The Darker Side of the News

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:50 am UTC

elasto wrote:Sure. Noone would argue that the guilty should be punished. The question is how much should the innocent be punished in order to get to the guilty?

If I have to suffer at the hands of the law for my misbehavior, if that is right and just according to everyone I know and it is b/c THEY told me so

Maybe they were wrong to tell you so? Even if you did something wrong (who hasn't), maybe what they did to you was greatly disproportionate? But if we don't want what happened to you to happen again, society actually has to move towards being less intrusive and judgemental overall, not more.

Sure, when there's a dramatic news story, there's the clamour for a knee-jerk responses. But there always has to be questions as to what the collateral damage would be.

Take Gitmo for example. It's now clear that most people held there tortured for years on end were innocent. Was it still worth it because some of them were guilty? Some would say yes, I would say no.

I'm getting too into the thread so. Anyways spoilers for abuse, twisted thoughts, innocence cray cray girly-girly feelings, triggers everywhere you have been warned

Spoiler:

ucim · Postby **ucim** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 3:40 pm UTC

Government does not, and cannot, punish the actually guilty. They can only punish the ones that some official (judge, jury, cop, whatever) claims is guilty. There's legal process to be sure, but it's not perfect. Your experiences are testament to this.

Think about that for a moment.

Suppose government did get as intrusive as you want them to be. How likely is it that you, yourself would be hauled away for being {fill in} and thus meriting punishment? How likely is it that this would be warranted and just?

Jose

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:05 pm UTC

That's why we have innocent until proven guilty, and why lawyers are so obsessed with the process rather than the result. We just need to make sure the process is the same for everyone, none of this BS like "rich people also aren't allowed to beg or sleep in public". Long story short, I saw my sister go from seeing an obvious case of classism/racism being unjust to being just simply because she became an attorney and, well, the rich white kids hired the attorney and the poor black didn't, so it's fair they got the same process.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:23 pm UTC

Well ucim your hypothetical actually happens to me sometimes more than once in a month. NOT Right Now per se, however it does happen, and once it happened three or four times in a month: The cops come, interrogate me about why I'm in a public park or something, say I'm stalking or gonna rape and take me away. Or they take me to a hospital in handcuffs. Or they take me to a crisis house in handcuffs. Or a homeless shelter and just dump me even if it's only a one night stay. I get punished constantly constantly by the law for just being homeless. It's so so so so so unfair that I can't even think rationally about the justice system. And if the justice system is based on only punishing the accused that LOOKS guilty enough in the right light then I wanna get out of the USA and ANY Country w/a developed justice system. Justice systems and laws talks are used to police me daily. My abuser just today said he would take legal action against me when He didn't even get injured when we fought, he was threatening me w/weapons, and then I hear about my friend gettin' stabbed in the legs too? It's all too too much and make me wanna heavily medicate myself. At least I can rehabilitate myself w/o the loving attentions of the law, therapists, doctors and lawyers and judges and juries that all hate... hate... me forever and. Ever and evermore.

ucim · Postby **ucim** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:41 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:Well ucim your hypothetical actually happens to me sometimes more than once in a month.

...which is why I'm surprised that you want to give government more power to do this. Because they don't always get it right.

Jose

sardia · Postby **sardia** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:43 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:That's why we have innocent until proven guilty, and why lawyers are so obsessed with the process rather than the result. We just need to make sure the process is the same for everyone, none of this BS like "rich people also aren't allowed to beg or sleep in public". Long story short, I saw my sister go from seeing an obvious case of classism/racism being unjust to being just simply because she became an attorney and, well, the rich white kids hired the attorney and the poor black didn't, so it's fair they got the same process.

Don't scare the plebians about how justice works. It's not usually that bad.
Also did you just call out your sister as a good person turned into a stereotypical lawyer gone bad?

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:06 pm UTC

Lawyers aren't "good" or "bad", they have a moral system that is almost completely orthogonal to our own. Their definition of "good" is "the rules are followed", not "the guilty is found guilty and the innocent found innocent". A mass murderer being let off due to technicalities is a terrible outcome for a layperson but a great outcome to an attorney, likewise an innocent person being found guilty because of the preponderance of evidence is also a bad outcome to a normal person but the right outcome to a lawyer. Because when you can twist the laws for a good reason you can twist them for a bad one.

