Some people hide behind and indeed cling on for years to one off things and exacerbate/ exaggerate them them immensely and purposefully in an attempt to justify their totally irrational and OTT dislike for that person.
Claiming someone's a racist for example gives them free reign to attack other aspects of them and often with attractive women celebs you see posts attacking their looks. It's a common theme that runs from thread to thread and it's always the same old posters that do it. ;-)
You also notice that male celebs who commit the exact same 'crime' get let off/ ignored. It's mainly attractive women that get the bile. This suggests that the reason for their hatred is not the one that they give, despite their protestations.
It's a stick with which to eternally bash them, nothing more and nothing less, and an easy fall back for when someone challenges them for some of the more odd or childish insults they make, especially when it concerns their looks. .
The hatred for so many female celebs on here appears to be borne of far more than one isolated incident. You don't have to be a genuis to pick that up from looking through the threads.
The classic example (although there are loads) is Cheryl Cole as you say- it's amusing and embarrassing in equal measure to see grown adults post and obsess as they do about her.
I did wonder when you'd be back old pal! And have to say your post is once again spot on! ;-)
Lets take George Michael for example, what he got up to probably gets brought up now and again, but nowhere near as frequent as if it had been a female celeb who had done that!
....
We must have different reference points as I have never heard it referred to as thus. Jack has always been equally vilified in accounts I have read.
Where do you find him always equally vilified? Even in the D Spy BB forum, he's often left out.
What did I say that wasn't true?
Look back at the posts.
And acting like a racist and being a racist are one and the same.
So you're still trying to exploit the ambiguity in "being" to avoid understanding what I said. I hope you can understand why I'm not interested in continuing a discussion on that basis.
Unless one is acting a part. Which Loyd wasn't - unless she was acting at being a spiteful racist - which isn't an especially canny career move.
Can you really not see the difference between what's in someone's mind and heart (their thoughts, beliefs, emotions, motives, etc) and behaviour?
I don't know what to say to someone who's behaviourist to such a degree.
As for this:
Surely it's possible to post opinions without claiming to know things that you don't.
Well, yes. But you asked me if I could see into her mind and heart - which suggested to me that unless I could do so, I could not possibly give an opinion or know the truth.
What's really hilarious is we know that if Danielle O'Hara looked like - for example - Natalie Cassidy, the White Knights of Digital Spy wouldn't be giving her the time of day.
If she looked like Natalie Cassidy, she'd been even less often mentioned than Jo O'Meara, this thread wouldn't exist, and you'd lose this chance to chance the forum rules and make a disrespectful comment about forum members.
What's really hilarious is we know that if Danielle O'Hara looked like - for example - Natalie Cassidy, the White Knights of Digital Spy wouldn't be giving her the time of day.
What's even more hilarious is that Natalie Cassidy won't get slated anywhere near the same extent as she's not aesthetically pleasing, and men don't desire her. She doesn't get the same vitriol on celeb forums from females- well at least not for her looks anyway.
It's probably not too much of a stretch to actually picture a thousand Sonia look-a-likes typing on forums- 'I hate Cheryl Cole- she's so pig ugly' from the safety of their keyboards. :D
What's really hilarious is we know that if Danielle O'Hara looked like - for example - Natalie Cassidy, the White Knights of Digital Spy wouldn't be giving her the time of day.
Actually, I think you'd find if she did look like Natalie Cassidy, I'd still have the same opinion about the vitriol nature of posts directed at her.
It's funny you mention Natalie Cassidy actually. She's not what most would call a conventional beauty, and yes she has got her fair share of stick on 'The Showbiz Forum' but not as half as much, I would suggest, if she had supermodel looks, you'd be first in the queue slagging her off!!!!
I did wonder when you'd be back old pal! And have to say your post is once again spot on! ;-)
Lets take George Michael for example, what he got up to probably gets brought up now and again, but nowhere near as frequent as if it had been a female celeb who had done that!
Yet again Veri, I find myself nodding in agreement at your posts. You make some outstanding and very insightful points in your posts here.
You are a breath of fresh air round these parts I tell you, and I think you should post more. You add balance in a place where balance is sorely needed.
Where do you find him always equally vilified? Even in the D Spy BB forum, he's often left out.
Look back at the posts.
So you're still trying to exploit the ambiguity in "being" to avoid understanding what I said. I hope you can understand why I'm not interested in continuing a discussion on that basis.
Can you really not see the difference between what's in someone's mind and heart (their thoughts, beliefs, emotions, motives, etc) and behaviour?
I don't know what to say to someone who's behaviourist to such a degree.
How do you get the "opinion" part?
How does one judge someone other than on their behaviour? As we have already established that we are not privy to people's innermost thoughts, hearts and minds, we can but judge them on their actions and their behaviour - which surely is a result of what is in their hearts and minds.
I think you're being deliberately obtuse as there is no excuse for O'Hara, Goody, Tweed and Budden's behaviour.
Interesting that you cannot tell me what I have said that isn't true and have used the cop-out 'look back on the posts', inferring that either you can't be bothered or know full well that you cannot prove that I have claimed nothing that didn't happen.
