DS Forums

 
 

The Kardashians donate over a hundred meals to the Homeless


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 31-12-2016, 09:50
stoatie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: By the Skeleton Tree.
Posts: 56,602
Not just me who does that then!
DEFINITELY not just you and blue. Me too.

(Sorry, had a bit of a Dr Seuss moment there).
stoatie is online now   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 31-12-2016, 09:54
Doctor_Wibble
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,888
I do hope that 'gourmet chef-prepared' is simply over-fancy talk for 'nicely done by expensive staff', rather than meaning some homeless people being confronted by some of those offensively intricate creations that really rub it in about who can or cannot afford to eat in places that serve that kind of food...

The appeal of a decent meal where it's warm and dry and you aren't rushed out to make way for the next sitting is not to be underestimated. Better than some restaurants!
Doctor_Wibble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:08
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 36,979
They give in secret and people slag them off because they think they aren't giving.
Nobody slagged off George Michael for not giving in his lifetime AFAIK and he gave generously of his time and money privately it seems and all without virtue-signalling what he'd done in order to get credit for it. To do it any other way really becomes all about being seen to be doing it rather than anything else.

Kardashians giving away 100 meals is like you or I scraping the plates after a family meal and leaving the doggy bag on top of the bins instead of inside them.
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:15
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
Not just me who does that then!
DEFINITELY not just you and blue. Me too.

(Sorry, had a bit of a Dr Seuss moment there).
Glad I'm not the only one !!
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:17
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
Nobody slagged off George Michael for not giving in his lifetime AFAIK and he gave generously of his time and money privately it seems and all without virtue-signalling what he'd done in order to get credit for it. To do it any other way really becomes all about being seen to be doing it rather than anything else.

Kardashians giving away 100 meals is like you or I scraping the plates after a family meal and leaving the doggy bag on top of the bins instead of inside them.
Nonetheless, whatever the motives or circumstances of the charitable act, the net effect for the beneficiaries is exactly the same. So I'd never knock it.
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:19
zx50
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: County Durham
Posts: 78,614
Nobody slagged off George Michael for not giving in his lifetime AFAIK and he gave generously of his time and money privately it seems and all without virtue-signalling what he'd done in order to get credit for it. To do it any other way really becomes all about being seen to be doing it rather than anything else.

Kardashians giving away 100 meals is like you or I scraping the plates after a family meal and leaving the doggy bag on top of the bins instead of inside them.
Maybe not, but I've seen some celebrities being criticised because people have thought that they haven't gave anything because it hasn't been reported about. It's a case of some celebrities can't win no matter what they do.
zx50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:26
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 36,979
Maybe not, but I've seen some celebrities being criticised because people have thought that they haven't gave anything because it hasn't been reported about. It's a case of some celebrities can't win no matter what they do.
I don't see how being seen to give (in relative terms) pocket change does anything to forestall those criticisms. We all know the Kardashians are entirely about self-promotion and this is just another aspect of that for them and no doubt nicely tax-deductible.
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:26
Trulytrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 242
I guess that there are many who have given their time, money and support to those homeless and in need over the festive period. When a family of multi millionaire reality stars give some I guess wonder if its due to generosity or publicity.

Either way someone benefits
- that's good
Exactly


I really don't care what the reasons were someone benefited from it . I hate Christmas and rather than sit at home hating and dreading it, I go help .. Yes I am giving my time, money and stuff I have collected throughout the year. Yes I get a lot of thank yous but in actual fact it helps me probably more than the homeless and lonely. So for me its a two way thing and im ever grateful that the homeless the elderly and the lonely let me enjoy the day (three days) with them.

If you have never sat at the table pulling crackers and joking with the homeless, the old and the lonely You really have never had a Christmas that is really a day of happiness and laughter. Its certainly gave me a reason to carry on at this time of year that brings back horrific memories.


I do not have a TV, or read a paper/magazine etc so don't really know these people. I gather they at hated and liked in equal proportions.

Any publicity is good. So if you do not like someone do not give them any publicity at all.
Trulytrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:29
Doctor_Wibble
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,888
I think if they intended it to be anonymous they could have done that quite easily - perhaps even asking that it was not publicised. As for location and quantity, that might simply have been a logistical thing of having space/staff to make/deliver/serve - so there is a degree of benefit of the doubt to put forward there.

