Tearful Karen sacked from booksellers for boasting about ripping up books by an author she doesn't like

Cupid Stunt

It’s the first mistake she’s ever made…

Woomp woomp! Do not pass Go! Do not collect $200.

"I tried to ruin someone else's livelihood and instead, she ruined mine! Boo-hoo!"

Leave the books alone. All of them. No one has the right to decide for others.

100 million books out there, some deserve to be torn up.

Let me guess: "Tilly" has a penis, testicles and a very prominent Adam's apple.

Checked the link and was surprised to discover she is an actual delusional woman who sucks TRA dick but doesn't have one.

I'm blocked by this woman I've never interacted with. Small mercies. She uses a blocklist that curates against 'transphobes'. What's interesting is more than one of those blocklists were created by rapists. There's one called Shinigami Eyes that was made by "Lauelai" Bailey, a man who's been accused of raping multiple women, including a 14 year old girl. Terf Tracker was founded by "Allison" Woolbert, a man who raped a 15 year old relative. And Terfblocker was made by "Aimee" Challenor and his father, infamous sickos and the stuff of nightmares. But J.K. is the problem 🙃

Mike (They/Them) is FURIOUS with Waterstones

[quote]The Glasgow branch of @Waterstones hosts a non-binary night every month. Are we to no longer feel safe or welcome in your store because you value a transphobic author over a dedicated member of staff who just happens to stand up for trans people?

The anti TERF book burners really are convinced they are the good guys and the publishing troons who think it is their job to protect the public from views they disagree with have no idea that they are authoritarian censors.

Ummmm throwing away ≠ ripping up. You people always lie lol.

Is this distinction important to her employer or to the question at hand, r10?

The distinction is relevant to the thread, because OP is lying R11. Did the person say she would rip up the books?

She was a salaried employee. If she had her own bookshop she'd be free to do what she wanted about authors' beliefs. She fucked up, thinking working in a bookshop was some twinkly existence free from consequence.

I worked in books for twenty years and on a daily basis you might come across books or authors you don't like, but it's not your place to decide whether or not to sell them.

[quote]The distinction is relevant to the thread, because OP is lying R11. Did the person say she would rip up the books?

YES SHE DID

Her exact words were "Ooh I’ll enjoy tearing up your books and popping them in the bin today. Thanks for the heads up."

Sniveling cow deserves to be sacked. Bet she won't even learn a lesson.

R13

Back in the day at Borders in liberal Seattle, it was required by corporate at one point to have two tables facing each other featuring left and right-wing writers. The staff were all "Ewww ... don't make me do that (take part in displaying Republican writers)!" The manager had to tell them firmly "It's about setting up a balanced display, you're not being asked to personally endorse a book!"

R14 link to that?

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

[quote][R14] link to that?

R18 beat me to it, but googling the quote immediately turned up an Independent article containing the "Ooh I’ll enjoy tearing up your books and popping them in the bin today. Thanks for the heads up" quote. She should've expected to get fired for that, but people get caught up in chasing 'likes' on social media and forget real life isn't an echo chamber.

And not that it needs to be said, but if a TERF book shop employee boasted that they were going to tear up copies of Pageboy by Elliot Page or Being Jazz or Laverne, Surely then I wouldn't be surprised if they were sacked too.

People can't resist opening up their yaps the the public and they will never learn. Not everyone needs to hear your every fucking thought.

Is she the asscrack lady??

I despise the trend of fraus, cows, they/thems, and assorted cunts crying into their iPhone cameras and broadcasting it to the world.

My instant assumption is that they are malignant, manipulative Cluster B trainwrecks.

Weeping snottily into your front-facing camera is the human version of bright colors on a frog or a rattle on a snake: A warning to stay far the fuck away if you value your life.

R18 hadn’t seen that, I stand corrected. Silly thing to post. I was only going off the vid in OP, and had also checked her twitter but it was private.

Did also see this on twitter while I was browsing, wonder will Waterstones take similar action against this employee hrmmmmm.

[quote]cluster B disorders

Damn right r23. People like that of any political stripe are toxic, nasty shitgibbons.

R24 Not quite equivalent since the poster didn't say anything about books.

Weeping Lady of the Unfairly Dismissed glosses over what she did to warrant her firing--a muttered "I made one mistake" isn't an apology, it's a defense. Suck it up lady, accept the consequence, can the waterworks, don't threaten to destroy your company's merchandise, and maybe a future employer will take pity on you.

R26 it’s retweeted through an official Waterstones account by an employee. It’s by degrees much worse. Are you kidding me? Maybe you didn’t read it properly.

Why be Cheerful Karen, when you can be Tearful Karen?

R27 Maybe you didn't read it properly. There is nothing in the post about books, destroying them or reading them. That's the only post my screen shows anyway.

