h1

Amanda Platell and the Daily Mail Strike again!

August 30, 2009

Where to start with Amanda Platell? We could go into the realm of personal insults, but I am better than she.

We have another of her ‘contributions‘ to journalism, on the Daily Mail website today. She is worried about a ‘boom in childbirth rates amongst immigrant teenage mothers on benefits- so good of her to be concerned about this, as noone else seems to have noticed it happening.

She starts by making a generalisation about ‘soaring immigration'(never mind the fact that immigration has fallen dramatically-we dont expect Ms.Platell to check her facts…its not like she is a journalist or anything), and we jump straight into a reference to a migrant baby boom. Again, no source, no reference- and then we see her expression of sadness that this baby boom is not from the ‘indigenous middle-class, hard-working, tax-paying population’- wow, an ethnic group I have never heard of… yet again… no stats to back up her assertion that our population is suffering a boom of these immigrants dropping kids all over the shop. Am not sure, whether as someone who is not a british national, she is expressing self loathing here, or just more misguided racist bollocks.

Then we jump straight to another assertion- these migrants dropping babies all over the shop are single. Wow, this is a coup for the Daily Mail- we have managed to get in immigration, single mothers, AND the discrimination faced by this marginalised ethnic group- the hard working INDIGENOUS daily mail readers! Hurrah!

Her key reference is a misrepresented, or wrongly understood statistic by the National Office of Statistics, about an decrease in age of first time mothers. .(yet another issue the Mail usually feels strongly about…these selfish bitch older mothers/childless women delaying their natural purpose till their ovaries have committed genocide on their eggs).

Apparently, the National Office of Statistics explanation, based entirely on their figures that actually many women are now putting babies over their careers(surely a cause for celebration to you and your colleagues…?)- is rubbish- because she knows noone who this applies to.

Well Amanda-if noone you know is doing this- then clearly the Office of National Statistics is wrong. They are probably skewing the numbers they collect, as part of a left wing conspiracy for immigrant lesbian single mothers to take over the world. Or maybe she is just getting on a bit, and her peers would have been included in statistics 20 years ago, if they were to count as ‘young’?

Apparently- the ONLY possible reason for this- is that its teenagers who are doing this. Well clearly that premise isnt flawed at all. The Office of National Statistics never once mention that these younger women are either teenagers, or single.

She launches into a bit of bile about how these teenagers are unmarried and dont have the fathers of these children around. Never mind that the statistics a) dont actually say a thing about teenagers b) there is nothing in these statistics that implies they are single c) the overwhelming majority of single parents who claim either benefits or tax credits actually brought children into familys headed by a couple d) the majority of single parents do work, (with the percentage increasing, as the age of the child goes up, and by the time you get to secondary school age, nearly ALL will work, or have worked at some point e)in the cases where the father isnt around- its statistically more likely to be the man who left, leaving someone else to care for the child- but fuck it. Who needs the facts to get in the way of a bit of hate mongering.

She asks how many live on benefits, and I am sure I could help her here. While her journalistic training might have been lacking in this area, I can helpfully tell her that these figures are published yearly, by the Department of Work and Pensions, and the Inland Revenue! THey show nothing like her claim about teenage immigrant mothers… so logic dictates that she is either a shit journalist who cant do research, or a woman who doesnt want the facts to get in the way of the hateful shit she is spreading.

You will have to bear with me a second= cos am just trying to get my head round where her article skipped from an ill informed rant about immigration, to her statement that Labour has made single motherhood a legitimate occupation… as far as I was aware-motherhood was not an occupation you got into by yourself- you generally do need a bit of sperm to help- which definitely has to come from a man, and statistically speaking, the ‘choice’ to be a single mother, is less likely to have been made by the mother, and a damn sight more likely to have been made by the father leaving…. I recall an interview with one of the Fathers 4 Justice campaigners, on the back of the situation where David Blunkett was involved in a paternity scare- where she sat and told the campaigner that fatherhood was not as important as motherhood, and fathers were replacable, with biological imperitive meaning little.

So if this woman doesnt value fatherhood, and doesnt value motherhood- then how precisely would she like the children of the country to be raised?? And if being single is not legitimate, what precisely are women with children to do when left by their partners- sell, abandon, or kill their children?

