• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Big Brother
Any disabled housemates ever? (merged)
<<
<
8 of 10
>>
>
smalltree
01-02-2005
i think the 'house' layout is okay as it is...very little needs adjusting..i don't think 'disabled' people would want to be 'fussed' around anymore than is neccessary...
also, 'those' who feel they have a good chance of coping are the 'ones' who are more likely to apply for entrance..
a 'post' in this thread has mentioned the "paraplegic/olympics" as an example which shows that 'disabled' people are capable of strengthening their weaknesses to become even stronger than what some sceptics may have thought not possible..
so really, i can't see the fuss..
as for the 'conspiracy' suspicion that there is an avoidance of adapting public areas/buildings for 'disabled' people,..i honestly don't think so..
loads already HAS been done to improve/refit particular areas, but to alter every 'space' in society will not happen overnight..it will take time..
there are plenty people who are ensuring 'this' happens thru civil campaign..
and just a thought for Channel4!...
'they' have pioneered the broadcasting and hosting of tv-productions that cater as much as possible for the wide and diverse areas of society/communities..and no doubt 'they' are bound to have "watchdogs" to keep check on the equality of 'their' service..
so go for 'it'...
little_dr_ted
01-02-2005
Originally Posted by Golden Virginia:
“
Originally Posted by Dany:
“I see you too have nothing constructive to add to add… Why is a discussion on disability prejudice on BB
so wrong? Or do you just feel that disability prejudice should not be challenged? This thread is for people who want to get to the bottom of the disability prejudice issue on BB. If it bores you, simply click somewhere else and take 10bellies and presshardy with you.”

You might see what I think ( ) but I can see my prosthetic limbs each night when I take them off to go to bed.

I don't see it as any reason why I should jump the que of BB, if I actually wanted to enter in the first place, I'm a person not a double amputee!.

Surely my personality should come first. If I was chosen for my 'story' I'd be offended.

So what part of disability prejudice do I not understand?”

i have just read back this thread from start to finish as i have an interest in the subject. i feel i must voice my concerns that dany never addressed the question put before him and golden virginia has re-iterated it twice with no response...it was predicted by presshardy that he would not answer it and would ignore it instead as he has never admitted to being wrong about anything or ever backed down. whilst dany has the right to not reply to anything if he does not want to i think dany is showing himself as rude and ignorant by not answering the question put to him or responding in any way
mikhail
01-02-2005
Originally Posted by Golden Virginia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dany
I see you too have nothing constructive to add to add… Why is a discussion on disability prejudice on BB
so wrong? Or do you just feel that disability prejudice should not be challenged? This thread is for people who want to get to the bottom of the disability prejudice issue on BB. If it bores you, simply click somewhere else and take 10bellies and presshardy with you.


You might see what I think ( ) but I can see my prosthetic limbs each night when I take them off to go to bed.

I don't see it as any reason why I should jump the que of BB, if I actually wanted to enter in the first place, I'm a person not a double amputee!.

Surely my personality should come first. If I was chosen for my 'story' I'd be offended.

So what part of disability prejudice do I not understand?


Whilst it is absolutely correct that you are a person and not (primarily) a double amputee and you wouldn't wish to be chosen for the latter reason, it does appear that hms are chosen on some sort of quota basis, gays, blacks ex-asylum-seekers etc. thus exposing the GBP to people they may not otherwise knowingly meet. Consequently the question of what other groups are not represented in the bb house does arise.
cel_001
01-02-2005
I also asked Dany a question (about page 4 i think) I wrote a post expressing my opinion. (I said at the end I didnt know anyone that is disabled and thus was not in a good position to judge,just merely adding my thoughts) He attacked my post saying I was using 'offensive' terminology and was totally wrong. Another poster, Vicky7 replied to my post in an eloquent manner and said why some of the stuff I had put was wrong-changing my opinion as I hadnt really thought it out from a disabled persons perspective. I thanked her for this. However Dany has a habit of jumping in and slating people and then not replying to questions generated from his/her irate responses to posts.

I would like to know which terminology he deems acceptable.
jojo the joyful
01-02-2005
I think this argument is going round in circles now because we have people all fighting for the same thing but from different corners.

Golden Virginia for example is saying that /his prosthesis should not be a valid reason to get him into the BB house because they are not him, they are just a mobility aid he uses, He is the person that should & would be chosen. ( & quite right)

Others are arguing that in built structural predudices are the reasons why that will not / has not happened. (which is possibly true in part even allowing for no vivid personalities to have emerged at interviews.)

And branching off from that others are saying how will we know that the producers have chosen a HM for them selves & not because of their disability, a hypothetical question to date.

