[Jack_]

I typed all this out before the other thread was closed and it's not going to waste (plus it's a genuine, civil response so)...

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I'm not attempting to tell any of you GC supporters who to support, but I would genuinely welcome any of you enlightening me as to just what it is about her that you find admirable or worthy of support, because I am genuinely baffled.

Let's see.

She has openly admitted she is just trying to 'make good TV' and is purposely exaggerating herself and to an extent playing a character in order to do so, which to start with is extremely commendable. It is about time more celebrities learnt that they need to earn their fee, instead of sitting on their arse and contributing **** all to the series, often sailing their way through undeservedly to the final and completely wasting the budget. The fact she realises this is an entertainment programme and is consciously providing both the viewers and producers with material is something to be applauded.

Furthermore, her ridiculously over the top outbursts and meltdowns that are so obviously fake - for reasons outlined above - are absolutely hilarious and what makes them so funny is not just because of their nature, but because the other housemates foolishly keep lapping up everything she is doing, when she categorically keeps spelling out to them that she is just 'trying to make a TV show'. They are playing right into her hands and it's so very silly.

I am sure someone will be quick to point out that this is not 'an act', and even if this is the case, this is a television show and not real life, so it doesn't matter. Nobody is denying that acts such as accepting a blow dry in return for sacrificing hot water for the rest of the house, or refusing to take part in tasks etc etc is selfish. Of course it is selfish, and if it weren't within the confines of an entertainment programme it would be condemnable, but there are of course two ways of seeing this since we're talking about such actions in the context of a TV show - one, on a personal level as something that is 'morally' wrong, but on the other as something that needs to be applauded for being something that 'rocks the boat', causes a discussion, pisses people off.

There would be nothing duller than in such situations for housemates to go 'nah guys I'm not that selfish, let's just keep the hot water' or 'I am going to be a team player guys!!!!'...because that's the scene over, and how boring is that? You need housemates that don't play ball and are difficult to live with. We, as viewers, are not living with them - and it's important for us to remember this. I am damn sure that if I were living with someone like Gemma I'd be pissed off at her actions, but I am not and this is not a morality competition, it's an entertainment programme. I am not seeking new friends or people to hang out with, so why would I judge housemates in such a way? You need housemates like Gemma (and countless others) to keep what is an entertainment television programme interesting.

[Dominic]

[MB.]

[Marsh.]

Maybe you should've opened a tumblr?

[SherzyK]

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Maybe you should've opened a tumblr?

Maybe you should suck my d

[jet]

Brilliant!

[Denver]

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Maybe you should suck my d

[Macie Lightfoot]

oooh this is so reminiscent of the Justification of Jem Palmer, which as a reminder can be found here:

http://www.thisisbigbrother.com/foru...d.php?t=270062

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I typed all this out before the other thread was closed and it's not going to waste (plus it's a genuine, civil response so)...



Let's see.

She has openly admitted she is just trying to 'make good TV' and is purposely exaggerating herself and to an extent playing a character in order to do so, which to start with is extremely commendable. It is about time more celebrities learnt that they need to earn their fee, instead of sitting on their arse and contributing **** all to the series, often sailing their way through undeservedly to the final and completely wasting the budget. The fact she realises this is an entertainment programme and is consciously providing both the viewers and producers with material is something to be applauded.

Furthermore, her ridiculously over the top outbursts and meltdowns that are so obviously fake - for reasons outlined above - are absolutely hilarious and what makes them so funny is not just because of their nature, but because the other housemates foolishly keep lapping up everything she is doing, when she categorically keeps spelling out to them that she is just 'trying to make a TV show'. They are playing right into her hands and it's so very silly.

I am sure someone will be quick to point out that this is not 'an act', and even if this is the case, this is a television show and not real life, so it doesn't matter. Nobody is denying that acts such as accepting a blow dry in return for sacrificing hot water for the rest of the house, or refusing to take part in tasks etc etc is selfish. Of course it is selfish, and if it weren't within the confines of an entertainment programme it would be condemnable, but there are of course two ways of seeing this since we're talking about such actions in the context of a TV show - one, on a personal level as something that is 'morally' wrong, but on the other as something that needs to be applauded for being something that 'rocks the boat', causes a discussion, pisses people off.

