LOL

‘You need to be on your best possible form’ for grouse shooting says Withers partner Bertie Hoskyns-Abrahall in Tatler advice column to women

By on
53

This actually happened

downton-abbey

Bertie Hoskyns-Abrahall, partner at big shot private client firm Withers, has made an appearance in a Tatler article called ‘The rules for wearing make-up during the shooting season’.

Yes, we know.

The column is written by the very middle-class magazine’s ‘Beauty in the Country’ columnist Netia Walker, and features advice on how best to play grouse shooting season.

grouse

The piece features unmissable fashion tips and tricks like:

Grouse are very alert and react to bright colours, so for heaven’s sake don’t go out bedecked in shocking-pink cashmere, and if you have very bright highlights or very blonde hair, wear a cap.

And:

There is A LOT of walking to be done and people forget that it’s meant to be the height of our summer so can be boiling. Remember this as you dress — you don’t want to be carrying armfuls of discarded tweed along with you all day.

You’d think a make-up advice piece about beauty in the countryside wouldn’t be the place for a London-based male law firm partner to make an appearance, especially given the firm’s efforts to buck the stereotype of stuffiness attached to lawyers who serve wealthy private individuals. But you’d be wrong. Cue Hoskyns-Abrahall:

No one in their right mind refuses a day’s grouse. Bertie Hoskyns-Abrahall, a partner at Withers, agrees: ‘If you are lucky enough to be invited grouse-shooting, you need to be on your best possible form — there is a waiting list, so if you make the cut, go for it!’

Well that settles that then.

Maybe Hoskyns-Abrahall’s fleeting appearance in the article can be explained by some law firm partners’ love of eating game birds.

Remember Fieldfisher’s pheasant farrago of a few years back, when the firm was forced to switch to other lunch options because — shock horror — their stock of the bird was “too thin”.

How the other half live, eh?

53 Comments

Anonymous

Katie.. Come on.

(20)(4)

Anonymous

This is a truly awful “article”.

(17)(5)

Trumpenkrieg

What kind of mind-numbingly stupid excuse for a sub-headline is “This actually happened”

It’s quite obvious all she reads is Jezebel and Gawker.

(9)(1)

Dr Wombles MBA MDS MA BS

No, it’s merely evidence Katie inspected RoF in the morning and pressed the trusted combo of ‘CTRL-C CTRL-V’ regarding their post on this, as she so often does.

(11)(0)

Not Amused

Sorry. But your article is really just a very prejudicial and bigoted attack. If you go to an event to shoot grouse then it seems to me perfectly helpful to be told not to wear bright colours, because doing so scares the grouse.

It’s really no different from being told that if I take you to go to visit my nan, don’t punch her in the face. In fact telling people how to behave at social functions that they may not otherwise know (how could they) how to behave is helpful, kind and inclusive.

Nobody knows anything until they learn by experience OR someone tells them. If you deliberately keep people ignorant then you harm them by limiting their life choices. If you pretend that people can behave how they want in any situation then you again harm them by being dishonest – no one, not even the queen, is allowed to punch my nan.

This absurdly vicious attack on anyone perceived as different from you is why the left wing is rapidly becoming the nasty party.

(68)(18)

Anonymous

Hear, Hear!

(14)(1)

Anonymous

See, see!

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Taste, Taste!

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Feel, Feel!

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

Anonymous

Wank, wank!

Lord Pooperpancensel

PULL!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeremy

Shut it you toxic Tory.

(5)(14)

Anonymous

Maybe Hoskyns-Abrahall’s fleeting appearance in the article can be explained by the fact he is a solicitor for landed estates and has an undergraduate degree in countryside management.

(26)(1)

Anonymous

Clearly Katie want Charlotte Proudman to be quoted though.

(6)(0)

Rumple

Miss Proud(wo)man is dripping at this, I tell you.

(7)(0)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

The patriarchy! The privilege! I’ll be writing about these cis gender scum on my tumblr page. Thanks for alerting me to this, fellow social justice warrior.

(10)(3)

Anonymous

Let’s all spare a thought for the grouse

(4)(1)

Anonymous

#jesuisgrouse

(21)(0)

Dublin BL

A middle class lawyer, telling a middle class readership how to behave at a middle class event in an article published in a middle class magazine, has completely offended the sensibilities of this middle class barrister. To each their own I suppose.

