Originally Posted by Handers:
“I'm so glad she made the comment about him and the door!”
“I'm so glad she made the comment about him and the door!”
Ignorant sod.
Zee is dismissive of the females
4 of 6
Originally Posted by Romola_Des_Loup:
“Him and Leah did not like each other and she behaved very badly and deserved to be in the firing line. However, there was everything sexist about the reason they didn't like each other. Zee's bad business decisions and the reasons he lost the task had only a tenuous link to his misogyny. He acceoted Kurt's dimensions for the flag. If a girl had said the same thing, he would have checked. I'm reliably told that it was Neil, not Kurt, who bought the wrong robe thingy and bragged about it. He was justified in bringing Leah back, as she had sought to undermine him and the task. However, despite two of the men making appalling task losing decisions, he brought back Natalie, who admittedly didn't contribute much but did nothing to contribute to the failure either. His prejudice in favour of Y chromosomes led him to leave the proper candidates scot free. that was a business decision which he could be expected to repeat in the real world and would make him a rotten business partner. Zee needed to go,this was his make or break task and he broke, It was absolutely the right decision.”
“Him and Leah did not like each other and she behaved very badly and deserved to be in the firing line. However, there was everything sexist about the reason they didn't like each other. Zee's bad business decisions and the reasons he lost the task had only a tenuous link to his misogyny. He acceoted Kurt's dimensions for the flag. If a girl had said the same thing, he would have checked. I'm reliably told that it was Neil, not Kurt, who bought the wrong robe thingy and bragged about it. He was justified in bringing Leah back, as she had sought to undermine him and the task. However, despite two of the men making appalling task losing decisions, he brought back Natalie, who admittedly didn't contribute much but did nothing to contribute to the failure either. His prejudice in favour of Y chromosomes led him to leave the proper candidates scot free. that was a business decision which he could be expected to repeat in the real world and would make him a rotten business partner. Zee needed to go,this was his make or break task and he broke, It was absolutely the right decision.”
A very well thought out and constructed post.... good luck with getting The Rhydler to understand it though
Originally Posted by Romola_Des_Loup:
“Him and Leah did not like each other and she behaved very badly and deserved to be in the firing line. However, there was everything sexist about the reason they didn't like each other. Zee's bad business decisions and the reasons he lost the task had only a tenuous link to his misogyny. He acceoted Kurt's dimensions for the flag. If a girl had said the same thing, he would have checked. I'm reliably told that it was Neil, not Kurt, who bought the wrong robe thingy and bragged about it. He was justified in bringing Leah back, as she had sought to undermine him and the task. However, despite two of the men making appalling task losing decisions, he brought back Natalie, who admittedly didn't contribute much but did nothing to contribute to the failure either. His prejudice in favour of Y chromosomes led him to leave the proper candidates scot free. that was a business decision which he could be expected to repeat in the real world and would make him a rotten business partner. Zee needed to go,this was his make or break task and he broke, It was absolutely the right decision.”
“Him and Leah did not like each other and she behaved very badly and deserved to be in the firing line. However, there was everything sexist about the reason they didn't like each other. Zee's bad business decisions and the reasons he lost the task had only a tenuous link to his misogyny. He acceoted Kurt's dimensions for the flag. If a girl had said the same thing, he would have checked. I'm reliably told that it was Neil, not Kurt, who bought the wrong robe thingy and bragged about it. He was justified in bringing Leah back, as she had sought to undermine him and the task. However, despite two of the men making appalling task losing decisions, he brought back Natalie, who admittedly didn't contribute much but did nothing to contribute to the failure either. His prejudice in favour of Y chromosomes led him to leave the proper candidates scot free. that was a business decision which he could be expected to repeat in the real world and would make him a rotten business partner. Zee needed to go,this was his make or break task and he broke, It was absolutely the right decision.”
Well said.
Originally Posted by The Rhydler:
“'you're just a doctor' in a really disparaging way that suggested being a doctor wasn't anything special.
But in reality, would a qualified doctor be equally competent in business? Unless she has degrees in both i'd say highly unlikely.”
