(request)Kevin Myers Irishman's diary

ronano

I think the edition was Monday8/02/05 right? Can someone post(if the mods are fine with it) the text of this piece

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Hairy Homer

Or if the mods allow it, here it is for your reading pleasure:


An Irishman’s Diary
Kevin Myers

How did Edward Walsh feel as he found himself sitting outside the warm tepee of political correctness, and in the howling blizzard of reality, after his remarks about unmarried mothers?

Not very comfortable, probably. Never mind, Ed, I’m used to the vitriolic epistolary hiss in the column inches that besiege me in my little corner here. We can sit together here in the snow and perish together—or maybe think the unthinkable.

Such as that our system of benefits to unmarried mothers is creating a long-term time-bomb. Even as things stand, we are bribing the unmotivated, the confused, the backward, the lazy into making the worst career decision of their young lives, and becoming professional unmarried mothers, living off the State until the grave takes over. Our welfare system is creating benefits-addicted, fatherless families who will be raised in a culture of personal and economic apathy—and from such warped timber, true masts are seldom hewn.

The response of Anne Bowen, policy officer of the One Parent organisation was—naturally—that Ed’s remarks were ‘offensive’ and ‘hurtful’. God knows why she didn’t say ‘unhelpful’, ‘unsavoury’ or ‘distasteful’, which form part of the usual verbal repertoire of the politically correct. This assesses any political observation not on its factual merits but on the lachrymosity of the audience.

So she naturally declared that it would be extremely ‘hurtful’ to suggest that women would choose single parenthood for financial pain, or that ‘they would be put themselves before their children’. No doubt it is hurtful. But is it true? And how many girls—and we’re largely talking about teenagers here—consciously embark upon a career of mothering bastards because it seems a good way of getting money and accommodation from the State?

Ah. You didn’t like the term bastard? No, I didn’t think you would. In the welfare-land of Euphemesia, what is the correct term for the offspring of unmarried mothers? One-parent offspring? But when we use that deceitful term, one-parent, we actually mean fatherless, in the social meaning of the word, though not of course in the genetic sense. The lads who (in Sinead O’Connor’s immortal word) are the donors are probably off elsewhere, donating away wherever and whenever they can, and usually without having to pay a penny of child support for the results of their generous donations.

Ed had suggested that mothers of bastards could earn up to €20,000 a year from benefits. Through her gushing tears, Anne inconsolably declared that a lone parent (i.e., a MoB) gets only €148.80 a week, plus €19.30 per child. And indeed, this would be impossible to live on if it were all that the State forked out; but it is not. In addition, the State pays for the MoBs’ rented accommodation—worth over €13,000 or more a year. So the MoB’s real income could come to nearly €23,000. If you’re working, you have to have pre-tax earnings in the region of €38,000 to match that income.

All of which is a long-winded way of describing insanity—because we all agree it is mad to bribe impressionable young women into a life of MoBbery, which is crushingly limiting, with little sense of achievement or personal ambition, and no career to speak of, other—that is—from cash-crop whelping.

And how do MoBs cope when their male bastards (in a literal sense) become metaphorical bastards in adolescence? How does a woman assert her will over a sour, aggressive, uncommunicative teenage boy? Well, she usually doesn’t—as a study of the parental backgrounds of gang members in London and New York—where they are ahead of us in such matters—will tell you. Mob members usually have stressed-out MoBs for mothers, and absent FoBs for dads.

The central heresy underlying welfarism is that benefits don’t influence general conduct and that all the State is doing is simply helping individuals. Social groups—the argument goes—do not emerge in direct response to welfare payments. That’s what liberals in the US said, so they formulated policies that were kind and good, and certainly not ones that were designed to corrupt and deprave. But corrupt and deprave they did. Welfare lines and teenage moms by the hundred thousand emerged as a direct result of the apparently but illusorily attractive State incentive not to work.