That's why the constitutionalist members of SCOTUS are despised by the public and beloved by the attorneys. For example, SCOTUS says that, for a person growing their own weed for personal use, not selling any, it's illegal. Why? Commerce clause, since by growing their own weed, they affect the demand for weed. Even though if they didn't consume or produce, there would be the exact same demand for weed. But then, can we ban sex in marriage because it affects the demand for prostitution? Yes! That is what happens when SCOTUS can twist laws and rules beyond their original meaning to achieve what SCOTUS believes is the right result.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:17 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Ginger wrote:Well ucim your hypothetical actually happens to me sometimes more than once in a month.
...which is why I'm surprised that you want to give government more power to do this. Because they don't always get it right.

Jose

Yeah yeah well we gotta work wit' what we got. And right now we got an imperfect justice system where judges like Miss Gina look down on you for your sex habits or supposed cray cray lying habits, boy prosecutors sue innocent girls and make it a boys' club about how she was askin' askin' for it w/her clothes and slutty makeups and she probably let him touch her breasts once or twice so so she totes Deserves It... and we gotta... keep workin' for it/with it, we gotta just make sure it's more fair and advocating for criminals when they're in legal trouble may be a solution? Imagine if therapists actually cared about their patients' recovery and not dominance and submission, they could advocate for them when they are taken to homeless shelters against their wills and help them find homes, or if parents care they would no longer abuse they kids and if they were sued over it not lie and keep the abuses secret, or if we could get more reduced sentences for people were prosecuted that made honest mistakes. I honestly don't even agree w/registering as a sex offender forever and ever but, what you gonna do yo? We just got to make more rights for criminals, not shut them out of legal jobs using their cray crayness or sex habits against them, change the culture of men versus women sexual/criminal games where men abuse innocent girls by malnourishing them or raping them... sighs. Yeah right. None of that is ever ever ever ever ever gonna happen is it?

ucim · Postby **ucim** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:49 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:we gotta just make sure it's more fair and advocating for criminals when they're in legal trouble may be a solution?

No, it's not a solution. It's an improvement. There's an important difference. If you want to solve a problem, you have to correctly identify the problem (not just a list of bad results), and then you attack the underlying cause of that problem (not a different but related one). It's important to distinguish between problems and bad results.

All too often, people don't actually want to solve a problem, they want to achieve a result, and they do so by pointing to a (sometimes unrelated!) problem and then pushing for the result they want. This compounds the problem.

In this case, the bad result that sparks the discussion is a set of parents who have chained their children to their beds for twenty-ish years. I agree it's a bad result, but is there a systematic problem that led to this bad result? That's the first question to ask.

You have (by your testimony and I'm oversimplifying) been harassed and abused because of your gender, sexuality, financial, and anger issues. Is this related to the issue one paragraph up? If there is a systematic problem one paragraph up, is this relevant to it? If not, then bringing it up clouds the issue, but if so, bringing it up helps illuminate the issue.

You have called for more government oversight of people as a solution. Yet that solution would exacerbate the issues you already have. This hints at something.... I'll leave that to further thought and discussion.

We can look at it differently. Erase the above. Now...

The bad result is that you've been harassed because of your gender, sexuality, financial, and anger issues. Is there a systematic problem that led to this bad result? If so, what is it? (or what are they - there could be more than one, but it might be best to look at one at a time.)

There's a news article about children chained to their beds (another bad result). Is this related to the same systematic problem identified above? If not, it's best to keep the two separate. If so, in what way, and how would the solution proposed to solve the problem one paragraph up affect this issue? Would that lead to another bad result?

