Am pissed off this morning. Here are my perceptions of celeb domination of #metoo and mainstream obsession with celeb suffering as a priority:
I just finished a phone call with a woman who has three young kids and is homeless. They’re all homeless. She and the kids sofa-surf at a friend of the woman’s some nights and some nights with the woman’s mother in her mum’s flat.
The woman was made intentionally homeless by her council for rent arrears – arrears the woman said she didn’t realise were building up, because her housing benefit, which was paid straight to her landlord, suddenly stopped last year. Her housing benefit was stopped, because there was a problem processing a JSA claim she’d made.
She was accused of “getting money from somewhere else.”
Just about every woman I talk to in these situations is accused of “getting money from somewhere else” – which, for so many women I speak to, often means accused of living with an ex, or sleeping with some bloke who pays, or your choice of variations on that charming theme.
This side of things is remarkable, now that I think about it. I’m actually sitting here as we speak thinking about all the women I’ve written about over the years who’ve received housing benefit, or other kinds of state support. It occurs to me that nearly all of these women were accused by a council or the DWP at one point or another of cheating the state by generating extra cash for extra goodies via a man – ie, living with an ex, or with new bloke, or with some bloke nobody had even heard of.
That should tell you all you need to know about the state’s real view of women. We’re all cheating liars who’ll suck anything for an extra fiver for drink and fags – and that goes particularly for women who receive housing benefit. No matter that the state accuses people wrongly. No matter either that some women need extra cash in austerity and that people take the options they have with good reason. The realities of real women’s lives in this era doesn’t matter a damn. Women are seen as graspers, whether we need money or not.
Back to the story. The woman I talked to this morning was eventually evicted and found intentionally homeless. The woman says that the council told her that it would house her kids, but not her. The council would find the kids somewhere to go if social services got involved – but not her. The subtext there was pretty clear, to her at least: she’d be separated from her kids if she went down that line. I hear this story again and again and again and again. I hear this story every time I interview a woman who has a housing problem, rent arrears and kids. “You’ll go one way and your kids will go another.” It’s the threat to beat all threats. It never, ever ends.
Which brings me to my main point. Where is the wall-to-wall #metoo mainstream press outrage for women in these situations? Where’s the non-stop support and mainstream press coverage that #metoo celebrities have now had for months on end? Why is a night out or a trip in a cab with a groping celeb or politician now the only sure way to get women’s issues on the mainstream agenda, especially as a viral and ongoing concern? Reading the mainstream press at the moment – even those publications we’re supposed to rate for maturity and depth – feels like spending too much time on rubbish celeb sites. I know this, because I do both.
Where’s the widespread mainstream press and political eagerness to believe and report non-stop women’s stories of abuse and dismissal at the hands of the austerity-enforcing state? I tell you this – I bet a lot of the women I speak to wouldn’t even be believed by the media and political classes at the moment. They’d be called liars and exaggerators. Even in polite liberal circles, there’d be smirking about the choices made by these women and about women who have children in poverty (for all the world as though women always have a choice). Councils and the DWP would say that women had lied about making rent payments and about missing jobcentre meetings and all the rest. They’d be believed – not the women. There’d be snarky remarks about the feckless and irresponsible poor, and the working-class mother’s terrible and destructive sense of entitlement.
Celebrities are admired by the mainstream and generate web traffic. Women who are throttled by the state in austerity are not and do not. I know this. I get this. I can’t accept it.
Very true Kate. It is women who have been the main victims of the Tory austerity programme. So often it is women who are the care-givers in society.
Take Universal Credit, where the household claiming it only receives a single payment, usually in the name of the man. Putting these women in a situation of total dependence. It’s as if they don’t exist as people. It must be really irritating, something most men probably can’t imagine. A system constantly slanted against you, because you happen to be female. And it needs to stop.
They shouldnt be allowed to make such allegations without proof. If they say someone is getting money from somewhere else then prove it! As for the celebs, I wouldnt really know, I don’t take much notice of all that bullshit. Hollywood might as well be on another planet, it’s so far removed from my reality. I’m smoking tab ends, out of the bin, & have just been given a leaflet about the bloody Health & Work Programme at the Jobcentre. Have to attend some bullshit Group Session, at the Jobcentre in morning. I wish they’d fuck off.
