I freaking HATE that vacant psychologist Judy James and whats more..

[puffpuffpuff]

I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist

[InOne]

Bea would eat her for breakfast.

[NolasGirl]

Thank you! You articulated perfectly what I was struggling to.
:hello:

[King Gizzard]

I thought freddie was always spot on with his assesments on the hms, like with the whole sheep thing

then judy horse james goes ''you werent a good judge of character at all, if anyone it was sophie''

i mean wtf, sophie is the biggest sheep there is, she didnt have her own opinions, she never judged anyone, she just said whatever lisa and kris said!

[MaratSafinForever]

I think she is absolutely useless, the other guy, Geoffrey is better. He used to be on Big Brothers Big Brain before.

[NolasGirl]

In fact- it's so well observed that I think you should try and send a copy of this to Judi James herself or channel 4 as a complaint.

Or even Freddie if he is contact-able at this point.

[setanta]

Were you watching the same interview that I was? Very colourful prose, but completely biased. There was no anger or resentment in her tone or gestures - your love of Freddie is simply clouding your perspective on the matter.

[ElProximo]

I cannot stand that anymore.
It is so annoying with this stupid thing where she just makes a 'parallel' to a tribe of chimpanzees 'as if' that is so intriguing,
then,
while boring on about nothing you or me or anyone else coudn't just make up by imagining some 'animal tribe' she interjects some stupid term "this is what we call retroflective interference projecting' and then everyone has to pretend "oh.. please speak english wha??'.
Stupid.
Not to mention she takes up way too much time which is in short supply.

Get rid of that. Any comedian, former-HM or celeb or 'super fan' would be far better in her place AND more insightful for any real observations.

[Discoo_x]

I hate how she compares everything to animals, seriously. Every interview all she ever talks about is how animals do this, or animals do that. Her assumptions are absolutely shite.

[setanta]

Originally posted by Discoo_x
I hate how she compares everything to animals, seriously. Every interview all she ever talks about is how animals do this, or animals do that. Her assumptions are absolutely s****.

She didn't mention animals this week.

[luminoussun]

She talks like they are a pack of wild animals.
I hate people like her ...do a couple of courses and think they know everything.
If she was in a pack she would be the one they all kick up the ass for being no use whatesoever

[Sir_Diary_of_Roomus]

Originally posted by MaratSafinForever
I think she is absolutely useless, the other guy, Geoffrey is better. He used to be on Big Brothers Big Brain before.

Is he the Swiss guy? If so he's much better.

[NolasGirl]

Having seen how everything panned out from week one to present... And the fact that you are right on this point "They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person."... I truly believe it would have been no major loss if Freddie launched into a mode of fully defending himself, and possibly giving the bullies an earfull before he left.
He was gettin pinned as "arrogant" regardless, even by Davina who's supposed to uphold impartiality...
It's been a lose, lose situation for Freddie. Instead of defending himself against Bea he retreated into himself and this only resulted in the bullies pressing on the accelerator with even more force. He would have had absolutely nothing to lose in launching a bit of a character assasination on the likes of Bea, who, as we saw, can't take the truth about her personality.

[puffpuffpuff]

I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

[keithafc]

Geoffrey beattie. End of discussion. Should do EVERY eviction night. The best at what he does in the whole country. Why is that woman doing it? She doesn't have a clue.

[GoldHeart]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist i prefer that other therapist cant remember his name but he got kirs down to a T! :laugh3::bigsmile:

[Prole]

I once shared an office with a psychology professor. I told him, laughingly, that I was a bit concerned that he'd be constantly psychoanalysing me. He told me that wouldn't happen. He said, the problem with psychologists is, they spend years studying the subject until they think they have all the answers. Then they put all that learning into psychoanalysing someone and feel qualified to stuff them into one pigeon hole or another. And the moment they do, the subject will do something completely out of character and blow their well thought-through theory out of the water.

[NolasGirl]

Noirin was the only one to observe those comments made to Ken by Sophie... No one else seemed to point them out. Karly must have been in denial, because there's no way that even she disregarded the sense of that, since her sensitivity to them would have been strongest. It was all "she's sticking by her girl"..by Davina and other guests on Kenneth's eviction night. Not sure why Davina has such a problem with basic insight.

[NolasGirl]

Originally posted by Prole
And the moment they do, the subject will do something completely out of character and blow their well thought-through theory out of the water.


Sometimes it's just a matter of commonsense insight..not all this methodological reasoning.. Pouring over evolutionary and anthropological texts etc. Sometimes it just takes basic social intelligence. My dad is a psychologist, and I can safely say it never helped him deal with issues in his own life.

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

But she only once drew a direct comparison to any of the other housemates and that was with relation to Sophie and her relative social strengths when compared to Freddie, where it's perfectly clear to me that she assumes that quiet, gentle nature that Freddie was so eager to impress on others but that continually eluded him. That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end. It was a valid point to make.

That was the only time she highlighted his behaviour and related it to others; all the rest of the time she committed to analysing him on his own. Plus she was not asked to judge any of the other contestants tonight. That wasn't part of the job requirements for this evenings interview. Why you seem to be on a crusade to defraud her claims by suggesting that the rest of the housemates can't compare to his moral rectitude is beyond me, and was beyond the agenda laid out to Judy James.

I agree that she went on a bit OTT with Sophie, but give the girl a break. She showed no aggression or hostility on the show like you would have us believe.

[Violetfairy]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

:thumbs::thumbs: Agree with you PuffpuffPuff
Freddie was in most cases a good judge of character, his only downfall was taking Bea when she came into the house at face value. Because she pretended to be all Hippy and in to free love trying to be a female Freddie, he must of thought "Oh great someone like minded as me". But I think he did see through her but was just in denial and it wasn't until Marcus pointed it out to him, did Freddie admit to himself who Bea really is, a user and abuser of people.

[NolasGirl]

Originally posted by setanta
That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end.

Yeah but some adaptation should be made for a "bad day" or an outburst. Particularly after a build up of resentment. That's why I couldn't abide the "he's showing his true colours- arrogance" argument. Is he not allowed to make any sort of defense of his position?

[Prole]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Originally posted by Prole
And the moment they do, the subject will do something completely out of character and blow their well thought-through theory out of the water.


Sometimes it's just a matter of commonsense insight..not all this methodological reasoning.. Pouring over evolutionary and anthropological texts etc. Sometimes it just takes basic social intelligence. My dad is a psychologist, and I can safely say it never helped him deal with issues in his own life.

You're right about common sense. And I don't mean to decry all psychologists... but a lot of them talk absolute nonsense because they read it somewhere and can spout all the right words. The trouble with TV psychologist in particular is that they don't really know the person they're discussing but use wild generalisations to pigeon-hole them anyway. The way a lot of people on the forum do. I've lost count of the number of diagnoses I've seen on here, from psychopathic to autistic and back.

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Originally posted by setanta
That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end.

Yeah but some adaptation should be made for a "bad day" or an outburst. Particularly after a build up of resentment. That's why I couldn't abide the "he's showing his true colours- arrogance" argument. Is he not allowed to make any sort of defense of his position?

Of course he's allowed and he was given the opportunity to respond, stating that the house was a very emotional enviroment where one was bound to feel tension or anxiety. Psychologists never make moral judgements on these things.... they just analyse behaviour and their causes.

To suggest that she has some ulterior or malicious motive is just plain silly. I saw no vindictive or judgemental qualties in her tone or her delivery of data..... she seemed genuinely interested in Freddie which is why I don't understand this kinda hostility for her.

[florence33]

Thanks, for letting out my frustrations..:bawling:

[aborigenie]

She hates freddy because Freddy did HER job inside the house ,, analysing ppl !! fantastically may I add

[NolasGirl]

Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by NolasGirl
Originally posted by setanta
That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end.

