Originally Posted by Eva bee (Post 6179751)

The show has evicted a contestant (Daley Ojuderie) for 'aggressive and threatening behaviour' towards Hazel O'Sullivan.
Many viewers are concerned that the show has acted unfairly as they have NOT evicted Hazel for pulling down Daley's underwear, and exposing his genitals to the cameras.
We are concerned that the actions of the program were unfair, sexist and racist! We believe that should Daley had done the same to Hazel he would have not only been removed from the program, but would have most definitely been arrested as well. In any case, if ANY male had done this to ANY female housemate, he would have without a doubt been removed from the program! We cannot understand exactly why Hazel has got away with only a warning. We believe the colour of Daley's skin and his gender has played a great part in all of this. It is the opinion of many that Hazel O'Sullivan should be removed from the program. We are not condoning Daley 's actions, but wholeheartedly believe that they should have BOTH been removed from the program. Both acted irresponsibly, both are at fault, so why was only ONE removed???
IF DALEY HAD DONE THIS TO HAZEL, HE WOULD HAVE BEEN CHARGED WITH SEXUAL ASSAULT!!! HAZEL PUT HER HANDS AROUND DALEY'S THROAT FIRST!!!SHE TORMENTED, TEASED AND PROVOKED HIM! WHY IS SHE GETTING AWAY WITH A 'WARNING'?!
WHY WERE THEY 'CHOSEN' FOR THE SAFE HOUSE???!
WHY, IF SHE WERE 'THREATENED', WERE THEY *ALLOWED TO SPEND ANOTHER NIGHT TOGETHER???!!
WHAT IS THIS REALLY ALL ABOUT CHANNEL 5??? WE NEED ANSWERS

!!!
Sent from my iPad

Originally Posted by anne666 (Post 6182475)

How long is this going on, once again, she got a formal warning .NO-ONE has EVER been evicted for exposing someone in that way or any other way !!!!

Originally Posted by kefln (Post 6182516)

Its the clutching at straws argument. When someone has little or no real reason for taking sides, apart from personal bais, they focus on one small thing and make it into more than it is.

If they had more, they would say more. Taking this example, had hazel acted like daley, imagine how people would have reacted. Shes called a ***** and a homewrecker as it is.

Originally Posted by anne666 (Post 6182551)

Yes I totally agree. Also I wonder about some peoples English comprehension. No matter how many true facts, both legally and historically are mentioned it never seems to sink in. In some cases we are even seen as Hazel lovers. It is beyond a joke and worrying. I dont like her at all. However that stupid man, whose one brain cell seems to inhabit his penis,only had to tell her to leave him alone from the start of the series.Simple really.Defend that Hazel haters.

Originally Posted by halfacrown (Post 6182674)

Is it not possible to see Hazel's actions as a trigger but not a justification? The OP is saying that if BB had intervened things would not have escalated. Had they been separated, Hazel would have been saved from Daley's rage and aggressive attack. Since Hazel got a warning, why not pull her out immediately? Of course Hazel didn't realise she was with a dangerous person but why were BB so slow to react?

I think that Hazel should have been ejected for exposing Daley, whether or not others have got away with it before. I also think Daley deserved to go because of what he did and until he gets re-education, he will remain a danger.

Originally Posted by kefln (Post 6182780)

Why would BB intervene? The voting public put daley and hazel in that room for one reason. They wanted to see what would happen. They wanted to see kissing and under the sheet action. They wanted those horrible squishy sounds that we hear every year when two HMs start getting close under the blankets.

A woman pulling down a mans pants, while they were alone, in the dark, after weeks of touchy-feely, was exactly what they wanted. What they planned for.

What no one expected was that ape going nuts.

Originally Posted by kefln (Post 6182780)

Why would BB intervene? The voting public put daley and hazel in that room for one reason. They wanted to see what would happen. They wanted to see kissing and under the sheet action. They wanted those horrible squishy sounds that we hear every year when two HMs start getting close under the blankets.

A woman pulling down a mans pants, while they were alone, in the dark, after weeks of touchy-feely, was exactly what they wanted. What they planned for.

What no one expected was that ape going nuts.

Originally Posted by halfacrown (Post 6182814)

Alone in the dark with a night vision camera rolling and thousands of people watching, not very intimate is it really? You or the viewers may have wanted to see Daley have his pants pulled down but Daley didn't, and that's the point.

