solid thread name
Ruby Granger #29 Is it soon yet?
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Ruby Granger Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
All studytubers were led to believe that Oxbridge, Oxford in particular is the gold standard for education - where the best and the brightest, most gifted students all go. So naturally all those egotistical clowns believed that they were all deserving if not entitled to it. None of them actually stopped to think "Why Oxford?" other than the prestige and the name recognition.
Ruby never explained what practical advantages Oxford offered to her. She didn't research other universities. She never looked into all the things Oxford would expect from an applicant (critical thinking ability, a well-rounded personality and interests) and spend her time wisely to prepare.
She just thought she'd wow them with memorised information and a scrapbook of nonsense and they instantly saw that she was an idiot. That was a learning approach that all of them adopted and encouraged, and all of them failed to learn independent thought and critical ability, they just used rote memorisation.
That should've been a humbling wake-up call for her to change her habits and approach to learning or how she spent her time, but she never did. None of them did. They just carried a bitter chip on their shoulder over it and kept applying with the same approach expecting different results. It doesn't matter to them if acceptance levels at undergrad and Masters are wildly different, they just want to get accepted to Oxford, because in their minds its a vindication for them - Oxford was wrong to reject them the first time and they finally realised their mistake.
That mass studytuber rejection at undergrad should've been the final nail in the coffin of studytube. Because if the people presenting themselves as geniuses and their study techniques as the key to academic success and all of the core studytubers were rejected from their unis of choice, then why would anyone listen to them?
It's one of those things that's entirely possible, but given Ruby's usual constant lies about outfit changes to hide the fabricated timescales of her "in a day" vlogs, it immediately screams that she's lying. Her then making a point of smugly insisting with a wagging finger that AKCSCUSE ME VARRY MOCH, she REALLY DID wear that outfit for THREE HOURS after WYAKING OP AT SIX but then changed into something else when it got hot just kinda confirms it.
There's no reason to lie, of course. It would've been incredibly easy to just say "Here's an outfit I wore to match my planner. Unfortunately I don't own anything lighter and weather-friendly that matches so I changed immediately" and it would've saved a lot of comments.
But there's never any reason to lie about most of the endless stuff Ruby lies about, it's just that she can't seem to imagine anything worse than people thinking the lifestyle that she presents as her own online isn't actually how she lives and she gets very defensive and doubles down on lies. Her opting to showcase the PETA-branded shirt is just the icing on the stupidity cake.
Honestly, when she said the Italy vlog was coming, my first thought was, "Wait, didn't that already happen?" I don't know what she'd going to put in a vlog that wasn't in her daily routine.
Ruby's "perfect summer" is apparently one spent confined to her room pretending to read and still be in school.
And that's the same lazy scrap paper titles she uses for half her videos, so we can probably expect a 25 minute ode to the joys of wasting your summer by being VARRY PRODOCKTIVE.
It's so interesting to me as an American to compare this to the American university application process. I don't know how familiar most people on here are with the process but I'll try to explain:
On reddit or college confidential, the two biggest college application forums, people often use the phrases T10/T20/T50 to refer to the top 10, 20, or 50 colleges as ranked by US News & World Report. Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT (HYPSM) are the absolute top tier. The rest of the Ivy League and other top privates such as the University of Chicago, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern, and Duke are a tier below but still extremely impressive. There are also regional differences when it comes to what schools are considered prestigious. In the South, Duke, Vanderbilt, and Rice are considered on par with Ivies whereas people on the west coast may have never heard of them. Public schools are funded by individual states and usually prioritize the students from their state. There are big inequities between states when it comes to the level of public universities available, with California having UC Berkeley and UCLA which are T20s while other states don't have any well-ranked schools.
The number of colleges you can apply to is only limited by how much money and time you're willing to spend. There are multiple application platforms, the most common being the "common app" which has 20 slots, but some universities use their own system and aren't available on the common app. It's common for people aiming for top universities to apply to as many as 20-25 schools, and college decision compilations are an entire genre on youtube.