Yeah but some adaptation should be made for a "bad day" or an outburst. Particularly after a build up of resentment. That's why I couldn't abide the "he's showing his true colours- arrogance" argument. Is he not allowed to make any sort of defense of his position?

Of course he's allowed and he was given the opportunity to respond, stating that the house was a very emotional enviroment where one was bound to feel tension or anxiety. Psychologists never make moral judgements on these things.... they just analyse behaviour and their causes.

To suggest that she has some ulterior or malicious motive is just plain silly. I saw no vindictive or judgemental qualties in her tone or her delivery of data..... she seemed genuinely interested in Freddie which is why I don't understand this kinda hostility for her.

I didn't even have the psychologist in mind with that point. I'm referring to the comment about arrogance being his fall-down and I was refuting it. I'm simply talking about his eventual mockery of Lisa. Was he not justified? Coz it seems the word "arrogant" has been thrown around without any real thought given to Freddies journey through the house.

[frozencharlotte]

ah! i totally agree!
she didnt understand freddie at ALL
he was making a better assessment of the situation than she was.
she missed the plot and everything she said was WRONG.

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by NolasGirl
Originally posted by setanta
That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end.

Yeah but some adaptation should be made for a "bad day" or an outburst. Particularly after a build up of resentment. That's why I couldn't abide the "he's showing his true colours- arrogance" argument. Is he not allowed to make any sort of defense of his position?

Of course he's allowed and he was given the opportunity to respond, stating that the house was a very emotional enviroment where one was bound to feel tension or anxiety. Psychologists never make moral judgements on these things.... they just analyse behaviour and their causes.

To suggest that she has some ulterior or malicious motive is just plain silly. I saw no vindictive or judgemental qualties in her tone or her delivery of data..... she seemed genuinely interested in Freddie which is why I don't understand this kinda hostility for her.

I didn't even have the psychologist in mind with that point. I'm referring to the comment about arrogance being his fall-down and I was refuting it. I'm simply talking about his eventual mockery of Lisa. Was he not justified? Coz it seems the word "arrogant" has been thrown around without any real thought given to Freddies journey through the house.

That's another discussion entirely and I'm too fecking tired to get into it cuz I don't agree with you and it's very likely we could be here all night. lol.

[NolasGirl]

Fair enough. :laugh:

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Fair enough. :laugh:

I don't mean it badly at all.... please understand that. Hope I didn't offend you there?

[puffpuffpuff]

Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

But she only once drew a direct comparison to any of the other housemates and that was with relation to Sophie and her relative social strengths when compared to Freddie, where it's perfectly clear to me that she assumes that quiet, gentle nature that Freddie was so eager to impress on others but that continually eluded him. That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end. It was a valid point to make.

That was the only time she highlighted his behaviour and related it to others; all the rest of the time she committed to analysing him on his own. Plus she was not asked to judge any of the other contestants tonight. That wasn't part of the job requirements for this evenings interview. Why you seem to be on a crusade to defraud her claims by suggesting that the rest of the housemates can't compare to his moral rectitude is beyond me, and was beyond the agenda laid out to Judy James.

I agree that she went on a bit OTT with Sophie, but give the girl a break. She showed no aggression or hostility on the show like you would have us believe.


Sophie stands for nothing and that is a good enough reason for me to a.not respect her b.not admire her c. not like her..She is a bystander. She puts her conscience on hold depending on the sway of the group at that moment. She protects herself first and foremost.I like people that are mature minded and genuinely good.


Have you ever experienced in your life a person who is vile, despicable, nasty, willfully cruel and unprovokingly cruel to you? Have you ever fantasized about some kind of revenge? Finally succeeding? Beating iniquity, injustice, evil with goodness and the right values? When Freddy was laughing in the face of Lisa, it was "just desserts". It was not inconsistent with his character. It was a kind of sweet revenge on the scum of society who would run over you to get what they want, who would likely bully you to death and not blink an eye. Manaically laughing in the face of those who are consistent bullies is alright in my books but maybe you have never been hurt and abused and degraded and humiliated in your life by people who have all the power but have no goodness or character and so do not know what it is like when the Hitlers of the world fall and get their comeuppance and you are a success. Freddy behaved as he ought to have done. Though childish, I was proud of him.

When Freddy was becoming so zealously confident at the end in himself, almost arrogant, I believe it was not at all rooted in his ego, in himself. But when Karly and Kris had been evicted, he assumed the public too were on the side of "the good". His confidence came from something greater and outside of all of us--an abstract principle called "morality", "justice". Telling Lisa she would go was simply a steadfast adherence to this belief in goodness and peoples desire for it..

[NolasGirl]

No not at all! It is fair enough. If we wanted to express the bulk of our thoughts on this years BB we would be on this thing 24/7. Plus the turnover of threads is v large. I always miss responses to my posts.

[NolasGirl]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff


Sophie stands for nothing and that is a good enough reason for me to a.not respect her b.not admire her c. not like her..She is a bystander. She puts her conscience on hold depending on the sway of the group at that moment. She protects herself first and foremost.I like people that are mature minded and genuinely good.


Have you ever experienced in your life a person who is vile, despicable, nasty, willfully cruel and unprovokingly cruel to you? Have you ever fantasized about some kind of revenge? Finally succeeding? Beating iniquity, injustice, evil with goodness and the right values? When Freddy was laughing in the face of Lisa, it was "just desserts". It was not inconsistent with his character. It was a kind of sweet revenge on the scum of society who would run over you to get what they want, who would likely bully you to death and not blink an eye. Manaically laughing in the face of those who are consistent bullies is alright in my books but maybe you have never been hurt and abused and degraded and humiliated in your life by people who have all the power but have no goodness or character and so do not know what it is like when the Hitlers of the world fall and get their comeuppance and you are a success. Freddy behaved as he ought to have done. Though childish, I was proud of him.

When Freddy was becoming so zealously confident at the end in himself, almost arrogant, I believe it was not at all rooted in his ego, in himself. But when Karly and Kris had been evicted, he assumed the public too were on the side of "the good". His confidence came from something greater and outside of all of us--an abstract principle called "morality", "justice". Telling Lisa she would go was simply a steadfast adherence to this belief in goodness and peoples desire for it..

Precisely. I hope people read that. And I can't believe how off the mark people have been in their assessment of Freddie's actions. Does it not piss you off that this idea was not once put forward during the interview or by the crowd on BBBM. And that the presenters and guests keep throwing around "arrogance".. as if that was the root of his personality.

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

But she only once drew a direct comparison to any of the other housemates and that was with relation to Sophie and her relative social strengths when compared to Freddie, where it's perfectly clear to me that she assumes that quiet, gentle nature that Freddie was so eager to impress on others but that continually eluded him. That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end. It was a valid point to make.

That was the only time she highlighted his behaviour and related it to others; all the rest of the time she committed to analysing him on his own. Plus she was not asked to judge any of the other contestants tonight. That wasn't part of the job requirements for this evenings interview. Why you seem to be on a crusade to defraud her claims by suggesting that the rest of the housemates can't compare to his moral rectitude is beyond me, and was beyond the agenda laid out to Judy James.

I agree that she went on a bit OTT with Sophie, but give the girl a break. She showed no aggression or hostility on the show like you would have us believe.


Sophie stands for nothing and that is a good enough reason for me to a.not respect her b.not admire her c. not like her..She is a bystander. She puts her conscience on hold depending on the sway of the group at that moment. She protects herself first and foremost.I like people that are mature minded and genuinely good.