Oh Trev, it’s time to cut down on the fags or fag-ends now! Otherwise the doctor will give you an earful… And the Tories will read this and say poor people spend too much on tobacco.
What are you supposed to “learn” in this group session? How to think yourself well? Sounds a pain.
Nothing like a healthy intake of fruit and vegetables to keep yourself well, but it sounds like you can’t afford that right now. They should take the money they spend on the stupid group session and give it to you for food.
Smoking roll ups is one of the few pleasures i have. I rarely drink, i don’t smoke weed or take any other drugs, never go out, have no social life whatsoever.
God knows what this Group Session will consist of, i’ll see in the morning. But it looks like i am getting put on to the Work & Health Programme, the latest DWP scheme, & it is compulsory for people who have been out of work for over 2
…years. and it is run by Reed employment agency (the rentowne health specialists – not!)
Thats reknowned
How was the session at Reed today? Was it any good?
Hi Alison,
The Group Info Session was at the Jobcentre, not Reed, and there wasn’t much too it, a waste of time really and I got drenched on the way there. I did manage to ascertain though, that the new Work & Health Programme is voluntary at the moment but becomes mandatory in April for those who have been claiming for 24 months, BUT even then only if you are referred to it by your JCP adviser, as there is way less funding than for the old Work Programme and therefore they cannot do a mass roll out to everyone, just if your adviser deems that you may benefit from it. So I hope to God that won’t include me!
Hi Trev,
Glad to hear the Work & Health Programme might be voluntary. Sorry to hear it was a waste of time. I suppose you’re not interested in their jobs anyway – unless you fancy working a few hours a week to buy food/cigarettes. If you earn up to £20 per week, it doesn’t affect your benefits. I was earning £20 per week previously and I’m thinking of doing it again now. I could use some extra cash and more to do to help me lose weight.
If the overpaid media in this country spent less time sucking-up to the Tories, and more time reporting on the of austerity, it would be a good thing.
But they’d rather chase after their Tory heroes like Boris Johnson.
A man permanently trapped in a web of self-importance.
Yes – and they’d rather bash Jeremy Corbyn.
Hey Corbyn-bashers! Where are you today?
I’m here
Corbyn has no solutions. He just wanders round going ‘this is wrong. We will fix this” with no plan or idea how to fix it. He thinks money falls from the skies.
All the countries Corbyn admires or takes money from (Venezuela, Iran, Russia) show a marked contempt for ordinary people and have leaderships who plunder their country’s wealth leaving the population in crushing poverty. He is a fraud.
“Corbyn admires or takes money from Venezuela, Iran, Russia”
I think you’re confusing him with Donald Trump.
Corbyn isn’t perfect, and I don’t think he’s the best thing since sliced bread, but at least he is Left wing , and a vegetarian (therefore a man of principle & some integrity in my view), and as I’ve said previously there is no other way to rid ourselves of the evil Tory menace but by voting Labour, that’s the fact of the matter. Those Tory psychopaths have got to go. Who will you vote for then Dipper?
Corbyn has received money for TV appearances on Iran and Rusia state TV.
if Corbyn remains as Labour’s leader I will vote Tory. Easily the best choice of the two. Corbyn avoids making clear policy statements as he is incapable of answering any firm questions on them. He has however said he will seize private houses and money as well as restrict the freedom of the press, that’s on top of a complete inability to see you cannot just give money to absolutely every needy cause without ever stopping and wondering where the productive capacity that money buys comes from. He practises cronyism giving jobs in his office and colleagues’ offices to children of friends and allies. The people discussed on this blog will see nothing.
A few years of Corbyn economic disaster will make the current tight budgets look like paradise.
Wow, Dipper, you would vote Tory???!!! WTF? You and me must be very different then. I’ve never voted Tory in my life and I never would under any circumstances. To me they are Public Enemy Number One. They are THE enemy! I struggle to understand why anyone would vote Tory, and can only come up with a few possible reasons; a). you are filthy rich, or perhaps a businessman, company director etc. or b) you are either a Psychopath or a Sociopath, or c). you are simply misinformed and rather gullible. I’l be kind and assume that the latter applies to yourself. You might be under the impression that Austerity is about saving the economy. It isn’t. The Tories have barely made a dent in the Deficit and economic growth is barely above the margin of error, whilst borrowing has actually increased. Austerity is really about massive transference of wealth to the Rich, at the expense of the poorest & most vulnerable. Doesn’t it bother you that thousands have died, and if the Tories remain thousands more will die? If the answer is no then you may be a psychopath or sociopath and should seek help.