Jose

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:54 pm UTC

I'm way way mixing up my childhood abuses w/the childhood abuses that continue into adulthood posted in the article. My apologies. Anyways, I still think we should monitor bad parents, b/c it's the only way. Governments watching bad citizens can be good too. They don't even have to send them to jail they could just do wellness checks, CPS visits and then take the kids when they abuse them. Compulsory counseling for your child abuses is not evil or wrong. Talking about they own abusive pasts probs gonna help 'em actually. They need need to seek therapy, bad parents, before it's too late. And if I as a child are gonna call the cops, a therapist, a social worker or a lawyer to FORCE THEM to see and notice that they are abusin' me... then so be it. THEY are the ones not me that asked to be prosecuted. Too too bad bad kids chained or shackled to beds and malnourished into hellish nightmarish territory have No Options to get up and call the polices... or if you're restrained in a bed at a hospital like me. Ha-ha. Anyways I dunno what else to say now? </3

ucim · Postby **ucim** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:00 pm UTC

I can get on board with most of that. But...

Ginger wrote:I still think we should monitor bad parents

...yeah, how do you tell which ones are bad parents without monitoring the good ones?

That is the Big Question, and pervades the entire privacy/spying debate across all fronts.

Jose

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:24 pm UTC

I guess I suppose after havin' been checked up on and motherly loved by crisis workers, social workers, therapists, mods, lawyers and blah-blah across state lines I have a more positively positive view on monitoring parents. My mommy was heavily monitored by CPS even when she didn't deserve it... and never when she did... 'cause we kept it secrets secrets to ourselves and were silent. And I wish we would've spoken up so she and we could've got help. And if you're a good parent in trouble with social workers then just plead your case in courts or whatevs to their company and bosses if they don't sue... and... everything should hopefully be okay. If it's not and good unabused kids get taken from non-abusing parents... I can't say anything about that. I only know about bad domestic abuses and bad, trying hard, depressed and struggling single moms. And dads that wanna call u up or text u beggin' u to do sex work--He means totes legit jobs for monies for him as his secretary/aide/girl friday assistant thingy. Those are all really really news stories of the darker kinds that happened to me and my girl friends.

LaserGuy · Postby **LaserGuy** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:34 pm UTC

I think, in this case in particular, at least making it extremely difficult for someone to be completely isolated outside of their immediate family would be a positive first step. E.g. having it that homeschooled kids are meet someone every semester or something to at least keep track of where they are at in their education, and hopefully provide at least an outlet where these kids can speak to someone confidentially. But this is a very extreme case and using this to as a guide to try to address more common but less extreme issues is not necessarily going to work very well

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:37 pm UTC

Ok, trafficking your own daughter? That's fucked up, and I can't tell if that's better or worse than trafficking someone else's daughter.

Yablo · Postby **Yablo** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:18 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:Anyways, I still think we should monitor bad parents, b/c it's the only way. Governments watching bad citizens can be good too.

I agree to a point. There are plenty of things which nearly everyone can agree are signs of good or bad parenting and citizenship, and watching for those things would be good. If everything is placed on a scale, though, eventually the lines get blurred, and we can argue for years over whether some things are really deserving of reward or punishment.

For example, is swatting your kid on the bottom bad? Is letting them continue to act out better? Kids need to be allowed to be kids, and hopefully, others in public will realize that and be tolerant. But at the same time, a parent needs to have control. If I see a kid who is screaming and being a terror in public, and the parent lets it happen, I think that's a bad parent. If that parent smacks the kid a few times to quiet them, I think that's a bad parent. But there's a middle-ground where a parent can and should be allowed to gain control without being reported. Where that line actually rests will be debated forever, and it will move one direction or another from time to time.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:17 pm UTC

One more response in spoilers for Yablo b/c and then I'm outta here to cool my heels. Twisted thoughts on parenting and teen girls you have been warned

Spoiler:

Yablo · Postby **Yablo** » Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:53 am UTC

Ginger wrote:One more response in spoilers for Yablo b/c and then I'm outta here to cool my heels. Twisted thoughts on parenting and teen girls you have been warned

