|
||||||||
Joanna - I don't like her. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#76 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 84
|
Thanks for the youtube links, I can't wait for next week. There will be blood on the floor lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
If anyone is showing bias it's you,
You, OTOH, are ignoring the gaps and just interpreting it to fit in with your previous views. Quote:
I'm basing what I say on what we have all seen, you're basing your position on some supposedly terrible act which was cut, the problem is if he'd really exploded that would make compelling television and would not be cut by producers
There's no 'terrible act' which is cut - just a great deal of the lead up.Watch the segment again. He is smoldering with suppressed aggression. He then erupts and makes a violent chopping movement with his arm. And, in your rush to point the finger at Joanna you seem to have either not noticed or ignored the fact that he was the first to mention aggression! At which point Joanna says, quite accurately, that he's also been aggressive towards her, that she felt threatened, and asks him to calm down (admittedly never a good thing to say to someone in that state.) Quote:
In addition Nick was looking directly at Joanna while reacting so its clear whom he disapproved off. To believe otherwise is to surrender to your imagination. Joanna's behavior was rude agressive and frankly indefensible, but I'm sure you'll try with further imagined scenarios.
Nick doesn't look disgusted. That's pretty much his default expression. The only out of the ordinary expression he pulls a sort of wry 'children will be children' one.In fact, the whole thing seems to have been blown up out of all proportion by Joanna's detractors who are desperate for something - anything - to use against her. That scene was far less out of control than the one between Chris and Baggs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
You try to position yourself as dispassionate and neutral, but you then go on to characterise Jamie with emotive phrases like smoldering aggression and violent chopping, your bias is clear for all to see.
Jamies response I think was measured in the face of the provokation. For a fully grown woman to cry wolf in the way she did after having provoked the situation reveals her to be extremely manipulative. The idea that without having seen every second of footage we can't get a fair impression of the events is pretty pathetic and relies upon the BBC producers showing extreme bias, in the current climate that is extremely unlikely. |
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
You try to position yourself as dispassionate and neutral, but you then go on to characterise Jamie with emotive phrases like smoldering aggression and violent chopping, your bias is clear for all to see.
He was quite clearly suppressing a lot of anger and he quite clearly made a violent chopping movement. He also very explicitly told Joanna that she was being aggressive before she ever mentioned aggression. Quote:
Jamies response I think was measured in the face of the provokation.
There goes the spin again.You can just as easily say that Joanna was very measured in her response to Jamie's provocation in not cooperating with her as PM. Quote:
For a fully grown woman to cry wolf in the way she did after having provoked the situation reveals her to be extremely manipulative.
Oh, do try and keep a sense of perspective. She hardly cried wolf. It was only after he had complained about her aggression that she mentioned that he's been aggressive towards her - something we actually had seen a few seconds before. Saying that she felt threatened is hardly an accusation rape of assault. Quote:
The idea that without having seen every second of footage we can't get a fair impression of the events is pretty pathetic and relies upon the BBC producers showing extreme bias, in the current climate that is extremely unlikely.
It's only the balance of Joanna nagging and Jamie not cooperating with his PM that is in doubt and there is no question that he got a chance to do a piece to camera criticising her for wanting to be kept informed but she did not get a corresponding piece to explain why she wasn't satisfied with the information she was getting.On the whole aggression thing it's there in the edit. Jamie does make an aggressive physical movement and he is the first to complain about aggression (which we did not see - at worst Joanna was guilty of nagging). As I said, this has been blown up out of all proportion by Joanna's detractors who don't really have anything significant with which to work. |
|
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
Joanna was not merely nagging she was hectoring, and she was the first to raise her voice and I believe the first to enter his physical space not vice versa, this chopping movement you describe bares no resembalance to the small gesticulation that actually happened and in no way could it be described as violent in nature by any neutral person.
He complained about her aggression because she was indeed behaving aggressively, the only defense she had was to mirror the accusation in the knowledge that any suggestion that a man is being physically threatening is enough cow them into submission to win a verbal disagreement, its a cheap and lousy shot. |
|
|
|
|
|
#81 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
Joanna was not merely nagging she was hectoring, and she was the first to raise her voice and I believe the first to enter his physical space not vice versa, this chopping movement you describe bares no resembalance to the small gesticulation that actually happened and in no way could it be described as violent in nature by any neutral person.
You say she was hectoring but you take no account of his refusing to respond in a professional and cooperative manner with his project manager. You then airily dismiss the fact that he could not contain his aggression and allowed it to manifest itself physically. And yet you are quite happy for a well built man to complain about aggression from a woman but poo poo any suggestion that she may similarly find his behaviour aggressive. Next you'll be telling us she was asking for it. Quote:
He complained about her aggression because she was indeed behaving aggressively, the only defense she had was to mirror the accusation in the knowledge that any suggestion that a man is being physically threatening is enough cow them into submission to win a verbal disagreement
That and the fact that the edit clearly shows him losing control to the extent that his suppressed aggression actually surfaced in a physical gesture.Quote:
its a cheap and lousy shot.
