is how big the advance was, which with celebrities can often be way bigger than any sales, meaning in some cases you get paid an advance and never really see royalties beyond that.


And that may well be the case with her. And while you're writing a book you still have to pay for your food, rent, light, heating etc, so - say - a generous £10,000 advance can quickly disappear unless the writer can bang out a book over a weekend.


----------



## ska invita (May 30, 2022)

editor said:


> And that may well be the case with her. And while you're writing a book you still have to pay for your food, rent, light, heating etc, so - say - a generous £10,000 advance can quickly disappear unless the writer can bang out a book over a weekend.


advances are sometimes paid ahead of writing, but in other cases once the book is completed but ahead of being put on sale

there are some huge advances paid - this explains why it still benefits publishers to do so (sometimes)








						Why Lena Dunham's Advance Is Not as Crazy as It Seems (Or: The Earn-Out Fallacy)
					

Without question, $3.5+ million is a <em>lot</em> of money. But that doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad business deal. Let's examine why, with a simplified version of the way publishing economics work.




					www.huffpost.com
				




Authors are increasingly getting massively squeezed by Amazon - I dont know what percentage Amazon pay for books but its a lot lot less than a bookshop does - because of their near dominance of the market they can sweat authors like they sweat their workers


----------



## editor (May 30, 2022)

ska invita said:


> advances are sometimes paid ahead of writing, but in other cases once the book is completed but ahead of being put on sale
> 
> there are some huge advances paid - this explains why it still benefits publishers to do so (sometimes)
> 
> ...


Most authors I know really don't make much money at all.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This tory cunt is vile and saying vile things for vile reasons. But unlike the Hopkins case, I don't see what Monroe's grounds are for suing here.



The quote in contention is:

“She’s taking money off some of the most vulnerable people in society and making an absolute fortune on [sic] the back of people.”

It seems to me that its not the 'absolute fortune' bit that's the slander here, its the claim that she's 'taking money off some of the most vulnerable people' and making money 'on [sic] the back of people.' The implication is that she's somehow exploiting people. That strikes me as quite likely to be libellous.


----------



## rutabowa (May 30, 2022)

killer b said:


> to summarise, no-one has a fucking clue how much money she's made


Speaking as someone who worked in the publishing industry for 20 years (for her actual publishing company as it happens), I can confirm I do not have a fucking clue how much she has made.


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2022)

rutabowa said:


> Speaking as someone who worked in the publishing industry for 20 years, I can confirm I do not have a fucking clue how much she has made.


We're currently entering week three of not having a fucking clue how much she's made.


----------



## liquidindian (May 30, 2022)

tommers said:


> everybody can make whatever conclusions they want to then.


You mean use it to work towards the the conclusion they've already made.


----------



## tommers (May 30, 2022)

liquidindian said:


> You mean use it to work towards the the conclusion they've already made.


Well. Yeah. Exactly.


----------



## planetgeli (May 30, 2022)

editor said:


> Most authors I know really don't make much money at all.



My brother's a decently published author. Wrote the accepted biography of a dead rock star, got 20K advance and never got another penny. Took him 4 years to write. You do the maths.

He earned far more writing for Mojo etc.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (May 30, 2022)

killer b said:


> We're currently entering week three of not having a fucking clue how much she's made.



how will we ever find out if she's a deserving or undeserving author?


----------



## platinumsage (May 30, 2022)

Jeff Robinson said:


> how will we ever find out if she's a deserving or undeserving author?



Apparently it doesn't matter because the lawyer she's using to sue a Tory has criticised some socialists on Twitter, so she's a bad person regardless. 🤷


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 30, 2022)

killer b said:


> We're currently entering week three of not having a fucking clue how much she's made.


Do we have a scrolling chyron for the bottom of the screen yet?


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2022)

DaveCinzano said:


> Do we have a scrolling chyron for the bottom of the screen yet?


it's coming with the next board update


----------



## steeplejack (May 30, 2022)

++++URBAN 75 CONFIRMS "NO FUCKING CLUE" ON AUTHOR JACK MONROE'S EARNINGS++++


----------



## pbsmooth (May 30, 2022)

a cursory look at her twitter account makes me pretty sure she wouldn't know how much she's made. she's quite open about not being very good on the financial side of things.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> a cursory look at her twitter account makes me pretty sure she wouldn't know how much she's made. she's quite open about not being very good on the financial side of things.


her. she. you don't know much about jack monroe i see.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> a cursory look at her twitter account makes me pretty sure she wouldn't know how much she's made. she's quite open about not being very good on the financial side of things.


how much have any of us made? i couldn't tell you offhand what i've made in the past 9 or 10 years and i'm pretty sure you couldn't either


----------



## pbsmooth (May 30, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> her. she. you don't know much about jack monroe i see.


she has 'she' in her bio? 

well I know what my annual salary has been and can add it up.