Well, even that compulsive sharer of pain, Bill Clinton, knew something tough had to be done: at the instigation of a Republican-dominated Congress, he began a concerted drive against MoBbery, cutting welfare and introducing strong tax incentives for working MoBs. The results were amazing. After 30 years of unbroken increase, the rise in MoBbery was swiftly halted. Welfare handouts plummeted; and 10 years on, two out of three MoBs are now in work.

We just know that’s not going to happen in Ireland while debate remains mired in the schoolgirl swamp of what is ‘hurtful’ and ‘offensive’: why, thith howwid talk makes one want to cwy. Even our super-sized MEP, Big Mac, tearfully denounced Ed for his heartless remarks. Well, naturally. After all, Sinn Féin/IRA have strong proprietorial feelings about single-parent families, having made hundreds and hundreds of them out of what had originally been two-parent families: why, God love them, they’ve even dabbled in making a good few no-parent families.

We have 80,000 MoBs, and the numbers are rising; time to ring the alarm bells. But of course, in Dáil Éireann, we’ll get some weepy, sanctimonious bilge over what is ‘offensive’, while the rest reach for the ear-plugs.

Sleepy

That's what all the fuss is about? :rolleyes:

FFS, can you imagine what some of the PC brigade would think of a lot of the posts on these very forums?

Sparks

Sleepy wrote:

That's what all the fuss is about? :rolleyes:
FFS, can you imagine what some of the PC brigade would think of a lot of the posts on these very forums?

Probably the same thing as what the Mods think about personal insults and unsubstantiated facts/figures here, I would hope...

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

FTA69

All the fuss? I think the labelling of children as "bastards" is a more serious issue than you are making it out to be sleepy. Myers specialises in picking on vulnerable groups in our society, immigrants, Travellers etc but now he has turned his poison pen on single mothers and their children.

As a person from a single parent family myself I take great offense at his calling me a "bastard" because my father happened to piss off when I was younger.

His subsequent lie of an apology was even more infuriating, he lamented how he had never known it would cause offense but in the original article he states;

You didn’t like the term bastard? No, I didn’t think you would.

The only thing he is sorry about is the fact that his comments resulted in the backlash it did. Both he and Geraldine Kennedy should resign for the insult and grievance they have caused thousands of people around the country.

Sparks

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Actually, he only mentions Walsh in relation to one figure (the "up to €20,000" one) - the rest of his figures seem to come out of thin air.

Look, the guy's a professional troll for the Times. End of story, at least as regards what he wrote. The important thing that that article raised was that we don't have an appropriate forum for debating such social and political problems. The Dail isn't up to it, it's a group of non-experts trying to score points off each other, not a moderated group of experts trying to find an optimal solution. The media obviously isn't the place to have the debate. So what else is there?

bonkey

Sparks wrote:

The Dail isn't up to it, it's a group of non-experts trying to score points off each other, not a moderated group of experts trying to find an optimal solution.

Wow....so you're saying its a bit like this forum, except the participants are paid?

Hmmm....maybe I should consider a career change.

jc

Sparks

bonkey wrote:

Wow....so you're saying its a bit like this forum, except the participants are paid?

And they get to set the laws for the rest of us. It'd give you pause for thought, wouldn't it?

hawkmoon269

Thank you for reprinting that article, HH, as it serves to remind us of how sick Kevin Myers is. I hope he gets help for his problems.

However I find the lynch mob mentality of some on the left rather disturbing also.

Poker_Peter

Considering that most single-mothers are widows, and only 14% are teenagers, I really don't think there is a credible basis for Myers' claims, and the use of the word "bastard" to describe a baby really plumbs depths in terms of offensiveness. I am glad he has apologised. But I fear the publicity his remarks caused might have created notions in people's heads (even as an afterthought) as to whether his claims are true or not.