Spoiler:
I think we should just let kids act out a bit. Hearing a kid be noisy is not the end of the world even if she cries, or throws things or pushes an inanimate objects off a shelf. Even if she wanna have something her mommy said she shouldn't. Yet I Don't think that invalidates a parent acting to... gain control... of her daughter necessarily. Just forget spanking spanking sucks. Letting kids be kids means accepting that some have behavioral issues. Anyways, I'm sure most parents don't even mistreat their kids, so it's not a privacy debates to me. Or freedoms debates. It's a debate about that some parents overprotect, control, neglect or counsel their children wrongly and need need constant supervision b/c they can't control their mouths/hands around their children. Do you Yablo know how humiliating it is to be dressed down by your father or mother, inspected for needles marks, inappropriate skirts or tops, having my hair brushed forcefully when I was a little girl, being told I need to grow up and stop acting so so inappropriate when all I did was disobey one. single. order? THOSE KINDS OF Parents need need constant supervision and a little misery so they stop abusing they kids. AND AND they let their male spoiled princes and kings get away w/touching, hitting and threatening their daughter w/guns and knives, committing suicide in my brother's house and failing and telling US to clean it up... neglect it's just neglect. Or denying food. Or saying you're unpretty when you eat chocolate and then smacking you when you get snippy w/him.

For what it's worth, I absolutely agree with everything behind this spoiler.

morriswalters · Postby **morriswalters** » Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:23 am UTC

Hearing a kid be noisy is not the end of the world even if she cries, or throws things or pushes an inanimate objects off a shelf.

At two it's normal, by the time a child is 6 it's problematic. It's the kiss of death for an adult. The phrase I believe is, poor impulse control.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:24 am UTC

TRIGGERS FOR offensive and little girl inappropriately chatting femininely about nothing

Spoiler:

ObsessoMom · Postby **ObsessoMom** » Fri Jan 19, 2018 9:56 pm UTC

Content warning: sexual assault

Larry Nassar's abuse victims, in their own words

Wow.

Sableagle · Postby **Sableagle** » Sat Jan 20, 2018 2:12 pm UTC

16/01/18:
Printer Sent Wedding Invites Telling Gay Couple They Were Going To Hell For “Evil Desires”

Stephen Heasley, 39, and Andrew Borg, 31, had ordered 100 blue-and-gold programs from Vistaprint for their hilltop ceremony. In addition to the order of events, and names of the wedding party, they asked that the lyrics from their processional, “Treasure” by Above and Beyond, be included. (The guys got engaged at an Above and Beyond concert.)

But when they opened the box, according to court papers, they instead discovered Vistaprint shipped them “approximately 80 copies of a discriminatory pamphlet entitled Understanding Temptation: Fight the Good Fight of the Faith.”

17/01/18:
Gay couple ordered wedding programs from printing company, received homophobic pamphlets instead

An Australian gay couple marrying in rural Pennsylvania to be close to their family ordered 100 copies of a wedding program from VistaPrint, but instead received about 80 copies of a Christian propaganda pamphlet. On Tuesday, they filed a federal lawsuit against the company in its home state of Massachusetts.

“We realized that whoever had sent this had our personal addresses,” Heasley told Yahoo News. “We were getting married on a family farm in what we understand to be a fairly conservative and rural part of Pennsylvania. If ill-intentioned people decided to target our wedding and guests, we would have very few options to escape or seek shelter.”

“Vistaprint would never discriminate against customers for their sexual orientation,” the company said. “We pride ourselves on being a company that celebrates diversity and enables customers all over the world to customize products for their special events. We have just been made aware of this incident in the last few hours. We understand how upsetting it would be for anyone to receive materials such as these the night before their wedding and we have immediately launched an internal investigation. Until we have had the opportunity to complete our investigation, we cannot comment further.”

18/01/18:
Gay couple sues Vistaprint for sending them ‘religious pamphlets not wedding programmes’

A gay couple is suing printing company Vistaprint after they allegedly received discriminatory flyers instead of their wedding programmes.

One of the statements said: ‘The supreme tempter is Satan who uses our weaknesses to lead us into sin. You must understand where temptations come from if you desire to change the way you live.’

18/01/18:
Vistaprint posts emotional open letter to LGBT community after gay couple sent ‘sin’ leaflets

Printing company Vistaprint has renewed support for same-sex marriage following a controversy where a gay couple was sent leaflets about sin on the eve of their wedding.

