[Jack_]

Originally Posted by troynuncdicit

Freddie brought everything onto himself. I'm sorry that I don't find it appealing to watch someone screech "LISA! I'M CUMMING! I'M CUMMING!" to someone twice his age or tell Bea that he's going to caveman **** her or whatever, and I'm sorry if you find that appealing. He was a walking cringe and couldn't handle normal social interactions, I had no time for that.

I also know that there's this renegade logic on here that "well if you did something bad at least you did something" but no, that's just some qualifying bull**** in attempt to seem objective. It's Big Brother, you like who you want to like and dislike who you want to dislike. I don't care how much we had to talk about with Marcus and Freddie because all they did was help make BB10 a very ****ty season.

Except the argument in which he said that to Lisa was 6-8 weeks after the events I mentioned. You know...at the start of the series where Lisa and her crew (Kris in particular) outcasted him, constantly mocked and belittled him for practically no reason at all? And so because he 'couldn't handle normal social interactions', that makes it acceptable for another group of housemates to attack and bully (and I don't use that term loosely like most around here) him does it? Warped logic.

And that's fine, but please do enlighten me on what you suggest people talk about if the housemates that create all the talking points are evicted? Perhaps you don't think talking points are essential, and that's fine - just offer me up some sort of alternative, or explain to me how little or no talking points are supposed to attract the attention of the British press and public? How if there's nothing to chat about in the workplace, on social media sites and on forums, you expect anybody to be bothered about tuning in to watch? And how that is supposed to benefit a programme you seemingly like and support? I'd be delighted to hear your solutions to those...small issues. I'm intrigued even.