I zoned out abit but caught her putting zee in his place.
Who is she?
Who is she?
Who was the 'middle aged woman' on you're fired?
1 of 4
I used to watch You're Fired, but I can only take an hour of anything Apprentice related a week now. Any more and I want to start breaking things. 
Loved capitalising on the lame sexist angle.
Also liked admiring Miles for his looks first and his business prowess second
Also liked admiring Miles for his looks first and his business prowess second
Originally Posted by koantemplation:
“Thankfully she's rich enough to pay someone to take that chip off her shoulder.”
“Thankfully she's rich enough to pay someone to take that chip off her shoulder.”
Yeah, I found her quite unpleasant I have to say. Did he deserve to be fired?' (Stony) 'Yes.' Now some will say he deserved it, I just think there's ways and means.
Originally Posted by Paul Wilson:
“Yeah, I found her quite unpleasant I have to say. Did he deserve to be fired?' (Stony) 'Yes.' Now some will say he deserved it, I just think there's ways and means.”
“Yeah, I found her quite unpleasant I have to say. Did he deserve to be fired?' (Stony) 'Yes.' Now some will say he deserved it, I just think there's ways and means.”
They probably chose him for the show knowing what he was like.
He was definitely arrogant on his VT but then again so are most of them.
They put her on the show because she's obviously a militant feminist and the BBC were shamelessly exploiting a sexist angle for the show tonight
Originally Posted by The Rhydler:
“They put her on the show because she's obviously a militant feminist and the BBC were shamelessly exploiting a sexist angle for the show tonight”
“They put her on the show because she's obviously a militant feminist and the BBC were shamelessly exploiting a sexist angle for the show tonight”
I thought there was a real 'kick him when he's down' vibe going on tonight. Quite mean spirited to be honest.
Originally Posted by Paul Wilson:
“I thought there was a real 'kick him when he's down' vibe going on tonight. Quite mean spirited to be honest.”
“I thought there was a real 'kick him when he's down' vibe going on tonight. Quite mean spirited to be honest.”
Yes, and he was so flustered that he began to say some really dumb things, he didn't help himself at all.
Nikki Chapman was at least fair, I've got a real crush on her.
Originally Posted by The Rhydler:
“They put her on the show because she's obviously a militant feminist and the BBC were shamelessly exploiting a sexist angle for the show tonight”
“They put her on the show because she's obviously a militant feminist and the BBC were shamelessly exploiting a sexist angle for the show tonight”
She was completely correct in every respect - other than her shameful lack of knowledge regarding London tube trains.
Originally Posted by The Rhydler:
“Yes, and he was so flustered that he began to say some really dumb things, he didn't help himself at all. .”
“Yes, and he was so flustered that he began to say some really dumb things, he didn't help himself at all. .”
No dumber than most of his comments for the last five weeks.
Originally Posted by Dr Dave:
“She was completely correct in every respect - other than her shameful lack of knowledge regarding London tube trains.”
“She was completely correct in every respect - other than her shameful lack of knowledge regarding London tube trains.”
Completely INcorrect.
So, from now on, if a PM leader picks two candidates of the opposite sex to go into the boardroom, its sexist. Official.
I don't know why people are calling her a militant feminist just because she didn't seem to like a man who came across as cocky, very sexist and somewhat unpleasant...... in my book she was spot on with what she said!
She hated him because he was a man. She leapt on the sexism angle like a fly circles excrement, it was shameless and shameful.
Originally Posted by The Rhydler:
“She hated him because he was a man. She leapt on the sexism angle like a fly circles excrement, it was shameless and shameful.”
“She hated him because he was a man. She leapt on the sexism angle like a fly circles excrement, it was shameless and shameful.”
No she didn't like him because he was sexist!
He brought two women into the boardroom and let the two guys who messed up go.
He claimed Leah was in there because she was the sub team leader so if a member of the team messed up she had to carry the can as the leader yet when it was pointed out to him by that logic he should have gone as he was responsible for the whole team he had no answer.
He disregarded any contribution Natalie tried to make and then blamed her for being quiet.
And can you think of any instance in any episode where he has engaged with one of the women on a task... no neither can I!
The case for the prosecution rests!
Did you really expect Zee to let Leah go back to the house after her outright mutiny against him? Be serious
And like Lord Sugar, I'm prepared to give Zee the benefit of the doubt that he thought Natalie contributed very little to this weeks task - which is true.
It's pretty insulting that its considered sexist to bring two women in who have underperformed, it would have been sexist to the MEN if one or both of them had to go into the boardroom just so Zee wouldnt be accused of sexism.
He didn't bring Neil in because quite frankly, Neil would have slaughtered him for the flag issue.
