UK Poverty 2025

Although the UK is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, "current levels of poverty are around 50% higher than in the 1970s" (via). According to the report "UK Poverty 2025", more than 1 in 5 (i.e. 21% or 14.3 million people) were in poverty in 2022/23. A closer look shows that 2 in every 20 adults but 3 in every 10 children lived in poverty. 4 in 10 of those in poverty (6 million people) were in very deep poverty defined by an income far below the poverty line. The poorest families had an average income of 57% below the poverty line. 

Around 3.8 million people (including one million children) experienced destitution, the deepest form of poverty where the most basic needs such as staying warm, dry, clean and fed cannot be met. These disturbing figures have more than doubled between 2017 and 2022. 

There are specific groups that are particularly vulnerable, such as children in general or - even more - larger families with three or more children or children in lone-parent families  (45% of children in large families and 44% of children in lone-parent families were in poverty). Minority ethnic groups are also susceptible to poverty. 56% of people in Bangladeshi and 49% in Pakistani households lived in poverty. The intersection of ethnicity and childhood in numbers means that 67% of children in Bangladeshi and 61% of children in Pakistani households were affected by poverty. 4 in 10 people (40%) in Black British households were in poverty. 

Ethnicity is not the only minoritiy status that is related to poverty. The poverty rate (30%) for disabled people, just to mention one example, was 10 percentage points higher than the rate for people without disabilities. A distinction of disabilities is of interest since it shows that it matters wether one has a limiting mental condition (50% poverty rate) or a physical type (29% poverty rate) of disability (via).

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation points out the importance of tackling poverty stigma in order to fight poverty:

We believe that poverty and poverty stigma are inextricably entangled social problems that reinforce and feed each other. 

We believe that poverty and poverty stigma need to be tackled simultaneously. Anti-poverty work needs to be anti-stigma work at its roots and in every branch of collective action towards ending poverty in the UK. 

We believe that designing stigma out of systems of welfare and support is integral to the fight for economic justice and economic security (Cooke, 2023). 

We believe that stigma is a powerful glue that holds poverty in place, enabling and exacerbating inequalities of wealth, health and opportunity. Loosening the grip of stigma is a key lever of wider progressive social change. 

Effective action on poverty stigma needs to be intersectional, collective and participatory. (via)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
photograph by Rob Brenner (copyright by R. Brenner) via

Huey P. Newton: "sometimes our first instinct is to want to hit a homosexual in the mouth, and want a woman to be quiet."

"We want to hit a homosexual in the mouth because we are afraid that we might be homosexual; and we want to hit the woman or shut her up because we are afraid that she might castrate us, or take the nuts that we might not have." Here is the full speech held by Huey P. Newton, co-founder of the Black Panthers, at a Black Panther rally in New York City on 15th of August 1970.

During the past few years strong movements have developed among women and among homosexuals seeking their liberation. There has been some uncertainty about how to relate to these movements. 

Whatever your personal opinions and your insecurities about homosexuality and the various liberation movements among homosexuals and women (and I speak of the homosexuals and women as oppressed groups), we should try to unite with them in a revolutionary fashion. 

I say ”whatever your insecurities are” because as we very well know, sometimes our first instinct is to want to hit a homosexual in the mouth, and want a woman to be quiet. We want to hit a homosexual in the mouth because we are afraid that we might be homosexual; and we want to hit the women or shut her up because we are afraid that she might castrate us, or take the nuts that we might not have to start with. 

We must gain security in ourselves and therefore have respect and feelings for all oppressed people. We must not use the racist attitude that the white racists use against our people because they are Black and poor. Many times the poorest white person is the most racist because he is afraid that he might lose something, or discover something that he does not have. So you’re some kind of a threat to him. This kind of psychology is in operation when we view oppressed people and we are angry with them because of their particular kind of behavior, or their particular kind of deviation from the established norm. 

Remember, we have not established a revolutionary value system; we are only in the process of establishing it. I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women’s right to be free. We have not said much about the homosexual at all, but we must relate to the homosexual movement because it is a real thing. And I know through reading, and through my life experience and observations that homosexuals are not given freedom and liberty by anyone in the society. They might be the most oppressed people in the society. 

