I am a bit shocked that you defending this crap just because you think the girls are hot. Racism, homophobia etc. should have no place in a TV show/live feed. And i can´t believe BBUS allows those ppl to stay in the house. The US comes across as big hypocrites sometimes.
you're assuming that's the reason i'm defending "them",
just like people are assuming many other things.
live feed is meant to see real people, how they behave and interact naturally.
because i don't agree with a specific word or way someone interacts i have no desire or the arrogance to intend to force my will upon it.
i'm mature enough to handle language, scenarios, themes that i might not agree with entirely and things different than my own thoughts and views without wanting to see them cleansed, purged and destroyed.
a side example, i say retarded from time to time... i've been around mental issues and some of my own all of my life and i have absolutely nothing against mentally handicapped people but it's just a word that early on the people around me used and so it comes up from time to time.
if i was under a microscope and judged almost 24/7 the odds are i would probably use that word at some point, like "that task was retarded", people could take that and make me out to be a horrible person that had something against mentally handicapped people when they have absolutely no clue anything about me or my life.
no viewers have any idea about these people's entire lives, the human being is very complex... a few comments does not make up a human being.
in the context of observing live feed i have no major issue with people behaving naturally as they would on the outside.
(in the sense of seeing people punished, removing, etc)
unless it was something that broke the rules and that production/cbs or whoever makes that decision felt it was something that required action against.
only separate from viewers trying to force their will onto it, that is.
meaning an impartial and logical person who wasn't making a decision to appease the crusaders.
live feed is meant to see real people, how they behave and interact naturally.
because i don't agree with a specific word or way someone interacts i have no desire or the arrogance to intend to force my will upon it.
yeah real ppl and the behaviour which is ok. But racism and homophobia should have no platform on TV ... period. If you you are a person who has to make racist comments all the time get the f*** off my TV.
I am surprised that you can´t see that this is so wrong.
yeah real ppl and the behaviour which is ok. But racism and homophobia should have no platform on TV ... period. If you you are a person who has to make racist comments all the time get the f*** off my TV.
I am surprised that you can´t see that this is so wrong.
or someone could not watch if it effects them that much? why does it have to be the other thing that's removed from the scenario? i'm able to handle such things so why should it be removed from my viewing because someone else can't handle it? doesn't make much sense.
it's not a platform on tv it's a live feed, we're observers.
if it's shown on tv and promoted in some way or praised then i might start shifting toward that side of things and possibly agreeing.
i think it's more wrong what else is going on about, moreso than it. (at this time).
i don't like when people judge complex humans in such ways,
i don't like when people try and force their will upon all (i feel that is supreme arrogance).
and in this context, of live feed i don't like when people try and censor it and force themselves upon it, i'm here as an observer to observe not to impose my will and i want to see it uncensored and without it being forced and shaped to the will of specific viewers.
if others feel the need to be outraged and complain about it, i'm sure with enough pressure a response will be forced, and that also won't effect me much, i'll just simply adapt and adjust accordingly similar to how i did with what happened in bbcan where everyone stopped being natural and censored themselves.
[except talla]
or someone could not watch if it effects them that much? why does it have to be the other thing that's removed from the scenario? i'm able to handle such things so why should it be removed from my viewing because someone else can't handle it? doesn't make much sense.
it's not a platform on tv it's a live feed, we're observers.
if it's shown on tv and promoted in some way or praised then i might start shifting toward that side of things and possibly agreeing.
i think it's more wrong what else is going on about, moreso than it. (at this time).
i don't like when people judge complex humans in such ways,
i don't like when people try and force their will upon all (i feel that is supreme arrogance).
and in this context, of live feed i don't like when people try and censor it and force themselves upon it, i'm here as an observer to observe not to impose my will and i want to see it uncensored and without it being forced and shaped to the will of specific viewers.
if others feel the need to be outraged and complain about it, i'm sure with enough pressure a response will be forced, and that also won't effect me much, i'll just simply adapt and adjust accordingly similar to how i did with what happened in bbcan where everyone stopped being natural and censored themselves.