----------



## 8ball (May 30, 2022)

I wrote a chapter of a book once.
Got two copies as payment.


----------



## Edie (May 30, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> how much have any of us made? i couldn't tell you offhand what i've made in the past 9 or 10 years and i'm pretty sure you couldn't either


I’d just look at my p60s and be able to give you exact annual figures. Pretty much everyone working for a wage would be the same?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2022)

Edie said:


> I’d just look at my p60s and be able to give you exact annual figures. Pretty much everyone working for a wage would be the same?





pbsmooth said:


> well I know what my annual salary has been and can add it up.


yeh that's not really offhand is it? i'm sure jack could just call the accountant and they'd be able to give precise figures.

at no point in the past ten years have i had only one job, i've had between 2 and 4 - i'm on 3 at the moment. and i couldn't say without checking what i made in any of those years. now, if you think about the range of money in sums big and small jack monroe might have had coming in, it's no great surprise they don't have everything at their fingertips. and why should they?


----------



## bluescreen (May 30, 2022)

She got the ONS to change the way they calculate inflation so it better reflects its impact on poorer people. I don't care if she's rich any more than I care that Marcus Rashford is rich (and she's certainly not remotely as rich as him,) - like him, she is using her celebrity clout to effect useful change. 








						Food prices surge by up to 50% for budget food items - Grocery Gazette - Latest Grocery Industry News
					

Supermarket food costs for budget-friendly items have surged over the past 12 months, with essentials such as pasta up by 50% year-on-year.




					www.grocerygazette.co.uk


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 30, 2022)

Edie said:


> I’d just look at my p60s and be able to give you exact annual figures. Pretty much everyone working for a wage would be the same?




Yeah but authors work via some arcane self assessed tax thing and are usually 6 months behind because some fuckers taking the piss and still hasn’t paid them.


----------



## Elpenor (May 30, 2022)

Edie said:


> I’d just look at my p60s and be able to give you exact annual figures. Pretty much everyone working for a wage would be the same?


P60s don’t show your salary, instead your taxable pay which is a very different figure  

(As I’ve told about 20 people in the past week)


----------



## platinumsage (May 30, 2022)

bluescreen said:


> She got the ONS to change the way they calculate inflation so it better reflects its impact on poorer people. I don't care if she's rich any more than I care that Marcus Rashford is rich (and she's certainly not remotely as rich as him,) - like him, she is using her celebrity clout to effect useful change.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Pretty sure the ONS were going to do that anyway:






						Transformation of consumer price statistics - Office for National Statistics
					

Our plans to transform UK consumer price statistics by including new improved data sources and developing our methods and systems for production from 2023.



					www.ons.gov.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (May 30, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> Pretty sure the ONS were going to do that anyway:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


from bluescreen's link, which you didn't bother reading


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 30, 2022)

I'm still puzzled by a few things. She's published by Bluebird, which is an imprint of MacMillan. So she's not self-published at all. In fact, she's advertised as one of Bluebird's star authors.

She does undeniably good things, like giving books to food banks. But it's kind of been the same from the start. Things don't quite add up.


----------



## platinumsage (May 30, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> from bluescreen's link, which you didn't bother reading
> View attachment 324745



You believe the Grocery Gazette, I'll go with the BBC:









						Jack Monroe hails inflation-measure shake-up
					

The food poverty campaigner had complained that official figures failed to reflect price rises for the poorest.



					www.bbc.co.uk


----------



## strung out (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm still puzzled by a few things. She's published by Bluebird, which is an imprint of MacMillan. So she's not self-published at all. In fact, she's advertised as one of Bluebird's star authors.
> 
> She does undeniably good things, like giving books to food banks. But it's kind of been the same from the start. Things don't quite add up.


She self published her second book on Kickstarter.


