17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.
Two favourites to win: One a misogynist, running strip clubs, using up to
1 of 3
...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?
Originally Posted by Nigelk:
“...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?”
“...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?”
Well said.
I think it's great. Makes a change from what we usually get. Especially considering they're not exactly bad people.
I actually couldn't give a monkeys about what they did prior to BB and I am sure most of the public don't either... I judge them from what I see in front of me. Adam, an ex LA gang member would not have come 2nd if he was being judged on his time before BB.
Originally Posted by pepipop:
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
Rather than Sam and Sophie, what is it they do again!? Again i go by housmates in the house and how they entertaine me.
Dexter the wine swilling, hedonistic ladys man for the WIN!!
Originally Posted by Nigelk:
“...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?”
“...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?”
Nonsense, utter and complete nonsense. People vote for who they like and as people like Dexter, Gina and hazel have made a significant effort to create some interest in themselves before entering the house, that information will be taken into account too. perfectly reasonable.
People vote for who they like, not necessarily who's the most entertaining. It may be a entertaining show, but its a popularity contest.
Dexter made a dreadful image of a cock end before he entered the house, with staged pap shots and two of the most appalling bad taste self promo videos you will ever see. Then he looked like he might be ok, but his inner cock end is coming to the fore
Shame.
Originally Posted by sheils1:
“Well said.”
“Well said.”
See above
Originally Posted by Salv*:
“I actually couldn't give a monkeys about what they did prior to BB and I am sure most of the public don't either... I judge them from what I see in front of me. Adam, an ex LA gang member would not have come 2nd if he was being judged on his time before BB.”
“I actually couldn't give a monkeys about what they did prior to BB and I am sure most of the public don't either... I judge them from what I see in front of me. Adam, an ex LA gang member would not have come 2nd if he was being judged on his time before BB.”
But what if we'd found out that Adam was in fact a public schoolboy from Middlesex, who had made up his gangland past to make himself more interesting to the BB producers? Silly me, I'm sure they wouldn't be so desperate to find weird and controversial characters that they wouldn't bother to check their backgrounds before unleashing them on us. Would they?
I don't care about their backstories and I have never cared about anyone's backstory. It is completely irrelevant to whether someone is an entertaining HM who throws
their self completely into their BB experience.
I have never understood why other people get so hung up on a HMs life outside of BB - why would anyone even care - but hey-ho, we're all different.
their self completely into their BB experience.
I have never understood why other people get so hung up on a HMs life outside of BB - why would anyone even care - but hey-ho, we're all different.
Originally Posted by Nigelk:
“...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?”
“...and your point is??
Are we not suppose to be voting who is entertaining in the house - not their lifestyle outside?”
I wouldn't mind if people were consistent in that view, but often I'll find that the people trotting out that line are the same ones who'll readily use outside info about a HM they dislike to portray them negatively. And they'll also bang on about morality when, as the OP points out, the people they're defending are hardly paragons of virtuous living.
Originally Posted by pepipop:
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
So we should discriminate on them because they have money? So no one with money should never be allowed on the show again?
What they do in their private lives is their business.
Originally Posted by pepipop:
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
So what, thats their choice, when they are in the house they are all equal, they won't be when they come out as one will be richer.
They're not the first HMs to have money. Rex was pretty well off and whether you liked him or not he gave full value as a housemate.
Originally Posted by previews:
“They're not the first HMs to have money. Rex was pretty well off and whether you liked him or not he gave full value as a housemate.”
“They're not the first HMs to have money. Rex was pretty well off and whether you liked him or not he gave full value as a housemate.”
He worked for a living though. Some of us admire industry. Dexter - I'm not sure what he does but I think he's a bit of an arse. He has his endearing moments but I think a lot of it is fake. Unlike Gina - where I think ALL of it is fake.
Originally Posted by previews:
“They're not the first HMs to have money. Rex was pretty well off and whether you liked him or not he gave full value as a housemate.”
“They're not the first HMs to have money. Rex was pretty well off and whether you liked him or not he gave full value as a housemate.”
Rex was cut from the same bullshit cloth
Originally Posted by Radical Joe:
“I wouldn't mind if people were consistent in that view, but often I'll find that the people trotting out that line are the same ones who'll readily use outside info about a HM they dislike to portray them negatively. And they'll also bang on about morality when, as the OP points out, the people they're defending are hardly paragons of virtuous living.”
“I wouldn't mind if people were consistent in that view, but often I'll find that the people trotting out that line are the same ones who'll readily use outside info about a HM they dislike to portray them negatively. And they'll also bang on about morality when, as the OP points out, the people they're defending are hardly paragons of virtuous living.”
Thank you, that was the point I was inferring in my OP.
Originally Posted by patsylimerick:
“He worked for a living though. Some of us admire industry. Dexter - I'm not sure what he does but I think he's a bit of an arse. He has his endearing moments but I think a lot of it is fake. Unlike Gina - where I think ALL of it is fake.”
“He worked for a living though. Some of us admire industry. Dexter - I'm not sure what he does but I think he's a bit of an arse. He has his endearing moments but I think a lot of it is fake. Unlike Gina - where I think ALL of it is fake.
”
I don't believe Gina is rich at all.
Originally Posted by Kasper69:
“I don't believe Gina is rich at all.”
“I don't believe Gina is rich at all.”
"she said she had a beautiful flat, we had to sleep on the matt"
Originally Posted by Radical Joe:
“I wouldn't mind if people were consistent in that view, but often I'll find that the people trotting out that line are the same ones who'll readily use outside info about a HM they dislike to portray them negatively. And they'll also bang on about morality when, as the OP points out, the people they're defending are hardly paragons of virtuous living.”
“I wouldn't mind if people were consistent in that view, but often I'll find that the people trotting out that line are the same ones who'll readily use outside info about a HM they dislike to portray them negatively. And they'll also bang on about morality when, as the OP points out, the people they're defending are hardly paragons of virtuous living.”
OK but I doubt you will find a post of mine mentioning their outside lifestyle. Do you have any idea of what Callum, Sophie or Sam gets up to outside the house? No? Me neither.
I couldn't care less about how they are on the outside world. It's what they do in the BB house that matters to me.
Originally Posted by ThaGazBoi:
“Isnt Sam second favourite?!”
“Isnt Sam second favourite?!”
He is according to the ch5 BB website poll/survey, 9,000 participants.
Originally Posted by pepipop:
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
Eh ?
So shall we vote on someone who has bored us sh*tless because they are poor then ?
Originally Posted by pepipop:
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
“17 women per month, a gambler, throws thousands of pounds away on drink/gambling and a hedonistic lifestyle. The other, lives (possibly because it's cheaper than paying servants) in a first class London hotel, does not work, shops most days of the week and parties, gets at least £10,000, tax free, income per month, i.e. the equivalent of a salary of a quarter of a million a year, £250,000.”
Also if you need to moan - have a go at BB for putting them in. Have a go at the viewers for putting them both on top on the polls week in week out (over 60% combined).. I am sure most of us have done something we are not proud of
1 of 3