[except talla]
Which is exactly what these girls are doing, degrading complex human beings based based on ethnicity or sexuality. I think your posts are towing a very tight line against what is appropriate for the forum and starting to veneer into the inappropriate and offensive. A national furore which nearly brought down UK big brother was started over language and behaviour which had undertones of racism, and in this country it is illegal (rightfully) to use language which can promote racial hatred. I consider defending racially hateful language to be covertly racist in and of itself.
I actually suggest you think more carefully about the hateful behaviour you're defending, and basically drop it.
Which is exactly what these girls are doing, degrading complex human beings based based on ethnicity or sexuality. I think your posts are towing a very tight line against what is appropriate for the forum and starting to veneer into the inappropriate and offensive. A national furore which nearly brought down UK big brother was started over language and behaviour which had undertones of racism, and in this country it is illegal (rightfully) to use language which can promote racial hatred. I consider defending racially hateful language to be covertly racist in and of itself.
I actually suggest you think more carefully about the hateful behaviour you're defending, and basically drop it.
you're assuming what i'm defending, and assuming intents and just about everything else.
no thanks,
i'll express my thoughts on what i choose to.
whoever is the moderator on the forum can decide what is appropriate or isn't.
you're assuming what i'm defending, and assuming intents and just about everything else.
no thanks,
i'll express my thoughts on what i choose to.
whoever is the moderator on the forum can decide what is appropriate or isn't.
On the fence with Rachel Rice? I think not.
You want to watch racist people in all their inglory on television for your entertainment? Shall we see if the BNP are available to do a live hour press conference on primetime BBC? Perhaps the KKK can have a weekly reality show to spit their bile on ch4?
Perhaps those suggestions are "retarded"? - that's a term you use freely when situations suggest, isn't it?
You want to watch racist people in all their inglory on television for your entertainment? Shall we see if the BNP are available to do a live hour press conference on primetime BBC? Perhaps the KKK can have a weekly reality show to spit their bile on ch4?
Perhaps those suggestions are "retarded"? - that's a term you use freely when situations suggest, isn't it?
and i think anyone logical observing this discussion will see what's what.
those are all pretty ridiculous assumptions, in my opinion.
but if a simple discussion gets people this heated and worked up, then i'm fine with dropping it.
since it doesn't effect me in any way in terms of emotion, i see no reason for anyone to get worked up and heated, or emotional over it.
i'll just agree to disagree and move on.
and i think anyone logical observing this discussion will see what's what.
those are all pretty ridiculous assumptions, in my opinion.
No, they're not.
There should not be a platform for racist, homophobic, sexist etc people to air their ignorant views in mainstream media. Language which can incite racial hatred is a crime in the UK and is not tolerated, yet you think it's appropriate on an entertainment show. That ignorance astounds me.
There should not be a platform for racist, homophobic, sexist etc people to air their ignorant views in mainstream media. Language which can incite racial hatred is a crime in the UK and is not tolerated, yet you think it's appropriate on an entertainment show. That ignorance astounds me.
Clearly, you are speaking with common sense and a logical mind. One can always read between the lines of particular posts.
As of now David will be voted out. Also, it has just been revealed Spencer did in fact lie about hatgate.
Yeah its still David for now and MC seems solid but who knows what happens until wednesday. This house is NUTS! Starting to watch more of Nick now and i love him, he is a great player so far.
There's no point discussing things with 'onethefencewithrach', he already admitted he has a weakness for hot girls on BB, and that is blinkering his judgement.
I'm not forcing my opinion on anyone. I'm saying prejudice based on race, gender and sexuality should not be tolerated. It's ridiculous and old fashioned and has no place in modern society. It's nothing to do with freedom of speech.