Even Our Lady of the Perpetually Aggrieved admits she violated Waterstones' social media policy, but thinks the punishment was disproportionate. In that case you shouldn't be sobbing and doubling down on how awful and hateful the author is, which makes you look unhinged and likely to go off the rails again. But this woman is so concerned with broadcasting how much integrity she has that any employer would be skittish about having her back.

For the record I don't even think she should have been fired, or at least I don't much care either way. it's her sniveling, dissembling victimhood that offends me.

R29 it’s political posting being undertaken by employees regarding their attitudes about trans rights and politics related to that. One employee used a private account and one used a business account. Which is more serious?

Both employees should be reprimanded but neither should be fired.

I don't think she deserved to be fired if this is the only tweet she posted on the subject:

[quote]“Ooh I’ll enjoy tearing up your books and popping them in the bin today. Thanks for the heads up.”

In that message there's no suggestion that she was going to tear up any of Waterstones' stock and she said herself she was referring to her own books. Additionally, she shared a tweet she posted from a few years ago where she praised the author in question's book, which is pretty decent evidence that she owned at least one of her books (it would be harder to argue she was talking about her own property if she'd never mentioned the author before).

I think what's funny though is how many gender critical people are rubbing their hands in glee over her being fired, despite being up in arms any time someone is sacked for sharing gender critical views. (I don't think anyone should be dismissed for gender critical views either.)

It's only OK to fire someone I disagree with! And that applies to both sides of the debate.

Yes, R32, I think all kinds of people would feel differently if the books in question were by Trump or Tucker Carlson.

The vast majority of people who are "anti-censorship" and "anti-book-burning" -- on any side of the political aisle -- turn out to make a lot of exceptions for things they personally disagree with. But it's okay, because by destroying ideas they don't like, they're just standing up for Truth. And protecting the world, y'see.

[quote]In that message there's no suggestion that she was going to tear up any of Waterstones' stock and she said herself she was referring to her own books.

Yeah it's ambiguous. It COULD be interpreted as her destroying Waterstone's stock or it COULD be interpreted as her destroying her own copies of the author's books.

But again, she works for Waterstones and is talking about destroying books where she doesn't approve of the author. Would a clothes shop continue to employ someone as a "fashion influencer" who publicly states she's going to take scissors to clothes by a certain designer? A record store and someone who smashes vinyl?

Waterstones have said she broke their social media policy, and considering the previous issues with Waterstones store staff hiding or not displaying "TERF books" I expect they will have invested a lot of time with HR advisors on staff conduct policies.

I'm not gleeful about her firing, but there's no point in martyring her, either. The company says she was fired for violating its social media policy, and she freely admits she indeed violated it. But she appears to have expected either no consequences or minor consequences as a result. From the Independent article:

[quote]“I acknowledge that my comments were a violation of the social media policy, and I did apologise for any trouble caused, however, I think the punishment was disproportionate and a warning would have been more appropriate.”

She could've expressed the same opinion anonymously and faced no professional repercussions.

[quote]But again, she works for Waterstones and is talking about destroying books where she doesn't approve of the author. Would a clothes shop continue to employ someone as a "fashion influencer" who publicly states she's going to take scissors to clothes by a certain designer? A record store and someone who smashes vinyl?

R34 I don't see why not, as long as they don't state they're doing it in a professional capacity. To use your examples, it would be an issue if someone stated they were going to destroy company owned clothes or vinyl, but not if they state an intention to destroy their own property in their time.

I think it was poor form of the author, too. If I'd written books, I'd expect pushback from some people who either didn't like my material or personal views. I don't give a fuck, though. That's why I can easily contribute to discussions on sites like this - I can tolerate, and engage with, disagreement. By tagging her employer the author was essentially saying: "Are you really going to employ someone who's offended me as a reasonably well known book writer?!"

People disagree with me here every day and I've had plenty of shit thrown my way, but I'd never want to get someone fired for doing so. It shows fragility but also a vengeful streak - ie you've hurt me, so I'll hurt you back ten times harder. Okay, weirdo.

I suppose I ought to be grateful I'm only known as "—Anonymous" here, or I could expect a call with my employer come the morning...

Anyone know what the fuck she's babbling on about? Some of these British accents are incomprehensible. Whatever happened to Received Pronunciation?

Any retail position in the UK will have a very long contract including things like "bringing the company into disrepute" will be seen as gross misconduct. We also have legal protections which mean you can't just be sacked on a whim.

I worked in the industry for 20 years and no manager would be so reckless to just sack anyone without reason, as there are far too many employment laws in place to protect employees from unlawful dismissal.

Also Waterstones has a very good reputation in the industry - they won't employ just anyone and their managers are very well trained. They're also not just some little independent bookshop. They have a huge Head Office team, many of which I've worked with at various points.

