[hot2go]

Originally Posted by Hayden

Natalie was not stupid enough to film herself doing the acts on camera though unlike Andrew

I think the thread is more about how people find the concept discusting for one and not the other...you're absolutely correct, Natalie hasn't, as yet, had footage leaked

A lot of people often comment how unfare it is that it's one rule for women and one for men, this is a prime example of the unfare rules that fall on men, the same rule attributed to Marco over the choking incident

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by LukeB

We just don't know because he told two different stories so it's like really. But the video looked like the Daley and Hazel thing. Would it surprise you if he was in on it the whole time though? he did make 100k out of it and he's meant to be 'smart' despite drink driving whilst on his phone + his views.

WHAT!



I haven't seen the Daley/Hazel series so I can't comment on that. I would be surprised if it was all a set up though, I mean it's definitely possible but I think I want to stay in my bubble of pretending that BB isn't contrived to the point where stuff like this gets planned in advance But who knows. It's just really odd the whole thing, there's something, I don't know what, but something they're not telling us!

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by MB.

I think there's a big difference between being "uneducated" (lovely turn of phrase) and being rightly fearful of the backlash you'll receive as a show when a national newspaper leaks a sans-context video of one of your housemates hitting a woman with a belt

incorrect


He was engaging in consensual sexual role play


that is a massive difference

[MB.]

Did you read any of the rest of the conversation or nah

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by MB.

Did you read any of the rest of the conversation or nah

eh?

[MB.]

I said that it doesn't matter what the video is of, The Sun are spinning it as him hitting a woman with a belt and that's what people are going to believe

BB's already "that sex show", "that racist show" and probably a dozen other charming monikers, so the last thing it wants to be is "that show with the guy who abuses people with belts", even if that's not true

[ebandit]

..did andrew pay to hit the woman (she appeared fearful )

natalie hit's men who have paid for the service...

Mark L

[vesavius]

Originally Posted by Jack_

But the show shouldn't be pandering to The ****ing Sun of all things and allowing them to effectively tarnish one of their participants names by taking a video out of context and have them ejected because of it

Not only do they dictate the results of elections, they're now interfering in a bloody reality show. The producers should rightfully have told the disgusting rag where to shove it

Yessir!

[letmein]

Big Brother doesn't owe anyone a spot in the house. They can eject anyone for whatever reason they please.

[wendywillow]

if you do it for a living, fine.
if you do it in your personal life and someone takes it and airs it for the viewing public without your permision, out you go

[Mokka]

Originally Posted by wendywillow

if you do it for a living, fine.
if you do it in your personal life and someone takes it and airs it for the viewing public without your permision, out you go

Add this to the BB rule book...you know...the one where they log the rules down then rip the page out and swallow it and **** it out all over the production room.

[jennyjuniper]

I must admit that although I couldn't stand Andrew, my first thought was that it was very 'double standard' to have a dominatrix in the house, whilst he was ejected for doing what she does for a living. But then if people pay her to do what she does, it's obviously consensual (weird, but consensual) whilst there is only Andrews word that those pictures 'were a bit of fun'.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by jennyjuniper

I must admit that although I couldn't stand Andrew, my first thought was that it was very 'double standard' to have a dominatrix in the house, whilst he was ejected for doing what she does for a living. But then if people pay her to do what she does, it's obviously consensual (weird, but consensual) whilst there is only Andrews word that those pictures 'were a bit of fun'.

well only Andrew and his girlfriend at the time, you know the one in the video

I would say that if both are singing from the same hymn sheet we have our selves a watertight case?

[sampvt]

Originally Posted by vesavius

yeah, I know, I'm bored of talking about Andrew as well, but there does seem to be some double standards going on...

Andrew is removed from the house for some consensual spanking, but they have Natalie in there... A HM recruited for her background as a dominatrix and the sex industry.

It just seems a weird contradiction.

However now they are actively supporting Blackmail by giving the lipless skank Jayne a huge platform and storyline hoping she spills the beans and ruins his life if she does not get what she demands. Incidentally her mistake was that he fobbed her off so he deserves a medal, not a crucifixion.

[sungrass]

Originally Posted by MB.

I think there's a big difference between being "uneducated" (lovely turn of phrase) and being rightly fearful of the backlash you'll receive as a show when a national newspaper leaks a sans-context video of one of your housemates hitting a woman with a belt

Yeah but the newspapers have to check it was consensual before they print a story on it other wise its slander and libel in the courts for them. They cant say "he did this" - he would be arrested for one!!! if they did and sued by him as well

not to mention natalie - madam whiplash - has already spoken that shes had clients including current mp's...

BB chucked him for no reason.