[Cherie]

Originally Posted by delta

The problem with Linda Nolan is she divided the house along the lines of sexism and feminism and Luisa and Sam F were sucked in, she needed a network of men haters around her to bolster her , almost obsessional, hatred of Jim.

It must have been very uncomfortable for Jim Davison being in the house and I am surprised he kept his cool. Notice now the instigator of all the hate has been removed how the house dynamics have changed? For Linda Nolan to use Luisa's mantra about the 46 minutes that we see and that she was never voted for by her fellow housemates all I can say about that, Jim or anyone else doesn't choose which minutes the viewers will see and just because someone doesn't get voted for by their fellow housemates doesn't mean to say that they are popular or well liked, a lot can slip under the radar. Jim and Liz were very easy targets, for what I consider to be a very weak, almost spineless, set of individuals.

In years gone past, numerous people have gone on to win big brother who have been voted for week after week. Life is a game and CBB & BB replicate it in minutiae, they are all playing the game of life with TV cameras on them and they will quite easy vote either for the softest target or the biggest threat. You can include Jim in both of those.

Great post. Liz was nominated every time by the majority of her HMs why are they not lumping her in to the most hated HM category?

[flamingGalah!]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Why can no one have an opinion on Jim without getting labeled? The names thrown around on here are so childish.

Works both ways dear. Why can people who like Jim not have people questioning why we like him & call us names for liking him. Very childish

[Livia]

I find it hilarious when people assume what they're seeing in the house is feminism. I have never heard a feminist say "you shouldn't swear at a woman". It seems to me they're all feminists when it suits them, and use their sexuality liberally to get what they want the rest of the time.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Well, to be fair to Jim, she was just being mean. He has at least two other faces, and she was just taking the piss out of the 'victim' behaviour to get a laugh. I haven't a lot of respect for that woman. I don't like the tone of her comments generally and I didn't think her input was all that helpful to Linda. It's not that great for people to go through life domineering other people into agreeing with them, and kicking off towards people she doesn't like. Linda is currently unemployed and there aren't many workplaces where she'd be allowed to exhibit behaviour like that. If she'd worked in my profession, she'd have been sacked.

Her grievance was valid, nobody knows how they would react in similar circumstances, I think she coped very well.
You didn't care for the psychologists tone? That's unfortunate maybe she should adopt rylans screeching tones....or john mccrirricks booming chauvinism?
You can't go through life allowing yourself to be manipulated and humiliated, if you need to make a stand do it.... Don't be shouted down by those who make disparaging comments about women in the vain hope of strengthening their argument.
Let's leave that to UKIP.

[flamingGalah!]

Originally Posted by Livia

I find it hilarious when people assume what they're seeing in the house is feminism. I have never heard a feminist say "you shouldn't swear at a woman". It seems to me they're all feminists when it suits them, and use their sexuality liberally to get what they want the rest of the time.

Indeed. And I was in shock last night when Luisa said to Jim that she has never been spoken to by a man like he has spoken to her & she expects a gentleman to behave like a gentleman, yet a lady can be vile, swear, be crude & an absolute slut bag like Luisa is. Complete double standards! That is NOT feminism!

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Robodog

Funny to compare last nights main show to last nights BOTP

The main show had Jim having insightful psychological conversations with the HMs and managed to compliment them and make them all smile (including Luisa)

The BOTP show had 2 professional 'psychologists' giving their insights about the HMs and only managed to insult them and (unlike Jim) made nobody smile. Far from it.

'Jim had insightful psychological conversations'....But the actuyal psychologist was talking rubbish?
Heard it all now, I give up!

[Robodog]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Her grievance was valid, nobody knows how they would react in similar circumstances, I think she coped very well.
You didn't care for the psychologists tone? That's unfortunate maybe she should adopt rylans screeching tones....or john mccrirricks booming chauvinism?
You can't go through life allowing yourself to be manipulated and humiliated, if you need to make a stand do it.... Don't be shouted down by those who make disparaging comments about women in the vain hope of strengthening their argument.
Let's leave that to UKIP.

Rylan and John aren't claiming to be psychologists.

Rachel and Kate are.