She asks ‘how many immigrant mums have contributed anything to this country before landing us with another child to educate in our already struggling schools?’- sorry do you mean the immigrant single mums you just invented for the purpose of this article Amanda?

Then links it to the dubious statistic that one in four mothers is born from overseas. Again a statistic she fails to reference. I am unsure how she links this into the premise of her argument- unless she is stating that ALL of those mothers are single mothers on benefits- which surprises me as it is a) it is demonstrably false, and b) she is er…an immigrant.  Have you declared your writing to the social Ms.Platell?

Or is it just the brown ones we need to worry about- not the Australians.

She then links these fictional mothers into the failing school system- and blames them for the problems faced by teachers across London. Many of whom are er….single mothers, often jonny foreigner single mothers.

Apparently she is concerned that the very core of Britishness is threatened. Well Miss Platell, as an Australian, you may not understand, but the brand of British you espouse isnt britishness, its racism, its homophobia, and its mysogyny. Not something I want preserved thank you very much. How dare you insult my country, by stating that those are our national characteristics. The only immigrant I can see damaging the perception of Britishness is you.

I am very concerned about it, but political correctness means every time someone tackles racist, mysogynistic, misandrist, homophobic views like yours, the person expressing them, starts whining that they are the indigenous white middle class hardworking taxpaying population and they are being abused and marginalised. Nothing like a ‘minority’ whinging about discrimination without foundation. Its political correctness gawn mad I say!

She ends her little piece with a question about why we need immigration to keep Britain booming- comparing it to the 5 million brits who have never worked. Well Amanda, you might want to check your statistics, but the majority of these people are er…white, british, and in households headed by two parents…and I dont think immigration, or single parents, are the reason they have never worked. I dont think they are somehow going to get off their arses, if Daily Mail gets its way, and rounds up all the single parents, and immigrants-and blows them to smithereens.

She cites the the total for ALL benefits paid, including all tax credits(paid to families, disabled people, pensioners) who work, all disability benefits, all state pensions, child benefit as the cost of unemployment benefits to the hardworking taxpayer(many of whom receive the benefits they are supposed to be angry about).

She cites 100billion as being the cost of housing benefit in the UK- yet ignores the fact that a high proportion of this is paid in the South East to familes(both single parent and two parent) who DO work, because rents have inflated to the point, where unless you are bringing home 2k a month, you cant actually afford to pay your rent in this region. THis inflation wasnt caused by immigration, or by any of the other groups she cares to blame- she may need to do some reading on the reasons behind the property bubble. I can recommend a couple of very interesting economists, and economic historians- who can enlighten her.

She then launches into an attack on some X Factor contestant, about whom she knows nothing- because she dared to say she liked being a single mum. She describes a woman, who she knows nothing about, who has supported her child since she was 17- as selfish, and even though this particular single mother actually lives in her extended family, and not in some council house on a sink estate. The only objectionable thing I can see that has brought about this level of ire, is that she is single- has every relationship you have ever had worked out Ms.Platell? Or is the ending of a relationship only a heinous crime if there is a child involved?

Just so we are clear Ms.Platell- I LOVE being a single mother. Compared to being in a marriage where two people are destroying each other, in full view of their child- its a bloody godsend. I wrote about it earlier in this blog.

Am sorry if this response to her article is rambling- its just hard to follow the incoherency of a journalist  trying desperately to link several false premises, to create a coherent argument to support her prejudices.

I, like Amanda, worry about people who contribute nothing but poison to British Society, and for that reason- I wish she would stop writing. At least until she has done a course in er…journalism.

Advertisements

4 comments

  1. Fucking brilliant. I sometimes wonder how articles like this get past an editor… then I realise the editor of The Fail probably really liked this.


  2. […] Amanda Platell […]


  3. Oh and before you knock AP’s journalistic skills ‘noone ‘ is two words NO ONE !


    • Am a blogger with a tendency to typo. What relation does that have to the hate mongering Amanda Platell specialises in. Calling what she does ‘journalism’ doesn’t make it so. The ‘oh and’ indicates your comment followed on from something else- have I missed something?



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: