So? It's just the human body, all perfectly natural and nothing much to see here. And fear not, your dick's not gonna come undone or catch on anything. ;-)
Soo there on tv though and its strangers e.t.c , everyone should take responsibility for themself aswell. No the gown might catch on something it happens
idiotic post - you know damn well that a robe - and a tie around one at that! - is in no way as secure as clothing. I don't know if you're a woman, and how well endowed you are in the chest area, but believe me, those things wobbly even when they are supported, so unsupported and with just a robe to hold them in - it's a losing battle, particularly if, like Chloe, you were bending down to attend to someone who was bending over being sick into the loo!
Not really an idiotic post at all, and it clearly was lost on you so I'll explain in rather more straightforward terms, the point being made. It was, I admit, a slightly out there post illustrating the idiocy of people thinking that a woman wearing a bathrobe (regardless of what she has on underneath it) is in anyway responsible or at fault (even to the most minute degree) for a bloke getting her boobs, or boob out as and when he feels like it. This isn't a tough one.
What a woman or indeed a man wears, is irrelevant to the issue at hand, and not a million miles away from the 'but she was wearing a short skirt so must have been asking for it' kind of mentality I thought was lost in the last Ice Age.
It's a bit of an oxymoron when people say she was naked underneath the clothes she was wearing.
HOLD ON - when did I EVER mention "kinky" in my post - I DID NOT - so stop putting words into my mouth.
Not one HM has ever "walk[ed] around stark naked", there are been extremely brief periods of nudity - usually as a result of alcohol or a dare.
since the first BB when the HM's hurled themselves at the wall covered in nothing but damp clay (bar Anna, who was naked in her head) and then did mixed showering HM's have pootled about clothed and semi-clothed with little regard. Roberto naked cheffed under his cooking apron, Shell naked lawnmowered and Michelle in BB5 was more often without a top than fully clothed.
Soo there on tv though and its strangers e.t.c , everyone should take responsibility for themself aswell. No the gown might catch on something it happens
So what? That blonde girl in BB5 (?) mowed the lawn completely starkers, Craig from BB1 and a couple of the girls rolled around naked in mud then plastered their naked bodies on the walls. There's been lots of nakedness in the house. Maybe even 'naked jacuzzi ness'. ;-)
since the first BB when the HM's hurled themselves at the wall covered in nothing but damp clay (bar Anna, who was naked in her head) and then did mixed showering HM's have pootled about clothed and semi-clothed with little regard. Roberto naked cheffed under his cooking apron, Shell naked lawnmowered and Michelle in BB5 was more often without a top than fully clothed.
It was far less unremarkable in olden times.
Our posts crossed but thank you, yes Shell was her name! That would have kept me up all night trying to think of her name!
So what? That blonde girl in BB5 (?) mowed the lawn completely starkers, Craig from BB1 and a couple of the girls rolled around naked in mud then plastered their naked bodies on the walls. There's been lots of nakedness in the house. Maybe even 'naked jacuzzi ness'. ;-)
Yes everyone takes responsibility for themselves as i said. Nadia would of called you a perv already lol
Doesn't mean everyone wants to do it though. And those were weeks in too depending whos left in I may mow lawns naked too
so you spend very night with a bunch of relative strangers you've only known for a few days!?
thrilling life you lead
What I do is nothing to do with anyone. I am not a HM. When HM are in the house, we see them in pjs, boxers, underwear, swimwear, towels, so a full length dressing gown is hardly provocative. Ken was in the hot tub with just a pair of short on. Callum was in the bedroom with just a pair of shorts on. Cami has walked around the house with quite skimpy underwear. Do they all deserve to have other HMs lunge at them and pull their clothes aside? Quite obviously, no.
It's cmmon to wear underwear under a gown.
Let's be honest what Jeremy did is inexcusable but anyone walking around naked under a bath robe is asking for gaping on live tv whilst living with 12 strangers your NOT in the comfort of your own home where reveals will be unnoticed.
Accidental "gaping" is one thing but that's not happened here. If she had "popped out" whilst powdering her nose and a fellow housemate saw it, well, her doing for being naked underneath. But she shouldn't have to worry about other people exposing her.