“'you're just a doctor' in a really disparaging way that suggested being a doctor wasn't anything special.
But in reality, would a qualified doctor be equally competent in business? Unless she has degrees in both i'd say highly unlikely.”
I know of a doctor who set up a business that was sold eventually for nine million pounds, so I'd say that doctors can be business people. And actually, look at Lord Sugar, he had no business degree, just a desire to make money and a market stall. It's really one field that you don't need a degree in.
one women did nothing
the other wanted to fail the task from start
id be dismissive too, its not a coincidence the women's team lost so much in the first few weeks
the other wanted to fail the task from start
id be dismissive too, its not a coincidence the women's team lost so much in the first few weeks
He seemed really unlikable particularly yesterday. He told Leah's subteam what to do and then blamed her when it went wrong even though Leah pushed to go to the mall. Then on You're Fired he blamed her over Neil? buying the wrong robe, I was glad the woman on You're Fired pointed out that by his logic he was to blame for the failure of the task.
Also if he's arguing Natalie didn't contribute, she tried in the taxi and he shot her down. Also between 6 of them they found 3 correct items by that logic other team members contributed just as much as Natalie.
ETA: Also the door thing was just rude. I'm released my inner Karren Brady feminism rant.
Also if he's arguing Natalie didn't contribute, she tried in the taxi and he shot her down. Also between 6 of them they found 3 correct items by that logic other team members contributed just as much as Natalie.
ETA: Also the door thing was just rude. I'm released my inner Karren Brady feminism rant.
Originally Posted by xKatieLx:
“Then on You're Fired he blamed her over Neil? buying the wrong robe, I was glad the woman on You're Fired pointed out that by his logic he was to blame for the failure of the task.”
“Then on You're Fired he blamed her over Neil? buying the wrong robe, I was glad the woman on You're Fired pointed out that by his logic he was to blame for the failure of the task.”
A fact lost on him until it was explained and on at least one poster here even after it was explained
Originally Posted by Dave_King:
“That women on You're Fired was out of order.”
“That women on You're Fired was out of order.”
She did come across a bit strong, didn't she? I mean, it's fair enough that she didn't think much of Zee but this is supposed to be an entertainment show, not Question Time. A lot of the points she made were fair, but it was more the venom with which they were delivered. Made for some painful viewing, and I imagine that there was a whole lot more that was left on the editing room floor just to tone her down a bit.
Natalie calling him sexist was very low, and not accurate at all. Funny how no one on this forum has brought it up before. Yet he loses brings in two woman, and Natalie plays the sexism card, nad Leah backs him up, even though he made her sub-team leader. Very poor showing from both the woman, cant wait for them to be fired, which they will.
Originally Posted by ACU:
“Natalie calling him sexist was very low, and not accurate at all. Funny how no one on this forum has brought it up before. Yet he loses brings in two woman, and Natalie plays the sexism card, nad Leah backs him up, even though he made her sub-team leader. Very poor showing from both the woman, cant wait for them to be fired, which they will.”
“Natalie calling him sexist was very low, and not accurate at all. Funny how no one on this forum has brought it up before. Yet he loses brings in two woman, and Natalie plays the sexism card, nad Leah backs him up, even though he made her sub-team leader. Very poor showing from both the woman, cant wait for them to be fired, which they will.”
I can understand why Natalie thought it was true. She wasn't the reason for the fail, had been sidelined when trying to contribute, yet got brought back anyway. In place of two guys that had made obvious game-changing mistakes.
Zee didn't make Leah sub-team manager, she appointed herself. Hard to call, but I'd say the way he reacted to her doing that sort of showed he wasn't going to.
However I do think Leah jumping on Natalie's accusation was a case of "woohoo another stick to beat him with".
