To be enjoying this downfall?

She's contradicted herself many times about factual stuff so she's a liar through her own admission. She begged people to donate money to be used to sue an MP and then failed to do so.
@Clementineorsatsuma exactly how much evidence do you want that she's a liar and a scammer?

Just read the Tattle wiki for proof of her never ending lies. Once you’ve seen that you’ll start doubting she was ever in poverty too.

What factual reports do you think people have access too?

And why is it only the people critical of Jack have to provide factual reports when her supports easily believe Jack's lies? They should ask Jack for proof of her claims before making demands of her critics.

But, as the wealth claim - her family was wealthy when she was growing up. Grand dad a wealthy property owner. dad a higher up and well paid fire service worker. Mum and dad foster carers, dad won an OBE. Hardly scratching about for £1 for an hour's electric.

Her lies are easily disproven and there's tons of places you can find those being highlighted. archive.ph/jiQRj

Could you link to factual reports of that please (not speculation)? Thanks.

If the allegations by the ‘bullies and the trolls’ of JM are inaccurate and as scurrilous as she maintains, she could silence her critics immediately by publishing accounts. Instead she obfuscates with smoke and mirrors, neatly side stepping and refusing to give straight answers, instead responding with threats, accusations and name calling. That would totally be her prerogative if it wasn’t other peoples’ money that appear to be funding her lifestyle.

For some reason, because she has created this virtuous, unquestionable persona, her donors seem to accept this behaviour. If it was a faceless business taking money and not supplying either goods, or failing to provide evidence where goodwill payments were going, there would be at minimum an enquiry into its operations and presumably a case for obtaining money by deception?

Exactly.

When JM was first becoming a public figure I actually kept my thoughts to myself (eg. That her reasons for quitting her job didn't stack up, and that it didn't make much sense she was living in poverty yet had (her words) "middle class " parents who lived nearby)

But the ridiculous Hunger hurts 2 beg peeled my eyes open and it was obvious huge numbers of people were prepared to throw money at someone without even asking basic questions about the veracity of their story.

Internet scams are everywhere and one of the best ways to stop them is to discuss them

I think when you're talking about a scammer, the primary purpose is exposing the behaviour for the benefit of everyone.

Not head to head completely disagreeing with you about Scholf and JM. The latter also had a sobriety story and as a recovering addict I found was very uncomfortable, but it was a million miles away from seeing an AA friend or family member dissembling. And I’m still not convinced about any positive effect on the individual.

I disagree. I think it’s firmly in the dodgy miller camp. Because she is, or would appear to be, a dodgy charity activist. And she appears to be slippery with the way she presents herself - different personae at different times. As an example, she used to talk about having been severely anorexic, and I was empathetic and interested in this, having been hospitalised for anorexia in my teens. But then I was confused and angry to subsequently see her posting thinspo selfies: angles and photoshopping to emphasise cheekbones, thin arms, waist, thighs. For the uninitiated that’s the equivalent of walking into an NA meeting and doing a big fat line at the podium. At best it’s disingenuous, at worst it’s downright fakery for likes.

I would also argue that the Phil Schofield thing is in the miller camp. We the public support these people via views on TV, via responding to adverts, our eyeballs pay their salaries. To continue your village analogy, Phil is the dodgy parish priest who preaches morals to us on Sunday and is up to no good with the choir boys on Monday. Fair game to discuss him.

As to the effect of gossiping on the gossiper, I posted earlier about recent research on the beneficial effects of indulging in moderate amounts of gossiping. It’s good for our brains and it’s good for social cohesion.

But my point is historically (and I mean in anthropological terms- not the effect for example of banks failing last century) gossip was useful when it was about people known personally and there was a practical action people could take- shun the miller or dodgy priest. This is a situation we’re not ‘wired’ to deal with. That’s what I mean by saying there’s a different function and effect. Speculating on SM scammers sits between warning each other about the cheating tradesman- definitely useful and gossiping about tv stars- pointless and harmful. And I’m focussing on the effect on the people having the conversation not the subject of the conversation.

JM is dishonest. She lies and scams people out of money. No liminal space about it whatsoever.

I guess that’s a new space. Historically people gossiped about people they knew and that was useful- if the miller was dishonest then people needed to know. There’s a long thread at the moment about daytime tv presenters- the vitriol on that is definitely of no use. This sits in a liminal space between the dishonest miller and the tv presenters.