Vistaprint has now responded saying it has launched an investigation into the incident, has said it has reaffirmed its commitment to equality internally and is looking into ways to reiterate its support for same-sex marriage.

In a lengthy statement on the Vistaprint website, CEO Trynka Shineman and founder Robert Keane expressed “disappointment” at the incident.

They said: “To know that any customer could feel treated in such a way, especially during a time that should be filled with joy, is extremely disheartening. Imagine a customer who took the time to create something personal to mark this special day and instead, the day before their wedding, goes to open their wedding programs and finds materials that they feel had targeted them in a hurtful way. We have never been more disappointed to let a customer down.”

Adding: “Vistaprint in no way condones – and does not tolerate – discrimination against any of our customers based on their race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. We have encouraged members of the LGBTQ community to use our services to help celebrate their life events for many years, and have published thousands of wedding invitations, programs and other content for same sex couples.”

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 12:57 am UTC

Sableagle's news article wrote:But when they opened the box, according to court papers, they instead discovered Vistaprint shipped them “approximately 80 copies of a discriminatory pamphlet entitled Understanding Temptation: Fight the Good Fight of the Faith.”

My favorite part. Pray the gay away never works. Even counselors and psychiatrists reputable ones anyways... don't use... fighting the good fights of faiths to cure gayness anymore because it just doesn't work.

Some chilling figures about female domestic/sexual/physical abuses.

Spoiler:

UN Women wrote:Worldwide, almost 750 million women and girls alive today were married before their 18th birthday. Child marriage is more common in West and Central Africa, where over 4 in 10 girls were married before age 18, and about 1 in 7 were married or in union before age 15. Child marriage often results in early pregnancy and social isolation, interrupts schooling, limits the girl’s opportunities and increases her risk of experiencing domestic violence.

http://www.unwomen.org/en/what-we-do/ending-violence-against-women/facts-and-figures

And an article about wrongful uses of banning re: proms of lesbians:

Hayley Lack, 16, a senior at Foothill High School in Palo Cedro, California, wrote a Facebook post explaining that she and her girlfriend were nominated for prom queens “alongside two other straight couples,” but the administration is now saying couple nominations aren’t allowed. Hayley told Mic that students nominating couples for prom court is the norm at their school. “Now that a lesbian couple was nominated together, they have decided to say that it isn’t about couples at all, but instead individuals, which is just their way of discriminating,” she said. “All my girlfriend and I ask for is for anyone, regardless of gender, to be nominated under king or queen, whichever is chosen by popular vote.”

https://www.teenvogue.com/story/high-school-blocks-lesbian-couple-prom-queen-nomination

I'm sure if I would've come out as a lesbian at my rural Catholic high school they'd ban me and my mate from being Prom Queens because, like, "it's all about true equality." So... equality means I can't go to proms b/c of my sexual orientations or even like... have a female partner and be named Prom Queens even if... people like us and believe we look cute together? Travesties and injustices everywhere for teen girls and young adult women.

And... anyone know how to make URL links as plain texts w/the links in them like I've seen ppl do? I only know how to post the URL itself.

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:13 pm UTC

You live in a part of the world where birth control and abortions are widely available. If a girl over there has sex, she's probably going to get pregnant. So don't go mocking their marriages... So long as the boys are of similar age, otherwise fuck that shit.

Yablo · Postby **Yablo** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 6:34 pm UTC

Ginger wrote:
Sableagle's news article wrote:But when they opened the box, according to court papers, they instead discovered Vistaprint shipped them “approximately 80 copies of a discriminatory pamphlet entitled Understanding Temptation: Fight the Good Fight of the Faith.”

My favorite part. Pray the gay away never works. Even counselors and psychiatrists reputable ones anyways... don't use... fighting the good fights of faiths to cure gayness anymore because it just doesn't work.

The reason it doesn't work is because that's totally not what prayer is for. It's not for magically changing things. It's a request for guidance and strength. If a homosexual Christian prays for guidance regarding sexuality and doesn't walk away knowing that being straight is the only way God will accept them, that just might mean it's not actually a sin in the first place.