College applications in the US are much more subjective than the UK, it seems. Local, average-rank schools often require nothing more than a high school transcript, but top schools require multiple essays and descriptions of extracurricular activities. Additionally, many no longer require the SAT or ACT tests, which removes the only standardized aspect of admissions as curriculums vary throughout the US. The essays often ask about aspects of a student's background and personal character, which is obviously extremely subjective. With the sheer number of students applying to dozens of colleges each, acceptance rates have dropped dramatically and people with straight A's in all honors classes with insane extracurriculars can be rejected from all the top colleges they apply to.
Basically, since America is such a large country, there are more universities considered to be top tier with regional differences playing a factor as well. Plummeting acceptance rates, a subjective admissions process, and an unlimited number of applications push people to apply to dozens of colleges with the hope of getting one acceptance. It's an extremely unhealthy process and unfortunately the nature of it compels students to make it their entire identity. It's very similar to the UK focus on Oxbridge, just not confined to two schools.
Hey, it's my Tattle-iversary! It's officially been one year since I accidentally stumbled across these threads, read like ten of them in a day, and went from desperately wanting an academic planner to thinking "wait, that doesn't seem healthy...". Honestly was the best accident of my life! This last school year I put so much less academic pressure on myself and I had a really good time talking to the peers that I was too busy to get to know the past three years when I was only focused on school and forcing myself to study all day every day. Also I saved a lot of money on pens once I realized that supplies aren't really what defines how good of a student you are hahaha. Sorry to ramble on, but I want to say keep up the good work guys!
I'm so glad this doesn't exist in my country. All unis are seen as equals and everyone is admitted (no other process than signing up) unless there's an overload of students for one specific study. It doesn't matter where you got you degree since they are all considered to cover the exact same things. The process your describing seems very stressful...
Just wanted to add for those that aren't aware (although I know it's been mentioned before here), in the UK you can only apply to Oxford OR Cambridge, you can't apply to both (at least not in the same admissions cycle). You still have to apply through UCAS, who co-ordinate the process for undergraduate university admissions.
That seems like such a better system, I personally know kids who applied to all 8 Ivy League schools just to be able to say they go to an Ivy even though the schools have drastically different sizes, settings, and cultures.
This just seems like such a waste of time, money and resources for everyone. I’ve watched a few of the YouTube videos where young people are showing their college acceptances and some have applied to an insane number of universities, seemingly just to say they’ve been accepted. It’s not like you can attend more than one at once! In the UK, you can apply for up to five courses per admission cycle and that’s it - and like alligatorshades said, at undergrad it’s Oxford OR Cambridge, and not both (unless you’re applying to be an Organ Scholar but that’s a tiny number of people). And it costs £26.50 to apply - that’s it. There’s still an element of ‘waste’ in what we do but it’s nothing like the US system, which seems to favour those with the time and money to make a huge number of applications.
This is an English graduate, people.
Attachments
I'll use that work when I return after maternity leaveSlow doses only please
Here's your medication it's only a slow dose
on the Morning of her graduation, no less!
I do sometimes. Not because I'm a weirdo or creep but because she, despite her fake posh accent, seemed more normal and genuine. She was healthy and not so diet/exercise obsessed, she didn't do any obvious body checks while filming, she spoke proper and logical sentences, she acted her age, did normal things outside of school, she did nice hairstyles, she didn't sell herself for any and every brand or company, she didn't do any of this finger wagging nonsense. Yes she had some obsessions back then too but, I don't know. She was just... different. In a better kind of way. In my opinion anyway.
Speaking of younger Ruby, I had this pop up in my YouTube recommendations that I can't believe I'd never seen before:
I could only watch 15 minutes before her constant lip-smacking got to be too much, but it's glorious cringe.
She's so snotty and passive-aggressive. Not even 3 minutes in and she's already on the contradiction and denial train.
She essentially starts the video saying: "There has been controversy and criticism over my book. This is because you all misunderstood it. Yes, the cover synopsis says the book is loosely based on my experiences with bullying and yes, it also says that the main character is based on me. But that's not true and so you are all wrong to criticise the book and say the main character is just a lazy copy of me."
She then says with a straight face that she intentionally made Erimentha very naïve and with too positive an opinion of everyone around her.