Sacking this woman wasn't just a case of someone saying "You're fired!".

R38 I still think she'd have had pretty strong grounds to appeal if she hadn't made the teary video. You'd be surprised at how many employers will sack employees and will just assume they won't take any further action. My sister was fired from a job she'd had for multiple years and got a lawyer involved. They ended up increasing their settlement by around 5 times after she and her lawyer went back and highlighted the inaccuracies in their accusations.

I should add my sister isn't an influencer and didn't make comments on social media! But they did think she'd be a teary woman and would meekly go without raising any objections. Wrong.

[quote][R38] I still think she'd have had pretty strong grounds to appeal if she hadn't made the teary video. You'd be surprised at how many employers will sack employees and will just assume they won't take any further action. My sister was fired from a job she'd had for multiple years and got a lawyer involved. They ended up increasing their settlement by around 5 times after she and her lawyer went back and highlighted the inaccuracies in their accusations.

This woman works in a shop and is paid to promote books online.

She would be able to crowdfund costs to take Waterstones to an employment tribunal like many TERFs have had to do and cite protected belief under the Equality Act.

But where the TERFs cited their belief that people can’t change sex and men can’t be lesbians, this woman wasn’t punished for her beliefs (trans women are women etc) she was punished for breaking social media policy for promoting the destruction of books.

I have no doubt she is receiving free legal advice, a lot of which will be from amateur lawyers, but we will see if any action is takeb.

[quote] The vast majority of people who are "anti-censorship" and "anti-book-burning" -- on any side of the political aisle -- turn out to make a lot of exceptions for things they personally disagree with

I'm not one of them and I'm glad she was fired.

R40 Do Waterstones pay her to promote books online, though? I understood she was employed by Waterstones in one of their bookshops and ran an Instagram account separately that provides income from advertising, etc. In the same way YouTube provides income.

I kind of hope she does take legal action. Not because I care about punishing Waterstones, nor do I care if she gets her job back, but more because it puts the law to the test and will provide clarity to any future employees who find themselves without a job after a similar situation.

R42 She doesn't have a case for legal action. You think her manager just saw her social media and dismissed her immediately? You think any retail manager in the UK just does that kind of thing? Process would have been followed. She would also have had a period in which to appeal and she doesn't seem to have done that.

I'd argue there's more going on with her work history and they'd had enough of her, though obviously I have no actual proof of that.

R43 I'm not saying she definitely does have a case for legal action, as I don't know the ins and outs of it. I'm just saying that she *might* have a case if things are as they've been presented.

If there were tweets other than: “Ooh I’ll enjoy tearing up your books and popping them in the bin today. Thanks for the heads up" that made it clear she wanted to destroy company stock, for example, then I'd agree there'd be no case. I can't find any other tweets on the subject, though.

I never jump to conclusions, whereas many will, purely because of the teary video. I agree she comes across as attention seeking, but it's still not evidence she intended to destroy company stock or that she intended to bring her employer into disrepute. Like I say, if there's other evidence that goes against her, I'm genuinely interested to hear it, as I didn't find anything else from the reading I did.

[quote]R34 Would a clothes shop continue to employ someone as a "fashion influencer" who publicly states she's going to take scissors to clothes by a certain designer? A record store and someone who smashes vinyl?

Um, yes. It shows a specialist has TASTE and STANDARDS.

Bookstores don’t carry every single book that’s published!

[quote]Bookstores don’t carry every single book that’s published!

No but they will order a book for you and if you do make a request they won’t do a google search to see if the author is problematic.

A few years ago an Australian book shop said they would remove JK Rowling’s books from display in protest at her ‘transphobia’. They still sold her books - they are a business after all - but advertised them as hidden to promote their business. On their website they had an online section and you could not only order JKR but also Mein Kampf.

Waterstones have had problems in the past with activist sales assistants. It looks like Karen aka Tilly worked in Worthing just along the coast from Brighton where staff were boasting about hiding books.

She looks like she smells.

Urgh I know it's off topic but Douglas Murray is such a smug arrogant cunt.

Okay that's better.

R44 There will be enough in her employment contract to cover what she did. It'll cover social media use, bringing the company into disrepute, a breakdown of trust between her and her employer etc

Summary dismissal of an employee isn't taken lightly. It would have involved her manager, her area manager, HR and by the sounds of it, other people higher up in the company. I've done some really basic, entry-level investigations, disciplinaries and eventual dismissals which involved us seeking legal advice before we proceeded. On no planet would her dismissal have been made without due process, especially when it has the potential to be high profile.

[quote]This woman works in a shop

You only work in a shop you know, you can drop the attitude.

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

After these negative stories in the media about their staff and countless anecdotes on Twitter of TERFs cruelly taunting shop staff by asking for TERF books Waterstones will have got their house in order.

