Good grief - is she fighting terrorism as well as taking part in a reality tv show

Why would you think that? I don't regularly watch EastEnders, it's the most depressing programme on the TV, so that's "probably" blown your theory right out of the window.

I go on what I see and I've seen a lovely young woman who doesn't flaunt her assets because she doesn't need to parade around the camp half naked to attract airtime.

She did a trial where she had to dive underwater even though she knew she had difficulty holding her breath, she did it and came up trumps with three stars and provided much needed food for the camp.

How the hell she ever kept her cool with another certain camp mate is to her credit. If Charlie wanted to vent, she did the right thing and did it in the BT, she caused no discontent in the camp itself and I applaud her for that.

As for the ridiculously stupid accusations of her continual references to her daughter Kiki, this just didn't happen, it's simply an excuse for those who don't like Charlie to have a pop at her, blame that on the editing and not on Charlie herself. Charlie's daughter is the most important person in her life, it's not hard (even for the thickest of FMs) to understand that everyone will talk about their loved ones when they've been parted for such a long time and three/four weeks is a long time to incarcerated with twelve strangers and no contact with the outside world other than Ant and Dec.

They also said Colin was missing his daughters. Don`t know why<> but I get the feeling he wouldn`t becoming under so much fire if he was in Charlie`s position now.

Gutted David was out - dont want a gushing American to win - Ashley has been nice enough but I am fed up of the All Amercan Girl now and Charlie and her blatant using little daughter Kiki at every opportunity to play at the public;s heart strings.

TBH by this point if someone wasn't missing their child it would put me off them

Maybe if it had become the thing he commented on the most, people would be reacting the same way.

So what are the names of Eric's children; David's son; Linda's children, Rosemary's daughter, Brian's children - yep, you don't know because their names were not frequently mentioned and neither do you know how old they are. No-one is saying that she shouldn't miss her daughter but the fact that we all know her daughter's name and what she looks like says a fair bit about how much airtime was given to mentions of Charlie's daughter - why, when no-one else did?

I can't speak for other FMs but I'm not overly interested in their family lives - I watch the programme to see the programme, not to get a glimpse into their personal lives which has nothing to do with IAC.

No the Fm's aren't thick just because their opinions differ from yours. You spend a lot of your time pointing out others grammar errors. Please concentrate on the thread and not being personal.

Don't be daft. Comparing essential armed services in Iraq with a gig in an Australian television set is crass.

I didn't know about KikI until only 3-4 days ago I didn't even know Charlie was a Mum.

The amount people say she has talked about her has been greatly exaggerated I bet people here have talked and thought about Kiki more than Charlie has

Not really people are saying that if a parent should miss their child then they should never leave them

Agree.
I cant understand the bitter nastiness that pervades some of the comments about Charlie, they are frequently hugely exaggerated and occasionally simply untrue.
Mystifying

She's a nice enough lass and she would be a very odd mum not to talk about missing her young child.

Quite correct.

There are dozens of reasons why parents have to be away from their children, among that being in the military but there are lots of jobs that require temporary separation from ones family.

Its ridiculous to criticise her for missing her young child. Ive worked on contracts with women who have young kids and they bang on monday - friday about how they miss them. Then go home at the weekend.
What are people supposed to do.... stay home on the dole?

No they are not. The poster was implying that she can't leave the set because she misses her child because its an essential job. No it isn't. Yes she can. Easily. In Afghanistan soldiers can't unless they want to end their career. It's a terrible comparison.

And if she walks she may lose future jobs I think plus if they walk they don't get their payment or at least they don't get all of it.

Anybody in any job can choose to leave if they miss their kids that much but no matter who you are you are allowed to miss them I'm sure entertainers on tour miss their kids and they could just cancel the tour actors can be away for months filming sometimes at the other side of the world they could quit to.

No matter if your an actor or solder you have the rights to miss and talk about your child and I bet most do.

Its not being compared in that way though is it? Its simply a valid response to people saying that if ones misses ones child one should not go away to work.

I know it must be frustrating when ones argument turns out to be straw, but it is what it is.

I can see why people would think Chalie is "using" her child for sympathy though (not that I think she is, but the producers are playing it up.) Did you know, for example, that David Haye has a young son? Yet we've never once heard him mentioned or heard David say he misses him (which I'm sure he does.)

Lets ALL be honest, IF, Charlie was quite so desperate to be with her daughter, she would not have willingly signed up to be away from her for three weeks.

Yes, she will miss her and no doubt being in celeb jungle is to gain more publicity for her career but I do hate it when people use children like this. It is Charlies choice, she chose to be away from her.

QFT - although the obsessions of some is highly entertaining.

I wish they'd keep all this contact with their families out of these gameshows because for me they're a corrupting influence that get used by the programme makers.

It's like X Factor and their sob stories.

If she was to win I'd like it to be a 'clean' win, so to speak. If you know what I mean.
If the programme use the 'Aww' factor for one contestant then they have to use it for all of them really. None of them or all of them.
I'd rather it was made to be a more level playing field when external factors such as this are brought into the equation and that the show is focused more purely on events in the jungle.

I've already said that I found the Kiki stuff unnecessary and that I think Charlie didn't need it and would probably have done rather well without it anyway.
All she really needed to do was to not be Janine and she would have probably got halfway just on that alone.

She did not use Kiki the show did. All this has come up since her child was behind the door. Other relatives were there too but no one is rattling on about them.

Charlie's crime...she called her child by name instead of saying 'my daughter' or 'my kid'. Then of course we have Ant and Dec refering to her by name. How terrible to personalize a realative instead of refering to someone as a posession.

But let's be honest here, Charlie's real crime is being in the final against the forum pet who is cuter and prettier. Unforgivable.

All we know is that they didn't put it in the edit for all we know her could have talked about him 10X more than Charlie talked about Kiki

TBH if he didn't mention him that does put me off him

It always makes me laugh when people say ''oh EastEnders did it'' while Joe Swash did win, the several other EE stars who have taken part in this show previously did not.

So I don't think that argument holds up.

Well it's going to work to some extent isn't it, surely?

It's a very popular TV show.

True enough but as I said I'm sure people who are fans of whatever made the others famous voted for them based on that.