Traitors UK S2 Thread 6 "She believes everything I say"

[EineReiseDurchDieZeit]

Carry on Faithful!

I hated the American one because of the reality TV "stars" and influencers, gave up after a couple of episodes - this is why I like the UK one so much because it's all normal looking people (not full of love island types) with proper everyday jobs

I'll give the Australian one a go but if it's the same type of cast as the American one I won't bother

I get cold easily so the freezing banishment room would probably make me want to plead for banishment just to go and warm up! 🥶

It would suit me down to the ground, what with my menopausal hot flushes and all...

I agree - this is all conspiracy theory bollocks. Harry is just more cunning than he (or maybe the producers) let us see. Well there was no need, he was doing well enough playing the innocent.

Really like this bit from the daily mail

"However, unlike the casting process for shows like Love Island, producers have said they do not look for fame-seekers or those with high following, as it ruins the show's authenticity."

It's so much better without fame seekers which the American one was full of and I hated because of it

I find the idea some people have that the Traitors ought to feel “guilty” is really interesting. If you are on a game show and you are quicker to the button in answering a question would you expect to have to feel guilty for beating other people to the prize? If you are quicker than them at competing a physical challenge would you need to show feelings of guilt for winning?

I think normally on tv we see the opposite - we see people celebrating when they beat other people.

The contestants on Traitors have all signed up to play a game where they know they are likely to be lied to and manipulated, so I don’t get why someone would need to feel guilty about the lying and manipulating?

I guess in modern parlance maybe it is a bit “triggering” for some viewers though? We have a game where, to be really good at it, some of the players have to show skills that we associate with being a bad/unpleasant person in real life, and it is just really hard to celebrate them for showing those skills on screen.

It creates a sort of “no smoke without fire” response, with people thinking that these skills at being devious and manipulative must SURELY mean they are like that in real life.

It feels like it could be a really interesting topic for a research paper!

There have actually been many posts saying how he's weird, creepy, red flags, narcissist, is the type to cheat then gaslight his girlfriend etc etc.

Was meant to be out for dinner tonight but I now can't go. There is an obvious upside to this however..

@Nesbi I find the idea some people have that the Traitors ought to feel “guilty” is really interesting. If you are on a game show and you are quicker to the button in answering a question would you expect to have to feel guilty for beating other people to the prize? If you are quicker than them at competing a physical challenge would you need to show feelings of guilt for winning?

Have you seen any other versions of the show? There is a post-show "where are they now" meetup for one of them and it's very clear that certain players feel personally betrayed.

The game is highly unusual for isolating contestants from their families over several weeks and putting them through intensely bonding team(-building) activities, and then asking that they trust each other to win money.

When they have compelling personal reasons for wanting the money, and they have shared those with someone they trust to help them win the money they need/want, and that person is a traitor who takes it all at the final moment - I can well understand the betrayal feeling really personal!

It's a massively unusual situation for 'normal' people to find themselves in on both sides, and us sitting on our sofas saying "it's just a game they shouldn't feel guilty" I think just really don't get the intensity of what they are experiencing :)

Whoever wins, Harry wins: the baby-faced killer who stole The Traitors

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/813bcd06-5a3d-41f4-8bb5-1e6778456a0a?shareToken=7379b928d45f63c11e66590708b6f913

People get carried away, some of them quite wildly, but really only a few have been so extreme.

I do think, however (and have seen several people agree) that Harry's been a bit 'laddish', even bordering on dismissive and misogynist, in the way he talks about and to women. I expect it's to do with his age and the company he keeps - a bunch of squaddies is rarely known for its feminist credentials, and much more for its macho bravado.

@Dotellhimpike @mrstea301 the female guests last night were Elizabeth Day (who is married) and Alex from Series 1, not sure if she’s still with her partner - they were the couple in the castle.

There must be a word for the sort of bonding that happens in these sorts of situations. It's not Stockholm syndrome but the quick, deeply felt bonds are very real.

I once went on a week long course in the Scottish countryside. The team studied, ate, drank and socialised together for 7 days. Bonds and friendships were formed incredibly quickly- we were in each others pockets for about 18 hours a day. By the time we left it felt distinctly odd to be going back to the 'real world' and leaving our little friendship group behind, so it must be ten times worse in the castle and being under so much stress

@WoolyMammoth55 - yes, I guess that is why it is so fascinating - the concept of trust and the experience of trust being broken, even when it is by competitors who you know you’re not supposed to trust.

If separating the game from the person is apparently so difficult for a lot of the audience (who don’t go through that experience), it must be incredibly hard for the contestants. But whereas we can empathise with the pain of, for example, an athlete who is crushed at losing a race, we normally still celebrate the winner.

In this case though people feel that the winner is almost choosing to inflict the pain of defeat on their fellow contestants in a way that, perhaps, they wouldn’t if the winner was merely faster, stronger, more athletically skilled, quicker on the button, or showed whatever other prowess was needed to win?

When they have compelling reasons for wanting the money

I think if the reasons were that compelling, and likely to cause considerable distress if the contestant failed or were betrayed, it is unlikely the production team would have chosen them for the show in the first place.

Off topic, and I’m going to be a pedant here, but I read a really interesting piece about why Stockholm Syndrome doesn’t actually exist. It’s in the book “See what you made me do” which is about domestic abuse and male violence towards women.

It’s a fascinating read, this link summarises it: https://www.stadafa.com/2020/12/stockholm-syndrome-discredit.html?m=1

However, unlike the casting process for shows like Love Island, producers have said they do not look for fame-seekers or those with high following, as it ruins the show's authenticity.

Yes, but....I read this too and thought how refreshing. But honestly? The contestants are not exactly strangers to chasing TV fame. Or rather, they are lower echelons - Paul and his Deal or no Deal and podcasts, Zack's older brother was on Big Brother, Diane's son is in GoT, Harry's girlfriend is an 'influencer'', Johnny was on a reality show previously..... I mean, it's a legit employment tbf - you can't move for TV shows with 'real people' as cast.
But I don't think the prize money is the real motivator. It's such a long shot you're going to win it. It's being on TV that seems more seductive and whatever opportunities you hope might come from it.

Mollie is a model.

Perhaps, but you could compare it with all sorts of different quiz shows that use various types of knowledge or include physical games.