[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by vesavius

As I said, in real life power is situational. It is not a constant value.

I know that this isn't the received wisdom in the LGBT community because, well, it's benefits them to not understand or acknowledge it, but it's true.

The dynamic def was not equal, I agree. Sam was in a power position and he abused it. He could have stayed true and consistent to his professed values and extended empathy to Carol, but instead he brayed like a donkey.

Agreed, Sam handled that badly. Mocking anyone’s age is cheap and hypocritical. But you’re twisting the wider point. A brief social advantage in a TV house isn’t power in the same way systemic bias is.

Situational shifts don’t erase structural reality. LGBTQ people might have influence for a week in a show, but they still face inequality outside it. That’s the difference you keep ignoring.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Agreed, Sam handled that badly. Mocking anyone’s age is cheap and hypocritical. But you’re twisting the wider point. A brief social advantage in a TV house isn’t power in the same way systemic bias is.

Situational shifts don’t erase structural reality. LGBTQ people might have influence for a week in a show, but they still face inequality outside it. That’s the difference you keep ignoring.

Systemic bias is an outdated myth in 2025. LGBT folks thrive in literally every field. Every system is designed to protect and promote their interests. As I said, this is not the 80s anymore... The LGBT community needs to stop pretending that things have not changed.

But, the thing is that victimhood in progressive circles is a form of social currency and so it is hoarded and treasured as such. it is in itself a form of power.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Systemic bias is an outdated myth in 2025. LGBT folks thrive in literally every field. Every system is designed to protect and promote their interests. As I said, this is not the 80s anymore... The LGBT community needs to stop pretending that things have not changed.

But, the thing is that victimhood in progressive circles is a form of social currency and so it is hoarded and treasured as such. it is in itself a form of power.

You’re mistaking visibility for equality. LGBTQ people might be more seen, but that doesn’t mean the bias is gone. Hate crimes, workplace discrimination, and conversion practices still exist. Legal rights don’t always mean lived equality.

And calling it victimhood when people speak about those realities is lazy. It’s not about collecting pity points. It’s about demanding the same safety and respect everyone else already takes for granted.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

You’re mistaking visibility for equality. LGBTQ people might be more seen, but that doesn’t mean the bias is gone. Hate crimes, workplace discrimination, and conversion practices still exist. Legal rights don’t always mean lived equality.

And calling it victimhood when people speak about those realities is lazy. It’s not about collecting pity points. It’s about demanding the same safety and respect everyone else already takes for granted.

You keep telling me that I am mistaking this for that, but I am not.

But I do think that you maybe mistake equality for equity.

That aside though, I am not talking about being seen, I am talking about there being zero institutional bias against LGBT. In fact, if anything in 2025 the bias institutionally speaking is in favour of them as a group. The social bias/ power, as I say, is situational.

Look, I grew up in the 80s in an openly gay family, when it was actually ****in hard to be gay. I saw what the bias was then first hand. I have seen over the decades how it has changed and improved, and I have seen how so many in the community have refused to acknowledge that because doing so would be giving a portion of their power away.

'Pity points' are social currency, as I say.

[Beso]

Agreed, Sam handled that badly. Mocking anyone’s age is cheap and hypocritical


It is indeed.

[Withano]

I mean by the exact same logic, your thread could have been about the heterosexual people making an exclusive group together - and I think it says more about you than you realise that this is instead the narrative of your thread

[Withano]

But for what it’s worth - and maybe I’ve forgotten.

I think you’re referring to a group consisting of zelah Sam fayeshola jenny Cameron teja- and I’m only aware of 2 in 6 identifying as lgbtq+?

Whilst another member of the lgbtq+ (Nancy) feels closer to Cameron Tate Marcus Elsa

So, basically I think your narrative is trash and your counting skills are worse

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Withano

But for what it’s worth - and maybe I’ve forgotten.

I think you’re referring to a group consisting of zelah Sam fayeshola jenny Cameron teja- and I’m only aware of 2 in 6 identifying as lgbtq+?

Whilst another member of the lgbtq+ (Nancy) feels closer to Cameron Tate Marcus Elsa

So, basically I think your narrative is trash and your counting skills are worse

Sam named them the 'gays and girlies' group, we didn't.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by vesavius

You keep telling me that I am mistaking this for that, but I am not.

But I do think that you maybe mistake equality for equity.

That aside though, I am not talking about being seen, I am talking about there being zero institutional bias against LGBT. In fact, if anything in 2025 the bias institutionally speaking is in favour of them as a group. The social bias/ power, as I say, is situational.

Look, I grew up in the 80s in an openly gay family, when it was actually ****in hard to be gay. I saw what the bias was then first hand. I have seen over the decades how it has changed and improved, and I have seen how so many in the community have refused to acknowledge that because doing so would be giving a portion of their power away.

'Pity points' are social currency, as I say.

You’ve seen progress, and that’s real. No one denies it. But equality isn’t a finish line you cross once. Rights can regress, protections can erode, and acceptance can vanish fast when politics shift.

Institutions may look supportive on paper, but bias lives in enforcement, culture, and everyday behaviour. Try being openly trans at work or holding your partner’s hand in some towns and see how “institutional favour” feels then.

What you call “pity points” is often just people refusing to pretend the job is done. Visibility doesn’t mean victory, it means the fight finally has witnesses.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Sam named them the 'gays and girlies' group, we didn't.