You said "being vitriolic is so bad for you" and then "How do Tattlers feel..."

So I reasonably assumed that you were talking about the effect of gossip on gossipers. Generally it has a good effect. Recent research suggests that gossiping binds subgroups together and releases dopamine. Of course we have known this for a long time without science having to tell us. The patriarchy has tried to convince us that 'gossiping' is bad because they associate it with something that women do. But all humans do it in some shape or form at some point in their lives. In fact it can even save lives. We have all been warned in the Ladies Room at a nightclub about the dodgy guy lurking around trying to buy random women drinks. Or we have been good enough to warn others.

As to the person being gossiped about, it's rarely pleasant. I was once the subject of workplace gossip, albeit for a fault I knew was my own. I mended my ways.

In Jack's case, I have told about my experience of being bullied by her followers on Twitter because I had the temerity to disagree with her hatred of Jeremy Corbyn. I would hope she was not aware of what was going on, but I have since noticed that she seems to talk a great deal of pleasure in the antics of her 'flying monkeys'.

@WilkinsonM exactly!

There's a difference between trolling, ie: deliberately posting inflammatory remarks to provoke, and shining a light on someone's lies and quite frankly fraudulent behaviour.

I know the anthropological theory you refer to about gossip and cohesion, I’m more interested on the effect on the individual.

I literally have no idea. But it definitely made me wiser to the ways of Twitter.

You're labouring under the misapprehension that people criticising Jack are trolls operating in the same manner as the trolls who attack JK etc. they are not. She is not being trolled, she is being called out.

Sorry you experienced that attack. Quite often her "followers" are sock puppet accounts though...

This is incorrect. Anthropologists believe that gossip plays an important part in the evolution of human settlements as it enables members of the group to identify bad actors who may threaten the cohesion, stability or survival of the group. They also believe that it is an important displacement activity as an escape valve against intergroup violence.

In this case, if Jack Monroe is indeed scamming money, it's important to talk about that to try to prevent other people from falling victim.

I personally feel dumb as hell as I used to give her money as I thought it went to foodbanks, then throughout 2019 and 2020 I saw her wanging on about random stuff she'd bought, ridiculous levels like she said on telly she has three freezers. Why have I been giving her money for three freezers when I only have one, i asked myself? Answer came there none.

I should've known really as prior to this, in I think around 2017, I was engaged in what I thought was a civilised discussion about her politics on twitter and I mentioned something she'd said that I personally thought was ill-considered and damaging. A bunch of her followers came down on me like a ton of bricks, then started going through my old twitter posts, accounts i followed and accusing me of all sorts. I don't know if she saw it or what because I freaked out and deleted my twitter, re-joining a year later. But honesly. Can you imagine Nigella or Jamie fans doing that. You can also be judged by the company you keep.

@potniatheron "Jack love you must know we can recognise your (fairly idiosyncratic) writing style!"

🤣Yesterday someone thought I was a well known children's book recommendation website! I wonder who I'll be tomorrow...

In complete agreement.

Does she caveat anywhere that that's short term, emergency management only and not sustainable long term? Because that really is the worst thing. Imagine the health implications alone. It can't be done.

Jack love you must know we can recognise your (fairly idiosyncratic) writing style!

If they’re genuine trolls, they’re just the modern version of the poison pen letter. Nothing new, and that why anyone in the public eye really should have an agent/manager to run their SM and actively avoid personal exchanges and interaction in order to screen out these people. JM (and others) have used Twitter particularly to lash out. Again, it’s just the 21st century’s version of a screaming match in the forum.
Sure, use SM to publicise an issue that you feel strongly about, but don’t use it to actively attack others or to open up your private life to public scrutiny. If JM is going to post every unfiltered thought, she’s bound to attract comment - welcome or otherwise.

I'm baffled that anyone is still claiming she's an effective poverty campaigner. Claiming you can feed a family on twenty quid a week is straight from the more Tory headbangery playbook that anyone struggling is feckless.

Her username was MxJackMonroe
Might still be for all I know, unless she lost the passwords like she tried to claim for the reason she couldn't stop Patreon...

I dimly remember her coming on here to slag off a woman at a pub. Very unpleasant as I recall, her true opinion of working class people came out there and that was before she tried to claim being working class.