----------



## killer b (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm still puzzled by a few things. She's published by Bluebird, which is an imprint of MacMillan. So she's not self-published at all. In fact, she's advertised as one of Bluebird's star authors.
> 
> She does undeniably good things, like giving books to food banks. But it's kind of been the same from the start. Things don't quite add up.


she makes a point in one tweet about self publishing being excruciating and being glad of the various things that come with being published by an established publishing house, not claiming to have self published all her books.


----------



## steeplejack (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm still puzzled by a few things.
> 
> Things don't quite add up.



without being nippy, so what?

who cares if you are "puzzled" by someone you don't know's financial affairs?

what right do you have to know in forensic detail exactly how much she has earned in the last decade?

how and in what ways will your life change if you do have access to this information?

This obsession with perfection, a plausible brand narrative, and 100% transparency on demand, all the time, is one of the reasons none of us ever get anything much meaningful done.


----------



## Edie (May 30, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> P60s don’t show your salary, instead your taxable pay which is a very different figure
> 
> (As I’ve told about 20 people in the past week)


 thank you Elpenor I can honestly say I’ve never even looked at mine I just save the pdf and get on with my day 

ETA: what is the difference?!


----------



## Elpenor (May 30, 2022)

Edie said:


> thank you Elpenor I can honestly say I’ve never even looked at mine I just save the pdf and get on with my day
> 
> ETA: what is the difference?!


Taxable pay is everything you’ve been paid (so your basic pay, overtime, bonus, other enhancements etc) from your employer 

*minus* any salary sacrifices (eg cycle to work, childcare vouchers, some types of pension contribution) 

Other free of tax deductions eg give as you earn charity deductions, some other types of pension contribution also reduce the taxable pay 

(Bet you wish you’d never asked  )


----------



## Edie (May 30, 2022)

Elpenor said:


> Taxable pay is everything you’ve been paid (so your basic pay, overtime, bonus, other enhancements etc) from your employer
> 
> *minus* any salary sacrifices (eg cycle to work, childcare vouchers, some types of pension contribution)
> 
> ...


No I’m grateful to learn, thanks x


----------



## elbows (May 30, 2022)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm still puzzled by a few things. She's published by Bluebird, which is an imprint of MacMillan. So she's not self-published at all. In fact, she's advertised as one of Bluebird's star authors.
> 
> She does undeniably good things, like giving books to food banks. But it's kind of been the same from the start. Things don't quite add up.


I dont think its so very hard to grasp. Its the story of a fairly complex personality with a complicated history, who is used to crap attacks but will never accept them and responds to them by drawing attention to them and going on the attack. And for those of us who care about the matters of substance, the causes being fought for which lead to the crap attacks, a mix of themes that we should learn to navigate without undermining the struggles that matter are present. For example even when we start off by seeing those crap attacks for the crap that they are, such angles are often designed to exploit messy baggage on the themes of class, opportunity, success, income and tempting people into making judgements about a persons perceived 'authenticity' as their personal circumstances change. It is not always easy to navigate through such things without some of the mud sticking, although continually putting much effort into anchoring ourselves to the underlying matters of substance can help. Less inspection of the messenger, more attention to the message.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 30, 2022)

I certainly wouldn't like to be subject to the sort of scrutiny that comes with any vaguely left public profile. I suspect I'd be deemed to fail dismally. Of course you could argue it's different because I don't seek that sort of position but I think it's better not to limit them to psychopaths with a hide of iron.


----------



## elbows (May 30, 2022)

Well we have our own version of that here, or did in the past, when it comes to picking at eachother over our histories of views expressed in past posts, perceived class backgrounds etc.

Sometimes its relevant to the substance, sometimes its a load of distracting shit. I certainly find it more refreshing when we stumble into sentiments that dont actually appear to be narrowly tied to a persons perceived self-interests, and are thus freed from all manner of crap angles and narrow dead ends. I suppose thats not a million miles away from being able to look back at, for example, certain thinkers from a hundred years ago that actually had decent attitudes and ideas in certain fields despite being aristocrats with certain advantages and luxuries that gave them the freedom and opportunity to develop such ideas in the first place. Can still remain alert to the possibility that they could be hypocrites or might betray certain causes when really tested, but can still make use of their ideas without being utterly blocked by cynicism.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 31, 2022)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh that's not really offhand is it? i'm sure jack could just call the accountant and they'd be able to give precise figures.
> 
> at no point in the past ten years have i had only one job, i've had between 2 and 4 - i'm on 3 at the moment. and i couldn't say without checking what i made in any of those years. now, if you think about the range of money in sums big and small jack monroe might have had coming in, it's no great surprise they don't have everything at their fingertips. and why should they?


so you meant to say *you* couldn't say how much you've earned... I've had the same job and practically the same salary so really isn't a hard calculation.