Originally Posted by Romola_Des_Loup:
“Him and Leah did not like each other and she behaved very badly and deserved to be in the firing line. However, there was everything sexist about the reason they didn't like each other. Zee's bad business decisions and the reasons he lost the task had only a tenuous link to his misogyny. He acceoted Kurt's dimensions for the flag. If a girl had said the same thing, he would have checked. I'm reliably told that it was Neil, not Kurt, who bought the wrong robe thingy and bragged about it. He was justified in bringing Leah back, as she had sought to undermine him and the task. However, despite two of the men making appalling task losing decisions, he brought back Natalie, who admittedly didn't contribute much but did nothing to contribute to the failure either. His prejudice in favour of Y chromosomes led him to leave the proper candidates scot free. that was a business decision which he could be expected to repeat in the real world and would make him a rotten business partner. Zee needed to go,this was his make or break task and he broke, It was absolutely the right decision.”
“Him and Leah did not like each other and she behaved very badly and deserved to be in the firing line. However, there was everything sexist about the reason they didn't like each other. Zee's bad business decisions and the reasons he lost the task had only a tenuous link to his misogyny. He acceoted Kurt's dimensions for the flag. If a girl had said the same thing, he would have checked. I'm reliably told that it was Neil, not Kurt, who bought the wrong robe thingy and bragged about it. He was justified in bringing Leah back, as she had sought to undermine him and the task. However, despite two of the men making appalling task losing decisions, he brought back Natalie, who admittedly didn't contribute much but did nothing to contribute to the failure either. His prejudice in favour of Y chromosomes led him to leave the proper candidates scot free. that was a business decision which he could be expected to repeat in the real world and would make him a rotten business partner. Zee needed to go,this was his make or break task and he broke, It was absolutely the right decision.”
What you wrote is fair enough,
But IMO I think him choosing Natalie instead of the boys is more of a coincidence then sexism.
He knew that Natalie had been in the boardroom and he specifically heard lord sugar say her card was marked.
So I reckon he was justified in bringing her in.
Kurt didn't really make a task losing decision, because without him they wouldn't have made a task winning offer on the plant.
Neil is a stronger candidate (IMO) so bringing Neil would be a risk.
Zee knew that he could pick up on Natalie not contributing and hope for the best. But no matter who he choose, he was always going out
So all in all I believe that it was just a coincidence that Zee appeared sexist.
Originally Posted by lightdragon:
“I can understand why Natalie thought it was true. She wasn't the reason for the fail, had been sidelined when trying to contribute, yet got brought back anyway. In place of two guys that had made obvious game-changing mistakes.
Zee didn't make Leah sub-team manager, she appointed herself. Hard to call, but I'd say the way he reacted to her doing that sort of showed he wasn't going to.
However I do think Leah jumping on Natalie's accusation was a case of "woohoo another stick to beat him with".”
“I can understand why Natalie thought it was true. She wasn't the reason for the fail, had been sidelined when trying to contribute, yet got brought back anyway. In place of two guys that had made obvious game-changing mistakes.
Zee didn't make Leah sub-team manager, she appointed herself. Hard to call, but I'd say the way he reacted to her doing that sort of showed he wasn't going to.
However I do think Leah jumping on Natalie's accusation was a case of "woohoo another stick to beat him with".
”
Nick actually acused Natalie of doing nothing all day. Which is probably why Zee brought her in.
Leah didnt appoint herself. Zee appointed her. She did make herself sub-team leader. However Zee did say, its not your call, its upto me who I make sub-team leader, and then appointed Leah.
To be fair to Zee, you are in a car with Natalie and Kurt. Natalie has yet to be on the winning team, Kurt and Zee have both won 3 out of 4 tasks. Who would yo listen to? Its a no-brainer its yourself and Kurt. Apart from the car, I didnt see any other time when Natalie asserted herself on the task.
Agree Leah did jump on to the sexism accusation. It wasnt even in her mind, when she went into the boardroom.
Originally Posted by ACU:
“Nick actually acused Natalie of doing nothing all day. Which is probably why Zee brought her in.
Leah didnt appoint herself. Zee appointed her. She did make herself sub-team leader. However Zee did say, its not your call, its upto me who I make sub-team leader, and then appointed Leah.