Ruby, desperate to prove that Erimentha isn't just a self-insert character: "Well, I DID GET BULLIED! And WHEN I GOT BULLIED...I did know that something was going wrong...and so that is definitely a difference between the two of us. But I know that some people might be in denial about that."
Ruby, in her "GETTING BULLIED made me the person I am today" video ten months later: "I've never even admitted properly that I was bullied. When I was younger I convinced myself that it wasn't bullying and it wasn't until years later that I realised that it was bullying."
Well, that all adds up. Nothing to see there.
Her stories about bullying have never added up, but it's always fun when yet another contradiction resurfaces.
And then she goes on to say how much she loves bullying books and these may have "unconsciously" informed Erimentha Parker. But not deliberately! It wasn't conscious or deliberate!
Nobody had even accused her of ripping off other books, she just leapt to her own suspicious defence apropos of nothing. It's like walking into a police station to prove you didn't murder a bunch of people when you weren't even a suspect. Way you out yourself as ripping off a bunch of middle-grade bullying books, Ruby.
Oh, and Erimentha Parker wasn't written or published for "professional" purposes. She just wanted to share it with her viewers. In exchange for money.
I could only watch 15 minutes before her constant lip-smacking got to be too much, but it's glorious cringe.
She's so snotty and passive-aggressive. Not even 3 minutes in and she's already on the contradiction and denial train.
She essentially starts the video saying: "There has been controversy and criticism over my book. This is because you all misunderstood it. Yes, the cover synopsis says the book is loosely based on my experiences with bullying and yes, it also says that the main character is based on me. But that's not true and so you are all wrong to criticise the book and say the main character is just a lazy copy of me."
She then says with a straight face that she intentionally made Erimentha very naïve and with too positive an opinion of everyone around her.
Ruby, desperate to prove that Erimentha isn't just a self-insert character: "Well, I DID GET BULLIED! And WHEN I GOT BULLIED...I did know that something was going wrong...and so that is definitely a difference between the two of us. But I know that some people might be in denial about that."
Ruby, in her "GETTING BULLIED made me the person I am today" video ten months later: "I've never even admitted properly that I was bullied. When I was younger I convinced myself that it wasn't bullying and it wasn't until years later that I realised that it was bullying."
Well, that all adds up. Nothing to see there.
Her stories about bullying have never added up, but it's always fun when yet another contradiction resurfaces.
And then she goes on to say how much she loves bullying books and these may have "unconsciously" informed Erimentha Parker. But not deliberately! It wasn't conscious or deliberate!
Nobody had even accused her of ripping off other books, she just leapt to her own suspicious defence apropos of nothing. It's like walking into a police station to prove you didn't murder a bunch of people when you weren't even a suspect. Way you out yourself as ripping off a bunch of middle-grade bullying books, Ruby.
Oh, and Erimentha Parker wasn't written or published for "professional" purposes. She just wanted to share it with her viewers. In exchange for money.
Pretty sure she did this on purpose and believes she is "poetic" with words or something. She is so much worse now since she became "a writer". She believes she's a new Virginia Woolf or Sylvia Plath.
Ughh I absolutely can't stand her, I can't even watch her for 3 minutes, she's incredibly witchy, snotty and pretentious. New profile pictures anyone?
Last edited:
the thing is, when i watch her first few videos i also wonder was she supposed to turn out the way she is now? because has she maybe accepted that her approach to learning doesn’t work after the oxford rejection, imagine where she could be now (ranty rant i know, it just makes me kinda sad because of the life she could have)
Yeah she had a lot of opportunity grow and learn from her mistakes. And with her family's support (financial and moral) she could achieved so many things during uni years. Unfortunately she regressed and became a shell of her high school version.
Wait she thinks that Kimberly should have been punished MORE? Didn’t she get sentenced to isolation for a month plus a terms worth of hard labour in the school canteen?
Also jeez imagine her going live these days to address criticism
she would get slaughtered.ETA I love how she gets halfway through answering some of the questions, realizes she’s bleeping it up horribly and just gives up and goes ‘ok, yep I’m going to move on now’ then starts looking for the next question hahahah
Obsessed with the hanging owl in the background
- Status