And what made them homosexual? Perhaps it’s a phenomenon that I don’t understand entirely. Some people say that it is the decadence of capitalism. I don’t know if that is the case; I rather doubt it. But whatever the case is, we know that homosexuality is a fact that exists, and we must understand it in its purest form: that is, a person should have the freedom to use his body in whatever way he wants. 

That is not endorsing things in homosexuality that we wouldn’t view as revolutionary. But there is nothing to say that a homosexual cannot also be a revolutionary. And maybe I’m now injecting some of my prejudice by saying that “even a homosexual can be a revolutionary.” Quite the contrary, maybe a homosexual could be the most revolutionary. 

When we have revolutionary conferences, rallies, and demonstrations, there should be full participation of the gay liberation movement and the women’s liberation movement. Some groups might be more revolutionary than others. We should not use the actions of a few to say that they are all reactionary or counter-revolutionary, because they are not. 

We should deal with the factions just as we deal with any other group or party that claims to be revolutionary. We should try to judge, somehow, whether they are operating in a sincere revolutionary fashion and from a really oppressed situation. (And we will grant that if they are women they are probably oppressed.) If they do things that are unrevolutionary or counter-revolutionary, then criticize that action. 

If we feel that the group in spirit means to be revolutionary in practice, but they make mistakes in interpretation of the revolutionary philosophy, or they do not understand the dialectics of the social forces in operation, we should criticize that and not criticize them because they are women trying to be free. And the same is true for homosexuals. We should never say a whole movement is dishonest when in fact they are trying to be honest. They are just making honest mistakes. Friends are allowed to make mistakes. The enemy is not allowed to make mistakes because his whole existence is a mistake, and we suffer from it. But the women’s liberation front and gay liberation front are our friends, they are our potential allies, and we need as many allies as possible.  

We should be willing to discuss the insecurities that many people have about homosexuality. When I say “insecurities,” I mean the fear that they are some kind of threat to our manhood. I can understand this fear. Because of the long conditioning process which builds insecurity in the American male, homosexuality might produce certain hang-ups in us. I have hang-ups myself about male homosexuality. But on the other hand, I have no hang-up about female homosexuality. And that is a phenomenon in itself. I think it is probably because male homosexuality is a threat to me and female homosexuality is not. 

We should be careful about using those terms that might turn our friends off. The terms “faggot” and “punk” should be deleted from our vocabulary, and especially we should not attach names normally designed for homosexuals to men who are enemies of the people, such as [Richard] Nixon or [John] Mitchell. Homosexuals are not enemies of the people. 

We should try to form a working coalition with the gay liberation and women’s liberation groups. We must always handle social forces in the most appropriate manner. And this is really a significant part of the population, both women, and the growing number of homosexuals that we have to deal with. 

ALL POWER TO THE PEOPLE!

Huey P. Newton, co-founder of the Black Panthers

- - - - - -
photographs via and via

Sacrificing Oneself for the Poor Victim

“It is more satisfying to sacrifice oneself for the poor victim than to enable the other to overcome their victim status and perhaps become even more succesful than ourselves.” 

Slavoj Žižek, Living in the End Times

photograph via

Quoting Elias Canetti

"There is nothing more base than a certain loathing for the oppressed that goes to great lengths to justify their downtrodden state by pointing to their shortcomings. Not even great and lofty philosophers are entirely free of this failing."
Elias Canetti, The Agony of Flies: Notes and Notations



photograph via

Photographing Freaks: Diane Arbus

Diane Arbus (1923-1971) was a US-American photographer known for capturing "the grand mélange of humanity" (via), for photographing "people on the fringes of society" (via). Since she became famous, her gaze has been celebrated and criticised: sideshow performers, nudists, dwarfs, transgender sex workers were the subjects she felt drawn to.



