Originally Posted by Veri:
“Just to be clear, do you think that because you voted for him it's ok for you to say why other people voted for him, even though their reasons could have been completely different from yours, but it's not ok for someone who didn't vote for him to express an opinion on the subject?”
I do know a lot of Luke's supporters and have read pretty much every post about him on digitalspy, and I challenge you to find one, ever, that says they support him because of his gender status. It seems a fatuous argument to me. There have been three transgender contestants: two, very different, did well, for clearly identifiable reasons; one seemed to elicit no support at all. And although there were no digitalspy posts at all from anyone saying they were supporting Luke for being transgender, there were an awful lot (some now removed) that clearly had a negative issue with it. And you must see how offensive it is for someone who doesn't like him to claim to speak on behalf of those who do.
Quote:
“Sure, but the idea was that "Luke won because he was brave, funny and honest amongst other things" -- not that Luke won because people thought he was brave, funny and honest amongst other things" (thought, regardless of whether he really was).”
I think that is a bit hair-splitting. But all right. Luke won because people thought he was brave, funny and honest (and relatable and likeable).
Quote:
“Perhaps it seems strange, put like that; but it looks like you also think people can be wrong about why they think as they do, because (for example) you think they can be "fooled by bad editing".”
That would have been very irritating if I had just put it on its own, but I did justify it with specific examples.
Quote:
“That someone might be naturally averse does not mean that everyone who stays out of arguments etc is naturally averse, as if that were the only possibility.”
Doesn't matter since I find staying out of arguments, except when defending someone who cannot defend themselves, admirable. I have always defended Rachel against the horrible allegation that she refused to get into rows with people even when they tried dragging her forcibly into them. If Luke and Adam were under the radar by trying to avoid rows, good for them.
Quote:
“Perhaps in the first few years of UK BB housemates thought of the DR in that way, and ignored the possibility that what they said might be shown to viewers; but for years now, many HMs have used the DR as a way to present things to viewers (even though they couldn't be sure it would be shown).”
Some housemates have indeed tried to use the diary room as their private blog, but since Luke marsden BB have been less inclined to allow it. But it is fatally easy to assume that because something is shown, the housemate(s) expected it to be shown. We know, because it was commented on by others, that Luke spent a lot of time in the diary room; as I said, I think he found a lot of BB tough and he liked to talk things through in the diary room. And as a matter of fact, not much diary room action IS shown these days; obviously when big groups of housemates go in there, it tends to be shown, but very little of the housemates just going in for a chat is shown. Luke was badly knocked off balance for that one day (he was fine by next day) by the harsh public nominations; during that day BB asked him how he felt, and he answered them honestly. That was not at all the image he was hoping to portray, which was of someone resilient and capable. If they had asked him next day, he would have given a completely different answer. But they caught him at that bad time.
Quote:
“There is something wrong with that 'on their own merits', if it's supposed to mean those other factors somehow vanish or can't matter to viewers.”
Yes, because I really don't think they do. If you take Nikki's anorexia, for example, it was given massive national publicity while she was still in the house; but people really did judge her on her behaviour in the house. I can't remember a single person either saying or even distantly implying "I don't really like her, but I'm voting for her anyway because she has had such an awful life". I can't say this enough times: if people had not really liked Luke, they would not have voted for him. Even other transgender people, who might conceivably have wanted him to win because he was a rare advocate for f to m people on tv, would have regarded him as an embarrassment rather than an asset if he had been dislikeable or ridiculous, just as gay people on here so very often complain bitterly about 'camp screamers'.
Quote:
“Re "that would not have got him past the first eviction if people had not warmed to him", you know he wasn't even up until week 7, right? By then, lots of factors were in play.”
Yes, which was why I used the word 'would'. By week 7 there were indeed other factors in play, and he was being judged entirely on his behaviour in the house; but even if he had been up against Victoria, people would have voted for the person they liked and enjoyed watching, not the person with a clear label on their back.
Originally Posted by chloedancer:
“its simple.both non deserving winners.both for a similar reason.the only reason i consider nadia better is because of her year and the fight night.it made entertainig viewing.luke a did nothing(maybe on par with cameron)? entertaining besides tell becky the truth.i liked that.......otherwise,he did nothing of interest......plus his hatred of luke s was boardering on stalkerish.”
