[alex_front2]

JIM said he'd win and he did. Usually a hm arrogantly predicting their triumph or acting up to a win ends in an annoyed public handing them a defeat or eviction eg bb10 Freddie, Charlie, bb9 Kathreya and recently bb14 Wolfy. Why didn't Jim's boast result in a backlash?

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by alex_front2

JIM said he'd win and he did. Usually a hm arrogantly predicting their triumph or acting up to a win ends in an annoyed public handing them a defeat or eviction eg bb10 Freddie, Charlie, bb9 Kathreya and recently bb14 Wolfy. Why didn't Jim's boast result in a backlash?

Because many blokes like it when another male on tv is blatant about his sexist views, which they secretly share, and want to cheer him on, whilst many young girls have yet to experience the negative effects of such sexist double standards on their own lives - but that naivity will bite them in the bum one day. Karma will win the day.

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

Because many blokes like it when another male on tv is blatant about his sexist views, which they secretly share, and want to cheer him on, whilst many young girls have yet to experience the negative effects of such sexist double standards on their own lives - but that naivity will bite them in the bum one day. Karma will win the day.

And just how many heterosexual males do you think watch this show to make that even an issue?

[joeysteele]

In all truth Jim didn't say he would win, in fact he likely didn't expect to on first going in.
What he said was in the diary room,after the public had him topping the votes in near all the eviction battles, was that if they kept him in again on that occasion then he would win it for them, adding afterwards he would then win it.

Not bragging, not disrespect for the viewers voting just a whole new confidence of seeing that he was supported very strongly by the public and now realised he could likely win it and would do so for them if they kept him in again and of course he is going to win for himself too.
Any housemate would.

There was no backlash from the public because there was no reason for any backlash as to what he said and the public saw and knew that too.

[Pete.]

Originally Posted by alex_front2

JIM said he'd win and he did. Usually a hm arrogantly predicting their triumph or acting up to a win ends in an annoyed public handing them a defeat or eviction eg bb10 Freddie, Charlie, bb9 Kathreya and recently bb14 Wolfy. Why didn't Jim's boast result in a backlash?

I don't remember Charlie bragging it just appeared that he wanted to win. Freddie did and it pissed me off. Sree bragged as well but no one cares about him

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by Kyle

And just how many heterosexual males do you think watch this show to make that even an issue?

I have no idea, but judging by the outcome I would have assumed quite a few. If it is mainly girls/women voting for him - more fool them. They clearly have too much time on their hands and not enough sense to have the right to vote. Unfortunately, idiots come in all shapes, sizes and sexies.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

I have no idea, but judging by the outcome I would have assumed quite a few. If it is mainly girls/women voting for him - more fool them. They clearly have too much time on their hands and not enough sense to have the right to vote. Unfortunately, idiots come in all shapes, sizes and sexies.

We're you equally outraged by Luisa's and Liz's sexist remarks?

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by Cherie

We're you equally outraged by Luisa's and Liz's sexist remarks?

Remind me please. I would imagine they were said in response to his constant sexist digs - hardly surprising really. A bit of tit for tat going on.

Are you trying to say that Jim isn't sexist, seriously. And if you admit he is - why do you not take it seriously - it is a serious subject, just like racism. Unfortunately people not taking it seriously allows men like Jim to get away with it - which ultimately affects all women in a negative way. I cannot understand how some women cannot see that.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

Remind me please. I would imagine they were said in response to his constant sexist digs - hardly surprising really. A bit of tit for tat going on.

Are you trying to say that Jim isn't sexist, seriously. And if you admit he is - why do you not take it seriously - it is a serious subject, just like racism. Unfortunately people not taking it seriously allows men like Jim to get away with it - which ultimately affects all women in a negative way. I cannot understand how some women cannot see that.

I never said he wasn't! Liz said on at least two occasions after leaving the house that men should never speak to women in a certain way and Luisa also admitted that no man had ever spoken to her like Jim had and she didn't think it was right that he should, those two have a very skewed view of equality. I don't see the big deal about Jim being sexist at least he is honest about it

[AnnieK]

I agree with Cherie. Luisa was quick to call jim sexist (which he is) but also felt that men should speak (or not speak) to women in a certain way. Equality goes both ways and if you are going to complain about one you really lose the right to complain about the other.

[flamingGalah!]

Jim didn't exactly brag & he won because he was the most deserving winner & thankfully most of the voting public saw it that way too...

Yes Luisa calls herself a feminist, but has very mixed up views as to what is equality, seems she wants to have her cake AND eat it...

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I never said he wasn't! Liz said on at least two occasions after leaving the house that men should never speak to women in a certain way and Luisa also admitted that no man had ever spoken to her like Jim had and she didn't think it was right that he should, those two have a very skewed view of equality. I don't see the big deal about Jim being sexist at least he is honest about it

Judging by that response you would believe it would be okay for anyone with racist views to be open and honest about it on the show, but we all know they would be warned about it. So how come those with sexist views are not warned for being open and honest about it? Why is one ok, but the other isn't? Honestly, some women really don't value themselves enough in my opinion.

