Chicken in the UK

noel emits

a wonderful wooden reason
I think this is what you are looking for:
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value=""></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>


Wild Horses
This is quite an interesting piece from my fave health and fitness blog. (I don't know if it works as a riposte to K Punk or not, because I'm not going to subject myself to reading him anymore).

It looks at the way in which our body types have changed and the archetypal representation of the poor person - as someone skinny - has all but disappeared.

The extract below is from one of his links - interesting stuff.

Twenty years ago, I parked at a supermarket, near where a poor family had just parked. I knew they were poor, because they looked like poor folks are supposed to look: Their clothes were worn (but mended and clean). Their car was an aging sedan. They were recycling a trunkful of aluminum cans. As I locked my car, they took the handful of change they got for the cans, and headed in ahead of me. There were three of them--man, woman, child--and all three were skinny. It's unusual to see that now. The new face of poverty is fat

One of the big reasons for this is, I guess, the easy availbility in receent years of food which has crap like corn syrup in and loads of other empty unhealthy calories. Possibily there's also a connection here with the decline of physical labour.


Tight but Polite
i agree you can eat very well very cheaply (especially if you willing to eat a lot of vegetables), but poorer families can't eat as other, middle class, families do without buying intensively farmed meat, and that's important; if you want to give your children what they see other children getting, like a roast on sunday, pork chops, bangers and mash, whatever, then you either have to pay a lot, or buy battery farmed stuff.

it's because the food we eat and offer to others is so wrapped up in feelings of social status that i'm not sure it's a good argument to say that poor families could just serve their kids vegetable bakes and there'd be no problem.
It's worth noting another of the weird inversions of the British class system here - my upbringing was pretty middle class and we tended to eat lots of pasta, vegetable bakes, bean stew, baked potatoes, vegetable soup, that sort of thing. Not many pork chops, steak bangers and mash - we'd have roast chicken at the weekend from time to time but then use the scraps for fried rice and boil the carcass for soup. I'm guessing a lot of other middle class families did similar sorts of stuff.

Similarly, Jamie Oliver's 'posh school dinners' were still more or less done on a budget of around 37p per child. If anything, they'd be considered 'aspirational' food...

Edit: sorry if that got a bit Four Yorkshiremen. I guess the point is that what constitutes providing for your family in a respectable manner is another socially constructed idea that manifests in slightly strange ways.

Double edit: on that topic,
Last edited:

Gabba Flamenco Crossover

High Sierra Skullfuck
I've got nothing to add to this thread. Except to say that every time I see the title, I think about the Sex Pistols performing 'Anarchy...' with Jonny Rotton wearing a big yellow rooster suit. Thats all.


It's a bit of a stretch, though. He'd have to sing it like "Chiiii-ken in the UK..." doesn't really fit the rhythm.