"But Arbus’s images in “Untitled” are, at first glance, unsettling. Why did she choose to train her lens repeatedly on people who were so vulnerable? There’s baggage to the work, knowing that she often proclaimed her love for photographing “freaks”—a caustic word to use today, though Arbus seemed to do so with affection. Critic Susan Sontag famously railed against Arbus’s practice in her 1977 collection of essays, On Photography, saying her work was “based on distance, on privilege, on a feeling that what the viewer is asked to look at is really other.”
“Othering” is a term we are especially cautious about today. Arbus did come from privilege—she was the middle child in a well-to-do Manhattan family that earned its wealth from her grandfather’s luxury department store. “One of the things I felt I suffered from as a kid was I never felt adversity,” Arbus herself once said. She sought out people with unusual stories, and titled them as such: Mexican Dwarf in his Hotel Room, N.Y.C 1970, and A Jewish Giant at Home with his Parents, in the Bronx, N.Y., 1970. Even in her portraits of people who were not marginalized, such as her widely known picture of twin girls, Identical twins, Roselle, N.J. (1966), she emphasized their strangeness. (...)
It wasn’t until a 2003 retrospective of Arbus’s work that many of her images, letters, and journal entries were made public. They clarified that she was empathetic, not voyeuristic, a word that continues to trail her legacy. (...)
Though there is always a power hierarchy between photographer and subject—a photographer is seeking honesty and vulnerability when the camera is raised—there is a difference between a photographer who takes the shot and leaves, and one who stays. Arbus was one to stay, giving her time and respect, and building a rapport with the people she photographed. She met Eddie Carmel, the Jewish giant, a decade before she snapped the now-famous image of him and his parents; she was invited to celebrate the birthday of a prostitute whom she photographed in bed, in front of a cake. And, late in her life, she returned to the residences of “Untitled” again and again, taking portraits that suggested friendship and closeness between her and her subjects."
Jacqui Palumbo

- - - - - - -
photograph by Diane Arbus via

Cages, the Myopic Focus and the Macroscopic View

Cages. Consider a bird cage. If you look very closely at just one wire in the cage, you cannot see the other wires. If your conception of what is before you is determined by this myopic focus, you could look at that one wire, up and down the length of it, and be unable to see why a bird could not just fly around the wire any time it wanted to go somewhere. Furthermore, even if, one day at a time, you myopically inspected each wire, you still could not see why a bird would have trouble going past the wires to get anywhere.



It is only when you step back, stop looking at the wires one by one, microscopically, and take a macroscopic view of the whole cage, that you can see why the bird does not go anywhere; and then you will see it in a moment. It will require no great subtlety of mental powers. It is perfectly obvious that the bird is surrounded by a network of systematically related barriers, no one of which would be the least hindrance to its flight, but which, by their relations to each other, are as confining as the solid walls of a dungeon.
Frye, 1983:23

- - - - - - - - - -
- Frye, M. (1983). The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory. Crossing Press.
- photograph (Trentham Racecourse, Upper Hutt, 1970) by Ans Westra via

Desmond Tutu's Letter to Aung San Suu Kyi

Aung San Suu Kyi, Nobel Peace Prize laureate (1991) and State Counsellor became a "democracy icon who fell from grace". Not only did she not speak out against the genocide taking place in Myanmar. She described the generals in her cabinet as "rather sweet" (via), denied the ethnic cleansing taking place, said the military would operate according to the rule of law (via) and that she had no idea why Muslims were fleeing the country (via).

"I don't think there is ethnic cleansing going on. I think ethnic cleansing is too strong an expression to use for what is happening. I think there is a lot of hostility there - it is Muslims killing Muslims as well, if they think they are co-operating with the authorities." Aung San Suu Kyi

Meanwhile, about 400 villages have been wiped off the map (80% of them in the first three weeks of the military campaign), women are tied to trees and gang-raped, children are assaulted and forced back inside burning houses, people tortured (via), over 725.000 people have been forced to flee to Bangladesh since 25 August 2017 (via and via). In the month after the violence broke out, at least 6.700 Rohingya were killed, at least 730 of them were children under the age of five (via).