Of course. Women should just toughen up and ignore male aggression. |
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
So I'm a thug or a misogynist because I'm certain Joanna was the wrongdoer in this situation? Is there any depth you won't plumb to appear to win the arguement?
Now its clear to me why you don't see anything wrong with how Joanna behaved, you behave in the same fashion, sad. |
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
So I'm a thug or a misogynist because I'm certain Joanna was the wrongdoer in this situation? Is there any depth you won't plumb to appear to win the arguement?
Now its clear to me why you don't see anything wrong with how Joanna behaved, you behave in the same fashion, sad. I think you need to get a bit of a sense of perspective. All this was was one person refusing to be managed, another responding perhaps a little excessively to that, a small flare up and then it was all over and done with. The problem for Joanna's detractors is that she's such an outstanding candidate and they are so desperate for something with which to bash her that blowing this minor incident up out of all proportion is the best they can do. Despite the fact that the both parties rapidly pulled themselves together, moved on, and won the task. |
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
I'm afraid its you who is the spinner here, nothing happened worthy of the description "physical aggression" it just didn't, no matter how many times you insist otherwise.
You tried to cram the words "she was asking for it" into my mouth, an ugly and loaded phrase, these were the depths to which I was referring, I think perhaps you have lost your sense of perspective. |
|
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
I'm afraid its you who is the spinner here, nothing happened worthy of the description "physical aggression" it just didn't, no matter how many times you insist otherwise.
He quite clearly cannot contain his anger by purely verbal remonstrance and makes a physically aggressive motion. You decide that that is of no consequence but you were not there. Even as a 6'2" male I would find some shaven headed guy punching the air whilst verbally having a go at me somewhat threatening - once they move from the verbal to the physical you don't know where it's going to end - so I can imagine it would be a lot worse for a woman. Quote:
You tried to cram the words "she was asking for it" into my mouth,
I didn't try to 'cram them into your mouth'. That's absurd. All I was saying is that your refusal to accept that a woman finding a male making physical gestures whilst venting his annoyance at her is reasonable grounds for feeling threatened is the first step on a slippery slope for similarly dismissing other, more serious, actions. Just how aggressive does a male have to be before you'll deign to allow a woman to feel threatened? |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12,332
|
Quote:
You must have seen a different edit to the one I have.
He quite clearly cannot contain his anger by purely verbal remonstrance and makes a physically aggressive motion. You decide that that is of no consequence but you were not there. Even as a 6'2" male I would find some shaven headed guy punching the air whilst verbally having a go at me somewhat threatening - once they move from the verbal to the physical you don't know where it's going to end - so I can imagine it would be a lot worse for a woman.? Instead, she pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed until Mother Theresa would have reached for the carving knife. Its her fault the situation escalated. Quote:
All I was saying is that your refusal to accept that a woman finding a male making physical gestures whilst venting his annoyance at her is reasonable grounds for feeling threatened is the first step on a slippery slope for similarly dismissing other, more serious, actions.
Just how aggressive does a male have to be before you'll deign to allow a woman to feel threatened? You'd like to paint Jamie the villain in this, but he was the model of restraint and the one moment he did lose his temper - she played the victim card. Disgraceful. |
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,924
|
I liked Joanna and wanted her to win as I thought she had the best combination of drive and business smarts. The fact that she started off being loud and then took the advice to tone it down only endeared her to me even more.
However.... her mock fright at Jamie's "agression" turned me right off. In that instance, I could believe everything others have said about the scheming, manipluative side to her character. If that's what she's really like under pressure, I'm not sure I want her to win any more. |
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,924
|
Quote:
If she hadnt been hectoring him in the first place none of this would have happened. What she did bordered on harassment. He tried to contain his anger and annoyance by shutting up and ignoring her. If she had any sense of nouse she would have notice and not pushed.
Instead, she pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed until Mother Theresa would have reached for the carving knife. Its her fault the situation escalated. "venting his annoyance" is the operative word. If she hadnt wound him up this would not have happened and deep down you know this. You'd like to paint Jamie the villain in this, but he was the model of restraint and the one moment he did lose his temper - she played the victim card. Disgraceful. |
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 247
|
Anyone who acts like that is a horrible person.
Spent all day belittling Jamie, snapping at him, condescending him, and after hours of restraining himself he finally snaps which she was after all along, and she plays the little frightened woman card.... I would hate to work with someone like that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#90 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,760
|
I thought her behaviour was dreadful, but in her everyday cleaning business I bet she's like that every day. Let's be honest, most people don't choose to work as cleaners, so she can treat her staff how she pleases and they'll just put up with it.
Thought it very telling that they didn't show any part of her business or talk to her staff. Underneath all that mouthy approach I don't think there's a great deal of intelligence either. |
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
OK, just an as exercise lets simply reverse the spin. Quote:
If she hadnt been hectoring him in the first place none of this would have happened.
Quote:
What she did bordered on harassment.