My favorite part of the article is that whoever decided this couple needed that pamphlet instead of the invitations they ordered also decided that they needed "approximately 80" of them. Because their point couldn't be made with one pamphlet. It's like adding 79 extra exclamation points to a statement. Vistaprint says it "in no way condones - and does not tolerate - discrimination" in any form. It should take no time at all for their investigation to determine exactly which employee was responsible. On top of firing the employee in a very public way and cooperating with any legal proceedings against him or her, they should also charge the employee for the 80 copies.

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:45 pm UTC

But can you pray the straight away?

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:54 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:You live in a part of the world where birth control and abortions are widely available. If a girl over there has sex, she's probably going to get pregnant. So don't go mocking their marriages... So long as the boys are of similar age, otherwise fuck that shit.

Well, technically I was only mocking child marriages where you're a teen girl getting married, isolate from school and socialization and whatnot.

Yablo wrote:The reason it doesn't work is because that's totally not what prayer is for. It's not for magically changing things. It's a request for guidance and strength.

That's how I view prayer too... and also: Some Christians think you can't even pray for yourself it got to be for someone else. So... anyways: If I wanna resist my lesbianism I don't need over eighty copies of a discriminatory pamphlet to do that. Yet God did say: "Men and men laying with each other are abominations..." dunno about lezzies though?

CorruptUser wrote:But can you pray the straight away?

I have tried and... men are too delicious and sexy for me to pray my straightness away ha-ha. <3

sardia · Postby **sardia** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:10 pm UTC

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... ts/551138/
Latest study shows that food deserts are symptoms, not the cause of unhealthy food consumption. The true cause is that poor people don't eat healthy as a rational choice.
For example, a poor couple moves to a rich neighborhood with good food choices. They continue to buy the same junk food as if they never left. People most affected by food deserts have cars and don't travel any further than rich people for groceries.
Healthy food is not meaningfully more expensive than unhealthy food.
This is a class issue. They aren't sure if it's an anti urban elite response, or a lack of time response.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:14 pm UTC

Good, healthy foods are too expensive. Fruits and vegetables, like I dunno cherries? WE GROW cherries in WA and it's STILL too expensive. Vegetables that aren't all mishandled and improperly cared for so you can buy fresh crunchy veggies? Don't exist in convenience stores. And any foods that market themselves as healthy just replace all the real sugars w/fake sugars... so. Poor peoples don't got much choices because healthy food is way too expensive. </3

natraj · Postby **natraj** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:23 pm UTC

fresh food also takes time to prepare, which is absolutely also a class divide issue -- if you have three jobs and kids to look on your own after vs. one regular workday daytime hours job and a nanny, even if you theoretically could buy raw "healthy food" ingredients for the same amount of money it takes to buy mcdonald's or kraft mac, you don't actually necessarily have the resources to turn that into food. i work in domestic service rn and several of my clients have had (in addition to me, the dog walker): housekeepers, nannies, people who buy their groceries, in multiple cases people who cook FOR them. even if we pretend that out-of-home job-working hours are equivalent for rich people and poor people (generally not true either when you factor in the need for multiple jobs and how much more time investment things like travel take when poor vs. wealthy) but EVEN if we pretend everyone is home for the same amount of time, people with more money still have more resources to actually turn food into healthy meals (whether cooking themselves or having other ppl cook for them)

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:27 pm UTC

EC: Ninjas

Healthy foods aren't always expensive. They just aren't instant.

speising · Postby **speising** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:31 pm UTC

it takes about 10 minutes to throw together a couple veggies and sear some meat. and the ingredients are cheaper that ready meals. that's my experience at least.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:33 pm UTC

Well, you know, the constant lecturing social services gives poor people to eat right when: It takes too long to make and you may be tired, too expensive, you may Wanna cook the vegetables yet what if you're so poor... you don't even have cooking stuffs so you Got To subsist on wrapped or instant prepared foods? It's classes issues all over the places. And the ingredients to make your own foods are not cheap at all in my experiences and it takes MORE THAN TEN Minutes to do what what's his faces said I bet?

Grop · Postby **Grop** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:39 pm UTC

I buy a lot of frozen vegetables (not frozen meals); they are super cheap and already peeled and cut into pieces. That really helps making fairly healthy meals very quick and without having to go and buy things often.

