She always disses men, doesn't treat her body with respect and enjoys arguing with them and putting them down .. In my opinion anyway.

We all hate misogyny and male chauvinism (she most certainly does) but how does speaking about men and disrespecting them like that be any better? Actually she disrespects everyone even herself!

Perhaps I am wrong, it is just my opinion. I hope her daughter is being encouraged not to watch mummy on tv!

Oh god. A sexually confident woman who doesn't give out simpering bs is a misandrist in your eyes?

What does "treating her body with respect" have to do with misandry?

The OP clearly has no idea what she's talking about.

Going by the evidence, quite the opposite I would have thought.

Why would her not "treating her body with respect" make her a misandrist?

'Sexually confident'? Is that what they call women who sleep around a lot in PC land these days?

Her obvious dislike for her own species to me is evident the way she treats men and portrays the female form. Perhaps it is because she doesn't like herself much . I can't stand the way she behavest especially around the other girls. Sorry if I didn't make myself understandable first time round. I just think she is vile!

I keep hearing this phrase "sexually confident" in regard to Luisa.

It kind of suggests that one must be lacking in sexual confidence if they're not promiscuous.

I'm sure there are plenty of women who are in monogamous relationships and feel perfectly confident in their sexuality.

I'm not sure equating promiscuity with confidence is actually very accurate.

Oh please If a woman having consensual sex with multiple people is truly so offensive to you then you need to get out more.

Is labelling someone 'politically correct' the new 'you're a Nazi'? It seems like whenever anyone wants to 'win' an argument nowadays, they just have to cry "It's political correctness gone mad, I tell you!" and then they can sit back smugly as if they've said something of value.

I never said people who are monogomous aren't sexually confident.

Luisa is sexually confident because she does what makes her happy in bed and doesn't let people's opinions stop her. A monogomous person can be sexually confident too - if they're doing what makes them happy in bed, even if it's having sex through a hole in a bedsheet, then they're sexually confident.

A sexually unconfident person is afraid to make themself happy because of what other people will think, won't stand up for themselves and lets people take advantage of them.

This says more about your prejudices than it does about mine. Where did I state or imply that I found the concept offensive? I was just pointing out the tendency to sugar coat concepts to make the more palatable. If it is so acceptable for a woman to sleep around then why is it so offensive to state it in plain English?

It amuses me (well it doesn't really) that a lot of posters on here dig out terminology and psychobabble for everything and everyone in BB. People are described as mysoginists, passive agressive, sociopathic etc. etc.

It is invariably used incorrectly and IMO quite unnecessary. I find it far more interesting debating BB with plain everyday language.

Jasmine was being a hypocrite when calling Dappy "sexist" to Luisa, saying that women were somehow "better" than men-the hypocrisy we men have to deal with these days! Both Dappy and Luisa were wrong, she is too promiscous, while he is not very articulate at arguing, and made a fool of himself.

I actually find the cry of "politically correct" really useful because it immediately identifies the poster as a Daily Mail reader and to be disregarded

Nor is equating it with immorality, which I've seen far more of on here tonight.

Again, someone who wants to play the man and not the ball. Why, if it is so acceptable for a woman to sleep around these days, is it so difficult to state it without making up some phrase for it that sounds so much more virtuous?

But what we know wouldn't support your view. We know that Lusia has sought therapy for sex addiction. A person who is simply doing what makes them happy wouldn't feel the need to seek help.

And I said it "implies", when citing Lusia as an example of a "sexually confident woman" (a number of times I've read that on this forum) that the opposite of someone with Luisa's lifestyle would be on the other end of the spectrum of confidence.

An implication.. and obviously one that is false and I felt needed stating.

So we must all make sure we aren't letting misogyny figure in our opinions.

I haven't seen tonights HL show yet but from what I've seen of Luisa she appears to be the only woman, in fact the only person, in the house who has the guts to stand up to these so called men and challenge them about their behaviour and unreasonable attitudes .

These neanderthal guys like Jim, Dappy, Evander have probably never been challenged like this before, especially not by a woman, and of course they don't like it.

I'm very fond of Polite Courtesy, where is this land?

This. End of.

Interesting that you single out women and not both sexes.

To answer your question, it's acceptable since around the time that people won their civil rights, which allow them to have consensual sex with whomever and however many people they like. If peculiar moral guardians want to call those people names, they're also free to do so, but they can expect to be called names back.

I'd agree that equating promiscuity with immorality isn't correct per se, but they're not mutually exclusive due to the many complications that can arise. After all we are social beings and tend to be monogamous and as a case in point, look at all the "upset" that Lee has caused.

It's often complex and messy and my personal view is that promiscuity is an ideal and doesn't translate well into reality. Hence my caution of describing it only with such wholly positive words such as "confidence".