A Girl Called Jack... time for action?

[weepiper]

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]

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...

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

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

....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).

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

is it vastly different to being a single dad with no money?

In whose experience?

 

[smokedout]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Are we allowed to disagree with Fridgey again then?

 

[Callie]

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]

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]

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]

You're as finicking, nitpicking and obfuscatory as a theologian, Liam.

not really. the inverted commas were important... but ignored.

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

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]

where are you getting this 300 calories figure from??

Good question. smokedout?

 

[LiamO]

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]

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?

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?

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]

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]

Like I said. I was speaking for myself... and seperating myself from the 'pack'.

 

[TruXta]

T

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]

careful now. Itchybanfingeritis may be catching.

 

[TruXta]

I'm off to board a flight, so that will be all from me.

 

[editor]

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]

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]

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.