Of course you would need a freezer.

Dauric · Postby **Dauric** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 9:51 pm UTC

Healthy options have less preservatives. The more difficult it is to go to the grocery store (lack of personal or public transport, long distances or times required to complete the shopping task) the longer-term your grocery shopping has to account for. Fresh ingredients (especially veggies/salad ingredients) will last a week, on the outside maybe 2. "Junk" foods can last months reducing the requirement to make multiple trips.

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:44 pm UTC

Frozen vegies are often fresher than most "fresh" foods, and only have ice as a preservative.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:48 pm UTC

natraj wrote:i work in domestic service rn and several of my clients have had (in addition to me, the dog walker): housekeepers, nannies, people who buy their groceries, in multiple cases people who cook FOR them. even if we pretend that out-of-home job-working hours are equivalent for rich people and poor people (generally not true either when you factor in the need for multiple jobs and how much more time investment things like travel take when poor vs. wealthy) but EVEN if we pretend everyone is home for the same amount of time, people with more money still have more resources to actually turn food into healthy meals (whether cooking themselves or having other ppl cook for them)

You know natraj is onto something here. People take care of me by law, so I don't always have time, w/constant checkups, supervision and appts. to... cooks anything? And. That is a class issue. Rich peoples have more time, monies and available resources in general to prepare healthy meals options. Poor people... too busy trying to survive and being watched by laws and head doctors to care about spending so much time, monies and efforts when they could just buy microwaved foods and eat those... or w/evs.

CorruptUser · Postby **CorruptUser** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:52 pm UTC

I... don't get the impression that removing the CPS checkups and such will benefit poor people overall.

Ginger · Postby **Ginger** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 10:55 pm UTC

Well, he or she, natraj, nor I said anything about removing constant, c-constant and invasive CPS checking up on us and lecturing whoever about her heritage and trying to... take us away from our only loving caregiver. ANYWAYS: Just saying that rich people got more time to do what they wanna 'cause they aren't having their families monitored or their daughters monitored c-constantly by CPS and Rural Resources or whatever.

Quercus · Postby **Quercus** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:07 pm UTC

I suspect that mental health plays a big role here too. Poor mental health is associated with poverty, both as cause and effect, and from personal experience you sure as hell ain't cooking a healthy, cheap meal during acute anxiety or depression (if you have the luxury of time and a freezer you might manage to cook enough to last you in between feeling like shit, but many poor people don't have those luxuries). Same story with disability and chronic illness.

Skill is also a factor - cooking a healthy, cheap, tasty, quick meal is a very particular skill (it's taken me the best part of a decade to get to the point where I can reliably do that in less than an hour), and loads of people aren't going to have the resources to learn that skill. Richer people can get around a lack of skill by using easier to cook stuff (principally the more expensive cuts of meat) subscribing to blue apron, or just following recipes (part of the key to cooking cheaply is being able to cook with what you have, not what a recipe tells you you should have).

Yablo · Postby **Yablo** » Mon Jan 22, 2018 11:41 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:But can you pray the straight away?

If I pray for guidance and don't walk away knowing gay is the one true way, that tells me it's not a sin to be straight either.

Ginger wrote:Yet God did say: "Men and men laying with each other are abominations..." dunno about lezzies though?

All the proof I need to tell me God is male.

Ginger wrote:Good, healthy foods are too expensive. Fruits and vegetables, like I dunno cherries? WE GROW cherries in WA and it's STILL too expensive. Vegetables that aren't all mishandled and improperly cared for so you can buy fresh crunchy veggies? Don't exist in convenience stores. And any foods that market themselves as healthy just replace all the real sugars w/fake sugars... so. Poor peoples don't got much choices because healthy food is way too expensive. </3

I know that feeling all too well. Fresh produce is ridiculous in Alaska. A friend of mine used to order a box of random fruits and vegetables from some place in Washington every month, but she couldn't really afford it, so I started splitting it with her. It was probably a mistake, though, because it only reminded me what good produce is supposed to be like.

Who is online