(19)(2)

Interloper

As a vegetarian, I’d rather not shoot animals.

Is that OK like ?

(4)(6)

Just a thought

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(14)(1)

Anonymous

Well done you fucksticks – someone criticises how shit this article is and you delete it because it ‘breaches your comments policy’?

You gotta be taking the piss.

(8)(0)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(8)(0)

Anonymous

Seems like practical advice.

As for the premise of the article, it’s hard to read Tatler and be surprised by articles about grouse hunting.

(4)(0)

Anonymous

One does not “hunt” grouse

(3)(0)

Anonymous

One hasn’t lived.

(1)(0)

Prince Bongo Uhombo Kholomndumo

Her Magisterial Erulu King Katie perhaps has amnesia of Struthio camelus, the most magnanimous bird upon the game globe , native to my land not to mention the varieties of francolin , wherefrom the pleasant Scots pheasant derives. Struthio camelus can kill a hunter. In rectification of the invagination of the great black hunter.

(1)(2)

Pongobulb

Ok calm down.

PS – can I have your bank details?

(4)(0)

Anonymous

What, nothing about Irwin Mitchell?

(0)(0)

Copacabanter

Irwin Mitchell is a titan among top City firms.

(1)(0)

Bagged me some game

How many TCs does the grouse offer?

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Ah, the Internet. Where rabied third-wave feminism comes to die.

(7)(1)

Bonzo

I eat turtles

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Just a guy posting about his hobby / pass time – could literally be about anything – chess, hockey, football, Morris dancing, etc etc

This Web page is called “legal cheek” so unsurprisingly, it takes an irreverent, tongue in cheek, satirical angle to this story. It’s nothing new. I don’t understand why people have to be so mean and personal to Katie king. It’s so unnecessary.

I just Googled her and her linked in came up. She got a first, in the top 5 per cent and won prizes, and she is young / graduated recently. Some people are just jealous and hiding behind a computer screen. The only explanation because there is nothing really that objectionable to the content / style / angle of her articles.

(7)(8)

Dr Wombles MBA MDS MA BS

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Roll on Friday, in my opinion, is not funny at all.

(1)(3)

Anon

Hello Alex!

(3)(0)

Dr Bango Chumbo

You’re an unfunny khunt then.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

People who think the problem is with the LC article and not the one being written about need to be shot in the face with their mum’s shotgun. I’m not sure what is worse the tweedy cvunts who do this stuff or the insipid stripy shirted city dweebs that pretend its part of their world.

(1)(6)

Anonymous

It’s this kind of flippant, “think I’m being hilariously funny”, abusive “cvunt” comment that defeats your own (credible) point.

I don’t agree with hunting either, but would not express my point in that way.

Grouse hunting vs mass slaughter for a high street supermarket??? Is there a difference?

Surely animals are equally terrified / traumatised by cramped conditions (costs driven down by consumer led demand for cheap meat), and waiting in line for their turn to be “processed” at the abbertoir? Meat production is long drawn out process lasting weeks / months, it’s not humane and we eat meat (including myself) without a second thought. here is the controversial bit: supermarket meat production is arguably way worse than grouse hunting.

At the same time, I am a city dweller, but I lived for a short period in the countryside and it IS a part of community life / what some would fancy term “a cultural practice”. I don’t agree with it (especially fox hunting), it’s not for me, but I respect the right of others do to whatever lawful activity they wish.

Seems this is turning into a pro / anti hunting / ethical food sourcing debate now….. :/

(0)(1)

Anonymous

*fancily

(0)(1)

Anonymous

It’s abattoir, you peasant.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Hunting animals is for cunts.

(7)(1)

Trumpenkrieg #maga

Preaching sanctimoniously about animal rights is for cunts.

(2)(5)

Anonymous

yeah… clearly comments section is just for trading insults and liberal use of the word “c**ts”

#futurelawyers

hate legal cheek sometimes, think i’ll join a growing number and just not bother reading this anymore

(3)(3)

Trumpenkrieg #shaga

Soz bruv, it’s all just banta.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(2)(1)

Nurse Schwartz

So much rage. You ok baby?

Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(3)(0)

Comments are closed.