That said, airline food is pretty decent these days and can be served hot to a couple of hundred people in a very short space of time, presumably there are seasonal variants on the 'standard' ones which surely would go a lot further? Or as well as?

Though given the history of the family in question, we are surely too far down the line for people to take things as being 'real' rather than just being another act of the publicity machine - they passed that point a long time ago.

When someone posts an instagram of 'thank you to X' why so many other '@'s along with it?
Doctor_Wibble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:44
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 36,979
Nonetheless, whatever the motives or circumstances of the charitable act, the net effect for the beneficiaries is exactly the same.
Stomach-cramps from over-rich food for people subsisting on a day-to-day diet of the cheapest and most basic foods?
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 10:49
muggins14
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Pit of Despair
Posts: 50,130
I don't see how being seen to give (in relative terms) pocket change does anything to forestall those criticisms. We all know the Kardashians are entirely about self-promotion and this is just another aspect of that for them and no doubt nicely tax-deductible.
Except - seemingly - they didn't tell anybody about this - the charity did, although they clearly state they were asked not to.

I imagine every charitable donation made by anybody - George Michael, whoever, is tax-deductible.

ETA: Never thought I would be defending the Kardashians of all people I did post above where the charity explain that they told about this against the wishes of the K's.
muggins14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:09
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 36,979
Except - seemingly - they didn't tell anybody about this - the charity did, although they clearly state they were asked not to.
And I suspect they asked it to be announced that they didn't want it to be made public. They issue press-releases every time one of them scratches their arse. Publicity is their oxygen - Without it they have no reason to exist. If they'd insisted on non-disclosure then why would that charity announce it - They'd effectively be ensuring the generous (sic) Kardashians never dealt with them again as their wishes were not respected.

Why not feed 1000 people with that same money or do the homeless turn their noses up at meals that aren't "chef-prepared"?
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:11
Doctor_Wibble
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 10,888
Except - seemingly - they didn't tell anybody about this - the charity did, although they clearly state they were asked not to.
On the other hand, expecting someone to keep their gob shut on something like that can often be wildly optimistic, and my remark about the publicity machine was on that basis - that they just needed to wait for someone else to blab, even when told not to - and if they wanted it to be anonymous that would have been quite easy.

Given how publicity-savvy they all are, I think this was at best a very careless and entirely avoidable slip-up. The question is surely about how much benefit of the doubt to extend...
Doctor_Wibble is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:23
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 36,979
On the other hand, expecting someone to keep their gob shut on something like that can often be wildly optimistic, and my remark about the publicity machine was on that basis - that they just needed to wait for someone else to blab, even when told not to - and if they wanted it to be anonymous that would have been quite easy.
Easy enough to keep it entirely anonymous if that's the true intent - Simply get a proxy to donate the money on behalf of the actual giver.

This donation is known about because they wanted it known about.

I cannot believe in this media-soaked age that anyone would think this was a truly altruistic, not for publicity gesture. Especially on DS - You lot are better than this!!
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:23
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
Stomach-cramps from over-rich food for people subsisting on a day-to-day diet of the cheapest and most basic foods?
Do you know what the meal consisted of?

If so, please do tell.
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:26
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
Easy enough to keep it entirely anonymous if that's the true intent - Simply get a proxy to donate the money on behalf of the actual giver.

This donation is known about because they wanted it known about.

I cannot believe in this media-soaked age that anyone would think this was a truly altruistic, not for publicity gesture. Especially on DS - You lot are better than this!!
But so what, even if it was for self promotion?

I don't get what your problem is. As I said before, with free gifts the motive is irrelevant and the end result is the same.

Or would you have preferred it if those beneficiaries had gone hungry?
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:31
Straker
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 36,979
Do you know what the meal consisted of?

If so, please do tell.
Seeing as they made a virtue of them being "chef-prepared" I'm assuming it wasn't mac and cheese, unless the chef in question was Boyardee?!?

But so what, even if it was for self promotion?

I don't get what your problem is. As I said before, with free gifts the motive is irrelevant and the end result is the same.