----------



## Serge Forward (May 31, 2022)

How come some people have got it in for that Jack Monroe? I know why the Daily Mail does, but why do some Urbanites? Sure, I doubt I'd agree with Monroe's politics... nevertheless, they seem like a good egg.


----------



## pbsmooth (May 31, 2022)

She just seems a bit annoying? In these partisan times I think it's OK to remember you can be broadly on the same side as someone politically and still think they're a bit annoying. Life goes on for everyone.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 31, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> so you meant to say *you* couldn't say how much you've earned... I've had the same job and practically the same salary so really isn't a hard calculation.


That wasn't really worth the posting as it repeats what you've said before, and no, adding things up isn't much of a calculation.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 31, 2022)

editor said:


> And that may well be the case with her. And while you're writing a book you still have to pay for your food, rent, light, heating etc, so - say - a generous £10,000 advance can quickly disappear unless the writer can bang out a book over a weekend.



Yeah, putting a book together will take a considerable amount of time. The flashing £10,000 could easily become less than minimum wage.


----------



## steeplejack (May 31, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> How come some people have got it in for that Jack Monroe?



a mixture of leftie purism, hyperventialting demands for TRANSPARENCY, and malodorous basement-dwelling misanthropy I'd reckon. It's a pretty horrible time to be alive.


----------



## 8ball (May 31, 2022)

steeplejack said:


> a mixture of leftie purism, hyperventialting demands for TRANSPARENCY, and malodorous basement-dwelling misandry I'd reckon. It's a pretty horrible time to be alive.



I knew it would be misandry.


----------



## scifisam (May 31, 2022)

pbsmooth said:


> She just seems a bit annoying? In these partisan times I think it's OK to remember you can be broadly on the same side as someone politically and still think they're a bit annoying. Life goes on for everyone.



I find her mildly annoying and have no idea why. But still, she is doing good things and I'm not about to try and twist facts to make it seem like she must be fantastically wealthy and lying about it.


----------



## steeplejack (May 31, 2022)

Clearly, that was a mistake


----------



## Edie (May 31, 2022)

scifisam said:


> I find her mildly annoying and have no idea why. But still, she is doing good things and I'm not about to try and twist facts to make it seem like she must be fantastically wealthy and lying about it.


Yeah that’s about where I am with her.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 31, 2022)

Serge Forward said:


> How come some people have got it in for that Jack Monroe? I know why the Daily Mail does, but why do some Urbanites? Sure, I doubt I'd agree with Monroe's politics... nevertheless, they seem like a good egg.



It’s all back in the mists of time now but I believe the original gripe was how their position was all about the poor learning to cook better with less (during the height of austerity) rather than arguing for higher wages etc. kind of similar to the Tory recently declaring that the people can make meals for 30p. 
It’s moved on somewhat since then though…


----------



## scifisam (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> It’s all back in the mists of time now but I believe the original gripe was how her position was all about the poor learning to cook better with less (during the height of austerity) rather than arguing for higher wages etc. kind of similar to the Tory recently declaring that the people can make meals for 30p.
> It’s moved on somewhat since then though…



That's not a very good argument though, is it. AFAICT her recipes are actually cheap and doable and it's not a bad idea to help people cook cheaply and healthily. The govt recommendations were never like that - they had recipes and shopping lists that called for a quarter of an egg a week and failed to take into account the way people on a small budget actually manage to shop cheaply. Also she did argue for higher wages etc - that's one of the things that actually got her in the public eye.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 31, 2022)

scifisam said:


> That's not a very good argument though, is it. AFAICT her recipes are actually cheap and doable and it's not a bad idea to help people cook cheaply and healthily. The govt recommendations were never like that - they had recipes and shopping lists that called for a quarter of an egg a week and failed to take into account the way people on a small budget actually manage to shop cheaply. Also she did argue for higher wages etc - that's one of the things that actually got her in the public eye.