Kurt should have been brought in, he was vulnerable from the previous weeks task, he absolutely should have gone, but he did negotiate one decent sale didnt he? So perhaps that ran through his mind, but I don't think even Zee would be dumb enough to prove his sexist credentials to the world at the expense of his place on the show. That's crazy even to think it.
There's yer rebuttal.
And like Lord Sugar, I'm prepared to give Zee the benefit of the doubt that he thought Natalie contributed very little to this weeks task - which is true.
It's pretty insulting that its considered sexist to bring two women in who have underperformed, it would have been sexist to the MEN if one or both of them had to go into the boardroom just so Zee wouldnt be accused of sexism.
He didn't bring Neil in because quite frankly, Neil would have slaughtered him for the flag issue.
Kurt should have been brought in, he was vulnerable from the previous weeks task, he absolutely should have gone, but he did negotiate one decent sale didnt he? So perhaps that ran through his mind, but I don't think even Zee would be dumb enough to prove his sexist credentials to the world at the expense of his place on the show. That's crazy even to think it.
There's yer rebuttal.
She had a face on her like a slapped arse - I get she didn't like Zee (nor did I) but she can't get that many invites onto national telly to promote herself and her business.
Originally Posted by tiggerspp:
“I don't know why people are calling her a militant feminist just because she didn't seem to like a man who came across as cocky, very sexist and somewhat unpleasant...... in my book she was spot on with what she said!”
“I don't know why people are calling her a militant feminist just because she didn't seem to like a man who came across as cocky, very sexist and somewhat unpleasant...... in my book she was spot on with what she said!”
Probably because he didn't have the guts or the morals to pull the two male losers into the boardroom who deserved to be there. If he had he'd still be there.
Originally Posted by The Rhydler:
“Did you really expect Zee to let Leah go back to the house after her outright mutiny against him? Be serious
And like Lord Sugar, I'm prepared to give Zee the benefit of the doubt that he thought Natalie contributed very little to this weeks task - which is true.
It's pretty insulting that its considered sexist to bring two women in who have underperformed, it would have been sexist to the MEN if one or both of them had to go into the boardroom just so Zee wouldnt be accused of sexism.
He didn't bring Neil in because quite frankly, Neil would have slaughtered him for the flag issue.
Kurt should have been brought in, he was vulnerable from the previous weeks task, he absolutely should have gone, but he did negotiate one decent sale didnt he? So perhaps that ran through his mind, but I don't think even Zee would be dumb enough to prove his sexist credentials to the world at the expense of his place on the show. That's crazy even to think it.
There's yer rebuttal.”
“Did you really expect Zee to let Leah go back to the house after her outright mutiny against him? Be serious
And like Lord Sugar, I'm prepared to give Zee the benefit of the doubt that he thought Natalie contributed very little to this weeks task - which is true.
It's pretty insulting that its considered sexist to bring two women in who have underperformed, it would have been sexist to the MEN if one or both of them had to go into the boardroom just so Zee wouldnt be accused of sexism.
He didn't bring Neil in because quite frankly, Neil would have slaughtered him for the flag issue.
Kurt should have been brought in, he was vulnerable from the previous weeks task, he absolutely should have gone, but he did negotiate one decent sale didnt he? So perhaps that ran through his mind, but I don't think even Zee would be dumb enough to prove his sexist credentials to the world at the expense of his place on the show. That's crazy even to think it.
There's yer rebuttal.”
None of which does anything to change the facts as presented in my post, thanks anyway though
Originally Posted by Shadyfish:
“Probably because he didn't have the guts or the morals to pull the two male losers into the boardroom who deserved to be there. If he had he'd still be there.”
“Probably because he didn't have the guts or the morals to pull the two male losers into the boardroom who deserved to be there. If he had he'd still be there.”
True.
Neil made a mistake with the dress, but he did at least make the sale at a negotiated price. He had a sub-team who could have pointed out to him that it was the wrong dress. Neil would not have been fired.
Kurt made a mistake with the flag, there were two others in the car that could have pulled him up on that, it MAY have been a firable offence, but its more likely that Sugar would have just fired Natalie for contributing little, than Kurt was for that error. Kurt did make a sale.
The women have been poor in this season, that's not sexist, that's a fact, they lost three out of three Boy V Girl tasks and Sugar has outlined his disappointment in them - was that sexist?
Its business! Zee should have walked for not backing up his credentials, not for sexism which didn't occur.
Kurt made a mistake with the flag, there were two others in the car that could have pulled him up on that, it MAY have been a firable offence, but its more likely that Sugar would have just fired Natalie for contributing little, than Kurt was for that error. Kurt did make a sale.
The women have been poor in this season, that's not sexist, that's a fact, they lost three out of three Boy V Girl tasks and Sugar has outlined his disappointment in them - was that sexist?
Its business! Zee should have walked for not backing up his credentials, not for sexism which didn't occur.
1 of 4