To be fair to Zee, you are in a car with Natalie and Kurt. Natalie has yet to be on the winning team, Kurt and Zee have both won 3 out of 4 tasks. Who would yo listen to? Its a no-brainer its yourself and Kurt. Apart from the car, I didnt see any other time when Natalie asserted herself on the task.
Agree Leah did jump on to the sexism accusation. It wasnt even in her mind, when she went into the boardroom.”
“Nick actually acused Natalie of doing nothing all day. Which is probably why Zee brought her in.
Leah didnt appoint herself. Zee appointed her. She did make herself sub-team leader. However Zee did say, its not your call, its upto me who I make sub-team leader, and then appointed Leah.
To be fair to Zee, you are in a car with Natalie and Kurt. Natalie has yet to be on the winning team, Kurt and Zee have both won 3 out of 4 tasks. Who would yo listen to? Its a no-brainer its yourself and Kurt. Apart from the car, I didnt see any other time when Natalie asserted herself on the task.
Agree Leah did jump on to the sexism accusation. It wasnt even in her mind, when she went into the boardroom.”
Don't get me wrong, Zee had quite a few to choose from when deciding who to bring back. I'm not sure Natalie was a sexist choice, but more a safety barrier in she'd been there a few times and might suffer the same fate as Uzma.
However Natalie isn't the type to reflect on what she did wrong, so I can see where she pulled that card from. Not that she was right in doing so.
Originally Posted by slouchingthatch:
“It WAS a low blow and bang out of order unless she had clear evidence to back it up. In a real workplace, you just don't make accusations like that just because you don't like someone - the ramifications are significant as management are compelled to investigate.
We did see some evidence to suggest that Zee has a bit of a problem with women, but outright sexism? Sorry, no proof of that. He was rude, yes. He didn't listen and was patronising, yes. But sexist? Impossible to say on the little evidence we saw. Zee was less sexist than he was a complete idiot.
I think a lot less of Natalie for what she did (and also Leah for backing her up without first-hand evidence). Yes, she was fighting for her life, but there are some lines you shouldn't cross unless you have clear evidence, and that's one of them. I wouldn't work with someone who comes up with stuff like that just because she's in a corner.”
“It WAS a low blow and bang out of order unless she had clear evidence to back it up. In a real workplace, you just don't make accusations like that just because you don't like someone - the ramifications are significant as management are compelled to investigate.
We did see some evidence to suggest that Zee has a bit of a problem with women, but outright sexism? Sorry, no proof of that. He was rude, yes. He didn't listen and was patronising, yes. But sexist? Impossible to say on the little evidence we saw. Zee was less sexist than he was a complete idiot.
I think a lot less of Natalie for what she did (and also Leah for backing her up without first-hand evidence). Yes, she was fighting for her life, but there are some lines you shouldn't cross unless you have clear evidence, and that's one of them. I wouldn't work with someone who comes up with stuff like that just because she's in a corner.”
Uhmmm.....both Neil and Kurt made major mistakes, but he brought back in Natalie and you don't believe that to be due to sexism
Come on, honestly, on a business level (not on a female vs. men stance; which this discussion is going towards) that is most strange thing ever to have happened in the boardroom.
Zee even admitted it basically on You're Fired by saying he didn't bring in Kurt because Zee was afraid that Kurt might get fired (he took a firing bullet for Kurt
).
Originally Posted by tom ace:
“What you wrote is fair enough,
But IMO I think him choosing Natalie instead of the boys is more of a coincidence then sexism.
He knew that Natalie had been in the boardroom and he specifically heard lord sugar say her card was marked.
So I reckon he was justified in bringing her in.
Kurt didn't really make a task losing decision, because without him they wouldn't have made a task winning offer on the plant.
Neil is a stronger candidate (IMO) so bringing Neil would be a risk.
Zee knew that he could pick up on Natalie not contributing and hope for the best. But no matter who he choose, he was always going out
So all in all I believe that it was just a coincidence that Zee appeared sexist.”
“What you wrote is fair enough,
But IMO I think him choosing Natalie instead of the boys is more of a coincidence then sexism.
