She didn't debate it. She called him a grumpy old bastard and immediately fled the room. This is what she does...attack and retreat. The same with all her rather unpleasant tweets, all done safely from a distance. Now if I saw her have a face to face debate with the Palestinians, the Muslims or ebola victims I might find some respect for her.

I don't buy the isolation quote as bullying because of the circumstances beforehand. However isolation can be used as a bullying technique.

So pick another example?
She is confrontational but again that doesn't mean she is a bully.

Yes she walked having muttered it under her breath. So what?! I've done that loads of times in my house! Does that make me a bully? She was happy to debate it with Keith when he followed her.

Would Katie's constant goading of Perez do you. She must have been in his ear nonstop for around 10mins, when he was sat by her on the sofa, and he was just yawning at her.

About Alicia, Hopkins said, "If she was smarter I'd leave her alone".

The goading of Nadia and Perez, where they said nothing, in the bedroom would be another example of bullying, in my view. The isolation and Katie's encouragement of others (Nadia and Alicia) to isolate Perez is typical of a bully in my opinion. She gets away because Nadia and Perez were deemed "acceptable" targets for whatever reason. Oh and apparently she's "witty".

And again in the Bedroom while he lay on his bed and she stood at the foot of it baiting and goading him.....

Hopkins is a goading type of person, you just have to shut her down quickly, and usually it's easier when you know something she doesn't.

Does it revert back to just as bad as each other though. If you are not happy with someone you think is a bully...to me doesn't make it acceptable for you to do the same.

Does it require will power to walk away when someone is kicking off? Absolutely but it can be done. She doesn't give Perez the chance to walk away though...how many times has she followed him around the house digging away at him.


I don't agree with any of those isolations either. Although i do believe the circumstances you listed in comparison to one woman encouraging about 10 others to isolate a grown man because she doesn't like him in a house where he can't get away from them (If he wants to get paid...I know he said he doesn't care about money but even I don't believe that. Rich people do care about money).

I can't condone Hopkins actions in any way here.





Virtual High 5's all round

So are we all excusing the circumstances that led up to the goading of Perez and the isolation request?

I will have to take each one of the above mentioned examples one by one..

I might even agree with you on some you never know..

I think she has used isolation as a bullying technique (I presume we're talking about Katie and Perez?) She also persistently hounded, goaded and insulted him in front of others.

She displayed most of what I have already described as bullying behaviour towards him. I appreciate that some people believe it was because Perez deserved it because of his previous behaviour, that she was doing it for a good reason (to get him to stop being annoying) etc. As annoying as Perez had been, I still viewed her attempts to ostracize him, as well as her attempts to hound anyone who went against her wishes to ostracize him as bullying, nasty behaviour - much more reflective of her character than the situation with Perez. I know others thought differently.

However the fact that she continues to show exactly the same mean spirited, childish behaviour towards Keith and Katie P (ie picking faults in them, bitching behind their backs to her clique about them to turn them against them, signalling for her clique members to leave them and go into another room, anouncing her plans to isolate them and encouraging others in the group to do the same) proves to me that this is the kind of person she is, this is the kind of thing she likes to do and Perez wasn't the exception to the rule, where allowances were made for her because they thought he was.

I think you mean 'moot'.

I'm behind the times re the forum so forgive me if I cover old ground but didn't Perez start this war of words with Katie Hopkins, he told everyone that didn't know her that she was the most hated person in Britain etc and then didn't he attack her first (quite aggressively) about her affair?
Didn't he then go on to pretty much alienate himself from everyone else with his constant childish attention seeking behaviour and using the rule book get people in to trouble with BB?
With that in mind isn't the best thing to do with a trouble making child ignore them and isn't that what she was saying to do?

Putting out a call to shun someone is not an opinion. It is victimisation. And I applaud the 'sensitive' people who know the difference

Expressing an opinion isn"t necessarily bullying but then behaving like an idiotic 5 year old isn"t bullying either.

See, I can accept a lot of what you're saying here. He does get in people's heads. That much is evident by the fact that none of them can stop talking about him even when he's shut in a room for two days. It's also demonstrated superbly by how Calum reacted in that clip from last night, where Perez just summed Callum up in a couple of sentences and Callum exploded in return.

He's a troll, there's no two ways about it.

But, so is Hopkins. And there are fundamental differences that make me appreciate Perez's trolling more than I do Hopkins'

Such as...

Motivation: My reading of Perez is that his motivation for winding people up, as far as I can tell, is to break through the walls of their pretence. He drops a little Perez-bomb that is a little too close to the bone for those fragile celebrity egos, many of which are just based on PR, sits back and allows them to reveal themselves in their reactions. Cases in point - Alex's ingrained homophobia. Callum's 'cool dude' veil.

On the flip-side you have Hopkins whose motivation appears to be... um... personal gain and or influence? Her 'brand'? One day to launch a political career? Marginalising easy targets so she can get more tax breaks? I don't know, you tell me.

One motivation is centred around exposing the inner workings of privileged celebrity bullshit PR personas, highlighting hypocrisy etc. One appears just to be mockery of marginalised groups ('but I'm funny' she bleats, unconvincingly)

Perez is undoubtedly a nightmare to live with. But that's exactly his brilliance in this particular context. I *hated* him with a passion in the first week or so. I've now warmed to him to the extent of wanting him to win. I've said before he's like some sick twisted genius and I stand by that, at least for the moment.

Sometimes we need troublemakers. Sometimes we need provocateurs. He's an evil but, I believe in this instance, a necessary evil.

Ouch! Touché

Yes. It isn't an opinion. And I don't believe it was bullying either. I didn't raise this issue as an opinion. Other posters did.

In this instance anyway.

I meant to edit the post!

No. But noone is saying he is a bully for behaving like a 5yr old. He did however manipulate a lot of HMs at the beginning. To get them out and rile them.

Katie has been consistently reacting to that since.

Did he? Or is that what Hopkins says?

I don't think he did.

I missed the post quoted immediately beneath mine . Fair enough

It's what a lot of them have said and it's even been shown.

I think with this situation Katie most probably taking the approach 'what's good for the goose is good for the gander'. She most probably believed in giving people a taste of their own medicine. Whether she took it too far eventually? As in it became tired. Maybe. But it wasn't bullying because of the context. Perez encourage it and gave it out just as much.

Yes they have ......I think Hopkins told them that though.

LOL and she somehow influenced what we've seen too.

Well I think she set that particular narrative both inside and outside the house TBH.