Some BDSM is ok, but some isn't? Make your mind up BB!

[vesavius]

yeah, I know, I'm bored of talking about Andrew as well, but there does seem to be some double standards going on...

Andrew is removed from the house for some consensual spanking, but they have Natalie in there... A HM recruited for her background as a dominatrix and the sex industry.

It just seems a weird contradiction.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Its nonsensical and wrong and andrew should sue them if that is the reason only

[Headie]

Natalie was not stupid enough to film herself doing the acts on camera though unlike Andrew

[Withano]

I was gonna say this last night but I couldnt be bothered to argue lol. I cant see much of a difference between Andrews video and Natalies career either.

[Jamie89]

It's very strange and I thought the same. It makes me wonder if there's more to his ejection though

[FwenchPussyCat]

It's just so obvious they have done what they done with Tila , recruited them knowing they were going to eject them at some point to gain publicity , they have commented on Ryan and said they will deal with comments made inside the house but NOT out! They kicked Tila out for comments she had made outside the house...

[vesavius]

It's just so obvious they have done what they done with Tila , recruited them knowing they were going to eject them at some point to gain publicity , they have commented on Ryan and said they will deal with comments made inside the house but NOT out! They kicked Tila out for comments she had made outside the house...

And remember when Marc was caught for having made rape threat tweets, and nothing was done?

I suspect that you are right and that BB's ethics just shift based on what get's them the most column inches.

[Raph]

Couldn't agree more. Andrew was wrongfully robbed of his time in the house because of uneducated producers who are so worried about 'being PC' (without even understanding what that means, some diversity perhaps instead?). I hate that. Nothing wrong with consensual bdsm. It was so ignorant of BB to eject him.

[MB.]

I think there's a big difference between being "uneducated" (lovely turn of phrase) and being rightly fearful of the backlash you'll receive as a show when a national newspaper leaks a sans-context video of one of your housemates hitting a woman with a belt

[vesavius]

Couldn't agree more. Andrew was wrongfully robbed of his time in the house because of uneducated producers who are so worried about 'being PC' (without even understanding what that means, some diversity perhaps instead?). I hate that. Nothing wrong with consensual bdsm. It was so ignorant of BB to eject him.

It's not my thing, but anything between consenting adults is cool by me. I'm not sure why people get so hung up on what other's get up to for fun.

[Raph]

I think there's a big difference between being "uneducated" (lovely turn of phrase) and being rightly fearful of the backlash you'll receive as a show when a national newspaper leaks a sans-context video of one of your housemates hitting a woman with a belt

It is an indication of the team being uneducated. They made an abrasive and rapid decision to eject him over a video that largely shows similar behaviour to what has been allowed in the house. Further, they choose to ignore the fact that it was consensual - something they should've tried to clarify before jumping to conclusions. Stuff like this happens in the bdsm world all the time. It's the least production should know.

[Raph]

It's not my thing, but anything between consenting adults is cool by me. I'm not sure why people get so hung up on what other's get up to for fun.

Agreed!

[LukeB]

He should never been casted in the first place because he was obviously used for ratings, they also shouldn't have casted him because he's a bigot

[Visage]

Things like this happen when the head doesn't know where the arse is.

[MB.]

It is an indication of the team being uneducated. They made an abrasive and rapid decision to eject him over a video that largely shows similar behaviour to what has been allowed in the house. Further, they choose to ignore the fact that it was consensual - something they should've tried to clarify before jumping to conclusions. Stuff like this happens in the bdsm world all the time. It's the least production should know.

A sign of them being uneducated would be them thinking the Battle of Hastings happened in 1957, not them not being experts in BDSM :unsure:

And even if they did know all that, you can't say the general public would (over-)react the same, especially when the show's holding on to what's left of its reputation and would do absolutely anything to avoid losing it

[Raph]

Andrew's shrewdness, intellect and perspicacity was way too much for BBUK :laugh:

[Raph]

A sign of them being uneducated would be them thinking the Battle of Hastings happened in 1957, not them not being experts in BDSM :unsure:

And even if they did know all that, you can't say the general public would (over-)react the same, especially when the show's holding on to what's left of its reputation and would do absolutely anything to avoid losing it

Uneducated, ignorant whatever you'd like to call them they lack an awareness and education about this topic, which is evident given the extremely fast removal of Andrew of fears of not being 'PC' enough.

And the argument about the general public holds little value with me, given the fact that they didn't choose to eject Marco or Laura, who also both consensually took part in BDSM related activities.

[Raph]

But sorry Andrew wasn't a blonde female, MB :wink:

[MB.]

The difference is, the Laura-Marco thing happened on their show, where they have control of the edit and can emphasise it as "risky sexual behaviour" or w/e

They had no control of the Andrew footage because The Sun were threatening to leak it and they spun it as abuse rather than anything sexual or consensual, regardless of whether it was or not

[Raph]

The difference is, the Laura-Marco thing happened on their show, where they have control of the edit and can emphasise it as "risky sexual behaviour" or w/e

They had no control of the Andrew footage because The Sun were threatening to leak it and they spun it as abuse rather than anything sexual or consensual, regardless of whether it was or not

Pretty messy, disrespectful (to Andrew) and incompetent if you ask me!

[MB.]

Well that's Dan Wootton for you

[LukeB]

It's very strange and I thought the same. It makes me wonder if there's more to his ejection though

We just don't know because he told two different stories so it's like :conf: really. But the video looked like the Daley and Hazel thing. Would it surprise you if he was in on it the whole time though? he did make 100k out of it and he's meant to be 'smart' despite drink driving whilst on his phone + his views.

