I think that this is a very good post.

The point is that the orchestrated campaign to isolate Perez is going on behind his back even when Perez is getting on with people. In fact it seems that when people try to influence others to isolate Perez it makes no difference how Perez is behaving at the time. Often some of them bring an argument to Perez and he is in his rights to defend himself, but then that is used as justification to isolate him.

No one deserves to be bullied after working at a Manchester secondary school most of my working life iv seen some awful things very violent at times and also as bad verbally and that's just the girls 😵
So I suppose that's the reason I don't like bullies tho at work I love the girls and help both bully and victim.Hopkins is no different to the girls in my office,sad really
I now changed career's 😊

no-one 'deserves' to be bullied.

but we all should be accountable to a due process around the way we behave and the impact of that on others.

the problem with bb is that they can't get away from him, and that the rules are being applied in an ad hoc manner which encourages / facilitates perez to basically dominate the house.

therefore people have to cope with him the best way they can, which is not always the 'right' way.

there are lots of real world examples of this, usually amongst communities on small islands.

That seems to be the case, she is older now but doesn't appear to have grown up and still has that teenage air about her where as she says things are back and white and she is allowed to be mean if she wants. Quite how she has got to her age and still thinks like that baffles me.

Yes, that's the problem when some try to seek justification for their behaviour.
It doesn't provide a solution or progress things forward. It just replicates and reinforces the very behaviour they claim that they are against.
It sends out the message that it's perfectly fine to treat people horribly if you want to as long as you can find a way to justify it.

The same intent or attitude is there. It's like secretly saying with a nod and a wink that bullying is okay. It's fine, you can justify it as long as you can find an excuse to do it.
Whether it's right or wrong is neither here nor there, all you need is an excuse and you have justified your own personal desire to bully somebody because it's been sanctioned and approved by a higher power and you've removed any responsibility for for your own personal actions.

The problem is your own desire and intent behind your own actions.
You're either the type of person who enjoys isolating somebody and making them feel miserable, or you aren't.

By the way if anybody disagrees with the use of the word 'bullying' which on this forum appears to be an impossibility within the BB house, then just replace it with some other word you are more comfortable with such as 'harrassment' or 'intimidation'.

Have you actually read my OP or just come to a conclusion based on the title?

NO ONE is being bullied it's just people trying to get others to hate the people they hate! For example Perez fans trying to get people to hate Katie Hopkins.

It's an insult to those who are being bullied to suggest that people in there are being bullied!

I know and I've read it. Sorry, it wasn't aimed at you. It was aimed at the people who actually say he does deserve to be bulled.

Maybe a straight up poll would have been enlightening, as we seem to be in 3 camps:

He is not being bullied.
He is on the receiving end of bullyish behaviour but it is justified because of his previous behavioir.
He is on the receiving end of bullyish behaviour which is unjustifiable.

I guess you have to use the word 'bullyish' because for some strange reason the BB house is the only place in Britain where the notion of anybody being bullied is a ludicrous proposition.

Anyone suffering from bullying? Then just apply to go into Big Brother because it's the one place where it can't possibly happen.

yes I chose bullyish deliberately because some people fail to understand that being on the receiving end of bullyish behavious is bullying!

You mean, walking around with a branch stuck down his shotts, deliberately provoking men like Alexander and Calum, behaving lewdly to the women in the house is the new improved Perez? I'd hate to have met him previously.

Yes it's tricky on this forum because it's the sort of word when used on here can be like a red rag to a bull.
I think you, like me, understand that it's more about the intent behind the action, rather than whether the person on the receiving end 'feels' like they're being bullied.

If somebody is described as 'giving as good as they get' and can make a fist of standing up to it, then the fact that somebody is probably bullying them is largely ignored.
If somebody is affected by it, then they are often described as either deserving it, or too weak and sensitive, or even worse 'playing the victim'.

I've even seen bullies on BB who know full what they're doing, but preempt how it might look to the viewers by actually stating "It's not bullying", or "I bet they'll go up to the diary room and cry, acting like they're being bullied". Which in both examples is very revealing about the thought process going on there.

So that means Perez is bullying Katie Hopkins and Katie is bullying Perez!

Accepted wisdom is that there are different levels of 'moral development'. In my opinion, anyone who feels that reciprocal bad behaviour is justified on the grounds that someone has 'deserved it', has not reached the pinnacle of moral development.

It's the same principle as wanting a 'justice' system versus wanting a 'vengeance' system. It seems to me that some posters are conflating 'justice' with two wrongs making a right or as a punishment. When the definition of 'justice' includes fairness, even-handedness, impartialness, lack of bias, objectivity, neutrality, disinterestedness, lack of prejudice, open-mindedness, non-partisanship.

Great post.
Says it all .

"Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively dominate others"

I don't think the treatment of Perez qualifies as bullying. You think of innocents getting bullied. Perez is no innocent as evidence by his 3, yes 3, warnings.

he brings it on himself and he give as good as he gets. He doesn't seem to act intimidated, not even contrite when pulled up by bb for his behavior. He and his "Perez Show" certainly haven't been dominated..

nor has he been the victim of coercion. Quiet the opposite .. by threatening to leave he was given a nomination pass and a free stay in a secret room by bb? Did the housemate decide that? Did you vote?

People here want to call it Bullying because he is out numbered. Well to bad, he is a nasty pig and most people in the house prefer not to kiss his ares like bb does

Rather childish way to behave but some of it was very funny, I would rather spend time with him than some of the others in there.

Callum and Alexander chose how they wanted to react to him if they had laughed it off it would have stopped him in his tracks.

Sure, and if a bully makes fun of you, and everyone laughs along with the bully while he taunts you, Im sure any reasonable person would realize they should just laugh at themselves along with everyone else to make it stop.

I wish I had written that post.

Does that mean Perez chooses to be upset and offended by KH?

A good point but isn't the whole point of BB that you meet and engage with vastly different types of people who you wouldn't ordinarily meet or be required to talk to or co-exist with. So not only have they signed up to do it but unlike the summer HM's they are being paid very large sums of money to do just that. So there is less excuse for pursuing a pattern of behaviour that leads to isolating one of their number.(Or which is bullying if you can see that before you)

Aww. We can share it if you like, especially cos your posts in this thread helped.

The ultimate Big Brother 'bully' is Big Brother himself.

Most discussion of 'bullying' conveniently ignores that angle because most people have an agenda to over-emphasise how the personalities of the HMs explain their behaviour.

Big Brother's 'bullying' falls into the category of situational factors but if you don't see how fundamentally Big Brother's actions (and the whole set-up of the show) provoke the behaviour of the HMs then you don't see much in my view.

That doesn't absolve HMs of responsibility or exempt them from criticism but it's a widely under-acknowledged mitigating factor.

Of course without Big Brother's 'bullying' there would be no show and the HMs all sign up for it.

Yes there is a distinct whiff of the school dorm about her to my mind.