Or would you have preferred it if those beneficiaries had gone hungry?
I would've preferred it if many more had their real needs met with the same money than being fed a self-serving (no pun...) blinged-up meal by the most publicity-hungry clan on the face of the planet. That's what I would've preferred, but apparently you bought their BS and see no problem with it.
Straker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:32
Trulytrue
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 242
Easy enough to keep it entirely anonymous if that's the true intent - Simply get a proxy to donate the money on behalf of the actual giver.

This donation is known about because they wanted it known about.

I cannot believe in this media-soaked age that anyone would think this was a truly altruistic, not for publicity gesture. Especially on DS - You lot are better than this!!
Why are you letting your dislike of them colour your common sense? Of course we know why it was done, but no matter the end result is the same as those giving for different reasons. People who don't have anything are getting something from those who have more than enough.
Trulytrue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:35
stoatie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: By the Skeleton Tree.
Posts: 56,602
But so what, even if it was for self promotion?

I don't get what your problem is. As I said before, with free gifts the motive is irrelevant and the end result is the same.

Or would you have preferred it if those beneficiaries had gone hungry?
Exactly. What, let 'em starve so as not to offend someone off DS's principles? Very noble.

"Bloody hell, I'm starving to death here".
"Not to worry, dude, at least you're not providing publicity for some people off the telly".
"Well, now you put it like that..."
stoatie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:38
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
Seeing as they made a virtue of them being "chef-prepared" I'm assuming it wasn't mac and cheese, unless the chef in question was Boyardee?!?
That'll be "No, I haven't got a clue mate, I'm just guessing in line with my personal agenda"

I would've preferred it if many more had their real needs met with the same money than being fed a self-serving (no pun...) blinged-up meal by the most publicity-hungry clan on the face of the planet. That's what I would've preferred, but apparently you bought their BS and see no problem with it.
The operative words being the bit in bold. I'm sure those hungry souls who ate, would disagree with you.
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:44
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
Exactly. What, let 'em starve so as not to offend someone off DS's principles? Very noble.

"Bloody hell, I'm starving to death here".
"Not to worry, dude, at least you're not providing publicity for some people off the telly".
"Well, now you put it like that..."
I just don't understand the attitude.

If you were somebody at work, without a car and reliant on two buses home in a snowstorm, and a colleague offers you a lift to your home, as you suspect, just to show off their new 4 x 4, or to be patronising because you haven't got a car, or they see it as an opportunity to bitch about another colleague, what do you do?

Most would be grateful that they'd been saved hours of hassle, discomfort and difficulty, irrespective of the underlying motive.
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:46
muggins14
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Pit of Despair
Posts: 50,130
Do you know what the meal consisted of?

If so, please do tell.
"We're told the menu had it all -- white truffle mac and cheese, sweet potato soufflé, turkey, ham, braised short ribs, and mashed potatoes. For dessert -- pies and cookies." according to TMZ.
muggins14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:47
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,207
"We're told the menu had it all -- white truffle mac and cheese, sweet potato soufflé, turkey, ham, braised short ribs, and mashed potatoes. For dessert -- pies and cookies." according to TMZ.
Sounds good to me
blueblade is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:48
muggins14
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Pit of Despair
Posts: 50,130

The operative words being the bit in bold. I'm sure those hungry souls who ate, would disagree with you.
I know! At the end of the day some needy people got to eat some nice food. The rest is all just fluff and bluster.

Is there a right and wrong way to do something charitable if, at the end of the day, somebody benefits? The end result is the same, some needy people that this project work with got a nice meal for Christmas.
muggins14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31-12-2016, 11:48
stoatie
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: By the Skeleton Tree.
Posts: 56,602
I just don't understand the attitude.

If you were somebody at work, without a car and reliant on two buses home in a snowstorm, and a colleague offers you a lift to your home, as you suspect, just to show off their new 4 x 4, or to be patronising because you haven't got a car, or they see it as an opportunity to bitch about another colleague, what do you do?

Most would be grateful that they'd been saved hours of hassle, discomfort and difficulty, irrespective of the underlying motive.
I also have to wonder how many of the people criticising them for doing this as a publicity stunt have themselves done anything similar out of nobler motives.
stoatie is online now   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 13:47.