[Jack_]

The difference is, the Laura-Marco thing happened on their show, where they have control of the edit and can emphasise it as "risky sexual behaviour" or w/e

They had no control of the Andrew footage because The Sun were threatening to leak it and they spun it as abuse rather than anything sexual or consensual, regardless of whether it was or not

But the show shouldn't be pandering to The ****ing Sun of all things and allowing them to effectively tarnish one of their participants names by taking a video out of context and have them ejected because of it

Not only do they dictate the results of elections, they're now interfering in a bloody reality show. The producers should rightfully have told the disgusting rag where to shove it

[Pete.]

Natalie always wins

[Raph]

But the show shouldn't be pandering to The ****ing Sun of all things and allowing them to effectively tarnish one of their participants names by taking a video out of context and have them ejected because of it

Not only do they dictate the results of elections, they're now interfering in a bloody reality show. The producers should rightfully have told the disgusting rag where to shove it

:clap1:

[hot2go]

Natalie was not stupid enough to film herself doing the acts on camera though unlike Andrew

I think the thread is more about how people find the concept discusting for one and not the other...you're absolutely correct, Natalie hasn't, as yet, had footage leaked

A lot of people often comment how unfare it is that it's one rule for women and one for men, this is a prime example of the unfare rules that fall on men, the same rule attributed to Marco over the choking incident

[Jamie89]

We just don't know because he told two different stories so it's like :conf: really. But the video looked like the Daley and Hazel thing. Would it surprise you if he was in on it the whole time though? he did make 100k out of it and he's meant to be 'smart' despite drink driving whilst on his phone + his views.

WHAT!

http://i.imgur.com/xqmAUYV.gif?3

I haven't seen the Daley/Hazel series so I can't comment on that. I would be surprised if it was all a set up though, I mean it's definitely possible but I think I want to stay in my bubble of pretending that BB isn't contrived to the point where stuff like this gets planned in advance :laugh: But who knows. It's just really odd the whole thing, there's something, I don't know what, but something they're not telling us! :think:

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think there's a big difference between being "uneducated" (lovely turn of phrase) and being rightly fearful of the backlash you'll receive as a show when a national newspaper leaks a sans-context video of one of your housemates hitting a woman with a belt

incorrect


He was engaging in consensual sexual role play


that is a massive difference

[MB.]

Did you read any of the rest of the conversation or nah

[Crimson Dynamo]

Did you read any of the rest of the conversation or nah

eh?

[MB.]

I said that it doesn't matter what the video is of, The Sun are spinning it as him hitting a woman with a belt and that's what people are going to believe

BB's already "that sex show", "that racist show" and probably a dozen other charming monikers, so the last thing it wants to be is "that show with the guy who abuses people with belts", even if that's not true

[ebandit]

..did andrew pay to hit the woman (she appeared fearful )

natalie hit's men who have paid for the service...

Mark L

[vesavius]

But the show shouldn't be pandering to The ****ing Sun of all things and allowing them to effectively tarnish one of their participants names by taking a video out of context and have them ejected because of it

Not only do they dictate the results of elections, they're now interfering in a bloody reality show. The producers should rightfully have told the disgusting rag where to shove it

Yessir!

[letmein]

Big Brother doesn't owe anyone a spot in the house. They can eject anyone for whatever reason they please.

[wendywillow]

if you do it for a living, fine.
if you do it in your personal life and someone takes it and airs it for the viewing public without your permision, out you go

[Mokka]

if you do it for a living, fine.
if you do it in your personal life and someone takes it and airs it for the viewing public without your permision, out you go

Add this to the BB rule book...you know...the one where they log the rules down then rip the page out and swallow it and **** it out all over the production room.

[jennyjuniper]

I must admit that although I couldn't stand Andrew, my first thought was that it was very 'double standard' to have a dominatrix in the house, whilst he was ejected for doing what she does for a living. But then if people pay her to do what she does, it's obviously consensual (weird, but consensual) whilst there is only Andrews word that those pictures 'were a bit of fun'.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I must admit that although I couldn't stand Andrew, my first thought was that it was very 'double standard' to have a dominatrix in the house, whilst he was ejected for doing what she does for a living. But then if people pay her to do what she does, it's obviously consensual (weird, but consensual) whilst there is only Andrews word that those pictures 'were a bit of fun'.

well only Andrew and his girlfriend at the time, you know the one in the video

I would say that if both are singing from the same hymn sheet we have our selves a watertight case?

[sampvt]

yeah, I know, I'm bored of talking about Andrew as well, but there does seem to be some double standards going on...

Andrew is removed from the house for some consensual spanking, but they have Natalie in there... A HM recruited for her background as a dominatrix and the sex industry.

It just seems a weird contradiction.

However now they are actively supporting Blackmail by giving the lipless skank Jayne a huge platform and storyline hoping she spills the beans and ruins his life if she does not get what she demands. Incidentally her mistake was that he fobbed her off so he deserves a medal, not a crucifixion.

[sungrass]

I think there's a big difference between being "uneducated" (lovely turn of phrase) and being rightly fearful of the backlash you'll receive as a show when a national newspaper leaks a sans-context video of one of your housemates hitting a woman with a belt

Yeah but the newspapers have to check it was consensual before they print a story on it other wise its slander and libel in the courts for them. They cant say "he did this" - he would be arrested for one!!! if they did and sued by him as well

not to mention natalie - madam whiplash - has already spoken that shes had clients including current mp's...

BB chucked him for no reason.