Have you ever experienced in your life a person who is vile, despicable, nasty, willfully cruel and unprovokingly cruel to you? Have you ever fantasized about some kind of revenge? Finally succeeding? Beating iniquity, injustice, evil with goodness and the right values? When Freddy was laughing in the face of Lisa, it was "just desserts". It was not inconsistent with his character. It was a kind of sweet revenge on the scum of society who would run over you to get what they want, who would likely bully you to death and not blink an eye. Manaically laughing in the face of those who are consistent bullies is alright in my books but maybe you have never been hurt and abused and degraded and humiliated in your life by people who have all the power but have no goodness or character and so do not know what it is like when the Hitlers of the world fall and get their comeuppance and you are a success. Freddy behaved as he ought to have done. Though childish, I was proud of him.

When Freddy was becoming so zealously confident at the end in himself, almost arrogant, I believe it was not at all rooted in his ego, in himself. But when Karly and Kris had been evicted, he assumed the public too were on the side of "the good". His confidence came from something greater and outside of all of us--an abstract principle called "morality", "justice". Telling Lisa she would go was simply a steadfast adherence to this belief in goodness and peoples desire for it..

You obviously have this fervant desire to defend Freddie and absolve him of any flaws in his character. Judy Jones is your latest target maybe, because she had the audacity to comment on his behaviour and analyse it in a purely objective manner. She was always open to his responses- her stern face was her way of focusing on his reactions and speech. That's what pyschologists do.

Your use of language and general distaste for the rest of the housemates is a bit worrying and has a kinda frenzied tone to it. Plus I don't agree with half of it and it literally has nothing to do with Judy Jones and everything to do with your own feelings..... feelings being the operative word.

[NolasGirl]

This may be completely irrelevant in certain ways..But I personally don't think this kind of psychologist has any role in a Big Brother evictee interview, and it's only in recent times they brought it in. It's a complete diversion from the purpose- an interview.. Supposed to be giving the housemate a chance to explain themselves, give their thoughts, learn the reality behind things that went on behind their back and display their reaction..They shouldn't have to listen to a "psycho- analysis" of themselves for 60% of the interview. Maybe if the interview was 2 hours long there would be time for that, but 30 mins?? Get real.
The old interviews were much better and actually let the housmate get a word in edgeways. Without being assaulted by a supposedly scientific analysis of their behaviour.

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
This may be completely irrelevant in certain ways..But I personally don't think this kind of psychologist has any role in a Big Brother evictee interview, and it's only in recent times they brought it in. It's a complete diversion from the purpose- an interview.. Supposed to be giving the housemate a chance to explain themselves, give their thoughts, learn the reality behind things that went on behind their back and display their reaction..They shouldn't have to listen to a "psycho- analysis" of themselves for 60% of the interview. Maybe if the interview was 2 hours long there would be time for that, but 30 mins?? Get real.
The old interviews were much better and actually let the housmate get a word in edgeways. Without being assaulted by a supposedly scientific analysis of their behaviour.

I agree that there should be more video footage used, with the housemate asked to react to it, and I don't know why they don't avail of the hour long show on e4 to further exploit this area. The backstabbing is very important to highlight, as well as the evictee's responses.

But you must remember that Big Brother was conceived of as being a social experiment and there was always going to be a psychological and sociological aspect to it. I personally find that part of it extremely fascinating and welcome that added feature to the interview.

[NolasGirl]

It was part of it in previous years but they confined it mainly to Big Bros Big Mouth and BBLB. The evicition night was all about crowds, cheering/booing, the panto, getting the evictee into the spotlight, then onto a chair in the center of a stage for an all hands on interview. It reflected more the excitement of the whole thing..
Why they can't just leave the psychologist input to BBBM is beyond me. It's more the environment for it in any case. A smaller crowd etc.

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
It was part of it in previous years but they confined it mainly to Big Bros Big Mouth and BBLB. The evicition night was all about crowds, cheering/booing, the panto, getting the evictee into the spotlight, then onto a chair in the center of a stage for an all hands on interview. It reflected more the excitement of the whole thing..
Why they can't just leave the psychologist input to BBBM is beyond me. It's more the environment for it in any case. A smaller crowd etc.

Yep, I agree with everything you've said but I still need some psychological analysis in the programme- I'm not pushed where it's shown as along as it's shown. Fascinating stuff to me.

[puffpuffpuff]

Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

But she only once drew a direct comparison to any of the other housemates and that was with relation to Sophie and her relative social strengths when compared to Freddie, where it's perfectly clear to me that she assumes that quiet, gentle nature that Freddie was so eager to impress on others but that continually eluded him. That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end. It was a valid point to make.

That was the only time she highlighted his behaviour and related it to others; all the rest of the time she committed to analysing him on his own. Plus she was not asked to judge any of the other contestants tonight. That wasn't part of the job requirements for this evenings interview. Why you seem to be on a crusade to defraud her claims by suggesting that the rest of the housemates can't compare to his moral rectitude is beyond me, and was beyond the agenda laid out to Judy James.

I agree that she went on a bit OTT with Sophie, but give the girl a break. She showed no aggression or hostility on the show like you would have us believe.


Sophie stands for nothing and that is a good enough reason for me to a.not respect her b.not admire her c. not like her..She is a bystander. She puts her conscience on hold depending on the sway of the group at that moment. She protects herself first and foremost.I like people that are mature minded and genuinely good.


Have you ever experienced in your life a person who is vile, despicable, nasty, willfully cruel and unprovokingly cruel to you? Have you ever fantasized about some kind of revenge? Finally succeeding? Beating iniquity, injustice, evil with goodness and the right values? When Freddy was laughing in the face of Lisa, it was "just desserts". It was not inconsistent with his character. It was a kind of sweet revenge on the scum of society who would run over you to get what they want, who would likely bully you to death and not blink an eye. Manaically laughing in the face of those who are consistent bullies is alright in my books but maybe you have never been hurt and abused and degraded and humiliated in your life by people who have all the power but have no goodness or character and so do not know what it is like when the Hitlers of the world fall and get their comeuppance and you are a success. Freddy behaved as he ought to have done. Though childish, I was proud of him.

When Freddy was becoming so zealously confident at the end in himself, almost arrogant, I believe it was not at all rooted in his ego, in himself. But when Karly and Kris had been evicted, he assumed the public too were on the side of "the good". His confidence came from something greater and outside of all of us--an abstract principle called "morality", "justice". Telling Lisa she would go was simply a steadfast adherence to this belief in goodness and peoples desire for it..

You obviously have this fervant desire to defend Freddie and absolve him of any flaws in his character. Judy Jones is your latest target maybe, because she had the audacity to comment on his behaviour and analyse it in a purely objective manner. She was always open to his responses- her stern face was her way of focusing on his reactions and speech. That's what pyschologists do.

Your use of language and general distaste for the rest of the housemates is a bit worrying and has a kinda frenzied tone to it. Plus I don't agree with half of it and it literally has nothing to do with Judy Jones and everything to do with your own feelings..... feelings being the operative word.




I agree my use of language and distaste for housemates and Judy James is concerned with my feelings. But of course. But, that is-- feeling coupled with intellect--which is the only real basis I think for any judicious assessment of a situation. For instance, I feel at a visceral level that the holocaust was evil and despicable as I am a human being who does not like hurt and does not like hurt inflicted on others and I understand it intellectually too. I am able to articulate my feelings through my facility with language and my brain. Isn't that the very nature of being human? So, where exactly did your opinions on the matter come from? Thin air, "objective reasoning" (when for every human being this is an impossible task when related to human values and not the sciences and even then that is contentious), or are they from your feelings, perceptions coupled with your thoughts on the issue as is mine?

Anyway, I might say that Fredriech Nietsche said "There are no facts, there are only perspectives" and I suppose that is quite evident in this chat..

But, I do not absolve Freddy of his character faults--he can be cocky, he does have annoying idiosyncrasies like mmmms when you're eating your cornflakes, long sighs etc. etc. but on the whole his good qualities outweigh the bad and surpass most of them in there...