Sleepy

Would you have taken similar offense if the article had used the word illegitimate throughout? Like it or not, Bastard is the technically correct term. Sure, the word has dual meaning in modern English but I think you'll find many words do.

FTA69, any member of Sinn Fein is really throwing rocks in a glass house when talking about "picking on vulnerable groups in our society".

Frankly I think there's a point in the middle of all the crap he's spouting. Personally I think it's a disgrace that should a woman choose to (and I'm not saying that many do) she can claim benefits equal to or above the salary of a large proportion of the workforce. It's not my duty or any other taxpayers to support the children of people that aren't prepared to do it themselves. This is why the child support agency needs far more power than it currently has, in order to force charlatans that "happen to piss off" on their kids.

ronano

When i mentioned the mods i meant in the sense of linking from another site/using text that is copyrighted or some bs like that. Thank you for the link/diary

Sand

Well Myers didnt murder anyone or rob any banks, noo that theyre crimes anymore apparently - he offended people by taking the mocking of the politically correct into genuinely offensive territory. He has apologised, and given that his own sister is a single mother its hard to argue that he intentionally meant to stigmatise his nephew/niece. Hes admitted that by his stupid use of bastard he has put an extremely large hole in his own argument.

Unfortunately Myers has clashed with numberous other left wing types in Ireland generally and the Irish media particularly. They reckon they have him in a hard place now and they wont let up until theyve well and truly crucified him, avenging themselves on him for lampooning them in the past. He'll survive but its a tad embarrassing to see that public outrage is reserved for Myers when you consider some of the subversive group's we have in the Dail.

Poker_Peter

Sleepy wrote:

Would you have taken similar offense if the article had used the word illegitimate throughout? Like it or not, Bastard is the technically correct term. Sure, the word has dual meaning in modern English but I think you'll find many words do.

FTA69, any member of Sinn Fein is really throwing rocks in a glass house when talking about "picking on vulnerable groups in our society".

Frankly I think there's a point in the middle of all the crap he's spouting. Personally I think it's a disgrace that should a woman choose to (and I'm not saying that many do) she can claim benefits equal to or above the salary of a large proportion of the workforce. It's not my duty or any other taxpayers to support the children of people that aren't prepared to do it themselves. This is why the child support agency needs far more power than it currently has, in order to force charlatans that "happen to piss off" on their kids.

I don't think we have a CSA in this country. The one in the UK has been constantly bashed in the UK for mistakes and technical problems. We should also remember that there are also a lot of "deadbeat dads" who refuse to contribute to the upbringing of their children financially or otherwise. We should not be sexist in addressing the issue of irresponsible parenting.

I understand that there are about 80,000 single mothers in this country who are not widows. In all likelihood, most of them have been married or are. Hence, they are often single not of their own choice, e.g. marital breakup. Of those, just 14% are in their teenage years, so I don't think it is fair to claim that there is some kind of huge scam by teenage girls to get benefits by getting pregnant. Also, remember that the definition of "single" can be grossly misleading, since the two parents may still live together and only be single in the sense of not being married. The consent of both parties is needed to contract a marriage, so it's not totally the mother's choice to be "single" in this case. I feel that stable unmarried parents should be treated on an equal footing to married couples for tax and benefit purposes.

We should not go down the road of Bush style Victorian values being imposed on the nation. Marriage is probably not the panacea it is painted by some religious groups. It can ruin relationships by making the partners feel like the property of the other, and causing rows about money etc. Even so, the Government should institute an inquiry so we can get a clearer picture of the role of incentives in terms of the ends some may go to to get benefits.

Sparks

Sand wrote:

Hes admitted that by his stupid use of bastard he has put an extremely large hole in his own argument.

What argument? All I saw was him stating his personal opinion, I didn't see any supporting cogent argument past "well, I think I'm right so there".

the_syco

He used the word "bastard" to get a reaction, and he got one. I think he has stated similair beliefs before, but it was only when he used the bad word that he got noticed.

