Oooh that seems counter her - cut me and I bleed Brighton like a stick of Brighton rock - how was she minimising? 
Yes, really love nails and jewellery - The Great Frog?
Yes, really love nails and jewellery - The Great Frog?
Sali Hughes #38 True to size. Mine is XS
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Sali Hughes Threads Wiki
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Thank you. I am basic witch beef face and it was from Essentials for about 8 quid years ago!
The dragon ring was from John Hardy @Stillwater. Have quite a bit of their stuff. It's lovely.
She was defending Clanchy? A new low.
Her racist comments and descriptions of autistic children were indefensible.
She said this article was "so good". She's now deleted that comment and seemingly another comment referred to here.
She claimed to be unaware of the Clanchy controversy. Er ...perhaps find out before commenting?
"Barely on Twitter these days"
Sure Jan
Sure Jan
Weak.
Snap, @Mselvista !
As I understand it, it was women of colour who made the initial criticisms of Clanchy's book - Monisha Rajesh, Chimene Suleyman and Sunny Singh - and also who bore the brunt of criticism on Twitter etc dismissing it (there was something to do with Philip Pullman but don't know details). So by wading in unaware of the background SH has unwittingly sided with those giving them tit. Suleyman said on social media how it had affected her mental health.
In ignoring the woman of colour (or dismissing her as there appears to be a deleted tweet about SH being working class) and then listening to 2 white posters SH has just compounded her error. She would possibly say that was because Rajesh was "aggressive" - yeah it's cos she's had a load of tit over this and then SH dismisses her!
What was that about woman being played? Being pitted against each other? Take your own advice SH. I thought women interested in makeup could also be concerned with more important matters - what's that phrase? Surface? Depth? Something about passion?
This wasn't just a shortlived twitter spat btw. It was a news story and not limited to opinion pieces
www.thebookseller.com
(It explains Pullman's involvement in the article)
In ignoring the woman of colour (or dismissing her as there appears to be a deleted tweet about SH being working class) and then listening to 2 white posters SH has just compounded her error. She would possibly say that was because Rajesh was "aggressive" - yeah it's cos she's had a load of tit over this and then SH dismisses her!
What was that about woman being played? Being pitted against each other? Take your own advice SH. I thought women interested in makeup could also be concerned with more important matters - what's that phrase? Surface? Depth? Something about passion?
This wasn't just a shortlived twitter spat btw. It was a news story and not limited to opinion pieces
Virago founder Callil quits Society of Authors over Clanchy response
Virago founder Carmen Callil has cancelled her membership of the Society of Authors (SoA), arguing it should have shown equal support to Kate Clanchy, Philip Pullman and their critics in the debate over Some Kids I Taught and What They Taught Me (Picador).
www.thebookseller.com
(It explains Pullman's involvement in the article)
Last edited:
Wow, what a non apology. Blaming someone else (they play on the limited attention span...") as well as absolving oneself of accountability by hiding behind a group ("we are all guilty...all of us need to get better...").
How about saying, "I was wrong. I made a mistake, and I need to work on doing better."
[The tweet was: "They play on the limited attention span of modern consumers. And we are all guilty of it. It’s a conscious decision to not bite. But all of us need to get better at making it."]
How about saying, "I was wrong. I made a mistake, and I need to work on doing better."
[The tweet was: "They play on the limited attention span of modern consumers. And we are all guilty of it. It’s a conscious decision to not bite. But all of us need to get better at making it."]
As I understand it, it was women of colour who made the initial criticisms of Clanchy's book - Monisha Rajesh, Chimene Suleyman and Sunny Singh - and also who bore the brunt of criticism on Twitter etc dismissing it (there was something to do with Philip Pullman but don't know details). So by wading in unaware of the background SH has unwittingly sided with those giving them tit. Suleyman said on social media how it had affected her mental health.
In ignoring the woman of colour (or dismissing her as there appears to be a deleted tweet about SH being working class) and then listening to 2 white posters SH has just compounded her error. She would possibly say that was because Rajesh was "aggressive" - yeah it's cos she's had a load of tit over this and then SH dismisses her!
What was that about woman being played? Being pitted against each other? Take your own advice SH. I thought women interested in makeup could also be concerned with more important matters - what's that phrase? Surface? Depth? Something about passion?
This wasn't just a shortlived twitter spat btw. It was a news story and not limited to opinion pieces
Virago founder Callil quits Society of Authors over Clanchy response
Virago founder Carmen Callil has cancelled her membership of the Society of Authors (SoA), arguing it should have shown equal support to Kate Clanchy, Philip Pullman and their critics in the debate over Some Kids I Taught and What They Taught Me (Picador).
(It explains Pullman's involvement in the article)
That tweet about the limited attention span was about the Tilbury makeup thing.
@SqualorVictoria 's right. Sorry, I should have been clearer. I was contrasting what SH said about the very important subject of makeup in bed and its relationship to marriage longevity (or not) and her disregarding her own advice when commenting on the trivial subject of the intersection of feminism and race (and disability/class). I was trying to be clever. Won't try that again
Oh for goodness sake. This seems to be her defence always. 'I wasn't fully aware of the facts'. She said that re her years of bullying Dawn.
She is so out of her depth here it is embarrassing.
But she's hardly ever on it these days
After moaning about criticism of a multimillionaire by people not fully aware of the facts
It was possibly a knee jerk response as she (and Caitlin) have been accused of "white feminism" in the past.
But yeah, SH was played by Owolade who framed his piece by criticising Joanne Harris (who was supporting Suleyman, Rajesh and Singh). Criticism of "white feminism" by a white (presumably) feminist is easier to ridicule.
Actually, I think I might be wrong about SH deleting a tweet in response to Monisha Rajesh. I think this might refer to an old twitter convo, SH's and Rajesh's tweets from which have now been deleted. In which case she just blanked Rajesh.
Last edited:
Barely on Twitter?
And I remember her saying ages ago that she needed to be on Twitter for 'work'
If you don’t know the situation and context then don’t bloody comment. Stay in your lane. She’s the most annoying kind of commenter: superficially woke, widely ignorant but with great faith in her her own takes.
This is actually more She Here’s lane:
This is actually more She Here’s lane:
Agree and with that faith comes an inability to admit an error or apologise for one. Just defensiveness/excuses
Or sometimes lashing out.
- Status