Celeb Big Brother Thread 11 - New product in the PWB shop! "Andrew's Guide to Treating Women with Respect"

[AnneEyhtMeyer]

I got them cheap. Ideal gift for Valentine's Day or Mother's Day.

Pram - his language, his aggression, his leading on someone he has no romantic interest in for the sole purpose of increasing his chances of staying in, for his inability to respect another HM's point of view, for his misogynistic comments about Jess and Ashley... need I go on?

It has also been mentioned elsewhere that we were only shown a very tame part of the scissoring, so yes, I would include that too. I would be mortified that a child of mine would do that, not only because it was making others uncomfortable but also because of my point above regarding leading on Shourtney (much as I dislike him).

Yes OP, I feel the same as you about Andrew's other behaviours being worse than the scissoring. I'm glad you provided clarification, as otherwise it would have seemed you were trying to insult the people who've already said they/people they know in that cohort wouldn't have been bothered by the pretty tame play scissoring we saw. If your view is being coloured by us apparently having seen an edited version, which I wasn't aware of until now, that changes things.

Obviously the scissoring was a calculated move to provoke Ann and to gain airtime.

I don’t like how Shane J deliberately sets up situations to come out on top and manipulates housemates to try and rule the roost.

Much prefer Amanda’s live and let live attitude.

IMO Shane J is more imposing of his views on others than Ann is.

Fun is great, everyone likes fun. But Andrew and Courtney’s idea of “fun” was obnoxious.

I'm not "trying to insult" anyone. What an odd thing to say. I didn't even know it was called scissoring until I saw it on here and elsewhere, so I couldn't tell you if it was "tame" or not. I actually thought they were wrestling until told otherwise. I've obviously lived a sheltered life.

At the time of the incident people said on Digital Spy and elsewhere how it was edited to take out the overt sex-simulation which couldn't be shown. I was seurprised because I hadn't realised it was meant to be showing anything of the sort.

Totally agree Royal that Shourtney is the one imposing his views. He seems to view himself as the Thought-Police.

I said it was clear that you weren't in the light of what you wrote about the edited stuff, not that you were.

Anne Thought police Yes, quite.

That’s what I see as a major difference in the way Ann and Shane debate. Ann puts forward her opinion and why she holds those views. Whereas Shane tells you why you are wrong to hold a particular view and what you should be thinking instead. As an activist, he is coming from a place of forcing change. Ann is not an activist, she is a politician. She puts forward an option for you to either choose or not. Subtle but major difference.

I know you said that but my point was that even if I had thought the "wrestling" was good enough reason for his parents to be ashamed (I didn't, because I didn't know what I was looking at) I wouldn't be insulting people who didn't agree. I would be disagreeing with them.

Disagreeing does not equal insulting. This is fundamentally the issue Shourtney has. He thinks anyone disagreeing with him is an affront to all decency.

"I remember her participating in Celebrity Fit Club in 2002 when she was still an MP"

Oh yeah, I remember that now!

I think Ann manifestly not giving a fuck is one of the things some of the men in the house particularly didn't like. Her discussion with Andrew when he came to forgive her and she didn't even bother to fake any contrition was hilarious, unintentional as it clearly was on both sides.

Someone said on one of the threads about CBB on the feminist board, it's one of the ways in which Ann doesn't really do socialised as woman, or performing femininity. Much more than just her appearance.

Yes Royal - you have said what I was trying to say, but more clearly.

I think Ann manifestly not giving a fuck is one of the things some of the men in the house particularly didn't like.

^ This is very true. It seemed to scare the men.

Disagreeing doesn't mean insulting, but the remark about judging people who didn't think the same as you re embarrassment was something quite different to simply disagreeing OP.

Had you merely said you didn't hold the same view as them, rather than taking the decision to state that you considered this behaviour worth judging, there wouldn't be any question of an insult. Even if one thinks the judging is innate and not something you can do anything about, your decision to post about it was deliberate.

Oh FFS futuristic, give it a rest please and pop over to aibu on the thread designed specifically for Ann Widdecombe insults.

This is a discussion about CBB, not your platform to try and force your narrow minded views down our throats.

Yes it was a deliberate post. Why wouldn't it be? Everybody judges. You are judging me right now. I couldn't give a toss.

Pointing out that your claim simply to be disagreeing and no more doesn't stand when you've chosen to tell us you judge people who think differently isn't judging you. It's correcting you. This isn't affected by whether you're bothered or not- that's your business.

I actually revisited the episode where Ann was discussing her views on marriage. I need to get a life

She is very dogmatic about the use of the word “marriage” and is unable to budge on the idea that a committed relationship that is not between a sole man and a sole woman, could be called “marriage”.

But she is not saying that gay couples should not be recognised, legally and personally. Just that “marriage” is the incorrect term to use to describe this union.

It is a bit “you say tomayto I say tomahto”.

But to Ann, it’s like trying to redefine what the colour blue is. When you add red, it stops being blue and become a completely different colour with a different name altogether.

To her, marriage and commitment are two separate descriptions whereas to others, expanding the historically understood concept of marriage (between a man and a woman) to include same sex relationships isn’t an issue.

I don't need you to correct me thanks. I was replying to someone saying that women in their 50s wouldn't necessarily think that behaviour was wrong and judge them for it. I disagreed and said that I'm younger than that and I would judge them for it. See? Disagreeing. Not telling them what to think. Disagreeing with their assumption that it was an age thing. Some may not care about that sort of thing but you can't assume everyone will think that behaviour is ok. I think many things are ok, but I wouldn't wrap myself in knots if someone disagreed with me. I am sure that a lot of people would judge me harshly for some of the things I've done. I'm not bothered. They are allowed to have a different opinion.

Do you know what else I judge? Virtue signalling on a telly thread.

But she is not saying that gay couples should not be recognised, legally and personally. Just that “marriage” is the incorrect term to use to describe this union.

The thing with that is that she voted against civil partnership. That is, a legal recognition of same sex unions that isn't marriage. And she talked of her desire to see mass protests against it.

Yes Anne - cba to engage "debate mode" on a telly thread!

Blimey, in the time it took me to write my last post things have got heated!

Seriously, Pram/futuristic, please let us telly addicts get on with actually chatting about a show we’re watching. This isn’t the place for pushing a political agenda, there’re plenty of other places where you would be most welcome.

The thread's confusing me tonight.

Thinking about your last comment Royal and it's something I touched on a day or so ago, marriage or civil partnership? Anyone who's eligible can get married, but only same sex couples can have a civil partnership. Apparently the Secretary of State was given leave by the Court of Appeal to have more time to consider the way forward. The way forward might be opening up Civil Partnerships for all, or to phase them out. It sounds a minefield, I'm glad I don't have to decide.

2 mins PWBs!

Evening all. I'm miles behind, still haven't watched the eviction.

What's been happening?

Do you know what else I judge? Virtue signalling on a telly thread.

The irony of that remark appears to be lost on you...

Anyway, you weren't simply disagreeing and that's not a matter of opinion. Your attempt to portray it as simple disagreement was false, and the fact that you didn't tell anyone what to think (nobody suggested you did) is not a refutation to the point being made.

Nor is you being younger than 50s and judging a refutation to the suggestion that people in their 50s wouldn't necessarily judge. You're not even part of the cohort being talked about!