If you or I were his friend I could guarantee he would be a beacon in your life. Someone to trust wholeheartedly, without reservation or caution as only he has demonstrated in the house through his association with Marcus and Siavash and even Bea when he did not tell Lisa and David the things she said about them when she turned on him (for instance, "everything she/he says is mundane and I cannot bear to listen to them''--this is real snobbery...


With the other housemates, I strongly believe through logical deduction and past behaviours they would betray you in an instance if you didn't suit their agenda or somethign better came along.....

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I really don't think my love of Freddy is clouding my issue on the matter. My love of maybe "uprightness", "integrity", "rectitude", "probity" and consistancy of character is why I feel such a way about Judy James. For a good nine weeks Freddy has exposed and revealed the inherent greed and rapaciousness of the other housemates and the extents to which they will go to get what they desire. They are shallow, immature and expedient. They will do what promotes their own interest rather then what is objectively good and when we see some good act on their part it is so contrived, self conscious that it is a ploy for the audience to like them. Charlie is a case in point. They are all transparent in there.

And Sophie does not have the greatest insight on the housemates. Judy James obviously saw certain aspects of Freddys hubris, pride and wanted to take him down a peg or two. Sophie perceives everything on a surface level and has no depth. She is like Charlie in that regard. Her thoughts are as simple and dull as "oh, Bea is crying and she said Freddys name therefore Bea is sad and Freddy is a bad man"..This is about as far as she goes and I do not know why this country rewards these kinds of characterless, spineless, stand for nothing women? (I'm actually from Ireland but anyway)..


The only person still left who I think is genuine and good is Marcus and I am able to overlook his rather beastly appearance for an integrity of spirit.

When someone shows you their true colours, believe them!

Lisa is not softening. Who we saw in week one aka the bully bitch is still this thick headed woman.Charlie is not a nice harmless boy. He is immature, a bully and selfish as we have consistently seen. Sophie has made bitchy little comments since day one and completely lacks any real sense of right and wrong. Do not dismiss comments "Never say never" as she said to Ken when he said she was too pretty to date him as innocent and throwaway. This girl wants something for nothing and is untrustworthy...I just want to clarify those three

But she only once drew a direct comparison to any of the other housemates and that was with relation to Sophie and her relative social strengths when compared to Freddie, where it's perfectly clear to me that she assumes that quiet, gentle nature that Freddie was so eager to impress on others but that continually eluded him. That's what ostracised him from the group - his pushy, forced goodness which flatly contradicted his behaviour near the end. It was a valid point to make.

That was the only time she highlighted his behaviour and related it to others; all the rest of the time she committed to analysing him on his own. Plus she was not asked to judge any of the other contestants tonight. That wasn't part of the job requirements for this evenings interview. Why you seem to be on a crusade to defraud her claims by suggesting that the rest of the housemates can't compare to his moral rectitude is beyond me, and was beyond the agenda laid out to Judy James.

I agree that she went on a bit OTT with Sophie, but give the girl a break. She showed no aggression or hostility on the show like you would have us believe.


Sophie stands for nothing and that is a good enough reason for me to a.not respect her b.not admire her c. not like her..She is a bystander. She puts her conscience on hold depending on the sway of the group at that moment. She protects herself first and foremost.I like people that are mature minded and genuinely good.


Have you ever experienced in your life a person who is vile, despicable, nasty, willfully cruel and unprovokingly cruel to you? Have you ever fantasized about some kind of revenge? Finally succeeding? Beating iniquity, injustice, evil with goodness and the right values? When Freddy was laughing in the face of Lisa, it was "just desserts". It was not inconsistent with his character. It was a kind of sweet revenge on the scum of society who would run over you to get what they want, who would likely bully you to death and not blink an eye. Manaically laughing in the face of those who are consistent bullies is alright in my books but maybe you have never been hurt and abused and degraded and humiliated in your life by people who have all the power but have no goodness or character and so do not know what it is like when the Hitlers of the world fall and get their comeuppance and you are a success. Freddy behaved as he ought to have done. Though childish, I was proud of him.

When Freddy was becoming so zealously confident at the end in himself, almost arrogant, I believe it was not at all rooted in his ego, in himself. But when Karly and Kris had been evicted, he assumed the public too were on the side of "the good". His confidence came from something greater and outside of all of us--an abstract principle called "morality", "justice". Telling Lisa she would go was simply a steadfast adherence to this belief in goodness and peoples desire for it..

You obviously have this fervant desire to defend Freddie and absolve him of any flaws in his character. Judy Jones is your latest target maybe, because she had the audacity to comment on his behaviour and analyse it in a purely objective manner. She was always open to his responses- her stern face was her way of focusing on his reactions and speech. That's what pyschologists do.

Your use of language and general distaste for the rest of the housemates is a bit worrying and has a kinda frenzied tone to it. Plus I don't agree with half of it and it literally has nothing to do with Judy Jones and everything to do with your own feelings..... feelings being the operative word.




I agree my use of language and distaste for housemates and Judy James is concerned with my feelings. But of course. But, that is-- feeling coupled with intellect--which is the only real basis I think for any judicious assessment of a situation. For instance, I feel at a visceral level that the holocaust was evil and despicable as I am a human being who does not like hurt and does not like hurt inflicted on others and I understand it intellectually too. I am able to articulate my feelings through my facility with language and my brain. Isn't that the very nature of being human? So, where exactly did your opinions on the matter come from? Thin air, "objective reasoning" (when for every human being this is an impossible task when related to human values and not the sciences and even then that is contentious), or are they from your feelings, perceptions coupled with your thoughts on the issue as is mine?

Anyway, I might say that Fredriech Nietsche said "There are no facts, there are only perspectives" and I suppose that is quite evident in this chat..

But, I do not absolve Freddy of his character faults--he can be cocky, he does have annoying idiosyncrasies like mmmms when you're eating your cornflakes, long sighs etc. etc. but on the whole his good qualities outweigh the bad and surpass most of them in there...

If you or I were his friend I could guarantee he would be a beacon in your life. Someone to trust wholeheartedly, without reservation or caution as only he has demonstrated in the house through his association with Marcus and Siavash and even Bea when he did not tell Lisa and David the things she said about them when she turned on him (for instance, "everything she/he says is mundane and I cannot bear to listen to them''--this is real snobbery...


With the other housemates, I strongly believe through logical deduction and past behaviours they would betray you in an instance if you didn't suit their agenda or somethign better came along.....

But your feelings are no concern of mine at the moment....I never asked you to impress them upon me. The only one I have a problem with is your abhorrence towards Judy James, which is misguided and unfounded. Plus please refrain from referring to Hitler in any argument you wish to form. Drawing parallels between him, the sins of the world and a couple of idiotic housemates is just plain silly.

[puffpuffpuff]

Okay well if my feelings are of no concern to you why are you commenting on my post in the first place? Is this not an exchange of thoughts and feelings and impressions on the matter and this is why you are here? This is a forum after all..

I personally believe that if people do not pay attention to the small minute injustices in everyday life, the small cruelties between people it only admits and allows the great atrocities. I think morality needs to be tackled at a localised level before we make any progress large scale so if I refer to Hitler or the Holocaust, it is only because I believe overlooking and dulling ourselves to small oppressions and abuses of power paves the way for big ones. It makes us all insensitive..

[puffpuffpuff]

And I might also say, I probably look at big brother from a more philosophical/psychological/sociological perspective then being just pure entertainment and it is a reflection on human nature on what people do, on what people are to a large degree so.. I do not think I am silly :banana:

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
Okay well if my feelings are of no concern to you why are you commenting on my post in the first place? Is this not an exchange of thoughts and feelings and impressions on the matter and this is why you are here? This is a forum after all..

