Jack Monroe #125 Tweeted it, completed it, deleted it

[waffle maker]

How much of that fish has she cooked btw?

 

[Winthropp Tuesday]

Hello, it's me again.

Just finished the last thread and I am VERY disappointed that nobody nominated @Winthropp Tuesday's "Dangling her flaps over a bleeping Cotswold sideboard like none of it matters" for thread title.

Please take this is my official (early but they are moving so fast) thread title suggestion.

Well thank you! I truly am honoured. Let no-one cast my flaps asunder. Or trap the unruly buggers in three pairs of granny pants.

I’m just contemplating spending some of my Christmas money (£25) on something from the Cotswolds range. By my calculations, I’ve enough for a knob.

How much of that fish has she cooked btw?

SHE’S VEGAN! How very dare you!

 

[Sentient mirror]

Omg wtfs going oooooooon?

 

[colouredlines]

Omg wtfs going oooooooon?

 

[Cookiecookie]

For all those tins of Del Monte?

 

[Flivver]

How much of that fish has she cooked btw?

It’s gone to join those chicken livers - never to be mentioned again.

 

[TriviaNewtonJohn]

How much of that fish has she cooked btw?

'Cooked' is such an elitist word. JM prefers to steam fish in their own juices or cover them in Weetabix.

 

[LyraBalaqua]

Morning Ninnies , I salute the night watch who stay chatting in the early hours , I honestly don’t know how you do it . I’m a lark by nature and asleep by 10.00 most nights.

Anyway, what joys will today bring?

 

[GoLando]

I think she gets away with it because she’s the “pet povvo” of the Twitterati and London media wankers who are so privileged and live in a bubble that they believe she really is working class and lived in extreme poverty. They can give her head pats because they don’t need to try her recipes like the oiks do.

 

[gliblyglobbo]

Just wanting to pop in very late and break my lurking streak to say that I saw Jack's trifle prep photo in thread #122 and I thought for a solid five seconds it was baked beans.

 

[NomDeGuerre]

I think she gets away with it because she’s the “pet povvo” of the Twitterati and London media wankers who are so privileged and live in a bubble that they believe she really is working class and lived in extreme poverty. They can give her head pats because they don’t need to try her recipes like the oiks do.

As someone said a few threads ago (it may actually have been the mythical thread 31, which I was re-reading as a treat)... she's been adopted as the poverty mascot of the trendy food set precisely because she doesn't look like a stereotypical food bank user.

 

[Lanie]

A comment from Jack on Instagram reposted to Kickstarter comments by a backer 4 ish years ago. "You know I invested *my own* money into this book and I have *made a loss*, right? I have literally not paid myself to do this. I have paid admin, artists, illustrators, helpers, kickstarter fees, and still to pay print and postage costs for 4000 books". She then went on to post a comment herself around same time period, ticking off a backer for daring to challenge her on Kickstarter comments " I have paid, out of this money, for a painter, 10 independent illustrators, 140 recipes worth of ingredients x2 or 3 (imagine buying food for 2000 people and you get the idea...), put aside most of it for printing and postage and paid myself absolutely bugger all for over a years work."

All that shows is she is pretty poor at sorting out her money to make it do everything that it needed to and still pay herself. How do others do it, it must be some of sort of magic.?!

 

[Fitnessqueen]

It’s gone to join those chicken livers - never to be mentioned again.

I’ve been thinking about those livers and that mysterious mutant strain of Covid that started in the South East......

 

[MancBee]

There is an awful lot of squiggle / tattle crossover on twitter tonight

Am I alone in thinking that if people read what is in the public domain, they have a right to do with it what they want?

As a member of Tattle, I know that I should not go on any other public platform and I don't. However, if someone that is not a Tattle member reads here and is disgusted by Jack's behaviour, we have no right to tell them what to do with the information that we have allowed them to read, It is akin to saying that we are wrong to read Twitter and use that information here.

The allegations of bullying go on whatever, so suggesting that it is feeding into her narrative, is in my opinion a moot point.

If we do not want members of the public reading here and reusing the information as they wish, we should not have a publicly accessible site. If you are unhappy that people read here and reuse the content elsewhere, then perhaps we should lock the site to members only, or you should not post anything that you do not want to be reused elsewhere.

I think it is a bit hypocritical to use Twitter content here, and be surprised that Tattle content is used elsewhere. It is why I will only ever post information that I know to be true, and that I would be willing to defend in court. If Tattle stays public, then you have to accept that the information is freely available for people to use without your consent.

Most information posted on Tattle is available elsewhere anyway, mainly on Jack's own Twitter. It is where you wonderful Fraus get all the damning evidence. To expect it to stay on Tattle is being a little naive.

 

[Sentient mirror]

I keep trying to fathom Tom Cruise and the fish

On topic... Fish smol fishie in 3 freezers

 

[TriviaNewtonJohn]

Am I alone in thinking that if people read what is in the public domain, they have a right to do with it what they want.

As a member of Tattle, I know that I should not go on any other public platform and I don't. However, if someone that is not a Tattle member reads here and is disgusted by Jack's behaviour, we have no right to tell them what to do with the information that we have allowed them to read, It is akin to saying that we are wrong to read Twitter and use that information here.

The allegations of bullying go on whatever, so suggesting that it is feeding into her narrative, is in my opinion a moot point.

If we do not want members of the public reading here and reusing the information as they wish, we should not have a publicly accessible site. If you are unhappy that people read here and reuse the content elsewhere, then perhaps we should lock the site to members only, or you should not post anything that you do not want to be reused elsewhere.

I think it is a bit hypocritical to use Twitter content here, and be surprised that Tattle content is used elsewhere. It is why I will only ever post information that I know to be true, and that I would be willing to defend in court. If Tattle stays public, then you have to accept that the information is freely available for people to use without your consent.

Most information posted on Tattle is available elsewhere anyway, mainly on Jack's own Twitter. It is where you wonderful Fraus get all the damning evidence. To expect it to stay on Tattle is being a little naive.

Good points very well made. We can't control the narrative any more than anyone else can. Aside from JM cos we don't have flying monkeys.

 

[MancBee]

I'm getting ads for red lipstick! By Terry, the lip expert and not a Lady Doctor. (I don't know how to post a screen grab)

 

[CuriousCat92]

@Pocahontas must need some breaks and @Minky McMoneypenny I appreciate you stepping in. These threads move ridiculously fast.

Definitely thank you. I wouldn’t know how to do it.

 

[live laugh loathe]

Wait what is this & how did we move past it so quickly?

You wouldn’t think you could flush a big fish like that would you, tho I dread to think the state it must be in before he disposes of it

What are we thinking he does with it? Is he shagging it?

 

[Sentient mirror]

What are we thinking he does with it? Is he shagging it?

The fish is DEAD!