I've just read a few things on this it's not quite so black and white is it ? she supported it for PEOPLE WHO DIDN'T WANT to be gay, they WANTED to be cured,totally different thing ,and it seems it was in very early stages and experimental so it wasn't known then about any after effects,although different sites say slightly different things ,a gay site will obviously find it abhorrent, a news site should tell you how it is,so although it is a strange thing to support,the woman was probably thinking it would help,she is not a bad woman at all,her past also says some very positive things about her, I suppose it depends on your outlook on life,we all have those things people don't like about us.

The amount of Ann threads on this site shows how much she has influenced this series.

Without ann we would be walking through tumbleweed:hehe:

Now that's just a total lie about what Ann said tonight isn't it?

Not much of a stretch to believe the rest is total bs too.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Nobody has ever wanted to be gay or anything other than the norm, most LGBT people have often thought of wanting to flick a switch and be 'normal' but that does not mean we should allow ourselves to be psychologically abused to the point that we don't want to live anymore.

Acceptance of who you are is the only way to be truly happy with yourself. There is no defending anyone who has ever been in favour of conversion therapy. It's a deadly con.

I hope we are all on the road to accepting being gay as normal, one size doesn’t fit all in any society.
We have been primed for believing heterosexual is normal, but I don’t doubt that homosexuality has been around since time began, other than for procreation I don’t see why that should be considered any different.

Also, conversion therapy was most definitely not "in very early stages" or "experimental" (well, I guess you could say the latter is true, but you'd have to clarify that said experiments don't work and are in fact nothing but different methods of torture) in 2012, when Ann wrote her article defending it

Oh God, if it isn't one thing to bash Ann with, it's another.

What do you expect to happen by keep going on about the past? Nothing can happen because the world has moved on and many of the things referred to either have happened or have not.

Why not focus on the future and what is yet to be achieved? Nothing can be changed now, why bang on and on about past issues.

I think all the education has been done and dusted, perhaps Shane Js next tutorial is to his own followers to not behave in the way they are pillorying Ann and to look to the future without rancor and hatred.

Interesting, thanks for the bigger picture there Kaz.

It's a sensitive subject for a lot of people, so it's important to get the facts right and not just react.

Like you say, people jump to black-or-white thinking.

But the truth is usually more subtle and complicated than that, and requires a bit more time and understanding.

No...they agree with her right to have an opinion. :shrug:

And all completely out of context and with none of the reasons when and why she might have voted and supported.

Good for her. I admire a person who has the independence of mind to not just mindlessly fall into line with the egalitarian zeitgest of our age, which is based on childish notions of equality.

Unlike most politicians, she had a certain integrity about her.

So are we ignoring external context and only basing our opinions on what we see on the show, or are we using phrases like "egalitarian zeitgeist" as part of a discussion on Celebrity Big Brother? Which is it?

"childish notions of equality"

I. have. heard. it. all.

Christ.

Lol at all those spouting hate for her fans. The likelihood is not many (if any) knew about her coversion therapy views. If they had been common knowledge they would have been ALL over this forum...endless threads.

Certainly Shane J, who has done an awful lot of research didnt know as there is no way he would have let that particular view slide if he knew (quite rightly) so whilst this forum is up in arms about Ann fans....let them do their research and see her views before blanket condemning them for supporting a women who they have probably only just found out believed in this ****ing awful "therapy". Judge HER but not her fans.....

I see it more as part of her mindless faith rather than independence of mind.

and despite posts like this, I get a warning for implying that Ann's fans agree with her views. I mean come on, it's not baiting if it's true.

Yeah I suppose thats a good point. I tend to try as clean slate as much as I can but cannot deny that sometimes thats hard to do. I knew nothing really of Anns voting record before she went in and maybe if I knew beforehand I would have found it harder to like her. Why on earth was there no backlash when she was on Strictly though..I assume her views were public knowledge then? I don't remember any backlash at all. And theres been next to none either until the past few days...which is especially odd. A few posters were voicing concerns earlier on the series, but the past few days it has ramped up HUGELY and I do feel its less about what she has voted for/against and more to do with people disliking her as a housemate and such.

The conversion therapy thing..appears to be about a gay person who actually wanted to try conversion therapy. I don't see how therapy could 'cure' someone of being gay in the first place, and of course its ridiculously abusive when forced onto people. But I cannot get all up in arms about her supporting a gay person (or someone she thought was a gay person, who was an undercover reporter) in doing what they apparently wanted to do.

Coupled with the rest of her record, it clear she has issues with homosexuality in general though. But seemingly not actual gay people. 'Just' (for want of a better word here) homosexuality overall.

Again though, I do not, especially at this late stage in the game..judge housemates on how they are outside of the house. And nor do many others, usually.

I can compare this to being female and being disabled (am bi but have been in a hetero relationship for like 10 years now so bi doesn't really count :laugh:) when trying to work out how I feel about the whole issue. If an MP went in who had voted against womens rights, I could still like them as a housemate, whilst obviously hating their views. If a Tory MP went in who had voted consistently against disabled rights, and was championing the likes of ATOS and claiming most PIP claimants were faking their illness whilst also voting to cut back on vital services for people with chronic pain (my personal issue) and even voting outright to give disabled people second class citizen status..I would possibly judge them harshly at first (if aware of their record, I wouldn't specifically seek it out to pick), but by this stage in the game, their outside voting record would be irrelevant to me as..I watch BB for personalities tbh, not for outside politics.


This just seems to have turned into a longer version of a post I made in another thread, tbh. I seem very repetitive tonight.

OK maybe I have a different understanding of conversion therapy here, genuinely did not know it 'had to be' the totally dracononian torture house kind of thing?

Huffpost is about as left wing as they come, and that doesn't even state anything of the sort?
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012...n_1249697.html
Is apparently what Ann had to say on the matter. And why it was decided she is for conversion therapy. Now if it actually is the 'lock people in rooms and force them to be raped by the opposite sex' kind of thing...then I would say huffpo should probably have made this clear.

If my understanding of conversion therapy is actually wrong, and its always the really horrible kind of 'we will utterly break you mentally' kind of thing, then obviously the conversion therapy part of my post is taken back.


OK. For some reason this did not show up when I searched before, but I found the actual full piece that has her talking about it

https://www.express.co.uk/comment/co...glad-to-be-gay

You've heard very little in your life if a comment like that is shocking to you.

I'm not religious, yet I largely agree with her.

As for her faith being "mindless". No, that's just a modern prejudice. The truth is Christianity can boast of an impressive philosophical and theological tradition.

Some of that is crossing lines for sure, if totally accurate and unexaggerated, but still. "I judge her as Ann Widdecombe, a silly giggly woman who eats chocolate biscuits in bed." :love:

I must say, that although I too find her too toxic to win and want Shane J to win, her one redeeming feature, in my eyes, was that she voted IN FAVOUR of the BAN of Fox Hunting! She's an animal lover by all accounts.

I disagree with her on that one.

I make a distinction between faith and religion.