Benefits: Too Fat To Work. Fucking really???

[Mountainygirl]

I just spotted this in the TV guide. Channel 5 have obviously hit on the perfect formula- bring everyone's two favourite folk devils ('fat people' and 'benefit scroungers') together, for a brand new series, which I am sure will be a balanced and fair portrayal of these people's lives....

TV seems over run with this shit atm. Everyone goes on about how sexist/racist telly was in the 70s, but honestly, in years to come, people will be totally gobsmacked about how in 2015, it was almost universally OK to rip the absolute shit out of poor people.

I had really flip emotions watching the programme.

Whilst I agree that the way these programmes are presented are absolutely abominable, especially when I read that the people on wanted to raise awareness :(, these are very real issues we have today that affect many people not just the sufferers of obesity related disabilities.

Just putting the facts out there Nana without the appeals to emotion or strawman arguments.

Dawn you are full of hyperbole and naievete - hardly "just putting the facts out there". I would never watch a programme like that as I think they're both boring and nasty, but to suggest they're spawned by some sort of shadowy Government-led cabal that is promulgating "German nazi propaganda" is tinfoil hat stuff and embarrassingly immature. The reality is that people are not very nice and like to gawk at this. Lots of these people will be on benefits themselves! There is of course underneath it all a very serious conversation to have about the impact of longevity and productivity gains on our ability to adequately provide for all citizens and deal with structural unemployment. Ironically it's impossible to have that discussion at the moment because of the unwillingness of most of the population to engage in anything more than sound bite, short termist politics against the tedious background of "evil tories" vs "communist labour" - people largely aren't interested, they just want the "Government" to pay them more/less money depending on how much they make themselves.

But to blame it on "the (presumably evil Tory) government" is 13 year old debating society stuff. If Labour wins the GE in May I can guarantee we will be having exactly the same conversations. And these programmes are driven by what we want to watch, as depressing as it is.

Totally agree Angeltulips.

Excellent post angel tulips, exactly what I wanted to say myself. This programme sounds like bottom of the barrel stuff, but television is awash with this kind of crap. Human nature is to like a good gawk, it was ever thus.

The rhetoric about Nazi Germany is embarrassing and has no basis whatsoever in fact, but those who believe this stuff will continue to assert that they are speaking in facts whilst demanding that others provide 'proof' to back up their opinions.

The same goes for the 'workhouse' chat that appears on here (and my Facebook feed). It makes me wonder if anybody knows what the workhouses were or how they operated.

Posters who bang on about Dickensian poverty etc wouldn't last two minutes in Dickensian Britain.

Gosh angel what a delight you are.
Still, may I suggest you take a look at history and how it works. E.H. Carr's What is History is quite good.
Suggest you also look up the meaning of hyperbole.
As for 13 year old debating society stuff, I take it you are a tory party member, that's their usual defence.
Bored now. The standard of argument here is really quite reprehensible.

Not that I need to justify any political affiliations I have to you but I am most certainly not a Tory party member. As I have said, I think both parties are as bad as each other on this topic and it's a bit telling that is the only thing you can come back with.

Thanks for the book list recommendation but I've read that - doesn't really have much relevance to the point I was making. And I do hope your statement about nazi Germany was hyperbolic so perhaps you should look it up - unless of course you are actually accusing the Cabinet of mass genocide in which case I humbly apologise for using it, but suggest you take a long hard look at what you're saying.

I suggest you take a long hard look at the figures, those who have died due to benefits being unfairly cut, who have taken their own lives, due to the fear of benefits being cut.

If you have read Carr (really? I have trouble getting my students to read it) then you will be aware that we have great difficulty as a race in learning our lessons from history.
I have not accused the government of mass genocide. If you read the posts, then I have stated quite clearly that the agenda to demonise the poor and those on benefits, including those with disabilities is the same as the agenda of the 1930s. It is. It is a sad fact and concerning that you and those of your ilk are unwilling/unable to see this, for if you were able, we would have so much more support for those that need it. It's people like you and I that could prevent an erosion of the benefits system, a punishment regime, zero hours contracts, but you won't whilst Nana and others continue to see and experience the reality and try to fight.
That's not hyperbole, it's fact.

What angel said, again.

