Online stalking by women and what it means for feminism

I strongly suspect she's talking about the 6 women she called the police on.

The majority of whom were ex employees and so knew each other long before they became aware of Tattle (which they became aware of in the same way many on the threads over there, about her do - because she told them about it!)

She's talking out of her arse. Again.

Some of the claims in the article are impossible. Apparently 8 women met up off tattle to plot how to tear her down. Except tattle is anonymous, and has no direct message function. So how did these women find each other?

Jess Taylor dislikes Tattle because the posters there document all her half-truths and distortions. Not to mention the multiple times she has told people - some of them severely unwell - that psychiatric disorders aren't real, medication is unnecessary and everything they're experiencing is just trauma (which they can conveniently address by buying her workbooks from her online shop).

Very disappointing to see The Times produce such a credulous article about her.

Absolutely correct. Nor is she qualified to work with clients / patients, nowhere near.

She did GCSEs. Didn't do A Levels. Did an Open University Psychology Degree.
Didn't do a Masters.

Self funded a PhD, which was on the topic of Victim Blaming. (Something she's certainly excelled at recently!).

Her PhD supervisors wanted to kick her off the course because they worried she'd bring the profession into disrepute. According to Jess, this was because she's a working class mum.

I strongly suspect if her supervisors ever spoke out they'd tell a very different story.

She is not a clinical psychologist, she has never done clinical work or had patients.

She is a chartered psychologist who has done a PhD. She likes you to think she has worked with hundreds of women who have been abused but she has not provided any kind of mental health treatment.

She is not a clinical psychologist, she has never done clinical work or had patients.

She is a chartered psychologist who has done a PhD. She likes you to think she has worked with hundreds of women who have been abused but she has not provided any kind of mental health treatment.

Does anyone know if the women who she claims stalked her were actually women and not men who identify as women?

People decide to make a living by posting publically everything about themselves - their homes, their daily routine, their meals, what beauty products they buy, what paint they put on their walls, they even monetise their children.

then they are genuinely surprised when people who consume all of this content they’re constantly pumping out start discussing the details

How are these two cases in any way the same?

The problem is that some types of people think even the mildest of criticism or pointing out inconsistencies is 'hate' or 'stalking'. Public figures should expect for others to scrutinise what they say and point out inconsistencies (or outright lies about experience or expertise).

I'm sure it feels horrible if other people are questioning the narrative you want them to believe and perhaps the narrative you even believe yourself. However, they may be right. If they're right it's not stalking, it's holding to account.

And yes, when people have been deceived they sometimes get angry and make nasty comments. Also not stalking.

Thanks to PP for sharing that substack. Quite a shocking read — and the author of that blog is most definitely not anonymous. She hasn’t been forced to take it down so one can only assume that it’s true.

Trolling is obviously a hot topic. But both Jess Taylor and others who have painted themselves as victims of trolling have done things which allegedly don’t tally with their version of events. And it’s much more than a little polishing of the cv. In one case the “victim” has shared huge amounts of detail about her life then been surprised or shocked when people comment on it.

On the other hand, mixed in with legitimate criticisms there are huge amounts of unkind, unfair, and outright cruel comments shared about all these people. Where do we draw the line? I’d say that if you’re in the public eye you have to have a thick skin, but that doesn’t extend to actual stalking of course. The trouble is, in these cases, I haven’t seen them produce evidence of stalking. They’ve alleged it. And arguably because they don’t like their version of events to be challenged.

I know for a fact that there is a lot more to this story…

This is the second article within a week in the Times about female stalkers, in both cases there is a book out or one being written. Mumsnet gets mentioned in the earlier article.
https://www.thetimes.com/article/19d7468e-e278-46d5-abdf-67dca5111b52?shareToken=1c80228224b724a12cb08c7bee66e9d0&ver=article

Liz Fraser and Jack Monroe also feel they’ve been stalked and harassed.
The objects of these situations seem to have certain commonalities, which seem to leave them exposed to interest from people who like exposing inconsistencies with people’s presentation.

Maybe there’s been a period of adjusting when people have been getting used to having a curated public presence. There will have been times, perhaps, that choosing a polished presentation risks slipping over the line into outright fabrication. Rather like your CV- we all know it needs a polish to show things in their best light. It shouldn’t be actually incorrect.

Trump would also say that he was misrepresented in the media, and targeted in a similar way.

Wow. Thanks for sharing this

Is anyone still believing anything Jessica Taylor says???

https://kerrydaynes.substack.com/p/click-lie-repeat-inside-the-claims

nb Some of the comments on this article are mind boggling.

This is a useful Substack that gives a different point of view to consider.
https://kerrydaynes.substack.com/p/click-lie-repeat-inside-the-claims

There is a bbc story on the complaints made about her by patients with eating disorders.

One has to tread carefully to avoid being the wrong side of defamation laws, but I would urge anyone to have a look at discussions about Jess Taylor on X and consider whether there might be another side to this story.

I don't see how this "stalking" by women on Tattle would work? AFAIK there isn't any form of messaging function on Tattle.

I'm sure people do comment on her sometimes dangerous advice.

^"Taylor told me that complaints about her to the British Psychological Society led to a six-month investigation that eventually cleared her name."^

This is a massive misrepresentation (as is typical for Jess) as the BPS is not a regulatory body.

Yes women can and do commit crime, albeit of course women commit massively fewer crimes than men commit, and men commit over 90% of violent and sexual crime.
I'm not sure that this says anything at all about feminism really. I don't think feminism could ever (sensibly) say that women are perfect. The point is surely that women are of equal value to men and must be treated as such, irrespective of the fact that some individual women can be badly-behaved.