There would be nothing duller than in such situations for housemates to go 'nah guys I'm not that selfish, let's just keep the hot water' or 'I am going to be a team player guys!!!!'...because that's the scene over, and how boring is that? You need housemates that don't play ball and are difficult to live with. We, as viewers, are not living with them - and it's important for us to remember this. I am damn sure that if I were living with someone like Gemma I'd be pissed off at her actions, but I am not and this is not a morality competition, it's an entertainment programme. I am not seeking new friends or people to hang out with, so why would I judge housemates in such a way? You need housemates like Gemma (and countless others) to keep what is an entertainment television programme interesting.

Thank you Jack. When the other thread closed so suddenly, I thought that I would not be receiving any type of serious answer, but though I do not like Gemma at all, I am now fecked, because I cannot in all honesty disagree with anything you have said above.

[Firewire]

I tried explaining this to people at work and just got dirty looks and "she's a ****" replies

[MB.]

Originally Posted by Firewire

I tried explaining this to people at work and just got dirty looks and "she's a ****" replies

Quit your job tbqh

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Firewire

I tried explaining this to people at work and just got dirty looks and "she's a ****" replies

If you threw a verbal essay at me in work you'd get a printer to the face.

[Will.]

Originally Posted by Firewire

I tried explaining this to people at work and just got dirty looks and "she's a ****" replies

ha.

[bots]

I'm afraid your defense of Gemma isn't realistic, and here is why.

1, Irrespective of whether its on TV or not, they are all staying their 24/7 (or at least should be) so they have to conform to social norms or be criticised. Gemma is not conforming to social norms.

2. Some may consider humiliating and abusing others entertaining, but the vast majority of viewers do not. Also, one only needs to look at her eyes to know she is not acting in the slightest.

[MB.]

Yeah Jack that told you

[jet]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

I'm afraid your defense of Gemma isn't realistic, and here is why.

1, Irrespective of whether its on TV or not, they are all staying their 24/7 (or at least should be) so they have to conform to social norms or be criticised. Gemma is not conforming to social norms.

2. Some may consider humiliating and abusing others entertaining, but the vast majority of viewers do not. Also, one only needs to look at her eyes to know she is not acting in the slightest.

Examples? I didn't see any of this.

[Tom4784]

She's a harmless drama queen, she's too ridiculous to be mad about. I don't really understand why people are losing their **** over her.

[rusticgal]

Well said....and you are right.

However.....but she won't get my vote for doing it.

[bots]

Originally Posted by MB.

Yeah Jack that told you

your sarcasm and wondrous wit are legendary

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Firewire

I tried explaining this to people at work and just got dirty looks and "she's a ****" replies

I feel you, whenever I try to explain this argument to anyone in real life regarding any kind of housemate like this it's always '... yeah but they're just a dick', they never know what to say it's hard enough doing it on a forum let alone in real life

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

I'm afraid your defense of Gemma isn't realistic, and here is why.

1, Irrespective of whether its on TV or not, they are all staying their 24/7 (or at least should be) so they have to conform to social norms or be criticised. Gemma is not conforming to social norms.

2. Some may consider humiliating and abusing others entertaining, but the vast majority of viewers do not. Also, one only needs to look at her eyes to know she is not acting in the slightest.

1) 'Social norms' (within reason) go out of the window in the confines of a television set in Borehamwood. Big Brother is not real life. 'Nominating' two people you're living with for potential eviction from your residence is not real life. Dressing up as puppets and puppet masters, eating fermented eggs, transporting coloured liquids using various contraptions (while secretly all 'sabotaging' it) is not real life. The whole programme is not real life. It is faux reality, ridiculous 'tasks', sleeping within walls made of plasterboard with about a hundred mirrors, the withdrawal of outside contact (well, you know). The entire thing is a suspension of everything all of us know to be true. 'Social norms' cannot genuinely exist within such a contrived, false environment. And pretty much every housemate to ever leave the house has said that their judgement and rationality were altered through living within it, because it isn't normal. It isn't real life.

2) I don't personally see how she's abused or humiliated anyone but regardless...so long as it doesn't go as far as bullying, anything goes in that house. If you enter a programme that is notorious for its arguments, drama, difficult conditions, knowing full well you will live with ***** and be looked after by a deliberately evil production team, you subject yourself to all of it willingly. If you can't hack it, don't go in.

[Jake.]

this is so true. honestly it's a month of television and you'd think people would want them all sitting around drinking tea and being polite the way they go on

[jet]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

She's a harmless drama queen, she's too ridiculous to be mad about. I don't really understand why people are losing their **** over her.

Thank goodness for common sense.

[MB.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

your sarcasm and wondrous wit are legendary

Not nearly as legendary as our lord and saviour Dame Gemma Collins, though