India knight still at the Times?

[Greenthomson]

Writing about her idyllic Christmas..I had no idea about her husband, is she still with him?

Now she's reduced to writing advertisements puff pieces about beauty freebies sent by big advertisers. She's not selling them well.😬

Yet another Nepo babe. Let alone her staying with a Paedo to the detriment of having a relationship with her youngest, I loathe her hectoring tone; basically, "if I say this, it has to be right." When she lived in Hackney, it was the best place in the world, rapidly replaced by Primrose Hill onwards and upwards to Dungeness, latter only after Derek Jarman, Roy Strong and others (Nigella?) in the 'Glitteratie' had endorsed. Her self delusion is beyond - her diet book had her claiming she'd lost stones - neither the maths or pics added up. She also inferred about smoking cannabis with her two oldest teens - because it would be hypocritical not to do so when passing around the joint post dinner (or Supper, what's UC these days?) parties. I read one of her 'fiction' books; a very thinly disguised autobiography where the heroine emerged, like a butterfly (more like a Death Head Moth) from a Chrysalis with gorgeous cheekbones and six stones lighter after her husband dumped her and fled abroad - but not because he was gay. The heroine ended up with the most gorgeous, talented,?2

Part 2 - post fail and don't know how to edit!
Gorgeous bloke in the world - talented and rich- and took her on with her half waxed nether regions (you would have to read the book but, don't).

It’s obvious from the comments under the Times column that many (most?) readers are ignorant of her support for a convicted paedophile. Was it a coincidence that Joyce chose a partner with a vulnerable young daughter with SEN including speech difficulties? That’s not her fault, but how could she continue to live with him knowing his real sexual interest is in little girls? I also remember her late night abusive outbursts on Twitter which felt drink-fuelled and were shockingly malevolent. Then there were her threats to ‘send Eric round’ to threaten women whose online comments upset her journalist mates. And her cruel comments about childless women. All cheered on by her claque of celebrity girlfriends. She’s a perfectly good columnist with a distinctively confident, breezy style, but that’s irrelevant at this point. People who pay for her substack should think about what kind of ‘home’ they are supporting.

I too dislike her lots. For her supporting a paedophile husband. But also for the sanctimonious lecturing.

She often preaches about how much better life is outside London now she has moved and how people should only support local business. Then in lockdown, her hair become dreadful and matted (how??) and she wrote in detail about her trip to her expensive hairdresser in Mayfair. Hypocrite.

Just looked at the nonce's twitter, still tweeting away despite the fact that not one of his followers so much as likes them. Prick.

When I first read her articles in the Sunday Times I thought she was India Hicks 🙄
Her birth name was Gisèle Aertsens.

She is insulated by privilege, which is why she still has a platform and also why the pieces she writes from it are so mind-blowingly tone deaf.

I read one at the beginning of the summer about how to make sure your post-GCSE teens were safe on their first solo holidays abroad. One top tip was give them the contact number of friends you have with villas in the vicinity. Like it never crossed her mind that we don't all have mates whose holiday property portfolios cover all the hot party destinations du jour.

I saw that she'd popped up on Substack and got herself a shedload of subscribers who want to be in the celeb writer clique. Grim.

Unfortunately the Times has plenty of form for employing very undesirable people to write columns.

So did I 🤣

I have now googled - and yes - privileged background.

I liked that article she wrote that I linked to in my post above, and she’s written some other stuff that I liked. I do agree that the Sunday Times had - and still has - lots of talented writers and that they employ some people who are probably more talented than her.

I remember with some distaste that her profile was elevated massively on the coat-tails of her friend Ruth Picardie's cancer columns. Ruth died in 1997 and in the early days of email, she liked to share India's "hilarious" missives and it gave her a kind of celebrity she didn't have before. She was bloody everywhere after that.

Interesting isn't it that she was happy to share her daughter’s issues and diagnoses far and wide but suddenly when it’s her own relationship in the spotlight the book clangs shut

Well that’s another Times subscription cancelled. My parents were unaware of this and made the right decision to not support a newspaper who have her writing for them.

Jeez I had no idea! I quite liked their house, but now I’ve read about him there’s no way I’d want to buy that!!

I always looked forward to reading India Knight in the Sunday Times (the only newspaper we bought), found her engaging and amusing, especially her observations of family life. Sometimes serious social issues.

I have no idea why she is shacked up with this man, I can only think she believes he is wrongly convicted and he has got into her head.

The newspaper is not something I buy now. I google 'latest news' everyday and reads bits from various sources, free; sometimes I watch the TV news. That's enough for me.

What do you mean you quite liked their house? I’m not quite sure what you mean.

She's selling her house, announced it on Substack the other day:

For Sale: Barton Grange, Worlingworth, Suffolk | Inigo

I see she’s planning on moving back to London, but I can’t see her being welcomed back by her old cronies and going to the parties like she used to do. Perhaps she wants a quieter life now.

I bet once everyone could see she was going to back her disgrace of a husband, they were booted off to social Siberia (as they should’ve) and I bet it’s boring as fuck out there with just the two of them. And no doubt a very expensive way for just two people to live judging by the size of the house. London at least has lots of things to do, even if you’re no longer welcomed by your beloved media hoi polloi

Yes. There aren't many who will knowingly socialise with a convicted paedophile.