There's plenty of support from those of 'our ilk' for those who need it Dawn, it's called philanthropy. It's those that don't need it but feel entitled that are the problem. As Angel so succinctly put it, (way more eloquent than me ), there are huge problems with the UK's future productivity and skills base. I'm sure that doesn't worry you though, because you have some ideas for a 'solution' to the nation's issues don't you? Perhaps the National Socialists would have been less successful had there been a viable opposition. So come on, let is 'benefit' from the knowledge you have gained as a scholar.

us oops!

I do hope your statement about nazi Germany was hyperbolic so perhaps you should look it up - unless of course you are actually accusing the Cabinet of mass genocide

Please go back and read the posts about the comparison as you're completely missing the point. Really, go read them. You'll probably still disagree, but at least we'd be arguing about the same thing.

Yes I have read Carr. If I were being pedantic I could laugh heartily at your continuing juxtaposition of citation of that book (in which Carr spends considerable time rejecting the view of history as a narrative of objective facts) with insisting that "these are the facts". But I won't.

I will point out that nazi Germany was ideologically opposed to Jews and pursued the deaths of all Jewish people, be they rich or poor, old or young, male or female. Quite frankly I think it's in pretty fucking poor taste to equate the deaths of 11m people of a particular religion in one of the greatest mass genocides in the history of the world with a very small number of deaths, as sad as they are, of people who have not been able to access benefits.

Fwiw I don't think the current system is working particularly well and I don't agree with sanctions, but I also don't agree with the large amount of subsidisation that the uk gives to such a wide range of its citizens. I think the welfare state is due for an enormous overhaul and the Tories have absolutely done the wrong thing in this parliament. But your "arguments" prevent us having any kind of sensible debate about that.

Hmm there seems to be some sort of competition about intellectual standing going on here - my money's on Dawn though who talks good sense. And NO I don't believe for a single minute that Playrail has read the book you mentioned Dawn. Whenever I am in "debate" on MN and recommend books, people usually come back and say "I've read those books and didn't think they proved anything" - I know for a fact they haven't as they weren't easy to read and they certainly did prove certain issues, that was the whole point of one of the books.

SO come on Plarail give us a critique of the book Dawn mentioned.

Think I'm leaving the thread as it's just getting boring although it's quite amusing seeing playrail trying to use more and more "big words" to prove that she is intelligent - e.g. philanthropy - !

At least we seem to have got rid of the bogus social worker!

Personally I detest being told to read specific books before I'm considered serious enough to comment. Utter rudeness now coming from Nana and Donna. The one nil comment was pathetic, and the whole 'I know better than you' tone is pretty grim.

I'm with you Nana I honestly can't be bothered with the rather pathetic posturing.

Dawn the only one posturing is you! You haven't engaged in a single substantive argument - just thrown condescending and inaccurate platitudes at people who haven't instantly agreed with your poorly-expressed and thought out posts.

If this programme has been about people who starved themselves everyone's attitude would be different?
I guess they wouldnt blame someone with anorexia or complain about any help they receive from the NHS . It seems sad its ok to be vile to overweight people.

Over eating is the addiction of carers.
Which is why no one gives a shit.

thats interesting Baddz ive heard that before, i am overweight and from being 11 I was my disabled sisters carer.

You can't be up at night, do school runs, drive people to appts if you are drunk or high on crack or whatever.
But eating a whole cake for breakfast?
You can still function.

OMG definitely time to leave the thread - we're now on to eating whole cakes for breakfast!! Doesn't everyone do that!

Sorry I think I've been confusing playrail with angel and it is the latter who claims to have read the book Dawn mentioned and is the one thinking up "big words and phrases" - am loving your continuing juxtaposition of citation of that book - coo angel you must be very clever to have such a knowledge of English language.

Over and out!

I'm just an offended mum, I've never claimed to be anything else.

Nana, it is very dismissive to state that you disbelieve people who don't share your point of view. It is a very bullying way posting with the intent to discredit other posters. Can you understand that, empathetic social worker that you used to be or was that how YOU treated people when you were practicing. Is it a way that you would like to be treated? To a large extent I don't require you to respond, but it may be something you want to reflect on before posting on other threads.

nana I think it was quite obvious Badzz was just using an extreme example. You're being childish.