Look at the pensions situation, and the plight of the WASPI women.
These women, born in the 1950’s, have basically been told that they can’t retire at 60, and will have to wait another 6 years, untill they are 66. Can you imagine the outcry if men had been told without any notice, that they were going to have to wait 6 extra years like this ?
Where is the media support for the WASPI women ? Beyond making sexist jokes ?
I always thought State Pension age would eventually come down to 55 for everyone, men & women, but no, it’s gone up. 67 for me. But being told you have an extra 6 yrs to go is a real kick in the teeth. I’m not surprised the WASPI s are angry. The Government & media keep telling us that people are living longer but that’s not the case for everyone by any means. I think the figure was recently given as 85 life expectancy for men in south of England, but at the time in Bradford the average age was just 58. I knew 3 guys in their early 5
(Grrr bloody phone!)
…in their early 50s who have died suddenly in last 3 yrs, & another at age 66. A doctor told me to expect to live to 68 at worst and about 74 at best, & I’m 56 now, but the bastards are still trying to get me back to work.
Don’t you let them get to you Trev. It is just what they want – for people to give up and stop signing.
It’s a scandal that they can treat people this way.
Cheers Steve. Unfortunately I can’t stop signing until I either Retire or get a job, which seems highly unlikely.
Right on Tanya ! Just to be handed a six year increase without any notice or anything. They could have done this in maybe one year or two year increase just the same. Made it a lot easier. But no they had to slap it on in one go. Typical.
So, often if you are female in this country, you are travelling second-class.
Isn’t that the truth ! And that’s because we’ve had to fit-in with a world that men have made.
A world that men have made. True up to a point but then there are women like Margaret Thatcher, Thereasa May, Esther McVey, Sarah Palin in America, etc. We need more nice women in positions of power & influence like that Green Party woman who’s name ive temporarily forgot, & Baroness Chakrabati for example.
Caroline Lucas, Molly Scott-Cato, Amelia Womack, Baroness Jenny Jones (Green Party ‘leading’ women).
Ah yes, i was thinking of Caroline Lucas, dunno why i forgot her name, just went blank, could be nicotine withdrawal! Couldnt break off to google her either as phone has gone a bit dicky (is now pre-empting txt in what looks like Polish, might have been hacked?)
Yep, they built it and we live in it. The world be a lot different if women had been able to have a 50% share in all the decisions for the last few centuries. Less violence, more co-operation, more sense and less testosterone.
And the disgusting way the Tories have closed so many of the women’s refuges.
Vital as an escape route for these women. But the government don’t care, it’s just another expense saved as far as they are concerned.
The cuts to social services, child allowance, pre-school nursery,
Cuts to the benefits of women who anyway spend most of it on food and clothing for their children. All of it. A nasty, evil system.
Yes, women probably do get that sort of treatment more than men, but going back in your archives, there was a man addressed in guilty-till-proven-innocent terms by Camden Council by way of his living in a house of multiple occupation (HMO) and someone moving into another part of the HMO, triggering an all-claimants-are-guilty-of-benefit-fraud until proven innocent standard ‘form letter’ from Camden Council. Authorities bully benefit claimants because they can.
Camden Council still send out such letters to claimants on account of Camden’s ‘shared intelligence’ with DWP, as far as I know.
Dude Swheatie of Kwug — now resident in Hereford — writing in a personal capacity
A woman with two kids gets sanctioned down at the jobcentre for being late.
Not her fault, but the system couldn’t care less.
Now she’s got no money for food, and her kids are going hungry.
This is the kind of vicious crap these women are dealing with on a day to day basis.
According to Commons figures, 86% of the burden of austerity has fallen on women: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/09/women-bearing-86-of-austerity-burden-labour-research-reveals
Also, this: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/17/women-and-disabled-austerity-report-tax-benefits-reforms
My situation is pretty bad ATM, but imagine the plight of a black disabled woman who is a single parent to 3 children, 1 of whom is disabled living in a house with an extra bedroom? How on earth does she survive?!
