When I read the OP, it's written in Perez' voice, surely that means he's not guilty?
I complained to Ofcom tonight for the first time
3 of 7
”
Originally Posted by SegaGamer:
“How is he correct ? no rules of tv have been broken so there is no reason to complain. OFCOM must laugh at BB fans.”
“How is he correct ? no rules of tv have been broken so there is no reason to complain. OFCOM must laugh at BB fans.”
He's correct in ways that most of the posters on here can't see. The reason they can't see it is because they came on here to jeer and criticise rather than to see someone else's point of view. They don't like that someone wants to take their candy away because it might rot their teeth. I don't care myself because I think their teeth are already rotten. I don't expect many people on here to understand what I'm talking about either, for that matter.
Originally Posted by Joni M:
“And when BB asked Hopkins if she was bothered, guess what?
She said NO.”
“And when BB asked Hopkins if she was bothered, guess what?
She said NO.”
Owned the OP
Originally Posted by Jejade05:
“Stuart I agree with you But Perez will be kept in so don't bother voting people. As for Open Heart why did you say that Stuart complained because Perez is gay? I think licking someone's face it as bad as spitting, she could catch whatever he's got and I hate to think about that.”
“Stuart I agree with you But Perez will be kept in so don't bother voting people. As for Open Heart why did you say that Stuart complained because Perez is gay? I think licking someone's face it as bad as spitting, she could catch whatever he's got and I hate to think about that.”
Okaaaaay, and what is it that Perez has got then?
Originally Posted by Joni M:
“And when BB asked Hopkins if she was bothered, guess what?
She said NO.”
“And when BB asked Hopkins if she was bothered, guess what?
She said NO.”
Perspective! Thank you!
Guess Stuart1000 didn't hear Perez ask for a truce that night with her..."one night of fun"...what he did, he did playfully and she wasn't seriously outraged so let's get it in proportion yeah?
Originally Posted by Silent Scream:
“My advice to you is to open your window and yell 'IT'S NOT FAIR' at all your neighbours and stamp your feet as loud as you can.
If that doesn't sort Perez out, I don't know what will.”
“My advice to you is to open your window and yell 'IT'S NOT FAIR' at all your neighbours and stamp your feet as loud as you can.
If that doesn't sort Perez out, I don't know what will.”
You sound like Ed Milliband.... Its not fair.... LOL
Originally Posted by Joni M:
“And when BB asked Hopkins if she was bothered, guess what?
She said NO.”
“And when BB asked Hopkins if she was bothered, guess what?
She said NO.”
But that was afterwards, you are meant to get consent BEFORE. Otherwise anybody could do anything and claim that the person wouldn't mind.
Originally Posted by diva_moon:
“He's correct in ways that most of the posters on here can't see. The reason they can't see it is because they came on here to jeer and criticise rather than to see someone else's point of view. They don't like that someone wants to take their candy away because it might rot their teeth. I don't care myself because I think their teeth are already rotten. I don't expect many people on here to understand what I'm talking about either, for that matter.”
“He's correct in ways that most of the posters on here can't see. The reason they can't see it is because they came on here to jeer and criticise rather than to see someone else's point of view. They don't like that someone wants to take their candy away because it might rot their teeth. I don't care myself because I think their teeth are already rotten. I don't expect many people on here to understand what I'm talking about either, for that matter.”
I totally get it diva and Stuarts point of view is as valid as everyone else on this forum
Originally Posted by nomad2king:
“But that was afterwards, you are meant to get consent BEFORE. Otherwise anybody could do anything and claim that the person wouldn't mind.”
“But that was afterwards, you are meant to get consent BEFORE. Otherwise anybody could do anything and claim that the person wouldn't mind.”
I'm aware of the semantics in this individual situation, and as she was playing chase, I think it's fair that her lack of objections were accepted.