"Why are bookshops dying? Why are people turning to Amazon? Oh, woe! O tempora! O mores!"

[quote]R49 There will be enough in her employment contract to cover what she did.

How do we know she has a contract? Couldn’t she be working the register at an hourly rate?

In England, we call her Lady Ashcrack, the Duchess Dowager Consort of Lume

It would be like working at a smoke shop and then saying you can't wait to throw the menthol cigs in the bin. Did you mean your own pack of menthols? or did you mean the ones in stock? It doesn't fucking matter. You don't brag about destroying stock at your place of business. You're a dumb asshole if you do. Also, this is just a sign of the other bullshit she would undoubtedly do. She clearly loves twitter asspats so you don't know what other shit she'll latch on to. Free Palestine or some other popular trend.

If you work in a bookstore and brag about destroying books that’s a problem. Can you work in a pet store and talk about how you hate certain pets? Maybe keep those opinions private.

Some writers including the woman who wrote that Chocolat book that was made into a film 25 years ago have signed a letter supporting book ripper Karen.

Not sure why I'm surprised but Karen aka Tilly has worked at the bookshop for less than a year

Your daily reminder that “Karen” is a misogynist, racist, and classist term.

It originated on Black Twitter as a way of making fun of white women.

Lower class whites then adopted it— there’s nothing fat, unemployed white men love more than insulting women.

So, if you want to be associated with those groups, go ahead. But the rest of us know you’re trash when you call someone a “Karen.”

Some authors are supporting this? Wow, how fucking idiotic. Of course the chick that wrote "Chocolat" is in no danger of any of her current work being ripped up. Enjoy cashing in on the name you made for a pretentious fucking 30 year old movie.

R60 Yep. Karen says more about the speaker than the person they're talking about.

I agree R60 but in this case Tilly (such a middle class name in the UK) is the kind of woman who calls other women Karen, so it was acceptable to call her a Karen. Tilly mocks other women for "turning on the white lady tears" to manipulate people and there is Tilly crying on camera. I expect Tilly went to an expensive school and looking at her social media her daughter has just turned 5 so she probably took on a "little part time job in a bookshop for something to do when Adelaide is at school". You know the type.

But I'll stop now as I've made the point and you've made clear your objection.

[quote]Some authors are supporting this? Wow, how fucking idiotic. Of course the chick that wrote "Chocolat" is in no danger of any of her current work being ripped up. Enjoy cashing in on the name you made for a pretentious fucking 30 year old movie.

As for Joanne Harris, she's a nasty piece of work. She now uses she/they pronouns as she has short hair, her daughter has decided she is a man and none of her books have achieved anything near the success of Chocolat. She despises JK Rowling and mocked the death threat sent to Rowling on the day Salman Rushdie was attacked posting a poll on twitter about death threats.

I have a lot of books. I confess I’ve thrown a bunch of the junkier ones in the fireplace over the years, preparing to move. They take a lot longer to burn than you’d think - even the paperbacks.

I learned the lesson in junior high. Back in the Dark Ages we used to pass notes. I wrote something bad about a friend and passed it to another friend. Of course that friend showed it to the original forensic and I was frozen out. My mother told me “Never put in writing what you wouldn’t want everyone to see.”

So I never did that again IRL. On the internet however, I do it anonymously.

People screeching "TERF!" at others are always fucking bonkers!

Bye, Tilly!

This is a funny article about the 500 people who signed the letter defending Tilly as covered by The Guardian

Colour me stunned, R66

I read the list of signatories with the suspicion that there was cherry-picking for nobodies, but nope.

Karen at R60 doesn't want to be called a "Karen," so we'll just call her a Deluded Scold.

[quote]R64: I learned the lesson in junior high. Back in the Dark Ages we used to pass notes. I wrote something bad about a friend and passed it to another friend. Of course that friend showed it to the original forensic and I was frozen out. My mother told me “Never put in writing what you wouldn’t want everyone to see.”

Forensic?

Oh, dear.

[quote]Karen at [R60] doesn't want to be called a "Karen," so we'll just call her a Deluded Scold.

And we’ll just call you illiterate trash.

Can’t she just wash her ladyfolds in a shower 🚿?

R69’s other charming posts include:

“In this case there's a difference between a seller learning that a buyer is black and learning that a buyer is so black.”

Calling Meghan Markle “a roach”

Referring to pets as “dumb animals”

Suggesting someone should be named “Tardo”

So you hate women, Black people, and animals.

And almost every other post is an attempt to start an argument with a random poster.

You’re a real piece of shit.

I’m blocked by the sacked employee. I think I am on a Twitter blocklist after following James Dreyfus years ago.

R73 Right, he thinks he only hates white women, but by supporting this trans lunacy, he hates all women.

sucks TRA dick

That is traumatizing to me, I now have PTSD.