Well am not a cerlebity but a mum this women dosnt deserve criticism she’s needs a award way I told my children working loan dad who didn’t care mum like super women bills education worry hospital shake my head and do it all the week after . I was told as a young child bye older family as long as you have food in your cupboards heat for warmth you need not worry feel for the poor women heat goes out you never got told neglect surly other agency’s shud try and help keep your self safe and your children safer with love Sarah
I don’t think many men realise what its like to always be on the other side as it were. The human alternate, a woman.
You’d think Theresa May, being a woman ,would have a bit more compassion for the way that women have been affected by all the austerity and the cuts.
I’m not sure May is a woman. She and the rest of these frenzied marionettes barely qualify as human.
May is a robot. No compassion.
Years ago there was a R4 programme on the 2001 census. The census had missed a large number of young men who had deliberately avoided it, so the programme tracked them down.
Largely they were working class men associated with council estates. the one they chose was in Manchester. On these estates the houses went to the women along with the benefits; men came and went, having no status or foothold in the community, and preferred not to trouble the authorities.
So where are the men in the lives of the women and children you describe? What are the fathers doing? Are they paying for their children? Do they see them?
Women’s choice of father for their children is a critical one. If their choice, for whatever reason, turns out to be a poor one then that will have consequences. The state is a poor father and it is a disservice to women to pretend it isn’t and they can always rely on it.
Dipper, that really is an appalling way to look at it. You seem to be saying that women should be punished for the shortcomings of men and that it’s women’s fault if men fail them. Of course feckless fathers are bad, but that is no excuse for leaving women to suffer, with no help from the state.
Agreed. There are a great many reasons why women end up raising kids on their own. Not every partner turns out to be the great guy he may have appeared on the first date. Women must be able to leave and their dwindling support options means leaving is becoming more difficult.
And in any event, whatever the circumstances, why should innocent children suffer ?
Precisely
well why should any child suffer?
I’m not sure that good wishes provide the basis for sound policy. If children are trainee adults, then rather than telling them they shouldn’t suffer it may be better impressing on them firstly that if things go wrong you will suffer so better to try and avoid things going wrong, and secondly the more qualifications you get at school the better your options in life are.
This is going to feed and clothe them?
I deliberately did not blame women for the shortcomings of men. However a lot of bad outcomes are associated with single parenthood and pretending that it should in some way be an equivalent choice seems to be misleading at best.
I’m still at a loss to understand what the fathers are doing and if they are paying for their kids. It doesn’t seem unreasonable for officials to ask those questions. If fathers aren’t paying for their children then someone else has to pay for them through tax whilst at the same time struggling to pay for their own kids, and in some cases forgoing having more of their own children because they do not feel they can afford them. That doesn’t seem fair or reasonable.
The state requires men to pay one third of their income towards their children. This is enforced by the courts. I would also point out that the state no longer pays Income Support to lone parents, as it did in 2001. Nowadays, single mothers must seek work or they lose benefit.
In theory, I agree with you that lone parenthood is not ideal. However, it really depends on the character of the man. I think we were better off after my dad left ( please note my mum WORKED). My grandad left my grandma for his secretary when she was just 24 years old, with 6 children, all under 10. This was in the 1940s in America. My grandma worked nights as a telephone operator to support the family. She could not have known that my grandpa would leave her and she was furious about it.
“a lot of bad outcomes are associated with single parenthood”
Correlation does not imply causation
Jeremy Corbyn noticeably better effort in Parliament today on the NHS at Prime Ministers Questions. But Theresa May still dominated in reply. Corbyn has got to stop letting her take the initiative. Particularly her tactic of an aggressive defense, even if its absolute cobblers, and then she sits down as if she’s scored some wonderful point. She’s like a parliamentary rottweiller. But she’s cunning too, notice the way she smirks as if listening to an idiot whenever Corbyn is speaking. Theresa May pays much more attention to the whole performance and the impression that she is making than he does.
The key thing is Corbyn has got to break the ritual of this. Stand up again, reinforce what he has said, and not let her always get the last word.
I am sure that’s true and I shall catch up on watching Prime Minister’s Questions this evening.
I know why it’s important for Jeremy Corbyn to appear to do well at Prime Minister’s Questions. However, I really don’t think most voters are so dumb and fickle as to vote for the one that had the last word or the one that seemed the most dynamic in an episode of Prime Minister’s Questions. I think most voters care about policies, what each party stands for, what Jeremy Corbyn stands for, etc. They will pay far more attention to leadership debates on TV in the run-up to the elections.