I wonder how long this thread will go on for? Oh well, it's pretty entertaining to see how desperate some of you are. I do wonder why though. It's not like the women you White Knight for will care or even know about it.
Funny how none of you have posted in, say, the Chawner thread. That's about women having their looks criticised too.
If she looked like Natalie Cassidy, she'd been even less often mentioned than Jo O'Meara, this thread wouldn't exist, and you'd lose this chance to chance the forum rules and make a disrespectful comment about forum members.
Calling people White Knights isn't being disrespectful in the slightest. It's no different from calling a spade a spade.
I wonder how long this thread will go on for? Oh well, it's pretty entertaining to see how desperate some of you are. I do wonder why though. It's not like the women you White Knight for will care or even know about it.
Funny how none of you have posted in, say, the Chawner thread. That's about women having their looks criticised too.
That's because I have no particular interest in Emma Chawner.. Although I'm sure myself & AOTB will be happy to pop over there if needs be!!
From my point of view its entertaining how far you will go to deny you aren't a vile misogynist, even though its blatantly obvious you ARE.
Oh well, it's pretty entertaining to see how desperate some of you are.
The desperation is hilarious to see from people round here, I totally agree. It appears that nerves have been hit left right and centre. :cool:
The White Knight thing makes me chuckle too. It's probably on a par with those who randomly call others jealous, no? The difference here is that I'd take no real offence, in fact it's amusing, whereas the J word sends certain posters here into a frenzy, which let's just say, is 'interesting'.
Calling people White Knights isn't being disrespectful in the slightest. It's no different from calling a spade a spade.
Hypothetically if a so called 'White Knight' called females who continually slag off good looking women, 'sad lonely old cat ladies' or 'Sonia's from Eastenders' would that be ok too? There's no real difference here right? Both supposedly insulting names designed to portray the flaws in certain posting styles or put down individual posters?
Obviously I'm not so rude as to call you a sad old cat lady (well not unless you start calling me playground-type names either, and then it's probably fair enough right? ;-))
Genuine question. Just off to feed my horse and repair my lance and I'll be back to see the reply!
How does one judge someone other than on their behaviour? As we have already established that we are not privy to people's innermost thoughts, hearts and minds, we can but judge them on their actions and their behaviour - which surely is a result of what is in their hearts and minds.
Behaviour results from a variety of different things, not only from what's in hearts and minds, and consider the unfortunately named fundamental attribution error. There's in any case a limit to what can be told by behaviour, and some of the extremes of vitriolic comment would require knowledge that's well beyond that limit.
I think you're being deliberately obtuse as there is no excuse for O'Hara, Goody, Tweed and Budden's behaviour.
I haven't said, implied, assumed, or even presupposed that there was any excuse for it.
Interesting that you cannot tell me what I have said that isn't true and have used the cop-out 'look back on the posts', inferring that either you can't be bothered or know full well that you cannot prove that I have claimed nothing that didn't happen.
The idea that I cannot tell you is made up. I've already told you; and I'm not inclined to spend time looking up the posts to tell you again.
I'm sure there are others, but I can't recall them off the top of my head.
Before anyone jumps on me, I'm not condoning what those three women did in the past. It just seems they are always brought up to justify their reason to hate on them.
When the accusation is racism, it not only makes dislike feel justified, it also provides an opportunity to wax vitriolic in ways that might otherwise seem way OTT -- an opportunity some seem to welcome, perhaps even relish. In Danielle's case, a further ramping-up comes from the belief that she "got away with it".
When the accusation is racism, it not only makes dislike feel justified, it also provides an opportunity to wax vitriolic in ways that might otherwise seem way OTT -- an opportunity some seem to welcome, perhaps even relish. In Danielle's case, a further ramping-up comes from the belief that she "got away with it".
I often wonder what she is supposed to of "got away with"? Because she lost loads of work, has the incident brought up every time and was even attacked and seriously injured because of it
I often wonder what she is supposed to of "got away with"? Because she lost loads of work, has the incident brought up every time and was even attacked and seriously injured because of it
Was that because of her CBB appearance? I didn't think the two had been officially connected.
It doesn't actually say it was connected with her CBB appearance, but I would bet my bottom dollar it was. Or at least fuelled by jealousy by her attackers.
It doesn't actually say it was connected with her CBB appearance, but I would bet my bottom dollar it was. Or at least fuelled by jealousy by her attackers.
I would've thought the latter, given that I've yet to see an article that suggests the motive for her attackers was the race row. Who can say, though.
I often wonder what she is supposed to of "got away with"? Because she lost loads of work, has the incident brought up every time and was even attacked and seriously injured because of it
An attack that not one witness came forward about, and no-one has ever been charged?
A busy nightclub, the VIP area, and no-one saw her attacked. Hmmm. I'll take that with a pinch of salt.
Comments
I did wonder when you'd be back old pal! And have to say your post is once again spot on! ;-)
Lets take George Michael for example, what he got up to probably gets brought up now and again, but nowhere near as frequent as if it had been a female celeb who had done that!
Funny that!
