It isn't a question of "is he allowed beliefs", he said it on national TV and is surely aware that is wrong?
Results:were BB right to warn Evander ?
yes
15 (41.67%)
no
21 (58.33%)
Voters: 36. You can't vote on this poll right now - are you signed in?
were BB right to warn Eveander ?
2 of 13
Originally Posted by Matthew_Waller:
“It was just a warning.”
“It was just a warning.”
Exactly. It's not like he's been arrested.
His opinion that homosexuality is wrong, based on his religion is an opinion he should be allowed to express, whether we agree with him or not.
But his opinion that homosexuality is a choice, rather than something you are born with, is more offensive I think, because it's a very outdated view.
I think BB were right to remind him that he is on a TV show and that no conversation is private.
He's a big strong tough sportsman. You don't often associate them with understanding of different sexualities.
But his opinion that homosexuality is a choice, rather than something you are born with, is more offensive I think, because it's a very outdated view.
I think BB were right to remind him that he is on a TV show and that no conversation is private.
He's a big strong tough sportsman. You don't often associate them with understanding of different sexualities.
Although punishing people for their "thoughts" is in keeping with the Big Brother theme, I felt the warning was unjust and I cant see why so many are clamouring to have free speech stifled.
As long as Evander Holyfield doesn't actually discriminate against anyone, what difference does it make what he thinks?
As long as Evander Holyfield doesn't actually discriminate against anyone, what difference does it make what he thinks?
I'd say no. People find all kinds of things offensive and Lionel even went to the diary room about being offended but the girl didn't get warned for that. They have deliberately picked people who have controversial views about various things and if they're going to threaten everyone who expresses an opinion that could cause offense they may aswell scrap the series.
Originally Posted by TrishF:
“Change the topic to 'black' and now give your answer”
“Change the topic to 'black' and now give your answer”
Evander is black, so exactly where can we go with this
It's not so much that he said he thinks it's wrong. That's his religious view and fair enough. HOWEVER. The line is drawn when someone starts saying that gay people can be cured or fixed. THAT is what made his comments wrong.
Well yeah he needed to be warned an if he hadn't he could've brought up a heated debate. I'm just glad none of the other housemates were there it'd could've been big heated debate.
Originally Posted by C14E:
“Well yes, they were right. Not in a moral sense - he's entitled to his rather outdated views - but because this is what they have to do now.
In the past they would have argued that Luisa provided context to the discussion and flagged up his controversial views. But when they used that argument in the race row (other housemates expressed their views that Jade was wrong) it didn't satisfy OFCOM. Hence why an apology given by Evander the next day was edited into the show immediately after the incident (because OFCOM require the context to be in the same show).
It's all ridiculous of course - OFCOM are no longer satisfied with two sides of an argument. They now expect the broadcaster to ensure that their audience "know" right from wrong (as determined by OFCOM!).”
“Well yes, they were right. Not in a moral sense - he's entitled to his rather outdated views - but because this is what they have to do now.
In the past they would have argued that Luisa provided context to the discussion and flagged up his controversial views. But when they used that argument in the race row (other housemates expressed their views that Jade was wrong) it didn't satisfy OFCOM. Hence why an apology given by Evander the next day was edited into the show immediately after the incident (because OFCOM require the context to be in the same show).
It's all ridiculous of course - OFCOM are no longer satisfied with two sides of an argument. They now expect the broadcaster to ensure that their audience "know" right from wrong (as determined by OFCOM!).”
Agree with this. I've actually disagreed with almost every warning ever given on BB in the last few years. It seems they are so obsessed with getting their wrists slapped when 3 people call OFCOM to complain that they go way OTT with not allowing HMs to voice opinions just in case someone watching might get offended.
Originally Posted by missfrankiecat:
“What nonsense. He expressed an unpopular view but one that is widely held by religious people - Evangelical Christians, Muslims and Orthodox Jews - and which it is not illegal to hold or express. It may offend but so will a lot of things already said and done by others in the house. What has happened to freedom of expression?”
“What nonsense. He expressed an unpopular view but one that is widely held by religious people - Evangelical Christians, Muslims and Orthodox Jews - and which it is not illegal to hold or express. It may offend but so will a lot of things already said and done by others in the house. What has happened to freedom of expression?”
And it is illegal in 83 countries around the world
Originally Posted by mysty211:
“Well yeah he needed to be warned an if he hadn't he could've brought up a heated debate. I'm just glad none of the other housemates were there it'd could've been big heated debate.”
“Well yeah he needed to be warned an if he hadn't he could've brought up a heated debate. I'm just glad none of the other housemates were there it'd could've been big heated debate.”
But what's wrong with someones views provoking debate? Surely a frank and forthright exchange of views that evolves naturally is something most of us would like to see in BB?
