What Qualities Does A Potential Female Winner Need?
 

I really would love a female winner this year, buit they need to be Kate material. Its really hard to find a female winner because they need a combination of qualities.

In my opinion, they need to be entertaining(obviously), not throw tantrums, have a great sense of humour, kind,someone average looking, loving and not bitchy. But to find someone like this is very rare in my opinion, even in male HMs. Emilia from BBCH had all of these qualities evven though people may argue about the bitchy part but I think if you tell someone you dont like them to their face (eg. Emilia to Latoya) it doesnt make you bitchy.

Anyway what qualities do you think a female winner has to have?

sorry but LMFAO at not bitchy and Emilia in the same sentence.

But, I tihnk they have to be likeable, but we wont get one, Samanda was our best chance.

Good topic.:thumbs:

It's an impossible question to answer. I thought Amy (BB:CH) had all the qualities but she failed to win. Samanda too. The way female viewers vote it has made it virtually impossible for a female to win. I hope I'm proved wrong but Idont see a female winning BB anytime in the forseable future.

Perhaps a hidden, male, past is the key?


Seriously though I think they have to be there for the experience, not the magazine deals, which has been the problem the last couple of years.


Amy was popular in Hijack (and robbed) as she was 100% confident in who she was and didn't seem to be trying to get anything out of it.

It falls down to the major audience that watch BB and it is females. Females like to vote for men. Esp in the last 3 season; Anthony, Pete and Brian. I dont think any of them deserved to win.

For a women to win, i think the men have to be bad housemates.

I do hope we have a female winner this year after so long though.

She needs to be likeable by females.

This means no outrageous flirting or wearing skimpy clothes for male attention (which most women do anyway, so yeah!). So once she's likeable, she needs to also be entertaining - controversial but a peacemaker. Involved in the "big stories" etc.

Samanda, Amy and even Emilia had the best chances, despite Emilia given exceptionally bad edits, but people saw through that and voted her to win because I watched her live and she was completely difefrent to the person that she was being portrayed as in the HLs. Also in the night before the final, Anthony started arguing with Emilia. But in the HLs they just showed it to the point where she was arguing with him.

Amy went in and i was expecting someone posh and stuck up but I was so wrong. She never bitched about anyone, if she had a problem she would say it and if other Housemates were slagging off someone else when they weren't around, Amy was always there to defend the other person.

That is what i call a winner in my eyes.

I think the female housemates has been fairly bad in recent years and what lets most of them down is either been too dull or just too bitchy.

Samanda were nice and bubbly but had very little else beyond that.

They need to be someone else other girls can relate to.I think Amy on celeb hijack came close to what was required to do well but perhaps being a conceptual artist went against her as some found her a bit odd and maybe stuck up.If you found someone intelligent, down to earth and entertaining with just your average job and interests then you might be onto a winner.

Amy deserved to win so much, and I think, had it bene a normal series on Channel 4, she would have.

Everybody's making good points.

I agree that the female HM's have been rubbish recently but I get a bit stuck in trying to put my finger on what a female HM's needs to be like to appeal to men and women. A beautiful girl will never get the female vote. So she would have to be relatively plain , but if she's plain she's unlikely to get into the house. If she's bubbly the girls wont like her but if she's dull then again, she wont get into the house.

It's a tricky one.

Exactly. But dont forget that both Emilia and Amy's percentage was so close to winning that they could have won if John didn't have immunity throughout the entire series. Its great to see a woman win again as it will be a change.

Thing is, Emilia wouldnt have won in a normal series becauseshe won because of that mass vote on DS, and they wouldnt have done that if it was on channel 4.

Yeahh it was DS and Channel 4 Forums that banded together to vote for both Amy and Emilia to win.I also know lots of female friends that voted Emilia to win. Also if on Channel 4, Victor would have been out in the first week.

I agree with Billy.The smaller voting numbers allowed for Emilia to do so well, in the normal series I'm convinced that she would have been evicted quite early into the series.

She was shown to be quite bitchy at times and we know full well that in the main series that doesn't go down well with the female voters.

Agreed. Emilia would not have got very far in a normal series. For that reason the whole result of hijack is a bit invalid. I dont think John would have won a normal series either.

If BBCH was on Channel 4 I think that Amy, Jeremy or Nathan would of won.

god we've only ever had one female winner!!!

Yeahh.. If you dont count Nadia or Celebrity Big Brother.

I think the Anthony would have won.

a penis?

A NICE ASS:laugh:

a female winner is long overdue (since bb5 Nadia) but i don't think we will in the next few years unless people like Amy from celeb hijack are going to be in the main series

They have a tough job..

IMO Amy wouldnt of one.why?1)the female voters didnt like her because shes hot and because Jeremy,Nathan & Victor fancied her.2)for the rest of the voters Emilia was more entertaining.

Its going to be interesting to see what the female HM's are like.