I know a few single mums, and there are two types; those who got pregnanant "out of wedlock", and those who got divorced afterwards.

The latter cannot help it that they are single moms.

The former cannot get a job untill the child starts primary school, as the cost of childcare is too much. Sadly, you need the income of two parents to provide childcare, mortgage, and food. Being the only parent, its not easy for the mother to start a job, or even college, without grants from the goverment.

=====

There is one way, and one way only, to stop this. Get the fathers to pay benifits. Use DNA testing, etc. Have a list of the top 10 muppets, for cross-referencing. A bit too much police state, maybe, but it's the only way it'd work.

This has a number of nice side effects;

• The state may not have to pay as much, as the father is paying the mother X a week.
• If he knows he can't get away with it, there's more chance that he'll be carefull.
• There'll be less repeat offenders, as after two kids, they'll find that they can no longer support any more.

FTA69

Would you have taken similar offense if the article had used the word illegitimate throughout?

Yes, I am not an "illigitmate" person and I am not a second class citizen. The dictionary defines "illegitamate" as being "unlawful" or "physiologically abnormal". It is as bad a term as bastard.

Like it or not, Bastard is the technically correct term. Sure, the word has dual meaning in modern English but I think you'll find many words do.

Rubbish, the fact is that it is an offensive archaic word that seeks to belittle those whose parents are not married. You know this well yourself and so did Kevin Myers when he wrote the original article.

FTA69, any member of Sinn Fein is really throwing rocks in a glass house when talking about "picking on vulnerable groups in our society".

An entirely seperate issue, it really is a pity that you cannot keep your disdain for Republicans out of a discussion.

It's not my duty or any other taxpayers to support the children of people that aren't prepared to do it themselves. This is why the child support agency needs far more power than it currently has, in order to force charlatans that "happen to piss off" on their kids.

Maybe peoples' tax shouldn't go to the health service then as it is not the concern of the healthy to pay for the sick etc etc etc. Tax should be focussed around the needs of the society and I believe one need of that is the security of the vulnerable. Many women are forced to become single parents due to eviction at a young age by their family, domestic violence, abandonment, drug abuse of a spouse or in the majority of cases, bereavment. Myers' big conspiracy of single parenthood by teenagers is simply that, a conspiracy. The overall percentage of teenage mothers amongst single parents a whole barely reaches double figures.

Moriarty

Mummy the bad man called me names


I am continuously amazed at how thin-skinned and dim-witted the public at large is. He called people bastards. Get the hell over yourselves.

<whine>but he hurt my ickle feelings ;(</whine> How the hell have you survived as long as you have? Do you go to pieces every time somone calls you a "bad name"? Jesus christ people, there's war and pestilence across the earth, and you're crying yourselves to sleep at night over somone implying that certain people in this country are bastards?

WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?


I don't think I've had such an apt sig for quite some time.

sceptre

FTA69 wrote:

Yes, I am not an "illigitmate" person and I am not a second class citizen. The dictionary defines "illegitamate" as being "unlawful" or "physiologically abnormal". It is as bad a term as bastard.

"Illegitimate" is probably worse in that it's no longer correct - we changed the Irish constitution back when I was two or three to allow for equal succession rights which effectively takes "illegitimate" out of the equation as a usable term. "Bastard" may be an un-PC word and may have a double meaning but it's technically correct and he got the reaction he wanted.

jman0

Unfortunately i think Kevin Myers actually is making a fair point. It's just that he happens to be about the worst messenger to make it.

I personally know a girl from a solidly middle class family that is a lone parent on the dole, and while her parents buy her things like a car, washing machine, etc; and offer to look after the child so she can go back to college she refuses. She seems contented enough to eek out a living on the dole with no ambition toward getting a job or anything.

Hairy Homer

Sand wrote:

Well Myers didnt murder anyone or rob any banks, noo that theyre crimes anymore apparently - he offended people by taking the mocking of the politically correct into genuinely offensive territory.

