Digital Spy's resident Shirley troll, monalisa62003, is digging herself another hole in her attempts to canonise her favourite, Shirley Carter, the character on whom she has a massive girl crush.
She's working herself into a lather because Phil's moved on from Shirley (who was nothing more than a scrawny friend with benefits) to Sharon, the woman he's loved all his life. In her inveterate rantings, Mona claims that Phil ruined Shirley's life.
He simply didn't.
Shirley ruined her own life. She is the architect of her own misfortune, and she should stop trying to project her failures on Phil Mitchell.
She chose to walk out on her own three small children, one of whom was disabled and two didn't even belong to her husband. She was lucky he brought them up so well.
She was always choosing various men over her best friend and substitute child, Heather.
She chose to ally herself with Phil Mitchell, although that was never a great romance, if it were a romance at all. The only way Shirley could entice Phil into her bed was to get him drunk and drink with him, knowing he was an alcoholic and that the next drink could kill him.
She encouraged the worst side of Phil during their association. Phil was really at his most unlikeable then - handling stolen goods, authorising drugs to be dealt in the R and R, bullying all and sundry, even stealing from his own cousin. Shirley - and to a great extent Jay - strutted about Walford, doing as she pleased and challenging people who challenged her with a succinct growl of "Do you know who I am?"]
Shirley's power came through Phil's prestige - but this is 21st Century EastEnders, where a woman can't stand alone in her own strengthl; and that's sad, because when Shirley came to Walford, she was a strong woman.
She lived with Phil, knowing he didn't love her, knowing that the real love of his life was Sharon and knowing and accepting that Phil would never commit to her or be faithful. His pithy excuse - "that's the way I am" - was a euphemism for his not loving her enough. Still, she stayed with him. And she kept her boots on.
Finally, she chose not to tell the police about the part Phil played in covering up the identity of Heather's killer. No one forced her to do that. She chose.
Phil didn't ruin Shirley's life. Shirley ruined her own life by the choices she made.
And in a final note, please stop wishing Shirley would find out about what Phil said to Dennis Rickman before Dennis decided to attack Jonnie Allen. Besides Phil, the only two people who know about what he said are Peggy and Grant. By the way, Phil wasn't responsible for Dennis's death either. Dennis was an adult with the emotional maturity of a spoiled child. He decided his own fate too ... like Shirley.
She's working herself into a lather because Phil's moved on from Shirley (who was nothing more than a scrawny friend with benefits) to Sharon, the woman he's loved all his life. In her inveterate rantings, Mona claims that Phil ruined Shirley's life.
He simply didn't.
Shirley ruined her own life. She is the architect of her own misfortune, and she should stop trying to project her failures on Phil Mitchell.
She chose to walk out on her own three small children, one of whom was disabled and two didn't even belong to her husband. She was lucky he brought them up so well.
She was always choosing various men over her best friend and substitute child, Heather.
She chose to ally herself with Phil Mitchell, although that was never a great romance, if it were a romance at all. The only way Shirley could entice Phil into her bed was to get him drunk and drink with him, knowing he was an alcoholic and that the next drink could kill him.
She encouraged the worst side of Phil during their association. Phil was really at his most unlikeable then - handling stolen goods, authorising drugs to be dealt in the R and R, bullying all and sundry, even stealing from his own cousin. Shirley - and to a great extent Jay - strutted about Walford, doing as she pleased and challenging people who challenged her with a succinct growl of "Do you know who I am?"]
Shirley's power came through Phil's prestige - but this is 21st Century EastEnders, where a woman can't stand alone in her own strengthl; and that's sad, because when Shirley came to Walford, she was a strong woman.
She lived with Phil, knowing he didn't love her, knowing that the real love of his life was Sharon and knowing and accepting that Phil would never commit to her or be faithful. His pithy excuse - "that's the way I am" - was a euphemism for his not loving her enough. Still, she stayed with him. And she kept her boots on.
Finally, she chose not to tell the police about the part Phil played in covering up the identity of Heather's killer. No one forced her to do that. She chose.
Phil didn't ruin Shirley's life. Shirley ruined her own life by the choices she made.
And in a final note, please stop wishing Shirley would find out about what Phil said to Dennis Rickman before Dennis decided to attack Jonnie Allen. Besides Phil, the only two people who know about what he said are Peggy and Grant. By the way, Phil wasn't responsible for Dennis's death either. Dennis was an adult with the emotional maturity of a spoiled child. He decided his own fate too ... like Shirley.
I genuinely don't think mona means to troll; she's obviously got some personal issues, and I think she's just highly obsessive. I find her constant Shirley posts really annoying, but I try to be as patient and understanding as possible with her (not an easy quest!)
ReplyDeleteAs for the character Shirley, I agree with you. I dislike the way she was made into some sort of second rate wannabe gangster's moll. I liked her at first - even though I found her rather unlikeable, she was an interesting, hard-headed character, with a strong backstory - but what's been done to her is inexcusable, IMO. I've always rated Linda Henry and an actress, and think her talents have been wasted for a long time.
She does mean to troll. You probably have not been victim to her threats including violence to members who have dared to disagree with her. A great many members have reported in private messages she has threatened them. One she said she would punch in the face, another she wished death on a sick relative and another she told him she hoped he died of AIDS. Then we move on to her calling anyone who disagreed with her on DS a fucking idiot on twitter.
DeleteTo call her a troll is actually mild. She is a psychopath where her obsession leads her to behave like a nutcase she should be locked up.
