I’ve met this instagrammer a couple of times. She’s fantastic!
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Living very close them, I can say for sure that they were above government lockdown.
Off topic- but GREAT username!!I’d hate to say the wrong thing here but seen as I haven’t seen anyone else reply to you I thought I would explain what I think she meant by it. Dolphins carry extra endorphins (natural pain relief) so some people believed swimming with dolphins or being around them helped with comfort and is pain relieving. Their sonar was said to have positive influence on motor skills and speech. So it was a popular activity for people with disabilities, especially children. I think it’s now been proved not to have the effect people once claimed though.
Nobody quote me on the details as I only vaguely remember this from watching a youtube video about dolphins years and years ago. But you get the gist of why I think she said Dolphins remind her of disabled children.
An article Susie wrote for Standard Issue magazine in 2015 (I believe around the time she was also posting THE tweets).
I’m just flabbergasted by the whole thing!
I’m just flabbergasted by the whole thing!
Attachments
I don't want to stick up for her but I don't think either of those posts are racists, they're taking the piss out of others in Dover for being racist surely? Like when Emma Thompson said the BNP would love Exeter University because it was so white (it was - I went there!)
She's actually slating morons who blame the country's problems on immigrants here. There's lots of them in this part of Kent, trust me!
It’s just a word.
Women shouldn’t be made to feel bad or have to question themselves for using it . If you don’t like it that’s ok so scroll on but don’t assume everybody should think the same as you.
This is fantastic.
That’s a bit harsh, I love a corn beef and tomato sandwich
I read Kisscub’s post earlier this morning — hadn’t read it before I posted anything yesterday.
I’m making a bit of an assumption here but my guess is that the incident she referenced (where Susie and her husband pulled faces that came across as mocking people with CP and then ignoring requests to take to down) was relatively recent, in comparison with the tweets.
That, tbh, makes me even more doubtful (an understatement, in truth) that SV has done an about-turn in the intervening few years, in terms of her attitude towards hurtful transgressions.
While I don’t agree with this methodology and think that, in its own way, it is often as cowardly as immediate overly obsequious and disingenuous apologies to save face, to an extent I understand the rationale behind the Dominic Cummings style “never apologise” mantra — at least strategically, in terms of screw-ups in the public sphere. The truth is that apologising very often makes things worse; if it’s too restrained then it is assumed you don’t mean it, if it’s too operatic and emotionally demonstrative then a) it is assumed you don’t mean it and b) people smell blood, because at a very base, animal level you’re seen to have demeaned yourself. Very often things do actually blow over when people don’t apologise. Of course it isn’t right or noble, but from a purely logical POV it has some function.
But this is completely different. Verrill had absolutely nothing to lose by apologising to KC and taking down the story. Nothing. It could all have been conducted privately, and if anyone had noticed and asked her about it, it would have been very straightforward for her to address it, simply by explaining that she’d posted it without thinking about the connotations, which had since been brought to her attention, and so she had removed it so that nobody else had to see it and potentially be hurt by it.
The fact that she took the same approach she did with her old tweets in private with the mother of a disabled child (you’d think that would make someone humbler/more circumspect even if only out of social embarrassment, at the very least!) when it would have cost her absolutely nothing to do the right thing makes me a lot more dubious about her. Most people have an aversion to hurting someone’s feelings, and by the sounds of it this was not something where the hurt feelings were over something fundamentally benign. So it is troubling that SV’s instinct was to do nothing.
I’m making a bit of an assumption here but my guess is that the incident she referenced (where Susie and her husband pulled faces that came across as mocking people with CP and then ignoring requests to take to down) was relatively recent, in comparison with the tweets.
That, tbh, makes me even more doubtful (an understatement, in truth) that SV has done an about-turn in the intervening few years, in terms of her attitude towards hurtful transgressions.
While I don’t agree with this methodology and think that, in its own way, it is often as cowardly as immediate overly obsequious and disingenuous apologies to save face, to an extent I understand the rationale behind the Dominic Cummings style “never apologise” mantra — at least strategically, in terms of screw-ups in the public sphere. The truth is that apologising very often makes things worse; if it’s too restrained then it is assumed you don’t mean it, if it’s too operatic and emotionally demonstrative then a) it is assumed you don’t mean it and b) people smell blood, because at a very base, animal level you’re seen to have demeaned yourself. Very often things do actually blow over when people don’t apologise. Of course it isn’t right or noble, but from a purely logical POV it has some function.
But this is completely different. Verrill had absolutely nothing to lose by apologising to KC and taking down the story. Nothing. It could all have been conducted privately, and if anyone had noticed and asked her about it, it would have been very straightforward for her to address it, simply by explaining that she’d posted it without thinking about the connotations, which had since been brought to her attention, and so she had removed it so that nobody else had to see it and potentially be hurt by it.
The fact that she took the same approach she did with her old tweets in private with the mother of a disabled child (you’d think that would make someone humbler/more circumspect even if only out of social embarrassment, at the very least!) when it would have cost her absolutely nothing to do the right thing makes me a lot more dubious about her. Most people have an aversion to hurting someone’s feelings, and by the sounds of it this was not something where the hurt feelings were over something fundamentally benign. So it is troubling that SV’s instinct was to do nothing.
Last edited:
At some point , in order to maintain his platform / earnings from social media, he is going to have to post some kind of photo that allows comments. He can’t carry on just posting videos of chicks ! So at some point, he has a decision to make regarding how he is going to go forward. Suzie’s tweets are indefensible so he can’t defend her , so I wonder how he is going to respond.
It is crucial for his ongoing earnings that he has to maintain a positive social media platform but so much of his content is geared around family life.
It is crucial for his ongoing earnings that he has to maintain a positive social media platform but so much of his content is geared around family life.
Brummy mummy is weighing in on her stories
Expect more bring out your dead moments with the mumfluencer brigade. MOD, SV, who’s next??
I don’t understand why so many are not naming her - the vague hints at “someone I worked with” by SO many of them if they do mention it at all is so disingenuous. That said, I’m glad she’s said something. The collective silence has been deafening on this one.
She is one year older than me. The whole thing about being young and stupid is ridiculous. She would have been 25 that's not that young and naive. I also lived in a very white and ignorant village growing up and a town that still is. Well I educated myself and was just never a dick about people who were different to me. Its really that simple.
Susie is with the same management as Saconne Joly’s right? They silenced UG and Luisa Zissman
This is an interview from Susiebluessy? Who, given the intro to her interview, was following SV on Twitter from at least when she started dating Greg.... so has she not seen these tweets before?
Something doesn’t add up here.
- Status