I personally believe that if people do not pay attention to the small minute injustices in everyday life, the small cruelties between people it only admits and allows the great atrocities. I think morality needs to be tackled at a localised level before we make any progress large scale so if I refer to Hitler or the Holocaust, it is only because I believe overlooking and dulling ourselves to small oppressions and abuses of power paves the way for big ones. It makes us all insensitive..

Because I believe that it's melodramatic and reactionary to be presenting such forceful and emotive views in such a manner. We'll leave it at that shall we?

[Nollie]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Thank you! You articulated perfectly what I was struggling to.
:hello:

I agree entirely. Couldn't have said it better.

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
And I might also say, I probably look at big brother from a more philosophical/psychological/sociological perspective then being just pure entertainment and it is a reflection on human nature on what people do, on what people are to a large degree so.. I do not think I am silly :banana:

Are you for real? You're after trying to butcher Judy Jones because she viewed Freddie in entirely this manner while you compare the behaviour of the housemates to Nazism or just plain evil and cast Freddie in the role of the Archangel Michael. Give me a break lol

[NolasGirl]

The thing is, Puff is correct to point out how often cruelties in everyday life (and if you want to hone in on the issue of bullying) are so often unresolved and overlooked. And that's the key point, it has nothing to do with comparisons, or melodrama. It's a face value point, a spade is a spade really.

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
The thing is, Puff is correct to point out how often cruelties in everyday life (and if you want to hone in on the issue of bullying) are so often unresolved and overlooked. And that's the key point, it has nothing to do with comparisons, or melodrama. It's a face value point, a spade is a spade really.

Of course it is.... it's misguided energy spent on crucifying anyone who spits on the sidewalk. He compares the housemates to Nazis when in fact his kinda ramblings could very well turn into a form of Fascism. Be careful of how much Nietzsche you read. lol

[puffpuffpuff]

Everything is reactionary--your reaction to my reaction is reaction. Our reaction to tonights show is a reaction. That is life and why is that bad?

And yes, I have been emotive as I explained as I feel passionately about these issues....so :cat:

[puffpuffpuff]

I am a lady thank you very much

[NolasGirl]

Setanta- OK. I think you're straying so far from the heart of this..so off the mark. It was just a well articulated point.

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
Everything is reactionary--your reaction to my reaction is reaction. Our reaction to tonights show is a reaction. That is life and why is that bad?

And yes, I have been emotive as I explained as I feel passionately about these issues....so :cat:

How anal are you to pick up on just one word and argue over it's usage? Wow, I'm off to bed. Can't listen to anymore of your misguided ramblings.

[setanta]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Setanta- OK. I think you're straying so far from the heart of this..so off the mark. It was just a well articulated point.

I'm not at all. If she's willing to form an insane connection between pure evil and the housemates than I'll revel in the same wild flights of fancy myself. Just trying to illustrate how ridiculous it is.

[puffpuffpuff]

And I didn't actually compare the housemates to Nazis or Freddie to an Archangel.. I was simply making an analogy and applying it on a much larger scale to emphasise how both our feelings and thoughts are vitally important in understanding any situation. For example, were we to use pure logic and not human emotion in assessing Hitlers motives for WW2 we might fall into the sophistry that he wanted a mass genocide, racial cleansing, the execution of all those afflicted with genetic anomolies in favour of a master race and logically speaking this idealism might appeal to the unfeeling mind with an intellectual vision, an almost mathetmatical notion of perfection but when we use our feeling, we see that it is a horrendously evil idealism, destroying others for its ends...

So, I was just stating the case that yes my post is all about my feelings but feelings are important and I drew an analogy with Nazi Germany but it wasn't quite such a one to one correlation with Nazi Germany and the housemates as you wrongfully claim.....

[Big_Kahuna]

I think you are jealous and a bit of a geek

[Big_Kahuna]

and also want a job............. haha

[fitz2k2]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist

dont hate because she is deeper then u

[puffpuffpuff]

What is this freaking "Saved by the Bell"?..Do you still categorise people by "cool people" and "geeks"..Well, I'm just extrapolating and I think it is quite interesting tbh...

Some maturity might be in order..you sound very shallow..and a supporter of Charlie and Kris too :yuk:

[puffpuffpuff]

And I have a job actually.....:cheer:

[Big_Kahuna]

I'm marcus, wow is this beas sister? :yuk:

[NolasGirl]

I don't really get why this girl is being berated for these posts. I didn't find anything unbalanced/bitter or overly emotive in them at all. What's the problem?

[puffpuffpuff]

And I have a cooler name then you!..it implies all those legal substances they sell in Amsterdam for your lightheaded pleasure while yours implies sheer silliness and dorkiness..change yo name man if you wanna fit in:dazzler:

[Big_Kahuna]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
And I have a cooler name then you!..it implies all those legal substances they sell in Amsterdam for your lightheaded pleasure while yours implies sheer silliness and dorkiness..change yo name man if you wanna fit in:dazzler:

OMG you're so cool you smoke weed pfft silly girl :pat:

[Insane_Spirit]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist

Ditto! :cheer:

She's clinging on to her job with BB for dear life...probably because her paying clients are drying up...FAST!

:shrug:

[puffpuffpuff]

What is the "Big Kahuna" going to do about it I wonder? Either this is an ironic screen name and the very opposite of you in life or you really do think you are to quote Bea "a big deal" or a big hyper inflated ego more like and I am more inclined to believe the latter tbh..

And I was being facetious but smoking weed as you call it does not have the same addictive properties as tobacco and I believe it to be much safer kind of drug.


Anyway to quote Jennifer Saunders in an episode of friends

'Im bored of you now so I'm going to cut you off"--posh British accent..

[setanta]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
And I didn't actually compare the housemates to Nazis or Freddie to an Archangel.. I was simply making an analogy and applying it on a much larger scale to emphasise how both our feelings and thoughts are vitally important in understanding any situation. For example, were we to use pure logic and not human emotion in assessing Hitlers motives for WW2 we might fall into the sophistry that he wanted a mass genocide, racial cleansing, the execution of all those afflicted with genetic anomolies in favour of a master race and logically speaking this idealism might appeal to the unfeeling mind with an intellectual vision, an almost mathetmatical notion of perfection but when we use our feeling, we see that it is a horrendously evil idealism, destroying others for its ends...

So, I was just stating the case that yes my post is all about my feelings but feelings are important and I drew an analogy with Nazi Germany but it wasn't quite such a one to one correlation with Nazi Germany and the housemates as you wrongfully claim.....

"Manaically laughing in the face of those who are consistent bullies is alright in my books but maybe you have never been hurt and abused and degraded and humiliated in your life by people who have all the power but have no goodness or character and so do not know what it is like when the Hitlers of the world fall and get their comeuppance and you are a success."

That's your original quote..... no need to change the goalposts and twist and manipulate your words to prove a point. Your analogy was not an appeal to us to use both our minds and emotions to form an opinion; it was an emotive and reactionary challenge to any little Hitlers who stand in the way of goodnees and purity. Anyway enough. You seem intent on continuing your speeches and rhetoric and I need a break from it.

[puffpuffpuff]

I am not manipulating at all.. I also alluded to the holocaust which is mostly where my rationale came from. In all honesty I didn't pay attention this here quote BUT yes this was a little hyperbolic but I was just being passionate about justice/injustice whether small or large scale..im sleeping nai :angel:

[BBAroudtheGlobe]

I wish they would go back to the old style of doing exit interviews. They were much better. The extra co-host now are so unneccesary and they waste too much time. Time, that could be used to ask the acutal housemates questions.

Also, I liked it when the housemates could here the crowd's responses when their names where called when Davina talked to them. It added anxiety and confusion for them sometimes. I enjoyed watching it better.

[Jords]

Telling Freddie he was rubbish at analysing? Jog on Judy!
Also the fat lump who sat next to her I CANT STAND!