Soo there on tv though and its strangers e.t.c , everyone should take responsibility for themself aswell. No the gown might catch on something it happens
Yes, everyone has to take responsibility - but the fact that in years gone by women and men have been pootling round the house in various stages of undress and yet no one so far ejected for inappropriate touching suggests the onus is on the potential toucher to be responsible for their actions rather than the potential touched, regardless of dress.
Why doesn't everybody who is questioning why Chloe was naked under her robe just come out and say it.
"It was all her fault."
She was wearing a dressing gown.
She was naked under the dressing gown.
The gown could have gaped.
It wasn't 'supporting' enough.
Why was she in the toilet with him.
She invaded his personal space.
She chose to go into the toilet with a drunken man.
She chose to go alone into the toilet with a stranger.
She didn't mind on another tv show.
She was in a bikini the other day
She was in a bikini wiggling her boobs the other day
She is a Page 3 model.
She gets them out plenty of times
She's used to makeup artists and others touching her boobs
Her boobs are not gold plated, get over it.
She should have slapped him/told him to eff off/kneed him
Yes, everyone has to take responsibility - but the fact that in years gone by women and men have been pootling round the house in various stages of undress and yet no one so far ejected for inappropriate touching suggests the onus is on the potential toucher to be responsible for their actions rather than the potential touched, regardless of dress.
Yes. But every case on it's own merits. Men have had their shorts randomly pulled down and female housemates tried to pull a guys towels of once after his shower. Without even warnings. Equality should mean just that equal for all while factoring in every situation judged on its own merits.
Another problem we did not see or hear exactly what happened , the stuff claimed by him that she was leaning over him flirting e.t.c. I'm saying judge things on evidence except we don't know everything.
And what we do know about what he did i'd say is equal to the things i've described above , that has happened to guys on BB without any punishments.
Yes everyone takes responsibility for themselves as i said. Nadia would of called you a perv already lol
Doesn't mean everyone wants to do it though. And those were weeks in too depending whos left in I may mow lawns naked too
But what is your point about responsibility? Are you saying Chloe should take a share of the blame for what happened ?
You're more likely to get your dick caught on something if you're out in the garden mowing the lawn than in the House, but good on you for shedding your inhibitions, even with thousands of strangers watching.
She was wearing a dressing gown.
She was naked under the dressing gown.
The gown could have gaped.
It wasn't 'supporting' enough.
Why was she in the toilet with him.
She invaded his personal space.
She chose to go into the toilet with a drunken man.
She chose to go alone into the toilet with a stranger.
She didn't mind on another tv show.
She was in a bikini the other day
She was in a bikini wiggling her boobs the other day
She is a Page 3 model.
She gets them out plenty of times
She's used to makeup artists and others touching her boobs
Her boobs are not gold plated, get over it.
She should have slapped him/told him to eff off/kneed him
SO CLEARLY IT IS ALL HER FAULT!!!
:o:o:o:o
Apparently, drunk men grope women all the time and so she should be used to it and handled it better - yes that has actually been said
But what is your point about responsibility? Are you saying Chloe should take a share of the blame for what happened ?
You're more likely to get your dick caught on something if you're out in the garden mowing the lawn than in the House, but good on you for shedding your inhibitions.
I've made a post on it now with more detail. But the responsibility point was just a general point originally. Now i've added to it though in another post.
She was wearing a dressing gown.
She was naked under the dressing gown.
The gown could have gaped.
It wasn't 'supporting' enough.
Why was she in the toilet with him.
She invaded his personal space.
She chose to go into the toilet with a drunken man.
She chose to go alone into the toilet with a stranger.
She didn't mind on another tv show.
She was in a bikini the other day
She was in a bikini wiggling her boobs the other day
She is a Page 3 model.
She gets them out plenty of times
She's used to makeup artists and others touching her boobs
Her boobs are not gold plated, get over it.