BB did intervene by giving Hazel a warning but they were playing with fire by being as much of a voyeur as the public. The difference is they have to judge and protect and here they let Hazel down. They should have pulled Daley out as soon as the hands went around the neck, I guess somebody at BB was thinking "a bit more, no, just a bit more"!

Originally Posted by halfacrown (Post 6182814)

Alone in the dark with a night vision camera rolling and thousands of people watching, not very intimate is it really? You or the viewers may have wanted to see Daley have his pants pulled down but Daley didn't, and that's the point.

BB did intervene by giving Hazel a warning but they were playing with fire by being as much of a voyeur as the public. The difference is they have to judge and protect and here they let Hazel down. They should have pulled Daley out as soon as the hands went around the neck, I guess somebody at BB was thinking "a bit more, no, just a bit more"!

Originally Posted by kefln (Post 6182862)

Everyone who has ever gone into the house have said that for the most part they forget that they are on camera. Even on BOTS, when they talked to judy after she went in for the task, mentioned that she completely forgot the cameras. She said that she even thought that they had decided not to film it. This from a woman who has been on the support shows for years.

So yes, in the dark, in bed, with a little bit of drink taken, I could easly see the cameras been forgotten. Or at least been pushed to the bsck of the mind.


And again BB was never going to intervene when there was a chance of sex. Because sex brings ratings. The voters put those two into the safe house for a reason. BB knows it. We know it.

Originally Posted by kefln (Post 6182516)

Its the clutching at straws argument. When someone has little or no real reason for taking sides, apart from personal bais, they focus on one small thing and make it into more than it is.

If they had more, they would say more. Taking this example, had hazel acted like daley, imagine how people would have reacted. Shes called a ***** and a homewrecker as it is.

Originally Posted by anne666 (Post 6182830)

BB did not intervene when they SHOULD have. He was in an abusive state of rage before she even went into the room. The live feed video now removed from you-tube of course to cover their own HUGE mistake.

Originally Posted by anne666 (Post 6182475)

How long is this going on, once again, she got a formal warning .NO-ONE has EVER been evicted for exposing someone in that way or any other way !!!!

Originally Posted by halfacrown (Post 6182893)

We agree on that, at least. You would think that after the rape allegation on BB Brazil last year they would be keeping a very close eye on what goes on.

Originally Posted by the truth (Post 6182896)

it was the whole sequence of events that lead up to her sexually assaulting him.....the sleep deprivation, the demanding of physical contact, the jumping in his ned on top of him when hed said no, she also grabbed his throat befre forcing his pants down to expose his penis....she should have been warned immediately and booted. if that exact same sequence of events had happened t a woman there would be riots

Originally Posted by the truth (Post 6182896)

it was the whole sequence of events that lead up to her sexually assaulting him.....the sleep deprivation, the demanding of physical contact, the jumping in his ned on top of him when hed said no, she also grabbed his throat befre forcing his pants down to expose his penis....she should have been warned immediately and booted. if that exact same sequence of events had happened t a woman there would be riots

Originally Posted by the truth (Post 6182896)

it was the whole sequence of events that lead up to her sexually assaulting him.....the sleep deprivation, the demanding of physical contact, the jumping in his ned on top of him when hed said no, she also grabbed his throat befre forcing his pants down to expose his penis....she should have been warned immediately and booted. if that exact same sequence of events had happened t a woman there would be riots

Originally Posted by YodaBB (Post 6182928)

Daley should have just went to sleep rather than forcing Hazel in the safehouse

Originally Posted by anne666 (Post 6182926)

Can I ask you for your honest opinion . If the outcome had been sexual activity how would you then have viewed her behaviour.

Originally Posted by the truth (Post 6182933)

just the same. pulling down someones pants to expose their genitalia against their will is sexual assault even when it happens to a man....Nw I would like an honest opinion to please ,,,how would you have reacted if a man did to you all of the things hazel did to daley? i.e. jumped in your bed when you said no, demanded physical contact when you said no, stuck a pillow over your head, kept you awake all night, grabbed your knickers and pulled them down when youd said no

Originally Posted by anne666 (Post 6182948)

Once again pulling someones pants down is NOT sexual assault.If she had gone on to touch him BB would have been thrilled of course and if he objected that is then sexual assault. When you answer my question I will answer yours.

Originally Posted by the truth (Post 6182961)

I have answered and you have ducked mine