Oh well, then. As long as he didn't actually kill anyone, he should be above reproach. He made a point in a national forum, a daily newspaper. Most of the reaction to it has also been in national fora, such as newspapers, radio and TV stations and this worthy website. What's your problem?

sand wrote:

Unfortunately Myers has clashed with numberous other left wing types in Ireland generally and the Irish media particularly. They reckon they have him in a hard place now and they wont let up until theyve well and truly crucified him, avenging themselves on him for lampooning them in the past.

Can you not make an argument without bringing in your totally unjustified paranoia about the 'left wing types' in 'the Irish media particularly.'? You're just like all those other right-wing whingers in the Sunday Independent and Magill (Incidentally, are we going to see a Frebruary issue in February, guys?) Bleating about a left-wing dominated media that simply does not exist.

FFS Myers was writing in the Irish bloody Times, which if you took the Sindo seriously you would think is the ultimate trendy liberal media outlet.

Obviously they don't read Myers.
Or John Waters.
Or Mark Steyn.
Or the neocon nutcases that are given the freedom of the letters pages.

Hairy Homer

hawkmoon269 wrote:

Thank you for reprinting that article, HH,

Shucks.

No need to compliment my peerless cut-and-paste skills :-)

mycroft

Sand wrote:

Well Myers didnt murder anyone or rob any banks, noo that theyre crimes anymore apparently - he offended people by taking the mocking of the politically correct into genuinely offensive territory. He has apologised, and given that his own sister is a single mother its hard to argue that he intentionally meant to stigmatise his nephew/niece. Hes admitted that by his stupid use of bastard he has put an extremely large hole in his own argument.
.

Myers apology is the thing that grates; he apologises for any offense accidently taken for his use of the term ba*tard

but in the orginal piece he says;

h. You didn’t like the term bastard? No, I didn’t think you would. In the welfare-land of Euphemesia, what is the correct term for the offspring of unmarried mothers?

and he then proceeds to use the offending word 16 times in the piece, he actually set out to offend was aware that it would offend and when the backlash was far worse than anticapted he sort of backpeddled and claimed he didn't realise it would offend, which he clearly did know it would in the original piece.

As for the hand wringing won't somebody think of the children attitude you're right it been overblown but I wonder if we had a press complaints board that people who have been able to turn to would the media furor have been so intense. Myers deserves to be pulled up on any number of vile articles he's written but there should be a body who will hear such complaints.

Of course it'd give nothing for Joe Duffy to talk about......

Redleslie2

'Politically incorrect' is all too often just political correctese for a troll (like Myers) or a thick or possibly insane person (like Ann Coulter).

mycroft

Redleslie2 wrote:

'Politically incorrect' is all too often just political correctese for a troll (like Myers) or a thick or possibly insane person (like Ann Coulter).

Vincent Browne made a solid point that it's become a handy rallying cry for Stern, Myers, O'Connor, and O'Hanlen et all, "call me political incorrect but...." and release another offensive illogical broadside, and when attacked they can just dismiss the argument as "more lefty PC bridgade nonsense, without answering the criticism"

Sleepy

If we are to allow a paper such as an Phoblacht to exist and glorify the acts of terrorists, how can we seek to prevent a right-winger like Myers from publishing his opinion? Personally I find the former far more offensive but I respect the rights of those who wish to be biggoted to be so. I'll hate you for it, but I don't think I have the right to prosecute you for it. Myers views are no more biggoted that those that appear in papers every day, he just has a talent for getting a rise out of people with them (possibly because he's a somewhat gifted writer?).

pickarooney

Whatever happened to just not agreeing with an article and turning the page?

mycroft

Sleepy wrote:

If we are to allow a paper such as an Phoblacht to exist and glorify the acts of terrorists, how can we seek to prevent a right-winger like Myers from publishing his opinion? Personally I find the former far more offensive but I respect the rights of those who wish to be biggoted to be so. I'll hate you for it, but I don't think I have the right to prosecute you for it. Myers views are no more biggoted that those that appear in papers every day, he just has a talent for getting a rise out of people with them (possibly because he's a somewhat gifted writer?).

