and don't she just love reminding us all of them !

I quite likes her warts and all.

Dear, Channel 5 Big Brother cleared Lauren Harries...

I thought Jasmine was the one playing victim.

I don't think she expects special treatment at all. I am not sure why she is doing it - perhaps the fount of inspiration is running dry, as it clearly does from time to time; she must have reverted to the cruel Nirpal as the day's topic about 50 billion times.

I am not convinced that Luisa is nearly as successful as she pretends, but Liz is a lot more successful than she pretends. During the period when she wrote in desperate grief about being too poor to buy food, inspiring pensioners to send her ten quid from their state pension to help out, she had just had (I think this is right) a £10,000 bat house put on her huge country house.

The question of where Liz ends and "Liz" begins is genuinely fascinating. I do honestly think that "the rock star" was pure invention, but the question is did she care whether the readers believed in him or not? And the Jo Yates piece which she made all about her - surely she didn't deliberately turn a column about a recently murdered young woman into a national joke?

My best guess is that she really is astonishingly self-absorbed, to an extent that she is blind to everyone else for a lot of the time; but she isn't deliberately cruel or spiteful as so many of the Mail's columnists are. She will write a lot of ridiculous bollocks about the horrors of children and why they shouldn't be allowed anywhere, but it won't be Liz you find making vindictive remarks about named individuals like the odious Amanda Platell.

Warts! Liz wouldn't amit to those.

I don't mind people being overly negative, I think someone's got to do it as life pretty much sucks when you think about it. I have days where I'm like that but I tend to keep it to myself.

Though I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place with Liz. I find her amusing and therefore want her to stay, but she also claims to want to go and I don't really know much about her to know if her mental state can take a long stay in the house. Especially if she really has checked out of there already. Sometimes she just sits there like she's counting down the hours hoping it goes as quickly as possible, but I even find that amusing.

She's needs to go .

She seems very honest about her failings. If I had all her problems I wouldn't want to go on a tv reality show and mention them! That's gong to make her even more self-absorbed! LOL She seems to have nice nature, though and I'm guessing her writing (in the Daily Mail You magazine and the stuff she does) is a bit of an act.

I've just realized, looking at the thread title, that Liz is a rare example of someone who is literally a professional victim. She has earned hundreds of thousands of pounds writing about her anorexia, lack of confidence, deafness, poverty, trouble with sick animals, further trouble with every other human being in the world, ill-fortune in having a mother who refuses to die when needed etc. Not only a professional, but an outstandingly good one. Perhaps she could start running seminars in 'make money out of victimhood'.

The way you put it there makes her out to be a conwoman in as much as she is not really damaged but milking it......when one only has to see her now in BB to see that she is indeed.

Not sure I agree. It's very odd that she can come across, for such a 'broken' creature, so bullishly when she wants to in interviews when questioned about things she's written; glossing glibly over them; twisting things to mean one thing despite written evidence to the contrary; dismissing the fuss as generated by personal dislike of her (poor me); protesting that she's been misunderstood (poor me, again); or even denying them completely. She takes no responsibility for her spite, her unreasonableness, her rudeness, her dismissal of people whose lives she despises and/or resents.

Is that self-absorption or is it someone very cunning and calculated?

She may not be a Moir or a Platell but she has her own brand of self-serving nastiness that's just as offensive as anything the former come out with.

It'll be interesting to see what she does with her CBB experience. I wonder if tonights nomination reasons (poor sad me, again) are a hint about the direction her 'tell-all' will take.

She has done some that were tied in to the promotion for her book launch. The book didn't sell very well so some of her advance will have to go back. Probably why she's on CBB now.

I am looking forward to reading her take on them all, lets not forget that the others will all get their say in the rags when its all over so why shouldn't she.

I never suggested otherwise.

Being a journalist with a DM column, it would be quite astonishing if she didn't.

Liz saying women such as Holly Willoughby were "the ultimate playground bullies" doesn't quite fit the picture you're painting.

Has she expected special treatment?

One tends to wonder if her caustic comments about people in her articles, will be viewed quite the same. Knowing her personality makes it all rather sad now.

I don't know if she's just taking the pi*s via a certain type of humour or if she really is that self deprecating. Either way I wouldn't miss her if she left, or Jim, Jasmine or Luisa for that matter either. Happily see a double eviction this week with Liz and one of the other three going.

I like her.

She doesn't seem to know how to connect with people very well - probably due to all her eating problems and psych ward encounters over the last 20 years.

She's my favourite in there. Easily.

She didn't say anything bad about Holly in the present, she suggested that previously Holly Willoughby would of been a playground bully - which is quite possible.

That's alright then. Let's all accuse others of anything we like, because everything is quite possible.

Wonkeydonkey, how dare you suggest that Liz blew £10,000 on a bat sanctuary, it was of course her usual small change of £26,000. For those that don’t know anything about Liz the article below might be a good place to start.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...#ixzz2qMqS10PK

I'm not so sure she's a professional victim. She has been/is extremely successful in her field. I don't think you get to be editor of a magazine like Marie Claire by seriously being a professional victim. She appears genuinely uncomfortable with human interaction, yet is assertive and confident enough to put across her point of view on anything she feels strongly about.

I don't feel she actively sets out to play the victim, but may use it as a form of self depreciation in order to appear nonthreatening and to keep others at arms length. She would rather be left to watch from the shadows as she obviously greatly fears emotional intimacy. She clearly has problems but I don't see much of the poor me attitude you usually see with professional victims. She doesn't seem to be seeking any sympathy as a 'victim' would, as for her that would invite face to face attention in the house - something she clearly avoids.

I see her as more of an emotional masochist than a professional victim. She seeks pain rather than sympathy and the attention that would bring. She is intelligent and capable enough to remove herself from most of the situations that reinforce her self loathing as far as her body image is concerned, so why doesn't she? Instead she opts for men/careers that seem designed to bring her the most pain.
She could choose to have a career working with animals, or with her skills and contacts she could write a whole host of 'animal' type books that I'm sure would earn her a very decent living. I'm sure she could also find a partner that would treat her well.

I find her quite intriguing and full of contradictions. I cannot help but warm to her even though I'd like to give her a damn good shake