I was giving an assessment of what I believed made her disliked what, a decade ago? Did I get it wrong?


----------



## bimble (May 31, 2022)

scifisam said:


> I find her mildly annoying and have no idea why. But still, she is doing good things and I'm not about to try and twist facts to make it seem like she must be fantastically wealthy and lying about it.


With that sort of attitude you won’t be able to spend your time swaggering around the internet feeling massively suoerior to everyone whose stuck their head over the parapet by actually doing stuff.


----------



## scifisam (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I was giving an assessment of what I believed made her disliked what, a decade ago? Did I get it wrong?



No idea, that might be why people claimed not to like her, but if that was their argument it was a weak one.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (May 31, 2022)

scifisam said:


> No idea, that might be why people claimed not to like her, but if that was their argument it was a weak one.


I was answering a specific question. I wasn't 'making an argument'. I don't know much about her/them tbh.


----------



## scifisam (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I was answering a specific question. I wasn't 'making an argument'. I don't know much about her/them tbh.



Yeah, I get that - I never claimed it was your own argument, so let's not have an argument about someone else's arguments


----------



## smokedout (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I was giving an assessment of what I believed made her disliked what, a decade ago? Did I get it wrong?



My concern at the time was she was parachuted into the anti-austerity movement by the Labour press with gushing endorsements from Alistair Campbell and John Prescott and was pretty cynically used by them to change the debate from one about sanctions, benefit caps and private sector disability assessments - all policies supported by Labour - to a debate about improved access to foodbanks, budgeting advice and preventing benefit delays.  Labour were very keen to portray the awful situation facing claimants at the time as one of DWP incompetence and a need to improve charity provision rather than a fault with policy, because the policies which caused that situation were largely introduced by Labour.


----------



## DaveCinzano (May 31, 2022)

Magnus McGinty said:


> I was giving an assessment of what I believed made her disliked what, a decade ago? Did I get it wrong?


You are really going to revise better if you want to pass next week's _What the hell was that whole Laurie Penny thing?_ test


----------



## bellaozzydog (Jun 1, 2022)

smokedout said:


> My concern at the time was she was parachuted into the anti-austerity movement by the Labour press with gushing endorsements from Alistair Campbell and John Prescott and was pretty cynically used by them to change the debate from one about sanctions, benefit caps and private sector disability assessments - all policies supported by Labour - to a debate about improved access to foodbanks, budgeting advice and preventing benefit delays.  Labour were very keen to portray the awful situation facing claimants at the time as one of DWP incompetence and a need to improve charity provision rather than a fault with policy, because the policies which caused that situation were largely introduced by Labour.


That’s quite a theory


----------



## platinumsage (Aug 21, 2022)

A long article here, which maybe someone who gives quite a few more fucks than me would like to read all of and do a tl;dr summary:









						Jack Monroe: Saint or Scammer?
					

How poverty in the UK became a one-person show




					medium.com


----------



## killer b (Aug 21, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> A long article here, which maybe someone who gives quite a few more fucks than me would like to read all of and do a tl;dr summary:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


who wrote it?


----------



## 8ball (Aug 21, 2022)

killer b said:


> who wrote it?



Someone on Medium who seems to only have published that one article.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Aug 21, 2022)

platinumsage said:


> A long article here, which maybe someone who gives quite a few more fucks than me would like to read all of and do a tl;dr summary:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Stop beating your flaccid right wing drooper over Jack Monroe 

It’s unhealthy


----------



## platinumsage (Aug 21, 2022)

bellaozzydog said:


> Stop beating your flaccid right wing drooper over Jack Monroe
> 
> It’s unhealthy



I've done nothing but defend her, take your fantasies elsewhere you weird miserable cunt.


----------



## LDC (Aug 21, 2022)

killer b said:


> who wrote it?



Someone with possibly a slightly unhealthy obsession with Monroe and_ far _too much time on their hands. I'm partial to some commentariat criticism and slaggings off but I couldn't even be bothered to read it.


----------



## pbsmooth (Jan 7, 2023)

Interesting read. 









