Post: #1

This is why fat shaming needs to go mainstream. The cost of these fuckers to each and every one of us productive citizens is just simply outrageous.

UK: Mother and daughter weigh a total of 43 stone and get £34k ($50k) a year handouts, but refuse to diet.

Telegraph article

A mother and daughter who get £34,000 a year in handouts because they are too fat to work say they'd rather be happy and on benefits than depressed and thin.

Janice and Amber Manzur weigh a total of 43 stone and are so overweight they have to use mobility scooters to get around.



But both women refuse to diet and mother-of-two Ms Manzur, 44, insists: "I'd rather my daughter live life on benefits being fat and happy than depressed and thin."

Ms Manzur lives in a three-bedroom house that has been customised by the council to accommodate her disability and drives a Fiat Quibo disability car worth around £15,000.

Ms Manzur said: "There's no point in dieting, it doesn't make a difference."I've always been big and I'm too fat to work, so I have a genuine disability. I should be miserable but I'm happy. I know this is the way I'm meant to be.

"I can't beat myself up that Amber is fat too.

"It's just the way we are built and I'll never encourage her to diet as it made me so unhappy.

"Amber has never stepped foot in the gym and never will.

"It won't change her weight as she is born to be fat."

Ms Manzur admits she eats junk food or ready-made meals because it said: "It costs £1 for a pasta ready meal, so why bother spending money on ingredients to cook?"

I do like fruit, but it's expensive. It's £1.50 for a punnet of grapes. A chocolate bar costs 50p and I can get a six-pack of crisps for £1, so I buy those instead.

"Convenience food is cheaper. I buy paper plates too, so I don't have to wash up."



Ms Manzur's obesity comes with a string of chronic health problems, many of them weight-related.They include oedema (swellings caused by a build-up of fluid) diabetes, high blood pressure, arthritis, high cholesterol and the heart condition angina.

Her daughter Miss Manzur has diabetes, which is often linked to obesity.

Ms Manzur said: "I hate to think Amber will inherit the other conditions I have. But we're happy accepting being overweight and living this lifestyle."The two women, from Kirkcaldy, Fife, jointly receive close to £33,600 benefits a year. That's the equivalent of a £46,000 salary before tax.
Mother-of-one Ms Manzur has not worked for more than two years, losing her last job in security after breaking a leg.

She gets £400 Employment and Support Allowance a month and £430 to cover the rent on her flat.

Miss Manzur also gets disability allowance because she is obese and has recurring problems with her leg.

She said: "People shouldn't judge me or my mum for how big we are because it's in our genes.

"I've never been on a diet or to a gym and I don't even eat that much junk food. It's my natural build to be this big and I'm happy to not work anymore. We can't help it, so why bother fighting it?"

Ms Manzur said she has tried dieting in the past but could never shift weight — and once even asked about gastric surgery.

She said: "I went to hospital for a consultation, but the dietician told me I was too fat for surgery.

"That was the moment I decided to stop dieting. It was such a relief. As far as I'm concerned it was evidence that I'm meant to be this way. I feel free."
Ms Manzur started claiming benefits in 2006 when she left her job as a manager in a call centre because of weight-related health problems.
She was forced to argue her case for disability pay after a tribunal claimed if she wanted to work she could lose weight.

Ms Manzur won and now gets £620 Employment and Support Allowance and £320 Disability Living Allowance a month.



She said: "I paid into the tax system for over ten years and I deserve the money I get.

"There is no point me dieting, it doesn't make a difference.

"It's not I don't care about the health risks. It's just the way I am and I'm simply too fat to work."

Miss Manzur's council-paid flat has been modified to cater for her disability. It has no stairs, a low front door so she can drive her disability scooter inside and a bath with a seat for easy access.

The two women are able to spend much of their free time together. Janice said: "We live less than a mile apart. I have the car, so I drive round to her or pick her up. We spend a lot of time together and often go out on our matching mobility scooters.

"I watch telly a lot and I also like reading and I recently brought a Kindle with my benefits."

Ms Manzur said her and her daughter have been the victims of cruel comments from strangers.