[Marc]

:laugh: at this thread

[6*Alives]

Originally posted by Nathan
I thought freddie was always spot on with his assesments on the hms, like with the whole sheep thing

then judy horse james goes ''you werent a good judge of character at all, if anyone it was sophie''

i mean wtf, sophie is the biggest sheep there is, she didnt have her own opinions, she never judged anyone, she just said whatever lisa and kris said!

I thought that comment was hilarious! Obviously the production team all now want Sophie to win and to get a "Psychologist" to say she is the best judge of character to gain public agreement is laughable!

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist

She was just pointing out some home truths! He IS a terrible amateur psychologist and his communication skills are lacking - noone in their right mind could deny that!!

[Linto99]

OMG :conf: That took a while to read all those posts! A wee bitty difference of opinions there, me thinks??? I also watch BB for the watching of human behaviour, I think it's fascinating. I love how when they first go into the house they all think they will get along and there won't be many arguments, as they are all such good friends, and 5 days later their all fighting and bitching.

People going onto BB just lay their souls bare for the viewers watching to see. They can't hide what is their true personalities for it seems longer than 3 weeks. I myself always hope that the winner will be the person who has shown most integrity, honesty, loyaltly and generally the 'All rounder' good guy, who is real in their behaviour and not fake - but I myself (which I'm aware of) tend to be a bit idealistic. We are what we are and we all have different opinions depending on what our beliefs are.

Freddie was generally a really nice person who you would be lucky to have as a friend, his problem was, he was too trusting in his friends (Don't think Marcus intentions where always in Freddie's interest) and his biggest downfall was falling head over heals in love with Bea (or falling for the Bea that she originally portrayed herself to be) Because his emotions got in the way - He just stopped seeing things clearly!

I do think Judy James was wrong in some of her assumptions of Freddie, but correct in others, but don't really rate her as a Psychologist either. The guy is way much better.

But at the end of the day everything on these forums is only ' Our opinion ' and that is what forums are for - expressing your opinions and debating them with other members - But sometimes these debates seem to turn really nasty!

[WOODYLASS]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist



You're just a sore loser! Face it he's gone, he deserved to go, and everything the psychologist said was spot on. Some of you Freddie fans start slinging insults as soon as somebody expresses an opinion that's different from your own. Very immature!

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by NolasGirl
The thing is, Puff is correct to point out how often cruelties in everyday life (and if you want to hone in on the issue of bullying) are so often unresolved and overlooked. And that's the key point, it has nothing to do with comparisons, or melodrama. It's a face value point, a spade is a spade really.

Of course it is.... it's misguided energy spent on crucifying anyone who spits on the sidewalk. He compares the housemates to Nazis when in fact his kinda ramblings could very well turn into a form of Fascism. Be careful of how much Nietzsche you read. lol

Well said Setanta!:thumbs:

[Tom4784]

Would the OP be saying this if it wasn't Freddie that got evicted? I don't think she's biased at all and the Freddie fans are just bleeting about him being evicted.

[mangasatsuma]

Originally posted by Dezzy
Would the OP be saying this if it wasn't Freddie that got evicted? I don't think she's biased at all and the Freddie fans are just bleeting about him being evicted.

Perhaps we would find fault in her analysis of Marcus then!

I found Judy James comments about Sophie ludicrous. Also highlighting the argument with Noirin as a changing point did not sound right, that incident stood pretty much in isolation. Freddie received more acceptance in the house because Kris & Karly got kicked out, and Tom told people the public liked him. But BB wouldn't want to admit their new HM's spoilt things.

[puffpuffpuff]

I have observed Judy James' pseudo analysis of the evictees of the BB house for weeks now and it always seems to me she gets it completely and entirely WRONG. It is like she does not watch the show at all. I think she is just ridiculous. When Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. Absolute rubbish! This woman has a very dubious sense of morality in stating these things about Karly v Freddy and does not seem to have a clue of the notion of "cause and effect"..Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked, of their own volition (they had a choice to do this or not to and they revealed the essence of their characters in that moment as bullies). This is what bullies do. You do not have to be anything in particular for someone to behave unjustly towards you. Freddy in his so called bitching is reacting to the cruelty of people like Lisa, Kris, Karly, Charlie, Dogface etc...Judy is completely nuts and she seems to twist absolutely everything. It is the equivalent of watching a group of schoolyard bullies at secondary gang up on one of the more vulnerable and different kids and then rationalising their nasty behaviour and contriving the victim as the instigator and culprit. The woman is insensitive and embarassing..

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I have observed Judy James' pseudo analysis of the evictees of the BB house for weeks now and it always seems to me she gets it completely and entirely WRONG. It is like she does not watch the show at all. I think she is just ridiculous. When Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. Absolute rubbish! This woman has a very dubious sense of morality in stating these things about Karly v Freddy and does not seem to have a clue of the notion of "cause and effect"..Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked, of their own volition (they had a choice to do this or not to and they revealed the essence of their characters in that moment as bullies). This is what bullies do. You do not have to be anything in particular for someone to behave unjustly towards you. Freddy in his so called bitching is reacting to the cruelty of people like Lisa, Kris, Karly, Charlie, Dogface etc...Judy is completely nuts and she seems to twist absolutely everything. It is the equivalent of watching a group of schoolyard bullies at secondary gang up on one of the more vulnerable and different kids and then rationalising their nasty behaviour and contriving the victim as the instigator and culprit. The woman is insensitive and embarassing..

Are yo a professional psychologist - or just an amateur one?

[setanta]

Originally posted by COMMONSENSE
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I have observed Judy James' pseudo analysis of the evictees of the BB house for weeks now and it always seems to me she gets it completely and entirely WRONG. It is like she does not watch the show at all. I think she is just ridiculous. When Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. Absolute rubbish! This woman has a very dubious sense of morality in stating these things about Karly v Freddy and does not seem to have a clue of the notion of "cause and effect"..Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked, of their own volition (they had a choice to do this or not to and they revealed the essence of their characters in that moment as bullies). This is what bullies do. You do not have to be anything in particular for someone to behave unjustly towards you. Freddy in his so called bitching is reacting to the cruelty of people like Lisa, Kris, Karly, Charlie, Dogface etc...Judy is completely nuts and she seems to twist absolutely everything. It is the equivalent of watching a group of schoolyard bullies at secondary gang up on one of the more vulnerable and different kids and then rationalising their nasty behaviour and contriving the victim as the instigator and culprit. The woman is insensitive and embarassing..

Are yo a professional psychologist - or just an amateur one?

She's obviously not a psychologist as she's judging Judy Jones on a purely emotional and extremely subjective level when it's perfectly clear to me that Jones never made moral assumptions on any of the housemates. A psychologists job is to observe and analysis behaviour - their causes and eventual effect - and never to question their ethical values or lack thereof. To do so would obscure her rational, logical thought pattern when it concerns human behaviour.... it's was very apparent in the interview that she was trying to stay focused and not involve herself in too much emotion, allowing the analytical mind to take control.
That's the key to remaining impartial when commenting on human behaviour.

To attack her for overt bias is really laughable in my eyes. There's no hidden, vindictive agenda behind her comments..... and most of her insights were bang on the mark. She never questioned them on an ethical level -stating it they're bad or good - she just tried to give Freddie some insight as to why some people may have viewed him suspiciously. She wasn't condeming him or seeking to crucify him.... ridiculous to see it that way.

[NolasGirl]

Why do you people have to complicate things to such an extreme. It really isn't that complex an issue. The pyschologist got it wrong. She left out details and facts of the actions of characters within the house..To focus on an example, That Karly's "Body language" was separate to her character. What ****. That just doesn't mean anything.

The End.

The root of what's been said here is factually correct. Regardless of how it's been said. Deal with it.