Yes, I know many of you will disagree with me on this. Think about it, though. Were Jeremy Corbyn to excel at Prime Minister’s Questions, how many Conservative-inclined voters would decide to vote for him?
For Jeremy Corbyn to excel at PMQ’s he would have to be a lot more analytical and quick witted. But that would mean he would be a different person, because he would have to ask himself hard questions and ditch his Islington Gandhi routine
I suspect a lot of Tories would vote for a Labour Leader who showed they had a grasp of the issues and didn’t just talk in vague generalities. I might even vote for them myself.
Dipper, as I have said before Corbyn is walking a tightrope at the moment trying not only to hold the PLP together but also the voters. He is leaving the Tories to hang themselves. Incidentally, anyone who is prepared to vote again for this vile, incompetent Tory Government and its homicidal policies has no intention of voting Labour and never will have.
I agree with you entirely, Bev. The Tories are the ones who go on and on and on about how much they dislike Jeremy Corbyn. In my view, THEY DON’T LIKE HIM FOR A REASON – and that reason is NOT that they love and care for the Labour Party!
I agree Dipper. If Labour can raise its game then there are large numbers of voters, concerned about things like the NHS, the low wages and endless austerity, who might be prepared to give Labour a chance. But they have got to look and act like a serious government in waiting.
I think you’d be suprised Alison. Most voters don’t even read the party manifesto, and they vote either out party loyalty or often just gut instinct, a general impression.
This is where Tony Blair was good, forget some of his policies and controversy. He was a good performer in parliament, former barrister. Articulate and quick-witted.
He ran the show for three Labour victories. He would never in a million years have let Theresa May get away with some of the things that Corbyn has. Politics has always been as much about style and presentation as policy.
I KNOW most voters don’t read manifestos. How old do you think I am? 18?
If the Corbyn-bashers stopped giving lectures, they might realise the rest of us have brains too.
NOBODY is going to vote on the basis of who got the last word at Prime Minister’s Questions. General impression, yes. House of Commons ping-pong, no.
I watched Prime Minister’s Questions this evening and I could not believe the way Theresa May and Philip Hammond were LAUGHING all the way through. They seemed to think it was funny that someone died waiting 16 hours for an ambulance, Tessa Jowell has brain cancer, people live in slums… THAT’S the general impression that the public are getting. The Tories are so obsessed with “arguing” and wit and who had the last word that they have completely lost sight of what everybody else thinks of them.
Don’t agree? Well we’ll see what happens at the election. Tories, you won’t clock up any votes writing me lectures!
‘General impression, yes. House of Commons ping-pong, no’ Oh Alison, it’s this low-level intellectual comprehension of Corbyn and what is wrong with his approach that lies at the root of your problem. Why do you think people were, as you say ‘laughing all the way through’ at Jeremy Corbyn. Believe me, when it comes to it, people are going to vote first and foremost on how they see Jeremy Corbyn. Competent or not ? Able to do the job of Prime Minister or not ?
TORY BULLIES GET LOST!
One thing I truly loathe is men who try to talk down to women until they lose the will to have any opinions of their own. Men who think they’re always right and everyone who disagrees with them must be stupid. Men who graduate from university and think they can change the world. Where are the women among you? That’s right, you’re a bunch of male chauvenist pigs. Go take your small-minded clique and stick it up your own backsides.
I’m suprised Alison at your response. Alan and others are only making a widely-held point regarding Mr.Corbyn. He must try and build a more positive image for himself in the House of Commons. Otherwise Labour simply cannot win the next election. And it is not constructive for his supporters to shriek in outrage whenever the least criticism is applied to him. As if somehow he is a holy figure beyond complaint of any kind.
In 2016, the Independent reported DWP sanctioned 40,000 parents [on Income Support] with pre-school aged children last year.
Income Support is one of the ‘legacy benefits’ being incorporated into ‘Universal Credit’, and a sanction on ‘Universal Credit’ stops the ‘Housing Component Element’ (formerly Housing Benefit) too.
Perhaps the devisers of such ‘welfare reforms’ want to privatise adoption too? The branding slogan for Barnardo’s is ‘A child’s past should not dictate its future’, rather than ‘Benefit sanctions should not rob children of their childhood’.
The content of this newspaper article is truly horrific, especially considering Iain Duncan Smith has 4 children and lives in a mansion.