He knew that Natalie had been in the boardroom and he specifically heard lord sugar say her card was marked.
So I reckon he was justified in bringing her in.
Kurt didn't really make a task losing decision, because without him they wouldn't have made a task winning offer on the plant.
Neil is a stronger candidate (IMO) so bringing Neil would be a risk.
Zee knew that he could pick up on Natalie not contributing and hope for the best. But no matter who he choose, he was always going out
So all in all I believe that it was just a coincidence that Zee appeared sexist.”
Unlike Kurt and Neil, who have never been in the boardroom before
not surprised if Zee is sexist because under his Muslim religion a woman is only worth half a man iirc
I think Zee is just generally dismissive and his manners leave a lot to be desired.
Whether this is due to sexism is another matter; it may be but I'd need more concrete evidence before making an absolute decision.
The thing is, everything that appears to show Zee as dismissive towards females (and there is evidence, no doubt about it), can possibly be explained another way.
The door incident was simple rudeness. Nothing to do with whether the person following him was male, female or Jason.
Choosing Natalie to bring back to the boardroom - as has been said, Zee was stuck a bit between a rock and a hard place with this one.
Kurt dropped a clanger with the flag measurements but again as people have stated, it wasn't a big mistake in context and certainly didn't cost them the task. Zee was also there when the mistake was made and did nothing to correct it.
Neil's mistake was bigger in context but I think Zee would be nervous of bringing Neil into the boardroom both from a past performance and an argumentative point of view.
The argument that Uzma tried to put forward - i.e. that she was an easy target, applied far more to Natalie. Natalie hasn't won a task yet, she lost badly as PM and she hasn't really done anything of note. I can see quite easily how Zee would feel she was an easy target to bring back to the boardroom; it backfired badly but it's hard to see how bringing back anyone else would have resulted in anything different.
Zee was dismissive of Natalie throughout the task but the reasons outlined above may be why. She hasn't been on the winning side or done anything particularly good. Yes, Zee appeared very dismissive and rude but it's not clear that he was like that because she's female. I think he'd be just the same to Jason for instance. If he doesn't rate you, he doesn't consult you - no tact, no diplomacy. It's not necessarily to do with gender bias. He's an arrogant, dismissive twonk but possibly not a sexist one.
I'm mainly playing devil's advocate here. I think it's quite likely that Zee has some difficulties accepting female authority. However, I don't think the evidence is conclusive.
Sexist? Very possibly.
Arrogant and dismissive? Almost certainly.
Fired? Incontrovertibly.
Move on
Whether this is due to sexism is another matter; it may be but I'd need more concrete evidence before making an absolute decision.
The thing is, everything that appears to show Zee as dismissive towards females (and there is evidence, no doubt about it), can possibly be explained another way.
The door incident was simple rudeness. Nothing to do with whether the person following him was male, female or Jason.
Choosing Natalie to bring back to the boardroom - as has been said, Zee was stuck a bit between a rock and a hard place with this one.
Kurt dropped a clanger with the flag measurements but again as people have stated, it wasn't a big mistake in context and certainly didn't cost them the task. Zee was also there when the mistake was made and did nothing to correct it.
Neil's mistake was bigger in context but I think Zee would be nervous of bringing Neil into the boardroom both from a past performance and an argumentative point of view.
The argument that Uzma tried to put forward - i.e. that she was an easy target, applied far more to Natalie. Natalie hasn't won a task yet, she lost badly as PM and she hasn't really done anything of note. I can see quite easily how Zee would feel she was an easy target to bring back to the boardroom; it backfired badly but it's hard to see how bringing back anyone else would have resulted in anything different.
Zee was dismissive of Natalie throughout the task but the reasons outlined above may be why. She hasn't been on the winning side or done anything particularly good. Yes, Zee appeared very dismissive and rude but it's not clear that he was like that because she's female. I think he'd be just the same to Jason for instance. If he doesn't rate you, he doesn't consult you - no tact, no diplomacy. It's not necessarily to do with gender bias. He's an arrogant, dismissive twonk but possibly not a sexist one.
