Must be the season for it, Emma Drew’s ex-assistant has joined the forum and spilt the beans over there. (Emma is a money blogger, well that’s what she claims to be but is another bullshitting scam artist.)
OMG! Inject this into my eyeballs.
no personal tax extensions at the moment - however you can always appeal penalties with a ‘good excuse’ and covid counts as an excuse.
Exactly. A better article would have published her words, but then questioned them and point out what their choice may reveal about her. It would also be appropriate to put into context WHY this type of language is very problematic.
I got this after the feral bit:
The bit that says she doesn't look after herself? As far as I can tell, most all she does is look after herself through her massive grift.
Dunno what they mean about anonymised. I did sign the email. Maybe they took my name out and passed it on. Maybe they know that if Jack finds out who has criticized her she will come knocking at my door.
yes, same here. I had never heard of it before the hello fresh meal I made but it is so good.Oh I love ketjap manis. We had it in one of our Hello Fresh meals and I bought a bottle the next day
I haven’t used it with my peanut butter noodles yet though so thanks for the tip!
I'm quite tempted to just email back with "literally everything that came out of her mouth" but perhaps I'll leave it.
She doesn’t need your name, Clarends.
skills, that render names entirely unnecessary. me I know how it works.Wait...fried rice is already made with precooked rice, now she's reheated it again?!
Taste buds fully recovered now, Jack?
This is such a good point. Thank you. I think like everyone else, my upset over the use of the word “feral” is bigger than our issues with Jack. It’s (for want of a better word) unacceptable to see it used in a national newspaper in this way. And so this is what I’d like to do now, knowing that the Guardian themselves won’t help, find a meaningful way to challenge this kind of language. Seriously, thank you. Are there any charities in particular you would recommend? I understand if you don’t want to answer that, and I’ll happily research myself, I just want to get this right.Lads. Lads, without being too bossy but at the same time, being really bossy...
You won’t Get anywhere with the Guardian. You don’t have a Cooper in a being forcibly brushed chance.
However, if you do wish to do “something” about the way fostered and adopted kids are described in the press, I urge you to reach out to fostering, adoption and children’s charities. They are probably fed up of this language as well.
In recent years, due to pressure and engagement between charities and the press, papers voluntarily signed up to avoid distressing language around suicide. You might have noticed how different it is lately?
Best outcome would be something similar between kids charities and press. I think they got there with child abuse which used to be “child prostitute”. You may get to describe feral behaviour (still problematic) you may not describe a child as feral.