Sleepy sometimes I swear you're FTA, in disguise, trolling.........

You've managed to swing this into SF bashing thread. Much to their delight. If any of the SFers on the site had the wit to buy the vilage this week (a week I think it found its voice btw) they'd see Myers has commited far greater transgressions than this in the past.

For starts the times prides itself on being the paper of record it's supposed to hold itself to a higher standard than the others, out of some self appointed, in light of myers article, and the continued publication of stern, it's just as rancid and bigoted as the rest of them.

Let me re-iterate my issue with the article, is not the article, and not the tone, by the oh so contrite "I'm so sorry for any unintented offense caused by my article, faux apology that appeared on thursday" when myers clearly in his article stated he wanted to offend.

What we need is a press complaints commision not our airwaves and bandwith choked with people, shocked and appalling, and not the Irish times letters page on thursdays filled with moral outrage (though I need to work out on a graph, the number of pro myers letters has mysteriously steadily increased as this week has gone by, the times is not contrite)

Redleslie2

mycroft wrote:

Vincent Browne made a solid point that it's become a handy rallying cry for Stern, Myers, O'Connor, and O'Hanlen et all, "call me political incorrect but...." and release another offensive illogical broadside, and when attacked they can just dismiss the argument as "more lefty PC bridgade nonsense, without answering the criticism"

Is that recent? I haven't seen it.

mycroft

Redleslie2 wrote:

Is that recent? I haven't seen it.

It's one of several articles in this week's village which by far and away was the best issue so far. It's criticism was measured and intelligent and reminded us of a few far worse Myers clangers from over the years, including his allegation of a Gardai cell working for the IRA in Dundalk which turned out to be utter horsecrap.

uberwolf

it was a legitimate term to use in so far as it is technically correct. It was also offensive due to the inherited stigma the word so clearly retains from days of yore. All of those who have been deeply wounded by its use in the correct context would of course never have allowed it escape their lips out of context, as a mere profanity - because that would be a more offensive use of the (or any) word.

Any one confusing single mothers with his intended target is missing the point. Widows, divorcees etc are far removed from the proportion of teenage girls who use pregnancy as a means of escaping lives they are unhappy with for whatever reason. The shortsightedness of such a decision goes without saying of course but I believe Myers intention was to draw attention to the actions of these girls becoming women for the wrong reasons and the fact that they are automatically drawn in to a unbreakable cycle of state dependency.

If anything Myers should apologise for his misjudgement in using the word only because he or his editor should have realised that its use detracted from his argument, because it distracted, providing those opposed to his opinion an easy means of attacking it without debating it.

and the SFers can take a spoon, F'ing hypocrites

mycroft

Actually the outrage about the terminalogy is taking away from the offensives of the sentiment of the article, Myers is like a solid proportion of the IT ten years behind the attitude and policys of the British tories, blaming the ills and expensive and problems of society on the most vunerable, visions of single mums in laps of luxury reaping the benefits of the system they were milking.

While anyway who has opened the irish times or any other paper in this country during the past ten years has learnt week in week out politicans, city planners, and the wealthy have defrauded the tax payer out of many thousands of single mothers (the majority being widows) through unpaid taxes and financial loopholes. Myers is doing the same tactic as the tory govt of thatcher and Major attacking the weakest and most vunerable of society using dubious statistics, while the people they rub shoulders with deprive the exchequer of the funds we the ordinart tax payer pay.

Memnoch

I think people are more offended over the fact that the term "bastard" is being used at all.

Are we still living in the dark ages where its considered bad for a woman who hasn't yet married to have a child? Its an archaic expression for archaic times and one would hope that we were now PAST such things.