Surely the fact that this thread exists is testement that we all basically agree that [ in the norm] people with a form of disability are treated differently by the media. & THAT is the issue we should be addressing, & not each other

Sorry lecture over
little_dr_ted
01-02-2005
dany felt she would rather respond via a pm

*admin edit* - please keep personal disputes off of the forum, if you have personal issues with another forum member please sort it out with them respectfully via private message.
presshardy
01-02-2005
*admin edit* - see above.
Last edited by presshardy : 02-02-2005 at 00:09
presshardy
02-02-2005
Originally Posted by little_dr_ted:
“dany felt she would rather respond via a pm

*admin edit* - please keep personal disputes off of the forum, if you have personal issues with another forum member please sort it out with them respectfully via private message.”

god forbid she might actually read them and double check what she reads in future before making accusations
mikhail
02-02-2005
A clue to why there are no disabled in any BB house might be that many HMs have felt they had to lie that they were bisexual to get in.
Dany
02-02-2005
Originally Posted by mikhail:
“A clue to why there are no disabled in any BB house might be that many HMs have felt they had to lie that they were bisexual to get in.”

That shouldn’t be problem; I know gay and bisexual people. If the criteria to go on BB is that you have to be bisexual or gay I will suggest that they audition.
EvilMeMeMe
02-02-2005
Originally Posted by mikhail:
“A clue to why there are no disabled in any BB house might be that many HMs have felt they had to lie that they were bisexual to get in.”

Surely you can be bisexual *and* disabled?
mikhail
02-02-2005
yeah, but they fear they might not get all the sexual activity they are so keen on. My point being, somewhat obscurely made I know, that if housemates think they have to say they are bi-sexual to up their chances of getting in as Endemol think there will be more chance of some "action" then they will think, there will be less chance of it from any disabled. As is clear I do not have a very high opinion of the aspirations or thinking powers of the organisers of BB.
Dany
02-02-2005
Originally Posted by mikhail:
“yeah, but they fear they might not get all the sexual activity they are so keen on. My point being, somewhat obscurely made I know, that if housemates think they have to say they are bi-sexual to up their chances of getting in as Endemol think there will be more chance of some "action" then they will think, there will be less chance of it from any disabled. As is clear I do not have a very high opinion of the aspirations or thinking powers of the organisers of BB.”


Why should Endemol think that there would be less chance of action from a disabled person?
presshardy
02-02-2005
Originally Posted by Dany:
“Why should Endemol think that there would be less chance of action from a disabled person?”

well i would have thought the same
dee19867
02-02-2005
edemol dont think that other countries have disabled housemates... its just the UK castings...
mikhail
02-02-2005
Originally Posted by Dany:
“Why should Endemol think that there would be less chance of action from a disabled person?”

Ah, that's just what I think Endomol might think!
jojo the joyful
02-02-2005
I don't think ( hoping) there is any danger in real life of any hanky panky on the show. (future shows)

Helen & Paul were sweet, Sophie & Lee are now married, Michelle & Stu by staying together have removed any taintedness attatched to their liasson & Jade is still a high prophile successful lady. ( No mention of PJ though) ~ so far.

So how can the excitement of a relationship, purely physical or other wise no matter between whom be unmissable TV ? :yawn:

If we are talking sex & BB HM, disabled or not, it is so last year ( yadda yadda darrrrlings ).

Or am I just past it ?
mikhail
02-02-2005
100% agree - now all you have to do is tell Endomol!
mitacond
03-02-2005
Originally Posted by baileybots:
“it wouldnt bother me either but i think that health and saftey might come into it some where, unless they totally kit the house out for the disabled”

Well and why not. It would show how BB has come up in the 'real' world. I agree with the H&S issue though, it would be a great idea though.
Kinkizoo
03-02-2005
Originally Posted by Dany:
“Why should Endemol think that there would be less chance of action from a disabled person?”

Ive never heard of a disabled person being called promiscuos (sp?) but i have heard of gay and bi being called it .. perhaps that could be at least one reason why
Dany
03-02-2005
Originally Posted by Kinkizoo:
“Ive never heard of a disabled person being called promiscuos (sp?) but i have heard of gay and bi being called it .. perhaps that could be at least one reason why”


If you have never heard of a disabled person being called promiscuous then you don’t know many disable people.


This myth about disable people not being promiscuous is anather reason why they need a disable housemate; then my be there will be less cases like the one in this article

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/columnists...04_index.shtml

