My nanny’s pregnant and I’m far from happy

[belleMarie]

Katie Hopkins is one vile person. Narcissistic much?

Yeah it's the dreaded DM but...

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2165804/My-nanny-s-pregnant-I-m-far-happy.html

Agree, that was horrible saucepans.

She is awful- an awful 'advert' for working Mums. Her poor children- no matter how amazing her nanny is reading thes in future years will not be healthy for them :(

Eeeek @ her blog. She has listed 'Ten Things to Love About Lady Thatcher', including: 'Would she have belonged to mumsnet? Never.'
And she, somewhat hypocritically, says of Carla Bruni: 'Mrs Sarkowsy [sic] stole a husband'. What a clunge.

Well, I feel chastised now. I must be fucking evil.

My nanny is only employed on satisfactory examination of her chastity belt.

She has absolutely no self-awareness at all.

Childcare is a massive problem and mainly as Katie points out is that it is mainly done by women who like children and therefore have or want to have their own.
If it had any status or a decent wage it would be done by men. But it doesn't so it's left to women to sort out and yet whatever we still slag off those that have it, those that do it, and look down on anyone that hasn't used it.

stupid thing is katie hopkins jibbed out of the apprentice, saying she didnt have childcare arranged, she didnt really do alot for making woman seem relaible did she.
what a twat

I don't look down on her. I just refuse to look up to her. I do not agree with most of her ideals.

her blog mentions orange tupperware? lol

i hope she does a "reply" to the backlash of this article (like that "women hate me cos i'm pretty" woman did) she seems to like mumsnet a lot, so I'm sure we'll get a mention

Good point well made r.e. childcare issues being the women's concern.

Think the site's been hacked or summat, on my iPhone and it keeps redirecting me to a scammy site by posting a message I have to click 'ok' to close

Which site?

Oh here we go again. The Fail is a professional troll that loves to put a woman who they know will incite strong emotions for a public witch hunt under the guise of sympathetically representing women.

Result: by the sheer bias towards coverage of stupid, unreasonable women they're touted as the norm rather than the exception. Secondly there is a public bitch fight on the comments board. Thus perpetuating the 'women are unreasonable and bitchy' myth so beloved of that misogynist rag.

Don't get sucked in.

I agree Gibbous.

I couldn't bear to read the whole article and must confess I also haven't read the whole thread.

But for the brief period we employed a nanny (two actually, both wonderful and both with their own children, which is what made it affordable for us (the first one sadly had to leave us for a full-time post when her husband was made redundant)), I did live in fear of their deciding to have another child, as there was no way we could have afforded to pay mat pay for our nanny and childcare costs for DD on top.

DD went to nursery at 2.6 and both nannies subsequently went on to have lovely DC2s, so it's all good, but I can't pretend it wasn't a concern.

Oh and Gibbous, you posted while I was writing but I couldn't agree more. The DM is consistently vile towards all women whatever their choices in life and I can't believe so many women continue to buy it.

It doesn't matter if you agree or not - why does it turn into a slagging match about her, her taste in homeware etc etc.

How many blokes disagree with someones views and then launch into some attack on which car he drives.

It's shit and we are not doing ourselves any favours.

I can name Jeremy Clarkson, another "favourite" but that's probably going away from the more genuine point you are making

The DM deliberately chose a not very nice person (I gather she is a not veyry nice person from how she says things in her article, I haven't a clue re who she is, I am not in the UK) with dubious taste in carpets to write a bad article to dumb down an important subject, the choice of childcare, who chooses it, and what do you do if it fails.

oh god, i'm not slagging off her tupperware! i love tupperware. it's just not the kind of thing i expected to see in her immaculate very pale and white house that's all. not v. upmarket

I have been trying to find out what she actually does and I've come to the conclusion that she's got no experience, no track record and is too mouthy for anything other than chatshows

I think that's a good point Glitter. How many times on here do we see Jeremy is a "twat" because of his views but he is considered a bit of a god to men because he and he alone in bloke land tells it like it is. A woman makes a fair point about the necessity of childcare and she's not worth the paper she writes on apparently.

However I have never heard Jeremy comment on the work -life - children balance because it not something he's had to worry about. Although I have heard rumours of a mistress.

She is such a selfish person. I have a feeling one day she will regret the way she prioritised her precious work over everything.

They are both twats.

The way the article is written makes KH come across as quite a selfish employer who didn't seem to consider her nanny as anything but a machine. One of the reasons we didn't choose a nanny over a nursery was for continuation of childcare in events such as pregnancy or illness. That said, the language in which the blog is written is also very similar to their article so was the article doctored as such?