Comments
you're assuming that's the reason i'm defending "them",
just like people are assuming many other things.
live feed is meant to see real people, how they behave and interact naturally.
because i don't agree with a specific word or way someone interacts i have no desire or the arrogance to intend to force my will upon it.
i'm mature enough to handle language, scenarios, themes that i might not agree with entirely and things different than my own thoughts and views without wanting to see them cleansed, purged and destroyed.
a side example, i say retarded from time to time... i've been around mental issues and some of my own all of my life and i have absolutely nothing against mentally handicapped people but it's just a word that early on the people around me used and so it comes up from time to time.
if i was under a microscope and judged almost 24/7 the odds are i would probably use that word at some point, like "that task was retarded", people could take that and make me out to be a horrible person that had something against mentally handicapped people when they have absolutely no clue anything about me or my life.
no viewers have any idea about these people's entire lives, the human being is very complex... a few comments does not make up a human being.
in the context of observing live feed i have no major issue with people behaving naturally as they would on the outside.
(in the sense of seeing people punished, removing, etc)
unless it was something that broke the rules and that production/cbs or whoever makes that decision felt it was something that required action against.
only separate from viewers trying to force their will onto it, that is.
meaning an impartial and logical person who wasn't making a decision to appease the crusaders.
I am surprised that you can´t see that this is so wrong.
or someone could not watch if it effects them that much? why does it have to be the other thing that's removed from the scenario? i'm able to handle such things so why should it be removed from my viewing because someone else can't handle it? doesn't make much sense.
it's not a platform on tv it's a live feed, we're observers.
if it's shown on tv and promoted in some way or praised then i might start shifting toward that side of things and possibly agreeing.
i think it's more wrong what else is going on about, moreso than it. (at this time).
i don't like when people judge complex humans in such ways,
i don't like when people try and force their will upon all (i feel that is supreme arrogance).
and in this context, of live feed i don't like when people try and censor it and force themselves upon it, i'm here as an observer to observe not to impose my will and i want to see it uncensored and without it being forced and shaped to the will of specific viewers.
if others feel the need to be outraged and complain about it, i'm sure with enough pressure a response will be forced, and that also won't effect me much, i'll just simply adapt and adjust accordingly similar to how i did with what happened in bbcan where everyone stopped being natural and censored themselves.
[except talla]
Which is exactly what these girls are doing, degrading complex human beings based based on ethnicity or sexuality. I think your posts are towing a very tight line against what is appropriate for the forum and starting to veneer into the inappropriate and offensive. A national furore which nearly brought down UK big brother was started over language and behaviour which had undertones of racism, and in this country it is illegal (rightfully) to use language which can promote racial hatred. I consider defending racially hateful language to be covertly racist in and of itself.
I actually suggest you think more carefully about the hateful behaviour you're defending, and basically drop it.
you're assuming what i'm defending, and assuming intents and just about everything else.
no thanks,
i'll express my thoughts on what i choose to.
whoever is the moderator on the forum can decide what is appropriate or isn't.
On the fence with Rachel Rice? I think not.
You want to watch racist people in all their inglory on television for your entertainment? Shall we see if the BNP are available to do a live hour press conference on primetime BBC? Perhaps the KKK can have a weekly reality show to spit their bile on ch4?
Perhaps those suggestions are "retarded"? - that's a term you use freely when situations suggest, isn't it?
and i think anyone logical observing this discussion will see what's what.
those are all pretty ridiculous assumptions, in my opinion.
but if a simple discussion gets people this heated and worked up, then i'm fine with dropping it.
since it doesn't effect me in any way in terms of emotion, i see no reason for anyone to get worked up and heated, or emotional over it.
i'll just agree to disagree and move on.
No, they're not.
There should not be a platform for racist, homophobic, sexist etc people to air their ignorant views in mainstream media. Language which can incite racial hatred is a crime in the UK and is not tolerated, yet you think it's appropriate on an entertainment show. That ignorance astounds me.
Clearly, you are speaking with common sense and a logical mind. One can always read between the lines of particular posts.
As of now David will be voted out. Also, it has just been revealed Spencer did in fact lie about hatgate.
I'm not forcing my opinion on anyone. I'm saying prejudice based on race, gender and sexuality should not be tolerated. It's ridiculous and old fashioned and has no place in modern society. It's nothing to do with freedom of speech.