There was a discussion whether Aung San Suu Kyi would be stripped of the Nobel Peace Prize and it was decided that she could keep it as the rules did not allow for it to be withdrawn (via). However, Canadian MPs voted to strip her of her honourary citizenship (via), she was stripped of her Freedom of Edinburgh reward, Oxford, Glasgow and Newcastle revoked all honourary awards, Sir Bob Geldof called Aung San Suu Kyi a murderer (via), she lost the Freedom of Paris award, Amnesty International's "Ambassador of Conscience Award" (via), Unison's honourary membership, Sheffield's award, Dublin's award, the honourary presidency of the London School of Economics student union, her name was deleted from an exhibition at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights, the City of London and the University of Bristol expressed their concerns (via)



My dear Aung San Su Kyi

I am now elderly, decrepit and formally retired, but breaking my vow to remain silent on public affairs out of profound sadness about the plight of the Muslim minority in your country, the Rohingya.

In my heart you are a dearly beloved younger sister. For years I had a photograph of you on my desk to remind me of the injustice and sacrifice you endured out of your love and commitment for Myanmar's people. You symbolised righteousness. In 2010 we rejoiced at your freedom from house arrest, and in 2012 we celebrated your election as leader of the opposition.

Your emergence into public life allayed our concerns about violence being perpetrated against members of the Rohingya. But what some have called 'ethnic cleansing' and others 'a slow genocide' has persisted – and recently accelerated. The images we are seeing of the suffering of the Rohingya fill us with pain and dread.

We know that you know that human beings may look and worship differently – and some may have greater firepower than others – but none are superior and none inferior; that when you scratch the surface we are all the same, members of one family, the human family; that there are no natural differences between Buddhists and Muslims; and that whether we are Jews or Hindus, Christians or atheists, we are born to love, without prejudice. Discrimination doesn't come naturally; it is taught.

My dear sister: If the political price of your ascension to the highest office in Myanmar is your silence, the price is surely too steep. A country that is not at peace with itself, that fails to acknowledge and protect the dignity and worth of all its people, is not a free country.

It is incongruous for a symbol of righteousness to lead such a country; it is adding to our pain.

As we witness the unfolding horror we pray for you to be courageous and resilient again. We pray for you to speak out for justice, human rights and the unity of your people. We pray for you to intervene in the escalating crisis and guide your people back towards the path of righteousness again.

God bless you.

Love

Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu

Hermanus, South Africa
September 2017

- - - - - - - -
photograph by Sumaya Hisham via

Sami. A Long History of Discrimination.

The Sami, indigenous people living in Arctic areas of Sweden, Finland, Norway and the Kola peninsula of Russia, are believed to have been living in northern Scandinavia since at least 11.000 BCE. When the Vikings arrived in the 8th century, Sami were driven further north where they were able to keep their independence and nomadic lifestyles ranging from reindeer herders to fishermen and fur trappers. Starting with the 14th century, Sweden and Norway showed interest in the riches of Sami lands and turned them into "Sami tax lands" and "tax mountains". Sami had to pay taxes if they wanted to stay where they were. In other words, they were forced to leave their lifestyles and to find new occupations (via and via).



In the 17th century, Sweden discoverd the first silver deposit and forced Sami to transport the ore as using reindeer was the only way of transportation. Wages were so low that they caused a crisis, forcing Sami to turn to begging or fleeing either further north in Sweden or to Norway. Their land was colonised more and more. In the 18th century, Sami lost any inheritance right in the Sami tax lands (via).
In the 19th century, Sami were relocated, settlers encouraged to move northwards (by promising a 15-year exemption from taxes while creating a tax burden for Sami), and Sami lands sold to wealthy landowners by the governments. Norway outlawed the usage of "primitive and backward" Sami languages and customs, children were taught in the Norwegian language only, converted to Christianity and given Christian names. The situation in Sweden was similar, so-called Lappmark priests were appointed and Sami had to attend church.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Norway passed a law that fertile land owned by Sami was to be given up to the government. At that time, Sami people and culture were erased through mass sterilisation and assimilation. In Sweden, Sami lost the right to own land with the Reindeer Grazing Act of 1928. They also reduced women's legal status as reindeer herding was defined as a man's job and women became more and more dependent on men. In addition, the "definition of the Sami as nomadic reindeer herders has created a system of different rights for different Sami. These rights have been founded in a conception of cultural inferiority where policies were formed about the Sami, not with them." (via and via).



