To agree with jamie oliver's principles, but still think he's a twat

[molyholy]

I agree with his campaigns, but he is an absolute dickhead. Really unlikeable.

read the menu of the one in Exeter; all buzz words and no real food on the plate

I was intrigued by this and googled the menu. All I could see was clear descriptions of each dish. Here's an example:

"Chargrilled British beef steak, with herby garlic butter, skinny fries, fresh horseradish and rocket salad".

Other dishes were similarly clearly described. And how does that result in "no real food in the plate"?

Really Suburban? I found 'Bleary-eyed, turnip-faced, lisping wanker' entirely apposite.

It was a review of one of Jamie's many TV programmes. As such the writer is allowed licence. She is a TV reviewer. He appears on telly. I thought it was accurate in its central analysis of the pointlessness of the programme and found the rest of the descriptions accurate too and amusing.

I was a dinner lady when his first campaign was on. My friends and i thought they must have spent a lot of time trying to find cooks that actually couldn't cook. They made us all out to be lazy, useless arseholes. When he had those ladies cooking chicken drumsticks we were just thinking what on earth do they feed their own families if they can't even do that without instructions. We could only cook what we were sent (although i did love a nice turkey twizzler) I agree TWAT.

I always wondered about that lazyarse123.

Remember that dinner lady he made famous for 15 minutes because she did exactly what he said and licked his arse? What was her name again?

I like him. I don't think he has a clue of real budget food though. I admire that he is trying to change peoples eating habits but resent him taking away turkey twizzlers. He seems genuinely nice.

Limited Can't remember her name, but there is no way the council i worked for would pay for all the hours she worked. He did a good job bringing it to peoples attention (gags at saying that), but i think things changed due to parents being made aware of just what shit their kids were being given.

Really Suburban? I found 'Bleary-eyed, turnip-faced, lisping wanker' entirely apposite.

If your MO is personal attacks on the way someone looks and speaks, that comes as no surprise.

He doesn't like people not doing what he tells them limited, but his main targets are always poor people. He demonises them.

His own food in his outlets is full of sugar. But that's okay, he's priced out the plebs.

Believe me, I am not a bleeding heart lefty, but even I find his views absolutely abhorrent, they're only a step up from 'send 'em to the workhouse' thinking.

Ah Suburban, but attacks on people because of their economic circumstances are a-okay with you though?

Not really my MO no, Suburban, however, if you choose to put yourself out there propagating such heinous, patronising and utterly divorced from the real-world wankery, I consider if fair game.

Ah Suburban, but attacks on people because of their economic circumstances are a-okay with you though?

Sorry, where did I post that?

Iseem

So if you disagree with someone's views, it's fine to write venomous comments about their appearance and the fact they have speech defect?

I don't remember her name either lazyarse. Never mind, she served her purpose and was chewed into the maw that is the Jamie Oliver Phenomenon.

I believe it was that programme where he called the women shoving burgers through the school fence 'arseholes'. Nice.

Maybe they were reluctant to have their ideas on diet challenged. And maybe their recalcitrance was stoked by a TV production crew employed by Jamie Oliver to make good telly.

Maybe that was the reason why the film crew just happened to stumble upon them passing burgers to their kids through the fence. No film crew has ever egged on naive people to provide good footage for them or edited footage ever, have they?

So they are arseholes and Jamie Oliver is a saviour.

It was disgraceful of the headteacher to allow access and if I was a parent there I would have refused permission for my child to take part. We're not guinea pigs and we don't exist to further Jamie Oliver's ascent to greater riches and sainthood.

What I'd find brave of him is if he made those kind of documentaries at the schools his own children attend.

Surely no one thinks that just because you're rich you don't make poor diet or parenting decisions?

I can't imagine him and Jools consenting to that kind of scrutiny of their children for a second. And just in case they were crazy enough to do it, I can't think of any fellow parent at the school wanting that attention for the greater glory of St Jamie of Oliver.

I don't disagree with you billsykesdog. My point is that he attacks - sometimes hysterically - anyone who doesn't agree with him.

It's just that people like Cameron and Govey, or anyone else with power and money can ignore him.

Poor and disadvantaged people can't fight back. I agree with you. He demonises them.

It's to sell his brand to the bit in the middle. He knows exactly what he's doing on a business sense. I think he also likes pontificating too. He's genuine about that.

Patronising twat who thinks he's on this earth to save working-class people from their feckless selves.

limited, I live locally. What happened with the 'burgers through the fence' has been misrepresented. Before Jamie came children were allowed out of the school to buy food to eat. They introduced a 'lock in' system without taking into account that this would mean a lot more children and longer queues. They also got rid of the system of one 15 minute break and a 45 minute break for lunch and replaced it with two half hour breaks, which meant less time to queue, and some children eating lunch twice, which meant they were running out of food for others who hadn't had their first lunch. Children were queuing for their entire lunches and being sent back to class without reaching the front and getting food. Sometimes even when they got there, there was no food left. The parents weren't passing food through in protest at the healthy food, they were passing food through because some days their children had no food at all because of the disorganisation.

And yes, parents who were passing through jackets with beans and salads were ignored, while the few with burgers were emphasised.

He's absolutely not a twat. He's done more to affect the positive change for children's nutrition in schools than anyone else.

I too think he is well intentioned. He put a much needed spotlight on school dinners and if you were a child of the eighties,you will remember how atrocious they were and continued to be for ages. He helped change that.
It is also unfair to label him ' mockney'.
He comes from Essex and the cockney accent is more likely to be found there now then it is in London.

Although this does make me laugh and think about Jamie's Italian

www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/poor-people-must-eat-gentrified-burgers-2015040297013

Gobbolino6
I interviewed him once, about 5 years ago, and yes, at the time he set my twat radar on fire. Every second word was 'fucking'...in the end I stopped making notes and just tallied the fucks, I got up to 75 before I decided to make notes again. He was so incredibly up his own arse.

Just wondering how Gordon Ramsey would compare on the fuck(ing) tally.

Gunting
I met him once accidentally (rebelling on a school trip, ran away from a museum and climbed over a small fence.... Small fence was a boundary for a tv show he was making) and he was making. He was sat in a caravan getting make up painted on him. He was nice but his security was a massive twat.

Loving the sound of that school trip

Yes whois. The Daily Mash often does have its finger on the pulse.

And yes, parents who were passing through jackets with beans and salads were ignored

Surely there must be photos of those parents somewhere, even posted by the parents themselves? I googled but couldn't find any.

I have all sorts of social and political ideas that I think are great and all my friends agree with me SuburbanRhonda.

Do you think it would be acceptable for me to bring my own TV production company down to your child's school and make a documentary highlighting those views and sidelining dissenting views or portraying them in a poor light by editing?

Would it be okay for me to give many broadcast and press interviews describing people who disagreed with me as 'arseholes' while the people I described as arseholes were ignored because I was a major celebrity and on course to become a national treasure and no one was interested in talking to them and pissing me off?

Would it be okay whether it was for nothing, or in this case for considerable profit at the time and also a continued profit to my image and company over the years, just because I really believed in what I was saying?

Or would you say to the starstruck headteacher: 'he's not filming my child and that's that.'

Enough people on MN complain about photography without permission, particularly where children are involved. But apparently it's okay when it's Jamie Oliver and parents sign a release form without really thinking about it and then realise too late that the filming is for every day for four weeks and edited to show the juicy bits.

It's all in a good cause though

Not sure where it was that I said I agreed with how Jamie's School Dinners was made, but you go right ahead misrepresenting my opinion about personal attacks on people whose views you disagree with