It also just proves my point that racism is taken more serioulsy than sexism by people that watch the show and by the makers of the show - which itself is a double standard and should not be condoned.

[Cherie]

Sexism is a bit more difficult to tackle especially when some women blow hot and cold about how it is they want men to act towards them. I agree it should carry the same warnings but we are nowhere near to that happening.

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Sexism is a bit more difficult to tackle especially when some women blow hot and cold about how it is they want men to act towards them. I agree it should carry the same warnings but we are nowhere near to that happening.

We should be. Women should demand it just as black people have demanded it. After all, without its female viewers the show would crash and burn. Half the staff must be female - it makes no sense that in 2014 this unequal treatment of women is being allowed to continue on a popular prime-time reality tv show.

Women voting for sexist male contestants to win the show - is just one big step backwards.

[Seraphim]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I never said he wasn't! Liz said on at least two occasions after leaving the house that men should never speak to women in a certain way and Luisa also admitted that no man had ever spoken to her like Jim had and she didn't think it was right that he should, those two have a very skewed view of equality. I don't see the big deal about Jim being sexist at least he is honest about it

As far as I remember, Luisa was commenting on Jim's nasty campaign criticising her appearance. No man should fight a battle by bringing a woman's appearance into the argument, so I agree with her. (Neither is it acceptable in the opposite direction, of course, but it seldom happens, because men are seldom judged solely by their looks). All Luisa's comments about Jim were appropriate, because they were accurate comments about his behaviour.

Liz, in her appraisal of Jim, criticised Jim for mainly showing an interest in the younger, attractive women, thus implying that he sees women as sex objects when they are young, and dismisses them when they are older. Liz wasn't asked for an example of what she meant when she said that no man should speak to a woman "like that". It's possible that Liz was referring to the comments which Jim was making beforehand, which eventually resulted in Linda losing her rag. Sam said Jim made nasty comments when the cameras weren't on; Rylan said that the rows we saw were preceded by numerous comments Jim would make to wind Linda up, but they weren't shown because it didn't make exciting viewing. In the sitting on the fence task, Sam and Ollie both acknowledged that Jim triggered most of the arguments by constantly winding Linda up. We don't therefore know what Liz thought was a problem. Liz wouldn't realise we hadn't seen the build-up to each incident, hence she didn't elucidate.

I personally think there's nothing wrong with telling a woman to "grow up or "f... off", but it's disrespectful for a man to make constant reference to a woman's body parts ("knockers", "tits" etc.), unless in the context of reciprocal banter, so in that respect I agree that there are some things a man shouldn't say to a women. It's demeaning, humiliating and offensive.

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by Seraphim

As far as I remember, Luisa was commenting on Jim's nasty campaign criticising her appearance. No man should fight a battle by bringing a woman's appearance into the argument, so I agree with her. (Neither is it acceptable in the opposite direction, of course, but it seldom happens, because men are seldom judged solely by their looks). All Luisa's comments about Jim were appropriate, because they were accurate comments about his behaviour.

Liz, in her appraisal of Jim, criticised Jim for mainly showing an interest in the younger, attractive women, thus implying that he sees women as sex objects when they are young, and dismisses them when they are older. Liz wasn't asked for an example of what she meant when she said that no man should speak to a woman "like that". It's possible that Liz was referring to the comments which Jim was making beforehand, which eventually resulted in Linda losing her rag. Sam said Jim made nasty comments when the cameras weren't on; Rylan said that the rows we saw were preceded by numerous comments Jim would make to wind Linda up, but they weren't shown because it didn't make exciting viewing. In the sitting on the fence task, Sam and Ollie both acknowledged that Jim triggered most of the arguments by constantly winding Linda up. We don't therefore know what Liz thought was a problem.

I personally think there's nothing wrong with telling a woman to "grow up or "f... off", but it's disrespectful for a man to make constant reference to a woman's body parts ("knockers", "tits" etc.), unless in the context of reciprocal banter, so in that respect I agree that there are some things a man shouldn't say to a women. It's demeaning, humiliating and offensive.

Excellent post. You have brought attention to some very valid points that seem to have been overlooked by many. In my opinion Jim is very basic, backward and spiteful with his attempts to use women's age and appearance as a stick to beat them with. For others to condone it is even worse.

[Seraphim]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

We should be. Women should demand it just as black people have demanded it. After all, without its female viewers the show would crash and burn. Half the staff must be female - it makes no sense that in 2014 this unequal treatment of women is being allowed to continue on a popular prime-time reality tv show.