Where do you find him always equally vilified? Even in the D Spy BB forum, he's often left out.
Look back at the posts.
So you're still trying to exploit the ambiguity in "being" to avoid understanding what I said. I hope you can understand why I'm not interested in continuing a discussion on that basis.
Can you really not see the difference between what's in someone's mind and heart (their thoughts, beliefs, emotions, motives, etc) and behaviour?
I don't know what to say to someone who's behaviourist to such a degree.
How do you get the "opinion" part?
If she looked like Natalie Cassidy, she'd been even less often mentioned than Jo O'Meara, this thread wouldn't exist, and you'd lose this chance to chance the forum rules and make a disrespectful comment about forum members.
What's even more hilarious is that Natalie Cassidy won't get slated anywhere near the same extent as she's not aesthetically pleasing, and men don't desire her. She doesn't get the same vitriol on celeb forums from females- well at least not for her looks anyway.
It's probably not too much of a stretch to actually picture a thousand Sonia look-a-likes typing on forums- 'I hate Cheryl Cole- she's so pig ugly' from the safety of their keyboards.
Actually, I think you'd find if she did look like Natalie Cassidy, I'd still have the same opinion about the vitriol nature of posts directed at her.
It's funny you mention Natalie Cassidy actually. She's not what most would call a conventional beauty, and yes she has got her fair share of stick on 'The Showbiz Forum' but not as half as much, I would suggest, if she had supermodel looks, you'd be first in the queue slagging her off!!!!
High fives Chip!.
Yet again Veri, I find myself nodding in agreement at your posts. You make some outstanding and very insightful points in your posts here.
You are a breath of fresh air round these parts I tell you, and I think you should post more. You add balance in a place where balance is sorely needed.
How does one judge someone other than on their behaviour? As we have already established that we are not privy to people's innermost thoughts, hearts and minds, we can but judge them on their actions and their behaviour - which surely is a result of what is in their hearts and minds.
I think you're being deliberately obtuse as there is no excuse for O'Hara, Goody, Tweed and Budden's behaviour.
Interesting that you cannot tell me what I have said that isn't true and have used the cop-out 'look back on the posts', inferring that either you can't be bothered or know full well that you cannot prove that I have claimed nothing that didn't happen.
Funny how none of you have posted in, say, the Chawner thread. That's about women having their looks criticised too.
Calling people White Knights isn't being disrespectful in the slightest. It's no different from calling a spade a spade.
*yawn*
Sorry, but it definitely is.
That's because I have no particular interest in Emma Chawner.. Although I'm sure myself & AOTB will be happy to pop over there if needs be!!
From my point of view its entertaining how far you will go to deny you aren't a vile misogynist, even though its blatantly obvious you ARE.
Typical response, when what I've said about you is true!!
The desperation is hilarious to see from people round here, I totally agree. It appears that nerves have been hit left right and centre. :cool:
The White Knight thing makes me chuckle too. It's probably on a par with those who randomly call others jealous, no? The difference here is that I'd take no real offence, in fact it's amusing, whereas the J word sends certain posters here into a frenzy, which let's just say, is 'interesting'.
Hypothetically if a so called 'White Knight' called females who continually slag off good looking women, 'sad lonely old cat ladies' or 'Sonia's from Eastenders' would that be ok too?
Obviously I'm not so rude as to call you a sad old cat lady (well not unless you start calling me playground-type names either, and then it's probably fair enough right? ;-))
Genuine question. Just off to feed my horse and repair my lance and I'll be back to see the reply!
Behaviour results from a variety of different things, not only from what's in hearts and minds, and consider the unfortunately named fundamental attribution error. There's in any case a limit to what can be told by behaviour, and some of the extremes of vitriolic comment would require knowledge that's well beyond that limit.
I haven't said, implied, assumed, or even presupposed that there was any excuse for it.
The idea that I cannot tell you is made up. I've already told you; and I'm not inclined to spend time looking up the posts to tell you again.
When the accusation is racism, it not only makes dislike feel justified, it also provides an opportunity to wax vitriolic in ways that might otherwise seem way OTT -- an opportunity some seem to welcome, perhaps even relish. In Danielle's case, a further ramping-up comes from the belief that she "got away with it".
I often wonder what she is supposed to of "got away with"? Because she lost loads of work, has the incident brought up every time and was even attacked and seriously injured because of it
Was that because of her CBB appearance? I didn't think the two had been officially connected.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1187436/Danielle-Lloyd-urged-quit-nightclub-scene-nearly-losing-leg-vicious-attack.html
It doesn't actually say it was connected with her CBB appearance, but I would bet my bottom dollar it was. Or at least fuelled by jealousy by her attackers.
I would've thought the latter, given that I've yet to see an article that suggests the motive for her attackers was the race row. Who can say, though.
An attack that not one witness came forward about, and no-one has ever been charged?
A busy nightclub, the VIP area, and no-one saw her attacked. Hmmm. I'll take that with a pinch of salt.
I wouldn't say 100% it was but I wouldn't say it wasn't
What an unkind thing to say ...she was seriously cut ... And just because no one was charged doesn't mean it didn't happen