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
IWhen Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. .Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
Why do you people have to complicate things to such an extreme. It really isn't that complex an issue. The pyschologist got it wrong. She left out details and facts of the actions of characters within the house..To focus on an example, That Karly's "Body language" was separate to her character. What ****. That just doesn't mean anything.

The End.

The root of what's been said here is factually correct. Regardless of how it's been said. Deal with it.

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
IWhen Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. .Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked

Oh - I see the psychologist got it wrong - because you say so!!

Another one that thinks they know better than a professional!

Sorry - but as has been said by another poster - she is there in a professional capacity to analyize behaviour and causes - not to get emotionally involved by giving personal opinions!!

You are the one simply giving personal opinions - and your opinions are more likely to be influenced by personal likes and dislikes than the psychologist's!!

[kittysnose]

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I seriously distrust her motives believing them to be entirely nefarious..Has she even watched the show? I seriously get the impression they show maybe two/three clips max to her and then she adds her completely futile two cents which is almost always invariably wrong and involves the complete reduction of human beings to mere instruments and prisoners of our evolutionary history..Then, when the housemate disagrees with her about her mischaracterisation of them and the other housemates she just vacantly and vapidly grins at them with an almost palpable sense of bubbling resentment and arrogance beneath her composure..She is the sort of therapist one would want to avoid..

Tonight it basically sounded as though she pinned absolutely everything that happened in the house to Freddy on Freddy when in fact some people really are just bullies. They ostracised him from day 1 as he was different and is a soft person. I was just rather irate when she effectively I think bullied him some more by identifying and affiliating herself with the pack mentality of the housemates and ridiculed his social skills. Methinks this is one prejudiced lady.

I really believe the woman is an idiot! Freddy was actually the most discerning person as regards peoples characters as he has some degree of integrity in his personality. Integrity is the cornerstone of discernment. Freddys (general) consistancy only illuminates the selfish motives and vices in others and has done from the very beginning. The only person in which he became lost was the nasty Bea..Honestly, Judy James just slung a few insults at the guy and feigned that the rest of the housemates were just paragons of virtue who couldn't relate to Freddy and his awful social skills when actually 99% of them in their bar Marcus are small minded, self seeking, pack, petty assholes!!

She really does get on me goat. BAD Psychologist

I think the OP has a point. Judi James seemed to overlook some quite major things and her appraisal of Freddie seemed very cold compared to when she met some of the others. That 'over-congruent' sh!te she attributed to Freddie - I was a bit confused, is she implying that when someone is genuinely nice, friendly and a bit enthusiastic by nature, that they are therefore perceived as a threat by other people? Because that is what she seemed to be saying. :puzzled:

[NolasGirl]

It's not that. As I stated before, I honestly believe that some of the methodological reasoning is nonesense.. For example "reading bodylanguage" in isolation from all other factors of the enviroment and character.

And as people stated before, trying to track certain behaviours to more primitive stages of human development.. (ie. What people were complaining about before in the references to "animals" etc.)...
Even with my most hated housemate Bea.. I would rather not have to listen to this **** being applied to her initial eviction interview. We want basic real questions, with real answers. Whether I like the housemate or not.. I found this reasoning to be too rigid and factually incorrect.

[kittysnose]

Originally posted by COMMONSENSE
Originally posted by NolasGirl
Why do you people have to complicate things to such an extreme. It really isn't that complex an issue. The pyschologist got it wrong. She left out details and facts of the actions of characters within the house..To focus on an example, That Karly's "Body language" was separate to her character. What ****. That just doesn't mean anything.

The End.

The root of what's been said here is factually correct. Regardless of how it's been said. Deal with it.

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
IWhen Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. .Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked

Oh - I see the psychologist got it wrong - because you say so!!

Another one that thinks they know better than a professional!

Sorry - but as has been said by another poster - she is there in a professional capacity to analyize behaviour and causes - not to get emotionally involved by giving personal opinions!!

You are the one simply giving personal opinions - and your opinions are more likely to be influenced by personal likes and dislikes than the psychologist's!!

Completely disagree. I'm sure many people have come across 'professionals' in Judi James' field and others who are not necessarily objective and not necessarily worthy of their title.

[NolasGirl]

Originally posted by kittysnose


I was a bit confused, is she implying that when someone is genuinely nice, friendly and a bit enthusiastic by nature, that they are therefore perceived as a threat by other people? Because that is what she seemed to be saying. :puzzled:

Exactly.

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by kittysnose
Originally posted by COMMONSENSE
Originally posted by NolasGirl
Why do you people have to complicate things to such an extreme. It really isn't that complex an issue. The pyschologist got it wrong. She left out details and facts of the actions of characters within the house..To focus on an example, That Karly's "Body language" was separate to her character. What ****. That just doesn't mean anything.

The End.

The root of what's been said here is factually correct. Regardless of how it's been said. Deal with it.

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
IWhen Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. .Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked

Oh - I see the psychologist got it wrong - because you say so!!

Another one that thinks they know better than a professional!

Sorry - but as has been said by another poster - she is there in a professional capacity to analyize behaviour and causes - not to get emotionally involved by giving personal opinions!!

You are the one simply giving personal opinions - and your opinions are more likely to be influenced by personal likes and dislikes than the psychologist's!!

Completely disagree. I'm sure many people have come across 'professionals' in Judi James' field and others who are not necessarily objective and not necessarily worthy of their title.

Based on what - those people's amateur opinions - my point exactly!

No professional has a 100% 'success rate' - in whatever field - but their opinions are based on professional knowledge and experience guided by accepted professional and academic guidelines! An amateur may not agree - but their opinion can only ever be a personal one - with a lot less expertise to back it up!

[cassieparis]

I agree with everything Judy said. Love what she said in fact.
Freddie isn't blameless and was unfortunately isolated.
Sophie is a better judge of character
Sophie too is soft and different and is better able at social interacting without constantly fecking people off; which Freddie constantly did with..... let me tell you how wrong you are and how right I'm sermons....... no listen listen dude listen ........ interludes.
Quirky and different are great but patronising and controlling will get you ostrasized.

[NolasGirl]

commonsense-
In actual fact you are coming across as the amateur one. OR maybe the arrogant one! I studied psychology for a year in college (a good few years ago now, so I forget certain categorical points in the learning process) and my dad is a psychologist. Are we not allowed to criticise certain methods even if they've been accepted in the academic world?

[Pandacoon]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
In fact- it's so well observed that I think you should try and send a copy of this to Judi James herself or channel 4 as a complaint.

Or even Freddie if he is contact-able at this point.

he does have a facebook. A friend of mine had it....

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by NolasGirl
commonsense-
In actual fact you are coming across as the amateur one. OR maybe the arrogant one! I studied psychology for a year in college (a good few years ago now, so I forget certain categorical points in the learning process) and my dad is a psychologist. Are we not allowed to criticise certain methods even if they've been accepted in the academic world?

Like you I have also studied psychology (although not to a particularly high level) and again, like you, some time ago - but psychology does come into my job as a nurse - so it is something that I give a lot of thought to!

Yes - we are allowed to criticise and disagree with professionals - but that doesn't make us right and them wrong! Our opinions are more likely to be emotive!

My point simply being that professionals have a lot more knowledge to back-up their opinion - and they are trained to base their findings on recognised professional practice and to keep personal opinions out of it!

[silversurfer]

She was way off with freddy..a therapist whos a bad judge of character is a dangerous one..she has peoples lives in her hands...

[setanta]

Originally posted by silversurfer
She was way off with freddy..a therapist whos a bad judge of character is a dangerous one..she has peoples lives in her hands...

You see, this is my point.... where was she way off?

[NettoSuperstar!]

She wasnt saying he caused the bullying ffs, she said he became an outsider because he didnt understand when to shut up sometimes and wasnt always that socially aware (basically)! lol

[Prole]

If only psychology was an exact science, we'd be able to say who was 100% right and who was 100% wrong.