Using the word "bastard" isn't so much so an insult as it is an implication. An implication that the women have commited some kind of crime by having a kid out of wedlock, and not conforming to chruch doctrine. Its an implication that someone is sitting on their high horse and passing judgement, and displaying self declared moral superiority.

Its obvious he used the term in order to offend people. Yes its "only" name calling, but I think its really a case of him displaying his own ignorance by using the word in the first place.

Ajnag

Myre's may be a wanker, but that still dosnt exuse the no. of young women/girls on our streets using pushchairs as battering rams.

Temporary sterilisation(if its possible without side effects) till 18 should be mandatory.
Oh but then our appointed moral guardians would bitch about the excess of underage sex :rolleyes:
As if it didnt already exist....

pickarooney

Ajnag wrote:

Myre's may be a wanker, but that still dosnt exuse the no. of young women/girls on our streets using pushchairs as battering rams.

Temporary sterilisation(if its possible without side effects) till 18 should be mandatory.
Oh but then our appointed moral guardians would bitch about the excess of underage sex :rolleyes:
As if it didnt already exist....

Man, you come up with a way to do that and watch Durex and Wyeth Pharm. bang on your door with bundles of cash to shut you up

TomF

My younger daughter heard this conversation on a Cork bus several years ago. Two teenagers, probably 14 or 15 were talking to another teenager, who seemed to be returning from classes at university. "Girl, you're 18 and you don't have a child yet? If you have a child, you get a house and everything."

Sparks

That indicates a deficiency in the educational system rather than a defect in the social welfare system TomF, unless you regularly see 14 and 15-year-olds cited as expert witnesses on social welfare...

mycroft

TomF wrote:

My younger daughter heard this conversation on a Cork bus several years ago. Two teenagers, probably 14 or 15 were talking to another teenager, who seemed to be returning from classes at university. "Girl, you're 18 and you don't have a child yet? If you have a child, you get a house and everything."

But props for posting on a thread without mentioned Dubya,

I shan't bother going into the details about how a conversation your daughter alledgedly heard on a bus isn't really valid evidence to support Myers.

Incidently todays Irishman's diary is getting the boot in on Miller, and supports the house of unamerican activities "rooting out of communism"

Nice the body is barely cold.......

uberwolf

Sparks wrote:

That indicates a deficiency in the educational system rather than a defect in the social welfare system TomF, unless you regularly see 14 and 15-year-olds cited as expert witnesses on social welfare...

IMO you've clean missed the point. The point of Myers article - the attitude that exists amongst some people that motherhood is the golden ticket. It's those very 14 and 15 year olds that perceive the social welfare system and a baby as their route. He alleges.

spanner

jman0 wrote:

Unfortunately i think Kevin Myers actually is making a fair point. It's just that he happens to be about the worst messenger to make it.

I personally know a girl from a solidly middle class family that is a lone parent on the dole, and while her parents buy her things like a car, washing machine, etc; and offer to look after the child so she can go back to college she refuses. She seems contented enough to eek out a living on the dole with no ambition toward getting a job or anything.

know of a similar case, my sister baby sits for the woman across the road who lives with her boyfriend, wont get married or get a job because it will cost her too much, they have to brand new cars and every mod con you can think of, while my parnets have one 92 car and struggle under the paye system, this isnt just a once of situation, its happening quite alot.

i am not saying that their is not single mothers who got themselves into the situation by accident and are now struggling but there is widespread abuse of the system

mycroft

spanner wrote:

know of a similar case, my sister baby sits for the woman across the road who lives with her boyfriend, wont get married or get a job because it will cost her too much, they have to brand new cars and every mod con you can think of, while my parnets have one 92 car and struggle under the paye system, this isnt just a once of situation, its happening quite alot.

i am not saying that their is not single mothers who got themselves into the situation by accident and are now struggling but there is widespread abuse of the system

Pauses............