She said: "We attract quite a bit of attention when we pop to the shops on our matching scooters.

"A man once compared us to a herd of elephants. Another rolled down his car window, called us "fatsos" and said, 'Get off and walk'. We just ignore them. We can't change the way we were born."

Post: #2

And nowhere in the article would it mention how removing their benefits would impact their lifestyle.

Quote:We can't change the way we were born

A society which allows fat people to claim disability without forcing them to go down another path is a weak society and deserves everything it gets.

Post: #3

i hate this world

Post: #4

The real question is...

Are you mad at these women?

So many people, in my experience far more women than men, get mad at the fat slobs here. And therein lies the problem. Women (and stupid betaboys) would rather live in a world with welfare handouts and hate on people who use it than actually change the system.

Don't get me wrong, they're fun to bash and hate on, make jokes about.

Post: #5

Heh. Guess the Telegraph is learning from the Daily Mail on how to troll for clicks.
No doubt there are many fat people who shouldn't be on benefits, but I'm fairly certain that most of the quotes in the article were entirely made up, and that the point of the writing style is to stir up outrage and get attention/page views.
Absent from the article is any discussion of policy or political issues and possible/realistic solutions.

Post: #6

Let's hear how much of this my global buddies here can understand

Post: #7

http://chronicprocrastination.org

Not sure if this is serious or not...

Post: #8

I love how the terminology at RVF gets more refined and more entertaining every day Here are just a few of the brilliant terms forged in the fires of our wonderful forum:

Whales
Landwhales
Putrid Landwhale
Trench monsters
Kaijus

Does anyone remember any others?

Post: #9

Sound like Denmark to me, but DAMN!

Post: #10

They look like two Hodors or godzillas, cave trolls and "Even Bill Gates can't pay for the amount of liposuction they need" - taken from some random internet troll.

Post: #11

Class 5 kajius

Post: #12

I have to say that 'whales' as a term for fat people has been around a lot longer than the forum. It might just be an English saying. The other words are definitely good though.

Post: #13

(01-15-2015 11:25 AM)heavy Wrote:  The real question is...

Are you mad at these women?

So many people, in my experience far more women than men, get mad at the fat slobs here. And therein lies the problem. Women (and stupid betaboys) would rather live in a world with welfare handouts and hate on people who use it than actually change the system.

Don't get me wrong, they're fun to bash and hate on, make jokes about.

The problem isn't honest taxpayers being angry at those who take advantage of a system that's meant to help the genuinely ill and poor.

The problem is that British are part of the IWC, which has pretty much banned whale-hunting.

If these gentle creatures had to constantly flee from predators they wouldn't be so damn heavy!

Post: #14

Hooooooooolyyy shit.

Post: #15

(01-15-2015 11:14 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  She said: "People shouldn't judge me or my mum for how big we are because it's in our genes.

   

Post: #16

(01-15-2015 12:37 PM)Hardy Daytona Wrote:  

(01-15-2015 11:14 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  She said: "People shouldn't judge me or my mum for how big we are because it's in our genes.

well, she means laziness genes

Post: #17

The only saving grace is that these people will die at a fraction of the age they should live to.

Post: #18

(01-15-2015 11:35 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  http://chronicprocrastination.org

Not sure if this is serious or not...

I'll try and get round to reading that later.

Post: #19

I would laugh at European ridiculousness but I know the US isn't far behind. On the bright side it might help the welfare state collapse sooner if they give all the obese people massive benefits.

Post: #20

The one thing that stuck out to me was her running off the numbers of junk food compared to better foods, like fruit.

She does have a point.

It's much cheaper to eat shitty stuff. I hate taxes but the costs of taking care of these "disability" claims should be paid for by a consumption tax on all of these fast food products that do more harm than good.

If the gov does the same with smoking, I don't see why they don't do the same with these types of foods.

Giving these people money to buy food is like giving crack addicts money. I bet when factoring in medical expenses she surpasses the 50k mark. Diabetes is inevitable with these people. Crazy.

Post: #21

(01-15-2015 11:27 AM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  Heh. Guess the Telegraph is learning from the Daily Mail on how to troll for clicks.