Originally Posted by tomorrow:
“Stuart does have a point though ... if it had been any other HM than Perez .. action would have been taken by BB”
“Stuart does have a point though ... if it had been any other HM than Perez .. action would have been taken by BB”
And, if it had been any other HM than Katie H action would have been taken by BB for her pushing her face into Perez's
Originally Posted by nomad2king:
“But that was afterwards, you are meant to get consent BEFORE. Otherwise anybody could do anything and claim that the person wouldn't mind.”
“But that was afterwards, you are meant to get consent BEFORE. Otherwise anybody could do anything and claim that the person wouldn't mind.”
Consent 
Did you feel there was sexual chemistry too 
Originally Posted by Stuart1000:
“Perez's behaviour is out of control yet we haven't seen him receive a formal warning for it. Through giving him so much airtime, Channel 5 are justifying his behaviour and, as such, condoning it.
Tonight's episode was the last straw. When he tried to lick Katie Hopkins, she said no. When he chased her around the garden trying to kiss her, she said no. When she was talking to him, he tried to lick her again, she said no and moved away. Now, let's put 2 different housemates in the situation. Let's say Calum tried to repeatedly lick Cami against her consent. Or Ken chased Chloe around the garden in pursuit of a kiss. Both of those housemates would either be warned for their behaviour or removed from the house. Why has that not happened with Perez?
By giving Perez a disproportionate amount of airtime, Channel 5 have effectively condoned his behaviour. His behaviour is upsetting the majority of fellow housemates and many viewers. Channel 5 need to be seen to be acting on this.”
“Perez's behaviour is out of control yet we haven't seen him receive a formal warning for it. Through giving him so much airtime, Channel 5 are justifying his behaviour and, as such, condoning it.
Tonight's episode was the last straw. When he tried to lick Katie Hopkins, she said no. When he chased her around the garden trying to kiss her, she said no. When she was talking to him, he tried to lick her again, she said no and moved away. Now, let's put 2 different housemates in the situation. Let's say Calum tried to repeatedly lick Cami against her consent. Or Ken chased Chloe around the garden in pursuit of a kiss. Both of those housemates would either be warned for their behaviour or removed from the house. Why has that not happened with Perez?
By giving Perez a disproportionate amount of airtime, Channel 5 have effectively condoned his behaviour. His behaviour is upsetting the majority of fellow housemates and many viewers. Channel 5 need to be seen to be acting on this.”
If you aren't joking I feel quite sorry for you
She said 'don't lick me again'.
He said 'then don't put your face so close to mine'
she said something along the lines of i'lldo what I want.
He said if you put it close enough that I can lick you then I will
She proceeded to continue putting her face in his face.
That's consent pretty much. He told her he would lick her if she did and she did...
He said 'then don't put your face so close to mine'
she said something along the lines of i'lldo what I want.
He said if you put it close enough that I can lick you then I will
She proceeded to continue putting her face in his face.
That's consent pretty much. He told her he would lick her if she did and she did...
Originally Posted by savvychels:
“She said 'don't lick me again'.
He said 'then don't put your face so close to mine'
she said something along the lines of i'lldo what I want.
He said if you put it close enough that I can lick you then I will
She proceeded to continue putting her face in his face.
That's consent pretty much. He told her he would lick her if she did and she did...”
“She said 'don't lick me again'.
He said 'then don't put your face so close to mine'
she said something along the lines of i'lldo what I want.
He said if you put it close enough that I can lick you then I will
She proceeded to continue putting her face in his face.
That's consent pretty much. He told her he would lick her if she did and she did...”
She wanted it really
Originally Posted by savvychels:
“She knew it was good TV.”
“She knew it was good TV.”
Yup
If you can't beat it, join it. The its were added courtesy of Michelle Visage #LGBT
Originally Posted by trevor tiger:
“Yup If you can't beat it, join it. The its were added courtesy of Michelle Visage #LGBT ”
“Yup
If you can't beat it, join it. The its were added courtesy of Michelle Visage #LGBT ”
bib
Originally Posted by liamgetg:
“If that's the first thing in the whole history of BB that's made you complain. Then 😄😄😄”
“If that's the first thing in the whole history of BB that's made you complain. Then 😄😄😄”
My thoughts exactly
3 of 7