SHE LIVES WITH HER BOYFRIEND

How is she a single mum?????

By the sounds of it all she needs is a reduction in the tax bracket for low income wage earners.

I don't know the situation but by the sounds of it, you've clearly not paid attention to one word on this thread or to the bones of the myer's article

galactus

uberwolf wrote:

IMO you've clean missed the point. The point of Myers article - the attitude that exists amongst some people that motherhood is the golden ticket. It's those very 14 and 15 year olds that perceive the social welfare system and a baby as their route. He alleges.

Its a point Myers could have made without mentioning the B word.

Is it OK now to call Myers an asshole? Personally I feel there's no stgma attached to calling Irish Times columnists assholes.

uberwolf

mycroft wrote:

How is she a single mum?????

in the eyes of the state she is. Or at least that her tax status is as such. And Myers amongst his barage was trying to suggest that this shouldn't be encouraged

mycroft

uberwolf wrote:

in the eyes of the state she is. Or at least that her tax status is as such. And Myers amongst his barage was trying to suggest that this shouldn't be encouraged

Hmmmmm I'm not sure, aren't we changing the law to give couples who live together similar rights to parents, and if she's living with the childs father, but out of wedlock?

galactus

pickarooney wrote:

Whatever happened to just not agreeing with an article and turning the page?

By that rationale you'd simply turn the page if there was an article advocating, say, paedophilia or enforced euthanasia for the over 70s?

pickarooney

galactus wrote:

By that rationale you'd simply turn the page if there was an article advocating, say, paedophilia or enforced euthanasia for the over 70s?

Well, yeah, why waste your time reading articles that have no useful information?

Sleepy

mycroft wrote:

Sleepy sometimes I swear you're FTA, in disguise, trolling.........

I assure you I'm not

You've managed to swing this into SF bashing thread. Much to their delight. If any of the SFers on the site had the wit to buy the vilage this week (a week I think it found its voice btw) they'd see Myers has commited far greater transgressions than this in the past.

Not trying to sway the thread that way at all. I just hate hypocrisy. Like I said, I find An Poblacht repulsive, but I respect their right to publish it.

For starts the times prides itself on being the paper of record it's supposed to hold itself to a higher standard than the others, out of some self appointed, in light of myers article, and the continued publication of stern, it's just as rancid and bigoted as the rest of them.

Unless you expect the paper to have no columnists and just dry news, I don't know how else you expect the paper to be. The Irish Times, while the paper of record is also a commercial entity and, as such, needs to sell papers and to do that, it needs to have opinion columns.

mycroft

Sleepy wrote:

I assure you I'm not

Dude I was joking

Not trying to sway the thread that way at all. I just hate hypocrisy. Like I said, I find An Poblacht repulsive, but I respect their right to publish it.

Exactly and if you'll read my issues with this article it's myers misrepresenting of the facts and the moral outrage over the language of article takes away from the viliness of the attitude of the article, and the shoddiness of Myers research.

Unless you expect the paper to have no columnists and just dry news, I don't know how else you expect the paper to be. The Irish Times, while the paper of record is also a commercial entity and, as such, needs to sell papers and to do that, it needs to have opinion columns.

Uh huh it's just the Times claims to hold itself to a higher ethical and journalist standard to other papers, when publishing columists like Steyrn and myers proves otherwise

Zombrex

spanner wrote:

know of a similar case, my sister baby sits for the woman across the road who lives with her boyfriend, wont get married or get a job because it will cost her too much, they have to brand new cars and every mod con you can think of, while my parnets have one 92 car and struggle under the paye system, this isnt just a once of situation, its happening quite alot.

A) as has been pointed out she isn't a single mum, she lives with her boyfriend.

How exactly does she afford a brand new car and all mod cons on social welfare. Are you sure the boyfriend doesn't support her? Do you even know if she gets social welfare?