You do know that he made things up with Luke S, took all the blame for their difference, and never spoke against him or nominated him again? And was actively kind and friendly to him when he was upset? And you really are bracketing Nadia and Luke together, in spite of being such wildly different people, just because they are both transgender, aren't you? Because we all know that transgender people are
all the same, right?
Originally Posted by Veri:
“Do you think no liking for Rylan carried over from X Factor? If some did, how can we know it wasn't enough to get him the CBB win?”
He looked like the obvious winner from day 1 to me, and I had never seen him before in my life. BB surely portrayed that whole series as nothing more than a battle between Rylan and Speidi; indeed that is what I think ruined the whole thing. The main players got nearly all the attention and loads of entertaining extra tasks; the others were mere ballast, hardly shown except as far as they interacted with Rylan and Speidi. And since Speidi behaved horribly for most of the series imo, the other possible candidate won.
Quote:
“The post was not claiming to speak for those who voted for Luke. Nor was it claiming to know better than the people themselves. It was just expressing an opinion on why he won -- like you did implicitly re Rylan above, and as Noisy Oyster did when saying Luke "won for being a great friend and support", etc.”
If someone says that Luke only won because he was transgender, of course it is speaking for those who voted for him: how else could he have won, other than by attracting votes?
Quote:
“chloedancer's post said "he sat and smoked for months." Does it make much difference to add that other HMs smoked as much and that he did most of the cooking, a lot of the cleaning, the most swimming, and regularly exercised? I don't think it does. It would still mean that, as the post said, "he did nothing to deserve a win."”
If someone is vilified for doing something, it is fair to point out that other people, not vilified, did the same. And as I always say when this kind of argument is used against a housemate, what were the others doing while Luke was sitting in the garden? BB is a very, very inactive experience on the whole, except when tasks are in progress. While Luke, Adam, Lauren and later Deana were sitting in the garden, the others were not toiling in thei fields: they were either sitting inside, lying in the garden, or lying in bed. The camera did not pan from the outsiders sitting in the garden to the others organising leapfrog competitions, did it?
Quote:
“We don't know whether the smokers all spent the same amount of time or not. Luke did sometimes smoke alone, or with one other person. Adam and Lauren weren't always both there with him. What Luke said about Ashleigh would be his subjective impression. It's not like he timed her or kept careful records.”
No, but the point is that Ashleigh had exactly the same amount of tobacco as the others, and was almost never shown smoking it. Which makes it into an editing trick, as happened with Lisa, who managed to give the impression that she sat and smoked all day even when they were on a ration of two cigarettes a day. Luke and Adam's 'story' was "sits in the garden smoking". Ashleigh's was 'has unattractive romance with Luke S and bitches with the other girls". You could fairly point out that Ashleigh's story was worse, but still, it is curious that BB chose to give the impression that the smoking area was only used by the same four people, when it clearly wasn't.
Quote:
“You mean like Gos was one of the most physically active housemates in bb4?
”
Well he did cook for the whole house throughout his time there, which was quite active. And again, he was rather unfairly vilified for spending so much time in a three quarters lying position on the sofa. But it is unfair because when he was there, so were the others, doing what they do in BB, ie lounging around. Cameron used to exercise as I recall, and Steph cleaned like a demon, but I doubt whether Gos was any less active than, for example, Tania. He was
fatter of course, which unfortunately is likely to have been behind the sneers.
Quote:
“In any case, cooking, cleaning, swimming, and exercising with Conor aren't the sort of things that make a HM deserve to win.”
There is nothing in particular that makes a housemate 'deserve to win', other than winning the affections of the people. Brian B succeeded by seeming dim but happy; Aaron succeeded by seeming moody but clever; Kate did it by seeming young, vulnerable but determined; Craig did it by seeming older, confident and relaxed. You are right that no one has ever won by being active and helpful in the house, but I DO take at least a bit of an interest in who pulls their weight; it irritates me by default when people like Ashleigh never so much as wash a spoon and give the impression that at home they have slaves to pick up after them. It is one little indicator among many of how selfish or unselfish a housemate is, and is interesting on that basis. (Carole came into a different category, using cooking and cleaning as a means of controlling others).