						‘I’ve heard it all: she’s a fraud, a liar, a thief’: Jack Monroe on alcohol, addiction and answering her critics
					

She’s the anti-poverty campaigner and food writer who shot to fame by teaching us how to make the most of our pennies. But behind the scenes her world was unravelling




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Rob Ray (Jan 7, 2023)

Yeah I thought so too, and pretty plausible as a tale especially given how close they're sailing to admitting fraud when they describe a binging/buying spiral using their Patreon proceeds. 

Though I doubt it'll change the minds of their more strident detractors, some of whom seem absolutely desperate to paint them as a 2D villain.


----------



## pbsmooth (Jan 7, 2023)

Yeah I'm surprised by some of the £££ admissions which aren't exactly ideal even cutting her plenty of slack. Clearly a somewhat chaotic person.


----------



## editor (Jan 7, 2023)

platinumsage said:


> A long article here, which maybe someone who gives quite a few more fucks than me would like to read all of and do a tl;dr summary:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The heroic  author has deleted it


----------



## Rob Ray (Jan 7, 2023)

Think they moved it to a dedicated website instead of Medium: Awfully Molly – #bekindnotblind

Edit: "#bekindnotblind" - good grief the "mean-spirited comment with an x at the end" energy on that one


----------



## killer b (Jan 7, 2023)

Rob Ray said:


> Yeah I thought so too, and pretty plausible as a tale especially given how close they're sailing to admitting fraud when they describe a binging/buying spiral using their Patreon proceeds.


What's the fraud here? Patreon isn't some kind of gofundme kind of thing to pay for specific stuff, it's means of artists and writers raising funds for living expenses while they make art or write


----------



## editor (Jan 7, 2023)

Rob Ray said:


> Think they moved it to a dedicated website instead of Medium: Awfully Molly – #bekindnotblind
> 
> Edit: "#bekindnotblind" - good grief the "mean-spirited comment with an x at the end" energy on that one


Bloody hell, I'm not interested enough to wade through all that, particularly when it's from an author I know nothing about.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jan 7, 2023)

killer b said:


> What's the fraud here? Patreon isn't some kind of gofundme kind of thing to pay for specific stuff, it's means of artists and writers raising funds for living expenses while they make art or write


She was offering particular things at different tiers which she didn't send out.


----------



## purenarcotic (Jan 7, 2023)

killer b said:


> What's the fraud here? Patreon isn't some kind of gofundme kind of thing to pay for specific stuff, it's means of artists and writers raising funds for living expenses while they make art or write



I wouldn’t define it as fraud, but people paid on the basis they would receive actual, physical things from her on a regular basis but they never got those things and when they asked why they didn’t get any explanation.


----------



## Thora (Jan 7, 2023)

Not a thoughtful fraud, more just being a chaotic addict with broadly good intentions but a tenuous relationship with reality.
Basically she shouldn’t be living in poverty still but she is because she’s an autistic alcoholic with adhd.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 7, 2023)

Thora said:


> Not a thoughtful fraud, more just being a chaotic addict with broadly good intentions but a tenuous relationship with reality.
> Basically she shouldn’t be living in poverty still but she is because she’s an autistic alcoholic with adhd.



90% of the twitter dama I see her tweeting seems to involve her having a serious meltdown rather than stepping well away from people saying she's wrong in a condescending voice.


I'm sure she gets way way to much shit and she shouldn't but she really cannot deal with twitter and the situation gets worse the more she reacts to it.


----------



## platinumsage (Jan 7, 2023)

purenarcotic said:


> I wouldn’t define it as fraud, but people paid on the basis they would receive actual, physical things from her on a regular basis but they never got those things and when they asked why they didn’t get any explanation.



That’s the risk you take with Patreon though, it’s basically donating to someone you like with the hope they’ll give you a regular reward, but in full knowledge that they might not get their act together etc, and knowing you can just cancel the monthly payment if you’re not satisfied. It’s not analogous to buying a product or service.


----------



## Cerv (Jan 7, 2023)

purenarcotic said:


> I wouldn’t define it as fraud, but people paid on the basis they would receive actual, physical things from her on a regular basis but they never got those things and when they asked why they didn’t get any explanation.



not the first person who's done that. through no ill intent to take the money and run.

I wonder if Patreon & similar platforms bear some responsibility here. that they let people jump in to offering so much without perhaps realising how much effort it'll be and whether they'll be able to deliver.
so should they adopt a more limited service? e.g. new users can only offer so many tiers. and then can add more down the line after they've a proven track record of delivering.


----------