As someone above has said, it's also the fact he said it's a choice. It's not a choice. I speak from experience. It's not right for someone to express that as an opinion because it IS offensive. Along with saying you can be fixed. I don't need fixing, there's nothing wrong with me. If he had just said he believes it's wrong because it goes against his religion then we wouldn't be in this position right now because that's a religious belief and it's fair enough. But you can't go around telling people that homosexuality is a choice and that it can be fixed.
Originally Posted by ucra girl:
“And it is illegal in 83 countries around the world”
“And it is illegal in 83 countries around the world
”
83 ? I guess you really do learn something new everyday!
Wrong, because clearly they would rather people lied than be honest in their opinions, but right to avoid the inevitable complaints, which is a bit hypocritical, if they are worried about offending some viewers they shouldn't transmit stuff they think will offend.
Still the Ofcom devotees will be delighted, at last they have something to be outraged about, and it is only day 3 of the show.
Still the Ofcom devotees will be delighted, at last they have something to be outraged about, and it is only day 3 of the show.
I understand it's a sensitive subject matter, but I don't think he should have been warned. One of the reasons archaic views such as his persist is because open dialogue about topics like homosexuality is disparaged. If it can't be discussed, then people are going to adhere to what they've been exposed to and religious doctrine. And you can't really fault a person if that's the case. I think it's foolhardy of Big Brother to make such a subject off limits thereby dismissing an opportunity to educate.
Originally Posted by paralax:
“Wrong, because clearly they would rather people lied than be honest in their opinions, but right to avoid the inevitable complaints, which is a bit hypocritical, if they are worried about offending some viewers they shouldn't transmit stuff they think will offend.
Still the Ofcom devotees will be delighted, at last they have something to be outraged about, and it is only day 3 of the show.”
“Wrong, because clearly they would rather people lied than be honest in their opinions, but right to avoid the inevitable complaints, which is a bit hypocritical, if they are worried about offending some viewers they shouldn't transmit stuff they think will offend.
Still the Ofcom devotees will be delighted, at last they have something to be outraged about, and it is only day 3 of the show.”
Or perhaps instead of lying about their opinions they could just keep them to themselves? He could have just said that he doesn't believe it to be the right way because of his religious beliefs. It went over the line when he said it was a choice and that it can be fixed.
It's laughable to warn someone for expressing "inappropriate views" and then go on to air them. However they've done this before a few times now. I'm surprised the glaring hypocrisy and contradiction isn't immediately spotted.
Originally Posted by SpiritedAway:
“I understand it's a sensitive subject matter, but I don't think he should have been warned. One of the reasons archaic views such as his persist is because open dialogue about topics like homosexuality is disparaged. If it can't be discussed, then people are going to adhere to what they've been exposed to and religious doctrine. And you can't really fault a person if that's the case. I think it's foolhardy of Big Brother to make such a subject off limits thereby dismissing an opportunity to educate.”
“I understand it's a sensitive subject matter, but I don't think he should have been warned. One of the reasons archaic views such as his persist is because open dialogue about topics like homosexuality is disparaged. If it can't be discussed, then people are going to adhere to what they've been exposed to and religious doctrine. And you can't really fault a person if that's the case. I think it's foolhardy of Big Brother to make such a subject off limits thereby dismissing an opportunity to educate.”
I agree with this.
Perhaps it would be better if BB had a disclaimer and warning at the beginning of all their shows that everything and everyone on the show will offend someone or another and if therefore easily offended then turn the tv over or switch off.
Originally Posted by SpiritedAway:
“I understand it's a sensitive subject matter, but I don't think he should have been warned. One of the reasons archaic views such as his persist is because open dialogue about topics like homosexuality is disparaged. If it can't be discussed, then people are going to adhere to what they've been exposed to and religious doctrine. And you can't really fault a person if that's the case. I think it's foolhardy of Big Brother to make such a subject off limits thereby dismissing an opportunity to educate.”
“I understand it's a sensitive subject matter, but I don't think he should have been warned. One of the reasons archaic views such as his persist is because open dialogue about topics like homosexuality is disparaged. If it can't be discussed, then people are going to adhere to what they've been exposed to and religious doctrine. And you can't really fault a person if that's the case. I think it's foolhardy of Big Brother to make such a subject off limits thereby dismissing an opportunity to educate.”
Completely agree with this.
Originally Posted by Sugar Ape:
“It's laughable to warn someone for expressing "inappropriate views" and then go on to air them. However they've done this before a few times now. I'm surprised the glaring hypocrisy and contradiction isn't immediately spotted.”
“It's laughable to warn someone for expressing "inappropriate views" and then go on to air them. However they've done this before a few times now. I'm surprised the glaring hypocrisy and contradiction isn't immediately spotted.”
I think people are too busy getting in a flap to realize that bit was cherry picked to get them talking.
2 of 13