[silversurfer]

Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by silversurfer
She was way off with freddy..a therapist whos a bad judge of character is a dangerous one..she has peoples lives in her hands...

You see, this is my point.... where was she way off?

She was terribly way off because when analysing freddys downfall she didnt take into consideration his awful wounding by Bea...she merely said he was a bad judge of character ...she had no insight or empathy..two traits that you definitely need in her field...

[WOMBAI]

Originally posted by silversurfer
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by silversurfer
She was way off with freddy..a therapist whos a bad judge of character is a dangerous one..she has peoples lives in her hands...

You see, this is my point.... where was she way off?

She was terribly way off because when analysing freddys downfall she didnt take into consideration his awful wounding by Bea...she merely said he was a bad judge of character ...she had no insight or empathy..two traits that you definitely need in her field...

Who said she didn't take Freddie's wounding by Bea into consideration - you! If she didn't mention it - doesn't mean she didn't take it into consideration! Freddie didn't just mis-judge Bea - he mis-judged other housemates and the public!

He mis-judged the public's ability to see his arrogance for a start! He mis-judged the public's ability to change their minds! It is not all about Bea!

I think she showed insight! She is a professional trained not to bring her emotions into it!

[setanta]

Originally posted by silversurfer
Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by silversurfer
She was way off with freddy..a therapist whos a bad judge of character is a dangerous one..she has peoples lives in her hands...

You see, this is my point.... where was she way off?

She was terribly way off because when analysing freddys downfall she didnt take into consideration his awful wounding by Bea...she merely said he was a bad judge of character ...she had no insight or empathy..two traits that you definitely need in her field...

But he obviously is a bad judge of character and his social skills need to be tinkered with..... that's clearly evident from his interpersonal skills. She wasn't there to condemn Bea or anyone else for that matter- that wasnt part of her agenda as a psychologist on the show. Her memo was to analyse Freddies behaviour, attempting to seek patterns and a possible explanation for his early departure, and she did so with clarity and with no trace of bias.

[dipeshp]

bring back cecilia

[puffpuffpuff]

Originally posted by COMMONSENSE
Originally posted by NolasGirl
Why do you people have to complicate things to such an extreme. It really isn't that complex an issue. The pyschologist got it wrong. She left out details and facts of the actions of characters within the house..To focus on an example, That Karly's "Body language" was separate to her character. What ****. That just doesn't mean anything.

The End.

The root of what's been said here is factually correct. Regardless of how it's been said. Deal with it.

Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
IWhen Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. .Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked

Oh - I see the psychologist got it wrong - because you say so!!

Another one that thinks they know better than a professional!

Sorry - but as has been said by another poster - she is there in a professional capacity to analyize behaviour and causes - not to get emotionally involved by giving personal opinions!!

You are the one simply giving personal opinions - and your opinions are more likely to be influenced by personal likes and dislikes than the psychologist's!!

Commonsense you have a profoundly superficial understanding of life if the only determination you make in any situation is a degree qualification, the nominal title of 'professional' or 'psychologist' or what have you. I judge people by their individual merits. Not everybody that pursues a particular profession has a real vocation for it. For many, it is a status thing. For many it is a necessity thing and for many it is a passion. It seems to me that if you were to see a therapist tomorrow and after your first few sessions they were confusing you, upsetting you, wrongly attributing things to you and your life, you would make recourse to their diploma and that is enough for you to have faith in them. Human beings are fallible and psychologists can be especially fallible also. I hope you do not consider everything in your life in such black and white terms and reduce the sheer complexity of human beings to superficial considerations. For example, there are many who are condescending and disrespectful to those younger then them as in their heads they have placed said young person in a box, a stereotype and give no further thought to the complexity of being a person. Their thinking is 'this person is younger then me therefore i can reduce them to a number of token sterotypes disregardingly'. My advice to you is look at what is actually there in another person, the reality and not to superficial signifiers about who they are whether 'psychologist', 'teenager',' pensioner' or 'priest'..


This is my attitude to Judy James. I am not impressed by any of the superficial titles and accolades of this world but on the content of character and I will think for myself. I will not agree with a person if it does not sit well with my own reasoning and logic even if they have as I said the nominal title of 'psychologist'. I know a woman who is a sadistic heroin/cocaine addict who was cruel and abusive to my brother who wants to practice psychology and you know what, I am not impressed with her expertise in such a case...and quite rightly I should think..

[puffpuffpuff]

Originally posted by setanta
Originally posted by COMMONSENSE
Originally posted by puffpuffpuff
I have observed Judy James' pseudo analysis of the evictees of the BB house for weeks now and it always seems to me she gets it completely and entirely WRONG. It is like she does not watch the show at all. I think she is just ridiculous. When Karly was evicted she made out that Karly was very nice person but looks bitchy in her body language and this is why people evicted her. Eh, no! Karly was sly, devious and ganged up on Freddy with the bullies. Now she is a gold digger. She also made out in said episode that Freddy was really a bitchy character but he had positive body language and so that is why he stayed in. Absolute rubbish! This woman has a very dubious sense of morality in stating these things about Karly v Freddy and does not seem to have a clue of the notion of "cause and effect"..Freddy was a pure intentioned man from day one, the housemates out of a reversed snobbery ostracised and bullied him unprovoked, of their own volition (they had a choice to do this or not to and they revealed the essence of their characters in that moment as bullies). This is what bullies do. You do not have to be anything in particular for someone to behave unjustly towards you. Freddy in his so called bitching is reacting to the cruelty of people like Lisa, Kris, Karly, Charlie, Dogface etc...Judy is completely nuts and she seems to twist absolutely everything. It is the equivalent of watching a group of schoolyard bullies at secondary gang up on one of the more vulnerable and different kids and then rationalising their nasty behaviour and contriving the victim as the instigator and culprit. The woman is insensitive and embarassing..

Are yo a professional psychologist - or just an amateur one?

She's obviously not a psychologist as she's judging Judy Jones on a purely emotional and extremely subjective level when it's perfectly clear to me that Jones never made moral assumptions on any of the housemates. A psychologists job is to observe and analysis behaviour - their causes and eventual effect - and never to question their ethical values or lack thereof. To do so would obscure her rational, logical thought pattern when it concerns human behaviour.... it's was very apparent in the interview that she was trying to stay focused and not involve herself in too much emotion, allowing the analytical mind to take control.
That's the key to remaining impartial when commenting on human behaviour.

To attack her for overt bias is really laughable in my eyes. There's no hidden, vindictive agenda behind her comments..... and most of her insights were bang on the mark. She never questioned them on an ethical level -stating it they're bad or good - she just tried to give Freddie some insight as to why some people may have viewed him suspiciously. She wasn't condeming him or seeking to crucify him.... ridiculous to see it that way.


Well like I said she either patently does not watch the show and so develops these ludicrous and eccentric understandings on a situation completely detached from all contextual and narrative hints in the house itself or the implication is that she is simply unethical. It is not a matter of personal sentiment. If she is completely aware and clued into all facets of the situation and she considers Karly to be an 'awright bird' and Halfwit to be rather nasty but with innocuous body language then this is a profound misreading or unethical. She might not have forthrightly made any moral judgements but in her analysis she heavily intimates them ie. Karly was actually a good person who was misread by seemingly negative body language, Freddie was actually a nasty so and so who was misread by his positive body language. Everything is inverted in her reasoning from the truth of it all and the viewer fills in the lacunae in her logic to conclude certain moral things. To me, her analysis is profoundly dense and obtuse and had absolutely nothing to do with the character of either Freddy or Karly

[Cristina]

sounds like someone is scared of the fact that someone can analyze them to the bone and know exactly what you are about. yeah i know some of you want to be all "mysterious" hows that working out?

[arsenalforever]

She's a team player for BB producers
knocking the HM's they don't want to win