This.

The Telegraph and the Guardian used to be highbrow-ish quality newspapers that took themselves seriously.

Their business model is now based on trolling and clickbait, exactly as you say.

And yes, it's because the online part of the Daily Mail is one of the most successful newspapers in the world, entirely because they know what brings in traffic - sensationalist stories, celebrity diets, rage profiteering, cute animals, royal babies, and general bullshit.

Who is their audience? Who emails this stuff to their friends and posts it on Facebook? Who reads this garbage?



Women do.

And they're the best audience for a newspaper to have, because advertisers love women. They buy tons more crap than men do.

Old media is dying. The only papers selling over a million copies a day in the UK now are The Sun (tits, football, and celebrity sex) and the Daily Mail.

The Telegraph only reaches half a million people a day in printed form. The Guardian shifts fewer than 200,000 copies - and that's artificially boosted by the public sector buying it in bulk.



Frankly, Mr and Mrs UK punter are running out of fucks to give about printed news.

So, clickbait it is. And idiots with journalism degrees willing to work as interns for free in the hope of landing a job that's rapidly going the way of the professional typist or telephone switchboard operator. And stuff nicked from the internet. And spelling mistakes because they can no longer afford decent sub editors.

The future of the newspaper biz looks a lot like Idiocracy.



I'm not being snobbish here. I love tits, football, and wacky clickbait stories as much as most folks do. But it's sad that newspapers that used to be for grown-ups are forced to go down that path.

It's like seeing a formerly hot woman, now in her 40's and having splattered against the Wall, desperately tarting herself up like a teenager in the hopes of wringing out a few more precious drops of attention before her pussy goes as dry and dusty as Tutankhamun's tomb - never again to be seen by men's eyes unless they're graverobbers or archaeologists.

That said, regarding the two manatees above, would not bang.

Post: #22

(01-15-2015 11:25 AM)heavy Wrote:  So many people, in my experience far more women than men, get mad at the fat slobs here. And therein lies the problem. Women (and stupid betaboys) would rather live in a world with welfare handouts and hate on people who use it than actually change the system.

The problem is that the system cannot be constitutionally changed. A pure democracy unitary state tends towards this, since competition for power involves competing for votes, including stealing from some people and giving the loot to others to gain their votes.

The UK previously had a defence against this: it wasn't a pure democracy. It had a hereditary House of Lords with equal power to the democratic House of Commons. And as you'd expect: the Lords tended to block welfare initiatives from the Commons. Had the Monarch not kept siding with democracy, the hereditary House of Lords might still be intact.

There is, however, no way for the constitutional changes to be reversed.

(01-15-2015 01:18 PM)TheFinalEpic Wrote:  The only saving grace is that these people will die at a fraction of the age they should live to.

Lol maybe that's the idea. Can't stop them claiming welfare, so encourage them to eat as much of the most unhealthy food they possible can. Hell, why not subsidize their alcohol and cigarettes too, or hard drugs even? The sooner they die the sooner they stop drawing their share of the loot.

Post: #23

I'm sorry to have to make you do this, but it's important. Look at these face. Look closely.
   
   
These are the faces of pain and misery. Self inflicted pain and misery. They are carrying the equivalent of extra humans in their clothes and it is killing them emotionally, and physically.

In most places in the world this type of vehicle is used to have fun in the great outdoors. It's a symbol of freedom, and excitement. With her it's a reminder of how she has ruined her life. Look at her face!
   
Whenever I got on a four wheeler I felt exhilaration. Even go carts excite me. What you are seeing is the dead. Dead eyes, dead souls, trapped in purgatory. This is the face of the enemy. Dour faces with lifeless eyes, and sausage fingers. They are trying to beat us down and accept life on their level. Enjoy a grand life my brothers! Death To Fatties!

Post: #24

"Happy and on benefits"

They look happy!

Post: #25

(01-15-2015 01:18 PM)TheFinalEpic Wrote:  The only saving grace is that these people will die at a fraction of the age they should live to.

Modern medicine makes miracles..
People living more than 90 years are no more something "strange" or unusual...