´óÏó´«Ã½

What an accurate remark from Doug Carnegie saying the social security system is paying so much in benefits to alcoholics that they drink themselves to an earlier grave. Maybe that is the purpose?
In my experience they should be on the basic minimum benefit for a single person and not be eligible for DLA. Remember most alcoholics die of malnutrition as they don't need food. More drink less food.

Estates like these are a modernist variation on the theme of bread and circuses. Stuff the lower orders into them, throw them enough cash to drink themselves to death and the rest of society and its advantages are thereafter reserved for the "deserving rich" (and middle classes)

Having watched the entire series, I must admit I found it heart-breaking in places. There was some hope for a few but when they come to do "The Estate - 10 years on" I wonder how much will have changed?

I leave in a similar estate in Belfast and I see the same issues around alcoholism, teenage pregnancy, illiteracy, truancy, and joblessness. And the biggest problem of all is the difficulty in breaking the cycles of social deprivation.

From what I see, we do have a serious societal problem with alcohol that the Govt does not want to face. We also have a problem with illiteracy that our education system cannot deal with. Making some way headway with these issues would make lives in Ballysally and elsewhere a lot less hopeless.

I watched two episodes. Although it was depressing it seemed positively upbeat compared to the Scottish equivalent. Perhaps I missed the heroin abuse and court appearances?

One thing I noticed was the prevalence of tattoos. One young man whose girlfriend was, I think, aged 16 (what is the age of consent in Northern Ireland!) had the words "only God can judge me" tattooed on his neck . The very same words one of the men imprisoned over the death of Baby Peter had tattooed on his arm. Certain tattoos should be outlawed. People with facial tattoos should receive reduced benefits.

I watched one alcoholic who receives £200 a week in benefits begging. Beggars should be imprisoned. The man receives increased benefits because of certain needs arising out of his alcoholism. The alcoholic himself said that giving him extra money is not helping him. He questioned why alcoholics are not given something to do. He made a good point. I have read about three drug addicts who shared a house and who each received increased benefits (DLA). Additionally, each provided care to one of the others and thereby each qualified for another benefit (ICA). This sort of nonsense must be stopped.

Yes, The Estate does present us with considerable evidence of abandonment. But if someone is a social "write off" what is the cheapest way to prevent them from becoming a serious social nuisance? Recently, a senior police officer in England said that with some of the most troublesome families in his area it would be cheaper to have a policeman sitting on their sofa 24 hours a day!

I didn't watch it because I've had suspicions about it from the off - based on the way it was pitched by advertising.

The people featured in this estate run the risk of becoming modern day circus show freaks.

And that's really all they are. That's all the TV company was interested in - the modern equivalent of the freak show.

I suppose a good many respectable and industrious people live on this estate also? I wouldn't know; and I certainly didn't see any depicted in the adverts.

Commercial media (including the ´óÏó´«Ã½) makes me sick sometimes.

@newdwr54

You didn't watch it but you feel free to denounce it as a freak show. Seriously?

It wasn't the Jeremy Kyle show - it could have been - but it wasn't. It was sympathetic and some of the people in the show showed real courage dealing with a life that did not give them much of an even break. A family trying to cope with a child with spina bifida. Several older men trying (and mostly failing) to extricate themselves from alcoholism. A young single mother trying to get into college so she and her daughter can escape Ballysally. A illiterate and unemployed man trying to do something to keep kids off drink and out of jail by forming a flute band (perhaps not a perfect idea but at least he is trying).

Even those whose problems were in some part of their own making were dealt with without judgement.

I wonder how you think we should portray social deprivation on TV? Perhaps you would prefer that we all close our eyes and not face what is going on in some parts of community?

newlach (@ 4) and newdwr54 (@ 5) -

Welcome to the "new judgmentalism". Funny, but I thought it was "religious" people who were supposed to be the self-righteous and judgmental finger pointers (so we have been told ad nauseam for so long by the so-called "freethinkers").

Really... a couple of organisms complaining about how other organisms arrange their own atoms and molecules. What's the problem (materialistically speaking)? I mean, if evolution has made some people as they are, then that's just part of "the magic of reality", isn't it? Or do you have a problem with evolution?

And newlach - don't you think you are guilty of tattoophobia? Such prejudice and archaic thinking has no place in our secular society.

LSV

I believe that people who have tattoos on their necks, faces and hands are at a great disadvantage when seeking work. For this reason, I think it makes sense to imprison anyone who draws a tattoo on these parts of a person's body. If a person knows that his benefit will be cut if he has a tattoo in a proscribed part of his body he will be less likely to act irresponsibly. I am not opposed to the sort of tattoo that the Prime Minister's wife has.

In The Estate the young man with the tattoo "Only God can judge me" on his neck got a job interview with a leading fast food company. Interviewers and customers are put off by such tattoos. Maybe he can conceal it, but it was clearly visible in the programme.

On matters relating to human sexuality I would accept that many religious leaders are "judgemental finger pointers". I haven't heard Protestant church leaders say to much, however, on the appalling educational achievement of so many of our schoolchildren.

William made the point on Sunday Sequence that some Protestant secondary schools were doing much worse (was it 2X?) than comparable Catholic schools (schools with a similar number of pupils receiving free school meals). One guest made the preposterous assertion that Protestants were less likely to claim free school meals therefore the comparison was not valid!

I must admit I am naturally prejudiced against people with tattoos, or against men who feel the need to wear earrings, necklaces and bracelets. I don't have the latter beef with women, but I think that older, and therefore less sexually attractive women (let's be honest) who have tattoos look like pathetic has-been wretches.

But my opinion doesn't matter.

6. warrenz:

I didn't watch it because, as I explained, I didn't like the pitch made by the ´óÏó´«Ã½.

7. logica_sine_vanitate:

I've evolved to dislike men who wear chains or other silly adornments. I include uniforms, crowns, earrings, bracelets, chains, rings, religious garb, badges of rank, medals, academic regalia and wigs. Unfortunately I have to wear one of those things to make a living and another to make the wife happy. But I hate them.

This short commentary sums my feelings on it up very well:

Given that the word has already been used, I think it will be OK to use it again - to be honest, the prejudice here is a bit concerning.

Newdwr, do you mean to say that you dislike *all* adornments - you take no interest in, for example, your presentation, no interest in, perhaps, painting a room, brushing a doorstep... I think you'll see what I'm getting at. We all find our identity in something.

10. peterm2 wrote:

"We all find our identity in something."

Yes, and we all have our own particular prejudices.

I just don't like the look of middle-aged men who wear earrings. I'm sure this makes me some sort of phobic, but I'm just not sure what kind.

"Yes, and we all have our own prejudices."

Indeed, except that we usually think of prejudice as an undesirable thing; but you seem rather untroubled about this... as long as it’s aimed in a particular direction. Perhaps I’m misreading you, but if we were to substitute another social group, prejudice may not be so acceptable.

So, as far as I could research, Only God Can Judge Me is not a gang tattoo. I think a couple of posts here created an interesting demonstration of the purpose for that particular tattoo.

Ime, it doesn’t take a tattooed body to harm, nor a mark-free body to help.

Saying that, before you get one, just make sure you’re not getting a gang tattoo. I hear they really don’t like impersonators.