Women voting for sexist male contestants to win the show - is just one big step backwards.

I agree. Now he's all over the newspapers and might even get a platform on the television. I don't care who is the butt of his jokes. Better and more gifted comedians like Billy Connolly continue to have people rolling in the aisles at his ability to find humour in all sorts of things, from women's sexual emancipation to opera, without offending anyone, except those who don't like his liberal use of the "f" word.

The fact that a callous, selfish philanderer, who bragged and joked about wife-beating, was given an OBE makes me utterly sick to the stomach.

[sassysocks]

Originally Posted by Seraphim

I agree. Now he's all over the newspapers and might even get a platform on the television. I don't care who is the butt of his jokes. Better and more gifted comedians like Billy Connolly continue to have people rolling in the aisles at his ability to find humour in all sorts of things, from women's sexual emancipation to opera, without offending anyone, except those who don't like his liberal use of the "f" word.

The fact that a callous, selfish philanderer, who bragged and joked about wife-beating, was given an OBE makes me utterly sick to the stomach.

He isn't even in the same league as Billy Connelly who is a very talented and likeable man. Jim on the other hand, as you have pointed out, uses his jokes to perpetrate his own misygonistic views. His humour is very limited, where as Mr Connelly's is much more diverse.

I guess that despite everything we still live in very misygonistic times as is evident by him being awarded an OBE and winning BB. What really concerns me is that much of this misygony is coming not from men, but from women. I can only summize that some women are not only jealous of good-looking women, but strong ones too.

Jealousy is an ugly emotion and, it seems, will only serve to delay further equality between the sexes. Women are often their own worst enemies.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by Seraphim

I agree. Now he's all over the newspapers and might even get a platform on the television. I don't care who is the butt of his jokes. Better and more gifted comedians like Billy Connolly continue to have people rolling in the aisles at his ability to find humour in all sorts of things, from women's sexual emancipation to opera, without offending anyone, except those who don't like his liberal use of the "f" word.

The fact that a callous, selfish philanderer, who bragged and joked about wife-beating, was given an OBE makes me utterly sick to the stomach.

Maybe it could be for all his other qualities.

[anne666]

Originally Posted by Seraphim

I agree. Now he's all over the newspapers and might even get a platform on the television. I don't care who is the butt of his jokes. Better and more gifted comedians like Billy Connolly continue to have people rolling in the aisles at his ability to find humour in all sorts of things, from women's sexual emancipation to opera, without offending anyone, except those who don't like his liberal use of the "f" word.

The fact that a callous, selfish philanderer, who bragged and joked about wife-beating, was given an OBE makes me utterly sick to the stomach.

He hadn't the longevity of the better comedians for a reason. He was old fashioned from the start. I am old enough to remember him when he first appeared on TV. I was in my 20's. New Faces, The Comedians, Wheel Tappers and Shunters etc. All the same old fashioned comedians who appealed to parents and grandparents in the main. Younger viewers didn't watch those programmes. We were watching the emerging, contemporary alternative comedians. End of the pier, older peoples, humour died a death in the end. I often wondered why Jim, as young as he was, used such outdated comedy in his stand up. His prejudicial humour was NOT accepted on TV , that's a complete fallacy.

[AnnieK]

I get so pissed off when people accuse women of being jealous of other women when try don't vote the way they think they should. Just because a woman is strong or beautiful doesn't make them a good person. I'm not talking about Luisa here, I actually wanted her to win as she was a fantastic housemate. She is not someone I would want as a friend she seems to self involved to me but I don't think she didn't win because people are jealous of her. That argument is as old and tired as Jims jokes. Jim won in a fair public vote.

[Arrow]

Originally Posted by sassysocks

I have no idea, but judging by the outcome I would have assumed quite a few. If it is mainly girls/women voting for him - more fool them. They clearly have too much time on their hands and not enough sense to have the right to vote. Unfortunately, idiots come in all shapes, sizes and sexies.

Nothing like a bit of soical darwinism to reaffirm how you want equality
cant you see the hypocrisy in your views ?

[anne666]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Davidson#cite_ref-5
Television section, 2nd paragraph. Social attitudes were not as accepting in the 70's as many seem to think. That was why his stand up was dropped on TV and he became a TV presenter.

[Lex]

Jim won because the the vast majority of the women that voted him to win Did Not agree with you're skewered view of what you were watching!...Simples


WELL DONE THAT MAN!



...a real pride to his gender , and proof that a genuine person can overcome years such bad political-correctness press!

[waterhog]

Originally Posted by Petemitch123

I don't remember Charlie bragging it just appeared that he wanted to win. Freddie did and it pissed me off. Sree bragged as well but no one cares about him

i am just doing a poem on this guy sree - it will be done shortly. this is not a BB poem but one on a news story's.

its amazing how much big brother is part of my life. everything i relate to is BB.