What he did bordered on misconduct.Quote:
He tried to contain his anger and annoyance by shutting up and ignoring her.
He didn't want any interference from the project manager so he acted like a sulky child and tried to ignore her.Quote:
If she had any sense of nouse she would have notice and not pushed.
If he had any nous he would have simply answered her questions in an adult, cooperative manner and not pusher her into having to keep asking.Quote:
Instead, she pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed and pushed until Mother Theresa would have reached for the carving knife.
Instead he refused to act in a reasonable manner towards his PM, stonewalling and stonewalling until Ghandi would have brained him with the spinning wheel.Quote:
Its her fault the situation escalated.
It was his fault the situation escalated.Quote:
"venting his annoyance" is the operative word. If she hadnt wound him up this would not have happened and deep down you know this.
If he had simply answered her questions this would not have happened and deep down you know this.Quote:
You'd like to paint Jamie the villain in this, but he was the model of restraint and the one moment he did lose his temper - she played the victim card.
You'd like to paint Joanna as the villain in this but she was a model of restraint.Then Jamie lost his cool, became aggressive and had the cheek to play the victim card and call her aggressive. Quote:
Disgraceful.
His behaviour certainly was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
It's just a pity that the producers neglected to show us exactly what Jamie did so we know just how much of a disgrace.
As they showed it could have been anything from breathing in and out to squaring up to her. As, despite having the footage, they decided not to show it thus depriving us of any chance of making an intelligent decision (as opposed to one that satisfied our particular prejudices), we are none the wiser. |
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
Anyone who acts like that is a horrible person.
Spent all day belittling Jamie, snapping at him, condescending him, and after hours of restraining himself he finally snaps which she was after all along, and she plays the little frightened woman card.... I would hate to work with someone like that. He has consitently undermined and harried but he does it very quietly, sneekily. It could well be that he deliberately waited until there was just him, Nick and Jo to have his little meltdown to convince Nick that Jo was bullying, harrasing and being agressive. What it seemd to me was that she then turned the tables to neutralise what he said. |
|
|
|
|
|
#94 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
As I said. There is no spoiler and it is no different to seeing a trailer on tv.
Also if people prefer not have any foreknowledge before the progamme, there would be foolish to come onto a forum that discusses it, ![]() Unfortunately, Joanna appears in a very bad light in this clip. Such a shame that she didn't even know the basics of who she wants to work for. I think that when people dont like a person they just pick on minor stuff. I think being discovered to be lying on CV is worse, or to have a dubious past..... beware Jamie and Stella
|
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,894
|
I have been cheering for Joanna for weeks, but her management of Jamie was downright awful and I can't see how anyone could try and defend her.
You need to give people space and time if they're preparing for something like that. As a manager you need to learn to trust people to deliver - and it was very obvious that Jamie was up to the task. All that constant hectoring and nagging did absolutely nothing to help him - it distracted him from the job and got his back up. I think Jamie was incredibly patient in the circumstances. I would have throttled her. The way in which she turned his reaction into 'big aggressive male threatens meek little woman' was quite manipulative. She's really gone down in my estimation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 12,332
|
Quote:
I thought her behaviour was dreadful, but in her everyday cleaning business I bet she's like that every day. Let's be honest, most people don't choose to work as cleaners, so she can treat her staff how she pleases and they'll just put up with it.
. |
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,270
|
Quote:
So I'm a thug or a misogynist because I'm certain Joanna was the wrongdoer in this situation? Is there any depth you won't plumb to appear to win the arguement?
Now its clear to me why you don't see anything wrong with how Joanna behaved, you behave in the same fashion, sad. neither will 'win' as neithers view will alter. ![]() BTW.. I think Jepson is pretty much right on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#98 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
I don't believe in winning arguments either per se , I was suggesting that Jepson was attempting to do so with a battering ram approach to the discussion, but I'll leave it there as this thread appears to have already been pruned by the mods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#99 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,089
|
Quote:
I don't believe in winning arguments either per se , I was suggesting that Jenson was attempting to do so with a battering ram approach to the discussion, but I'll leave it there as this thread appears to have already been pruned by the mods.
There is a prima facie case that Jamie is at fault because he appeared to be trying to exclude Joanna from persuing her role as project manager. However, it is possible that, in untransmitted footage, he did answer her questions and she was 'over managing'. We just don't know. I've also pointed out that it really wasn't that big a deal. It's only because Joanna has hardly put a foot wrong during the whole process that those who seem to have taken an almost vitriolic dislike to her have seized upon this comparatively minor incident to try and bash her. All it was was two people, both operating under extremely high pressure and with little sleep, getting a bit wound up with each other. There wasn't a war. No one died. (paraphrased, from Boris Becker) |
|
|
|
|
|
#100 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 29
|
Man that was almost a really balanced posting but then... Quote:
There is a prima facie case that Jamie is at fault ...
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:14.




Also if people prefer not have any foreknowledge before the progamme, there would be foolish to come onto a forum that discusses it, 