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

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

Bea would eat her for breakfast.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

She didn't mention animals this week.

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

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

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.

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

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.

i prefer that other therapist cant remember his name but he got kirs down to a T! :laugh3::bigsmile:

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.

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.

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.

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.

: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.

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?

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.

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.

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