I dont agree with what Charley said. But why are people comparing this incident to that of Emily's...just leave Emily out of it. These are two seperate situations.

Emily got kicked out because she used a racist word, which was not only offensive to Charley, but offensive to the public.

What Charley said, as pointed out before, was offensive to Gerry as it was a personal insult.

Whether Charley should get kicked out or not, i dnt know, but as we have seen she and Gerry have made up... but please dont be so ignorant as to say that Emily should be let back in, that is just condoning what she did.

I think what happened with Emily was a knee-jerk reaction on the back of the CBB racism row. The CBB stuff was made a national incident and Channel 4 didn't want the same thing happening again if they'd kept Emily in or given her a formal warning as opposed to ejecting her from the house.

With Charley saying what she did about Gerry, maybe they felt that her comments only affected and offended Gerry rather than the outside world and Big Brother felt it necessary for the incident to be sorted out among themselves. Having said that, I'm surprised Charley has lasted as long as what she has in the house with her volatile nature and the way she's turned on nearly all of the housemates, and after the Fake Eviction it seems she has more issues with a lot of them now after finding out who nominated her and what they said.

Great post Nicola :dance2:

That's my complaint sent to CH4 :bigsmile:

Pro-Charley Blindness

Unfortunately for your 'argument', I'm objective as possible where Charley's concerned.

Try again.

Here's the link (again) to the appropriate thread...

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru....php?tid=66029

...incase you can come up with an argument.

Anti-everything tedium.

Considering my post, perhaps you should look up the definition of "argument" - then consider the post I replied to, and then look in the mirror.

Pro-ad nauseum predictability

You responded to logic with a flame. Ergo, there's no need for anyone to check any definitions. Love the mirror part, though. Such maturity. I bet your dad's bigger than his, too.



Manipulum ad nauseum.

The post I replied to



My reply


Hmmmm,
so the first is logic
yet
my reply is flame ?

Such maturity

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:


sic transit gloria mundi

People were hating Charlie before she even went in on the opening night and people are allowing their predjudices to make them hear what they want to here and not what is said.

The age of consent for hetrosexual couples, IIRC is younger than that for homosexual couples, but it is known that "experimentation" between young peopple takes place, unfortunately.

In this light, picking the age of 15 out of the air in the heat of an argument, (Why were they arguing prior to this statement of 15), is quite likely to happen, and if there is confusion this would also add to this.

The Emily issue is a separate matter and should not be dragged in here.

BB dealt with it, and the matter should rest there

BTW Still Neutral

Is that a reply, or an appalling attempt at poetry? The first links to an explanation. Yours is indeed a flame. Ambiguous Latin epitaphs can be so clichéd, can't they? Where does the concept of fame/glory fit into this delusion, exactly?

It isn't. The law (as far as England is concerned) was changed seven years ago.

My Bad :blush:

I was still under the impression that homosexual age of consent was 18 and hetrosexual age of consent was 16

But it did still seem like a figure plucked at random with out much thought.

but isnt that a perfect example Sticks that not every person is up to date with the law, so if you thought it was older Charley may well have not known!

nah, though he should be made to make a live TV apology to ladies of the night, they must be mortified to be compared to that creature.

If he doesn't they're liable to form a pressure group, up knickers and complain to OFCOM

Pandering to the Charley-haters with an attempt at humour?

Spacebandit, it’s clear to many here that you’re trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes (e.g. misrepresenting my post and claiming it was the one you responded to) with subterfuge for your original pretence (“Pro-Charley Blindness”). The fact that CharlotteSometimes has had to systematically dismantle your repeated, petulant rebuttals is evidence that you would rather string out the discussion along any tangent possible in order to ‘save face’, rather than simply admit your possible mistake. I’ll ask you now to please stop.

I’ll also ask you, one last time, to actually take up the debate in this thread..

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru....php?tid=66029

…where you can make a formed argument, hopefully erasing your pretence and proving you did actually have a point to make. This is one way, in my opinion, which you might save some of that ‘face’ you consider so precious.

I won’t comment on this (side-tracked) issue anymore in this thread.

it was unfair, it was discriminitive and rude. she should be chucked

iam so shocked at some people's comments all i know if emily called me that word she would be on the floor. don't say it's not offensive unless you have ever been called it by some nasty racist. and by the way i don't like charley and think she should have gone along time ago.

Not sure about kicking Charley out, two wrongs don't make a right.