But they acted and spoke tonight like John and other such regular opinionated panelists. That's the problem.

[MrWong]

For those rubbishing the opinion of Rachel Morris, what are your qualifications in that field?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Same whining every series when something negative is said about the favourite on bots

Originally Posted by Jordan.

Why can no one have an opinion on Jim without getting labeled? The names thrown around on here are so childish.

You win the thread, time to close it now

[Suze]

You don't even have to be a Jim fan, to see how extremely anti Jim that episode was.

[abhorson]

When it was Carol Mcgiffin being the most pleasant about Jim, the alarm bells were ringing.

[Robodog]

Originally Posted by Jack_

You win the thread, time to close it now

No one wins a thread.

Keep it open as long as people want to debate.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Robodog

Rylan and John aren't claiming to be psychologists.

Rachel and Kate are.

But they acted and spoke tonight like John and other such regular opinionated panelists. That's the problem.

I don't feel they did, they vocalised how they felt events in the house played out very well with honesty and conviction.... no histrionics necessary.
Female professionals offering an opinion shouldn't be castigated and labelled witches and feminists, it's rather silly.

[Robodog]

Originally Posted by MrWong

For those rubbishing the opinion of Rachel Morris, what are your qualifications in that field?

Are you suggesting only a qualified chef can tell when a meal is badly cooked?

[Robodog]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I don't feel they did, they vocalised how they felt events in the house played out very well with honesty and conviction.... no histrionics necessary.
Female professionals offering an opinion shouldn't be castigated and labelled witches and feminists, it's rather silly.

Their gender is not an issue here.

Their professionalism is.

[abhorson]

Rylan went from Friday nights BOTS where imo he went from his best ever presenting and interviewing of Linda to Saturdays show where he was dire and controlled instead of being in control.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by abhorson

When it was Carol Mcgiffin being the most pleasant about Jim, the alarm bells were ringing.

Yes,it was a bit scarey

[Suze]

Originally Posted by abhorson

Rylan went from Friday nights BOTS where imo he went from his best ever presenting and interviewing of Linda to Saturdays show where he was dire and controlled instead of being in control.

I expect BB producers wanted Jim to make the final but without a chance of winning, so a word in some shell likes and make it clear it is all sympathy voting for Jim (which I don't happen to think it is at all), and they hope not to get another Aaron situation. It was a totally obvious episode of BOTP of where they were trying to lead the viewers.

[Samm]

It wasn't bias at all

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by abhorson

Rylan went from Friday nights BOTS where imo he went from his best ever presenting and interviewing of Linda to Saturdays show where he was dire and controlled instead of being in control.

Same for me too.

Also while at Uni, I have seen so called professional Psychologists cause more distress to students with their problems and difficulties than just alking things through with their friends likely would.

They often generalise their advice and analysis on a one fits all assessment.
That is often not the case at all and how come we only get these near nutcases of psychologists on BB,their services don't seem to be in demand anywhere else.

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

Same for me too.

Also while at Uni, I have seen so called professional Psychologists cause more distress to students with their problems and difficulties than just alking things through with their friends likely would.

They often generalise their advice and analysis on a one fits all assessment.
That is often not the case at all and how come we only get these near nutcases of psychologists on BB,their services don't seem to be in demand anywhere else.

You win, thread closed

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Robodog

Their gender is not an issue here.

Their professionalism is.

What did you feel was unprofessional about what they said?

[abhorson]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

What did you feel was unprofessional about what they said?

They did not say much, that is the point. They were just ass licking Linda.

[rusticgal]

What made me laugh was that Luisa who has decided to bury the hatchet with Jim zsince Linda left (funny that...) sat at the table and told Jim she had never been talked to by a man like Jim had her....She thinks men should have more respect.... So it's ok for a woman to speak to a man the way she has to Jim...but he can't do the same to her because she is a woman.
Now that IS sexist... Luisa is very hypocritical.

[rionablue]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Defending a man accused of sexism by accusing an all female panel of feminism?
Imo they were spot on.... couldn't have put it better myself!
He does have 2 faces, 'poor me!' and 'who me?'
Apart from his beetroot 'merlot me' face obv.... :laugh;

yes Kizzy tell it how it is totally agree