She should have slapped him/told him to eff off/kneed him
Comments
Not really an idiotic post at all, and it clearly was lost on you so I'll explain in rather more straightforward terms, the point being made. It was, I admit, a slightly out there post illustrating the idiocy of people thinking that a woman wearing a bathrobe (regardless of what she has on underneath it) is in anyway responsible or at fault (even to the most minute degree) for a bloke getting her boobs, or boob out as and when he feels like it. This isn't a tough one.
What a woman or indeed a man wears, is irrelevant to the issue at hand, and not a million miles away from the 'but she was wearing a short skirt so must have been asking for it' kind of mentality I thought was lost in the last Ice Age.
It's a bit of an oxymoron when people say she was naked underneath the clothes she was wearing.
Yeah I suppose many use them after a swim etc
I find that really worrying if I'm honest.
Oh and 'she wouldn't have complained if she fancied him' that's the other one.
As if it's not her body really and she doesn't get to choose who sees/touches what, when and how >:(
Jacuzzi?
I agree. Following the sequence of events and dialogue also seems to be a challenge.
Exactly. That's kind of the point of those perverted, kinky things isn't it?
It was far less unremarkable in olden times.
So what? That blonde girl in BB5 (?) mowed the lawn completely starkers, Craig from BB1 and a couple of the girls rolled around naked in mud then plastered their naked bodies on the walls. There's been lots of nakedness in the house. Maybe even 'naked jacuzzi ness'. ;-)
Our posts crossed but thank you, yes Shell was her name! That would have kept me up all night trying to think of her name!
Great post!
Doesn't mean everyone wants to do it though. And those were weeks in too depending whos left in I may mow lawns naked too
What I do is nothing to do with anyone. I am not a HM. When HM are in the house, we see them in pjs, boxers, underwear, swimwear, towels, so a full length dressing gown is hardly provocative. Ken was in the hot tub with just a pair of short on. Callum was in the bedroom with just a pair of shorts on. Cami has walked around the house with quite skimpy underwear. Do they all deserve to have other HMs lunge at them and pull their clothes aside? Quite obviously, no.
"It was all her fault."
Exactly! Fgs people get a grip. There was no 'wardrobe malfunction' here. It was Mr Wandering Hands who opened it.
Accidental "gaping" is one thing but that's not happened here. If she had "popped out" whilst powdering her nose and a fellow housemate saw it, well, her doing for being naked underneath. But she shouldn't have to worry about other people exposing her.
Yes, everyone has to take responsibility - but the fact that in years gone by women and men have been pootling round the house in various stages of undress and yet no one so far ejected for inappropriate touching suggests the onus is on the potential toucher to be responsible for their actions rather than the potential touched, regardless of dress.
Indeed. Naked or sometimes wear joggers, i walk around like a chavy version of Hugh Hefner
A lot of the posts (and I am not talking about just this thead) do read rather worryingly like that, I have to agree.
She was wearing a dressing gown.
She was naked under the dressing gown.
The gown could have gaped.
It wasn't 'supporting' enough.
Why was she in the toilet with him.
She invaded his personal space.
She chose to go into the toilet with a drunken man.
She chose to go alone into the toilet with a stranger.
She didn't mind on another tv show.
She was in a bikini the other day
She was in a bikini wiggling her boobs the other day
She is a Page 3 model.
She gets them out plenty of times
She's used to makeup artists and others touching her boobs
Her boobs are not gold plated, get over it.
She should have slapped him/told him to eff off/kneed him
SO CLEARLY IT IS ALL HER FAULT!!!
Another problem we did not see or hear exactly what happened , the stuff claimed by him that she was leaning over him flirting e.t.c. I'm saying judge things on evidence except we don't know everything.
And what we do know about what he did i'd say is equal to the things i've described above , that has happened to guys on BB without any punishments.
But what is your point about responsibility? Are you saying Chloe should take a share of the blame for what happened ?
You're more likely to get your dick caught on something if you're out in the garden mowing the lawn than in the House, but good on you for shedding your inhibitions, even with thousands of strangers watching.
Apparently, drunk men grope women all the time and so she should be used to it and handled it better - yes that has actually been said
Hmm yes and the insects bites
I shouldn't chuckle but pretty well summed up!