Why would Zoe Williams not question Jack calling foster children feral?
I don't get it.
Are Jack and Zoe friends/do they move in the same circles?
This piece is an example of very lazy journalism. I don't even think you can call it journalism. It's also very out of touch with the issues society is currently facing as Jack is doing quite well for herself now isn't she..?
She's not on benefits, her child doesn't need FSM and she privately rents a large house in an expensive area. Who does she speak for/who does she represent/does she honestly believe she is the voice of those currently in poverty? What good does this article achieve? She is worlds away from having to receive money from the soul destroying system that is Universal Credit. I don't want to hear her ranty opinions on something she knows absolutely nothing about. She doesn't need the FSM service and she was never on UC, it didn't exist when she was allegedly poor. The benefits system has changed a lot over the last 20 years and for the worst. It's incomparable.
A better article would have been to run a piece where those in actual poverty are interviewed. It's not difficult to find people in that situation and it's important they are given a voice.
I struggled last year and my neighbours struggle as we live in a deprived part of the country. This article does nothing for us/them. Jack Monroe speaks for no one but herself. I know she thinks she's the Patron Saint of the Poors but she's not and her Poverty Cosplay is starting to really anger me.
Sorry for ranting on. Jack normally winds me up anyway but this article is something else. It's quite disconcerting, sinister almost.