I'm mainly playing devil's advocate here. I think it's quite likely that Zee has some difficulties accepting female authority. However, I don't think the evidence is conclusive.
Sexist? Very possibly.
Arrogant and dismissive? Almost certainly.
Fired? Incontrovertibly.
Move on
Originally Posted by boab34:
“not surprised if Zee is sexist because under his Muslim religion a woman is only worth half a man iirc”
“not surprised if Zee is sexist because under his Muslim religion a woman is only worth half a man iirc
”
Is he Muslim?
In which case why does he have tattoos?
So many questions.
I don't think Leah was determined to disobey him, I think she was just genuinely frustrated that someone who claimed to know Dubai 'like the back of my hand' was utterly useless and gave them wrong info (the perfume thing)
Originally Posted by lightdragon:
“Is he Muslim?
In which case why does he have tattoos?
So many questions.”
“Is he Muslim?
In which case why does he have tattoos?
So many questions.
”
they said Zee is a Muslim in the beer task that's why Kurt was dumb to send him to beer production
Shia scholars say tattoos aren't haram while Sunni scholars say they are iirc
Originally Posted by boab34:
“they said he's Muslim in the beer task that's why Kurt was dumb to send him to beer production
Shia scholars say tattoos aren't haram while Sunni scholars say they are iirc”
“they said he's Muslim in the beer task that's why Kurt was dumb to send him to beer production
Shia scholars say tattoos aren't haram while Sunni scholars say they are iirc
”
Oh yeah he couldn't drink for religious reasons. Blimey that feels like months ago.
Too many conflicting rules in Islam IMO, I thought tattoos were haram for everyone, learn summat new every day, thanks for info.
Originally Posted by slouchingthatch:
“She did come across a bit strong, didn't she? I mean, it's fair enough that she didn't think much of Zee but this is supposed to be an entertainment show, not Question Time. A lot of the points she made were fair, but it was more the venom with which they were delivered. Made for some painful viewing, and I imagine that there was a whole lot more that was left on the editing room floor just to tone her down a bit.”
“She did come across a bit strong, didn't she? I mean, it's fair enough that she didn't think much of Zee but this is supposed to be an entertainment show, not Question Time. A lot of the points she made were fair, but it was more the venom with which they were delivered. Made for some painful viewing, and I imagine that there was a whole lot more that was left on the editing room floor just to tone her down a bit.”
I agree. The criticism on You're Fired is usually in jest but that woman was actually quite nasty and completely uncalled for.
Apparently next week they have Pussy Riot on the panel
Originally Posted by Sherlock_Holmes:
“Uhmmm.....both Neil and Kurt made major mistakes, but he brought back in Natalie and you don't believe that to be due to sexism
Come on, honestly, on a business level (not on a female vs. men stance; which this discussion is going towards) that is most strange thing ever to have happened in the boardroom.
Zee even admitted it basically on You're Fired by saying he didn't bring in Kurt because Zee was afraid that Kurt might get fired (he took a firing bullet for Kurt).”
“Uhmmm.....both Neil and Kurt made major mistakes, but he brought back in Natalie and you don't believe that to be due to sexism
Come on, honestly, on a business level (not on a female vs. men stance; which this discussion is going towards) that is most strange thing ever to have happened in the boardroom.
Zee even admitted it basically on You're Fired by saying he didn't bring in Kurt because Zee was afraid that Kurt might get fired (he took a firing bullet for Kurt
).”
Sherlock...last night, did Natalie say something about Zee not holding the door for her? It was just when they enterred the boardroom. I missed that part a bit.
Originally Posted by Dave_King:
“I agree. The criticism on You're Fired is usually in jest but that woman was actually quite nasty and completely uncalled for.
Apparently next week they have Pussy Riot on the panel”
“I agree. The criticism on You're Fired is usually in jest but that woman was actually quite nasty and completely uncalled for.
Apparently next week they have Pussy Riot on the panel
”
That woman was spot on. It's odd how sexism in this country is now more acceptable than racism, yet if someone speaks out they're labelled as nasty.
4 of 6