So his counting skills are just as bad then… blindly agreeing to something someone says doesn’t make it correct - in this instance, it makes you all wrong from a technical and literal standpoint.

But compare the language he’s using and you’re using - because there’s a difference in morality here.

It’s time to self reflect mate

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

You’ve seen progress, and that’s real. No one denies it. But equality isn’t a finish line you cross once. Rights can regress, protections can erode, and acceptance can vanish fast when politics shift.

100% agree and if that happens I will be right there to fight against it.

In fact, one of the reasons I am actively anti Islam is it's stance on LGBT rights.

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Institutions may look supportive on paper, but bias lives in enforcement, culture, and everyday behaviour. Try being openly trans at work or holding your partner’s hand in some towns and see how “institutional favour” feels then.

What you call “pity points” is often just people refusing to pretend the job is done. Visibility doesn’t mean victory, it means the fight finally has witnesses.

You called it pity points, not me

But, as I say, social power and bias is situational. I fully agree that LGBT can be on the bad end of it, ofc, but what I am saying is that they can also very often be on the positive side of it. The same as anyone else.

Anyhow, we are repeating ourselves now and I think we have heard each other, so I will bow out. Thanks for the chill conversation on it though, I appreciate not falling into attacks and slurs.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Withano

So his counting skills are just as bad then… blindly agreeing to something someone says doesn’t make it correct - in this instance, it makes you all wrong from a technical and literal standpoint.

But compare the language he’s using and you’re using - because there’s a difference in morality here.

It’s time to self reflect mate

Who are you again?

Tell me about this language though. Help me be a better person, seeing as you are clearly the forums morality police

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by Withano

I mean by the exact same logic, your thread could have been about the heterosexual people making an exclusive group together - and I think it says more about you than you realise that this is instead the narrative of your thread

Agreed

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Withano

I mean by the exact same logic, your thread could have been about the heterosexual people making an exclusive group together - and I think it says more about you than you realise that this is instead the narrative of your thread

There isn't an exclusive heterosexual group though.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Withano

But for what it’s worth - and maybe I’ve forgotten.

I think you’re referring to a group consisting of zelah Sam fayeshola jenny Cameron teja- and I’m only aware of 2 in 6 identifying as lgbtq+?

Whilst another member of the lgbtq+ (Nancy) feels closer to Cameron Tate Marcus Elsa

So, basically I think your narrative is trash and your counting skills are worse

That would be correct had it not been Nancy Sam and Zelah who were the only 3 discussing it.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by vesavius

Who are you again?

Tell me about this language though. Help me be a better person, seeing as you are clearly the forums morality police

Bro

I’m not the one pushing the narrative of a minority group excluding others based on sexual orientation based on something objectively and obviously incorrect because ‘he said it first not me

Call me the morality police if you want. I quite like the title. Deliberately ignoring any points made is quite the deflection though. Self-reflection is still my key piece of advice still.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Beso

That would be correct had it not been Nancy Sam and Zelah who were the only 3 discussing it.

I’m sorry, is this actually a thread about three people having a chat

This is wild

Somebody bump this thread every time three heterosexual people have a chat (spoiler, it’s 75% of the entire show) until they work out how absurd this is

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Withano

I’m sorry, is this actually a thread about three people having a chat

This is wild

Somebody bump this thread every time three heterosexual people have a chat (spoiler, it’s 75% of the entire show) until they work out how absurd this is

You are forgetting what the chat was about.

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Withano

Bro

I’m not the one pushing the narrative of a minority group excluding others based on sexual orientation based on something objectively and obviously incorrect because ‘he said it first not me

Call me the morality police if you want. I quite like the title. Deliberately ignoring any points made is quite the deflection though. Self-reflection is still my key piece of advice still.

You seem really hostile for some weird reason. I haven't got the energy to engage with you right now over a pedantic point of how many actual lgbt are required for it to be a self identified lgbt group that you clearly feel very strongly about and think you are scoring some kind of win with.

Maybe later.

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by vesavius

I noticed that.

Sam seemed to be quite happy that there were a couple excluded from the 2 main groups.

I didn't see much empathy there at all.

He didn’t even mention Caroline

LoL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zizu]

Originally Posted by Beso

Sam didnt mention feyisola, either.

Are you certain ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Zizu

Are you certain ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1million percent.

[Mystic Mock]

The only thing that I've noticed is Feyisola and Teja having a grudge against men so far.

- Both nominated George and Tate.

- Teja in particular can't stop talking about her irrational dislike of Tate.

- And Teja did say how she finds Cameron B annoying.

So if Cameron B survives tonight, I am expecting both women to nominate a mixture of Tate/Cameron B/Marcus in the next round of nominations, as they are looking like they're trying to remove that group now that George is gone.

And tbh it wouldn't take much for them to get Sam onboard considering he did nominate both George and Marcus.

And Zelah nominated Cameron B and Marcus.

So basically we've got the Tate/Cameron B/Marcus trio up against the Feyisola/Zelah/Teja/Sam quad.

But I'm sure ITV BB will try to blame the four guys (including George) for all of the breakdown in their individual relationships with the Feyisola side of the house.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I think people naturally gravitate towards others similar to themselves so this isn't really a surprise

That is true tbf.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

Funny how when straight people stick together it’s “natural,” but when LGBTQ people do it, it’s “isolation.”

I personally would say that it's narrow-minded from both sides.

Even if it's psychologically a common thing for most people to do.