@ KD
DeleteI had no idea about this, and if it is true, then Mona clearly needs a lot more help than she is getting. I will inform my acquaintance who knows her about this. If it is the case, then I hope they'll find the help for her that she obviously needs.
I notice there is a new Shirley-shipper on DS, named Marcus Reeed, who only joined this month. Not only can Mr Reed not spell his own surname correctly, but he also interspeses the meaningless "lol" midway through a sentence, in exactly the same way that MonaLisa does. A bit of a giveaway, that one. I cannot see a man using the silly childish titter that "lol" suggests anyway, unless he is lacking in wits or is a girlie pretending to be a man.
ReplyDeleteThis leads me to the conclusion that Mr Ree(e)d doesn't exist at all, and this is a second account opened by Mona so that she can gush to herself endelssly about "Shirl" when everyone else has given up and gone away. Desperate or what?
Oh wonderful. This means she'll be bumping the threads for ever more. How sad she needs an imaginery friend to bore on about "Shirl" to.
I've long been a supporter of Shirley's. I loved her during her first few years and I've been majorly disappointed to see her used so poorly for the last few. I still think there are masses of potential to be utilized there, and I still hold out hope that the producers will realise how much of an asset she could be if they bothered to actually explore the woman.
ReplyDeleteAll that being said - as much as I like the character, Mona's fucking obsession and constant moronic musings about her has managed to start putting even me off her. I wouldn't be surprised if the producers axed her just to stop Mona harassing them day and night over Twitter.
@ Anonymous.
ReplyDeleteIt could well could be Mona. It might be some freak pretending to be her (I've been posting on DS for about 9 years, and have seen this behaviour from trolls many a time.)
Your ''lol'' comment was revoltingly sexist. I'm a moderator on a football forum, and have seen blokes use ''lol'' many a time. I'm not a fan of the mid-sentence ''lol'' myself, but that's not the point. It says a hell of a lot about you that you equate ''lacking in wits'' with being a ''girlie'', which is effectively what you said. Ugh, have a word with yourself. I don't give a rat's backside whether you are male or female (there are plenty of examples of females being misogynistic), that comment was disgusting.
Apologies, Emilia, for ranting on your blog like this at another poster. Like you, I call people out if I think they deserve it, and that bit of nonsense made my blood boil.
Another reason I don't think Mona is a deliberate troll is because I am acquainted with someone who knows her in real life. This person says that Mona is a very nice person who has severe learning difficulties, and is very obsessive. If it is indeed Mona who has opened this new account purely to obsess about Shirley, then I think she needs more help than she is currently getting.
Thanks for the debate.
So she was nice to someone in real life what about the violent threats to people online and being abusive? There was another member like that called Mormon Girl who also was obsessive but she was not going around threatening people. Why should be be abused and threatened because they disagreed with her?
DeleteAs I said earlier (think our comments got published at the same time though, so you prob didn't see it), I had no idea about all that. It is quite shocking. I think she needs serious help if she's going round behaving like that.
DeleteThe acquaintance I was on about is quite close to her, I will definitely let them know and hope they can help do something about it. Does Mona still indulge in this sort of behaviour, or has she stopped?
The last threat of violence I heard about was a few weeks ago. The guy who got it just laughed but some people actually stopped going on because of her. I see she has now been banned from DS.
DeleteMona has been BANNED? She was banned for a few days a couple of weeks ago, but has it happened again?
DeleteYou call her obsessive but you lot are the one who seem just that with your constant fascination of talking about her, anyone else would just ignore her if she irritates them that much but you all seem to thrive on what she does or say, certainly one individual on Digital Spy just can't let their obsession with Mona go.
DeleteThat is, quite frankly, an absurd comment. She IS obsessive, and freely admits to it. Can't speak for anyone else here, obviously, but Mona has no effect on my life whatsoever; I have better things to worry about.
DeleteThe only reason we're discussing Mona is because Emilia blogged about her posts, which we then had a debate on. I had thought she was a nice person, and don't like to see others suffering, so was slightly concerned about her. Not really the same as being ''obsessed'', is it?
As for whichever person is allegedly hounding her on DS (no idea who this is as I haven't been arsed going on there for days) - if that is the case, then the mods really ought to do their jobs and sort it out.
Have a pleasant evening. :)
Hello Mona ... or is it Harlow or dullagj2? If you're Mona, welcome, considering you've been banned AGAIN from DS for harassment.
DeleteI remember Mona trying to justify her hounding of various cast members a few weeks back. I bet they fucking dread seeing her down Elstree. Where are her community workers? They need sacking! Is she related to that other obsessive freak MORMONGIRL? She sent me weird scary pm's after I made a comment about Max and Tanya being better apart.
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the PMs, just ignore them (i.e. don't open them!) if they're from posters you already have a 'radar' instinct about. MG tried to send me PMs once, but I replied to her (on the thread in question when she asked me if I'd seen her PMs) that I do not engage in any 'correspondence' that can't be seen by everyone. I have disagreed with ML as well - only inasmuch as I find her very immature (although, it seems now, she may have other issues over and above her young age in real life) but she hasn't tried to PM me... yet! But everyone's DS account is their own (inasmuch as it's subject to the Ts and Cs) so no one should let others control them though it via PMs - it's not obligatory to open them or reply to them (and, usually, if you ignore the ones vying for your attention, they'll soon give up if you don't indulge them.) I second the apologies for diverting the point of the blog in this particular post. J.C.
ReplyDelete