“Almost five years ago, I first made my way into my local gay club. Anyone with a mobility impairment who's tried to access the gay scene in this country is now probably thinking, "Her local gay nightspot was accessible?!"
The Dot Cotton Club, held monthly at The Junction in Cambridge, filled me with high hopes. At the time it seemed logical to me that the promoters of a gay club would want to hold their night in an accessible venue. After all, gay people understand and experience discrimination, so it would make sense for them to be as welcoming as possible to members of their fold with mobility impairments, wouldn't it?
Of course, this haven for the disabled lesbian wasn't without its prejudiced clientele. I lost count of the number of times someone came up to me and said, "I think you're so brave and wonderful for going clubbing, even though you're in a wheelchair!"
My standard reply was, "Is there really anything brave and wonderful about wanting to get drunk and stick your tongue down someone else's throat?"
Seven months after that initial adventure into the world of gay clubs, I spent the summer travelling around the USA prior to moving to London to start university. The places I discovered led me to expect a lot from the gay clubs and bars back in London. For instance, even the smallest lesbian bars in Seattle had accessible toilets, while the 'super clubs' were, well, super!
Needless to say, when I started exploring what London had to offer, I was bitterly disappointed. One major gay club does offer free entry to wheelchair users and their friends (my personal record for number of people I've managed to get in free currently stands at 7), because the access is completely non-existent.
While I do have a very supportive group of friends who are always willing to help me in inaccessible environments, I hate having to rely on them. I'm very independent, and I love wandering off and meeting new people. Once, shortly after coming down to London, I went out with a group of friends but got chatting to some new people. My friends all went down to another floor, but I was happy where I was. In my drunken state, it took me a while to realise that I'd shooed all my friends downstairs and was now stuck on the top floor of a club with no way down. Take it from me - a drunken, sobbing wreck is never attractive.
Inaccessibility also makes going out on the pull very difficult. Five minutes after first snogging someone never really seems like the right time to say, "Oh, when we leave, you're going to need to carry my chair down the stairs." I guess the one entertaining perk about inaccessible clubs is limping back from the toilets to find all your friends dancing round your empty wheelchair like Essex Girls around a white handbag.
Somehow, London's entire gay scene seems to have managed to exempt itself from the DDA. I can think of only one accessible lesbian bar in the whole city, and even there youhave to whistle whilst weeing as there's no lock on the door of the disabled toilet for fire safety reasons (yes, the fire exit is in the crip bog). Most of the huge gay clubs don't own” their own venues and hold their nights in buildings often used as concert venues - all of them inaccessible.
So much for my optimism after that first excursion into the land of gay. Would these clubs consider moving to a new venue to adjust their service to make it accessible? I doubt it. It would probably be 'unreasonable' to inconvenience such a high number of non-disabled clubbers.
I went to Manchester a few months ago for a friend's birthday, and a bunch of us hit Canal Street (a group of gay boys with the two women - how very Queer As Folk). Imagine my surprise when on our way to our first bar, my friend casually mentioned that it was accessible. Before I'd even seen inside the place I was planning my move up to Manchester, away from London and it's pure inaccessibility.
But then we got to the door of the club. "The lift's not working," said the surly female bouncer. She failed to mention that the doors to the lift on both floors had been blocked thanks to their not-so-clever furniture arranging.
"Oh, never mind," I volunteered. "Ny friends will help me." And in we went.
"Where are the toilets?" I shouted at my friend over the noise of cheesy, mid-nineties Europop.
"There!" he responded, pointing at a door bearing the universal symbol for 'cripple'.
A disabled toilet? In a gay club in a big British city?
Sure enough, it was too good to be true. A member of staff had to find the key for the door, and I made the discovery that the door wouldn't lock from the inside. To add insult to a full bladder, the toilet had no seat either. What is the point of installing the facilities to make your building DDA compliant, only to keep them so poorly serviced that your premises are still unwelcoming to disabled people? Tsk. Anyone would think they were trying to stay on the right side of the law whilst keeping those unsightly disabled people out of their bar or something.
presshardy
03-02-2005
Originally Posted by Dany:
“If you have never heard of a disabled person being called promiscuous then you don’t know many disable people.


This myth about disable people not being promiscuous is anather reason why they need a disable housemate; then my be there will be less cases like the one in this article

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/columnists...04_index.shtml
”

so your saying BB should have a disabled housemate for reasons other than that person is right for the show. i agree that to educate people about disabled people is a good thing but why does endemol have to do it? surely the only reason a disabled contestant should be on BB ( which is an entertainment game show not a public service announcement) would be if they had the right personality for the show and can bring something to the show. the same goes for non-disabled people. that way its fair and non-patronising.
Kinkizoo
03-02-2005
You are right Dany, I don't know many disabled people, but i do have 2 very good friends, both confined to wheelchairs, both in long term stable relationships. They would both be offended at the suggestion that they are/or are seen to be promiscuos as your last post implies.
Dany
03-02-2005
Originally Posted by Kinkizoo:
“You are right Dany, I don't know many disabled people, but i do have 2 very good friends, both confined to wheelchairs, both in long term stable relationships. They would both be offended at the suggestion that they are/or are seen to be promiscuos as your last post implies.”

We are all individuals - I have some very good friends, who are disabled , all of whom are young and single. They would all be offended at the suggestion that they are not seen to be promiscuous as your last post implies. In contrast I have non-disabled friends in long term stable relationships. Who would be offended at the suggestion that they are seen to be promiscuous

I have epilepsy and I am not very promiscuous but a friend of mine, who also has epilepsy, is the complete opposite.

The point being that just because you have never heard of a disabled person being called promiscuous it does not mean that promiscuous disable people do not exist. So it can not be used as a reason for ‘Why Endemol should think that there would be less chance of action from a disabled person?’
Kinkizoo
03-02-2005
so tell me .. what were you saying previous about disabled people and myths? If you can't scroll through your lengthy copy/paste .. presshardy quoted you
<<
<
8 of 10
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map