"One example described by Lundmark is found in 1909 report on the Sami schools where reindeer herding is considered incompatible with civilisation. The special education system for certain Sami, the Sami schools, were intended for the children of the nomadic mountain Sami. Wooden Lapp cots were built where the children lived and were taught. This effectively separated the children of the mountain Sami from those of the forest Sami. The State regarded the forest Sami as corrupted nomads, since their way of life was not considered to be as genuinely Sami as that of the mountain Sami. The children of the forest Sami and other domiciled Sami had to attend the same schools as the Swedish children. The level of teaching in the nomad schools was not the same as for Swedish children, but the teaching hours were shorter and the competence requirements for the teachers were lower. Since the Sami children were to become reindeer herders, the State felt that they did not need extensive education. This continued until the end of the 1930s."
Ombudsmannen Mot Etnisk Diskriminering, 2008




Only in 1977 did Sweden recognise Sami as an indigenous people ... without "any appreciable consequences as regards Sami policy" who continue having the status of a national minority instead of the status as an indigenous people. Today, Sami children are discriminated against, bullied and harassed at school, mother tongue teaching is not taken seriously, in their contacts with authorities, Sami "find themselves in a position of dependence", there is still a lack of Sami influence when it comes to matters that concern them, when seeking medical care, many report the feeling of being insulted by medical staff, there is no real Sami eldercare, Sami are discriminated against at employment offices, job interviews and places of work, mass media conveys the picture of "exotic, frock-wearing people" or "a reactionary group dependent of social welfare" (via).




- Ombudsmannen Mot Etnisk Diskriminering/Swedish Equality Ombudsman (2008). Discrimination of the Sami - the rights of the Sami from a discrimination perspective; download
- photographs via and via (first two by Erika Larsen, National Geographic) and via and via and via and via (last one by Michael Perry, National Geographic), copyright by owners

Minority Status and Bullying

Bullying is a major concern and can lead to long-term behavioural, emotional and physical adjustment problems (Hamburger et al., 2011). Being exposed to bullying at work is a significant source of social stress and might lead to psychiatric problems in victims (Einarsen et al., 2002). While, theoretically, every individual can become a victim, some people seem to be more likely to be targeted.

 

A study carried out among employees of the National Health Service came to the conclusion that the minority ethnic staff had disproportionate experiences of bullying and harassment (Bécares, 2009). Males with gender minority status are more likely to be bullied, too (Wang, 2012). Age also seems to correlate with bullying as e.g. research in Norway shows that particularly older employees feel affected by bullying (Einarsen et al., n.y.). And, people with a disability are at higher risk of being victimised (Sin et al., 2009).

 

In other words, being a member of a minority group increases the likelihood of being bullied. In case of intersection, i.e. the individual belongs to more than one minority group (e.g. the person is of a different ethnicity than the majority plus queer), the likelihood of being bullied might rise. For instance, if one is already being bullied for being a sexual minority, then the additional membership of an ethnic or a religious minority group increases the odds of being bullied even more. According to a study, as people move to one additional minority group membership, they are 22 times more likely to be bullied because of their sexual orientation, when they move to two additional minority groups, the likelihood increases 37-fold, and in the case of three minority groups it increases 167-fold (Rivera, 2011).

 

Bécares, L. (2009) Experiences of bullying and racial harassment among minority ethnic staff in the NHS. A Race Equality Foundation Briefing Paper
Einarsen, S., Hoel, H. & Nielsen, M. B. (n.y.) Workplace Bullying (via)
Einarsen, S., Mikkelsen, E. G. & Matthiesen, S. B. (2002) The psychology of bullying at work: Explaining the detrimental effects on victims (via)
Hamburger, M. E, BAsile, K. C. & Vivolo, A. M. (2011) Measuring Bullying Victimization, Perpetration, and Bystander Experiences: A Compendium of Assessment Tools. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control
Rivera, L. K. (2011) Bullying of sexual minorities: How does multiple minority status affect the likelihood of being victimized? Master Thesis: Kaplan University
Sin, C. H., Hedges, A., Cook, C., Mguni, N. & Comber, N. (2009) Disabled people's experiences of targeted violence and hostility. Manchester: Research Team - Equality and Human Rights Commission
Wang, M.-L. (2012) Gender Differences Are Predictors of Workplace Bullying. Conference on Arts and Humanities 2012 Conference Proceedings
(photos via and via)