I found Michelle utterly insincere. She treats "the LBGT community" like a fashion accessory. She seems to have this incredibly patronising and narrow view of who and what they might be, and how the world actually is. Her children seem to be another fashion accessory. They are at the tender age when they need their mother, yet she isn't planning to see them for months. At times it seemed to me that she brought them up in conversation as proof that she's a straight woman, to make her seem all the more wonderful for her support of "the gays, the freaks, the misfits".. Ugh! Just UGH!
Michelle and "her" gays
1 of 3
Originally Posted by Flora_McDonald:
“I found Michelle utterly insincere. She treats "the LBGT community" like a fashion accessory. She seems to have this incredibly patronising and narrow view of who and what they might be, and how the world actually is. Her children seem to be another fashion accessory. They are at the tender age when they need their mother, yet she isn't planning to see them for months. At times it seemed to me that she brought them up in conversation as proof that she's a straight woman, to make her seem all the more wonderful for her support of "the gays, the freaks, the misfits".. Ugh! Just UGH!”
“I found Michelle utterly insincere. She treats "the LBGT community" like a fashion accessory. She seems to have this incredibly patronising and narrow view of who and what they might be, and how the world actually is. Her children seem to be another fashion accessory. They are at the tender age when they need their mother, yet she isn't planning to see them for months. At times it seemed to me that she brought them up in conversation as proof that she's a straight woman, to make her seem all the more wonderful for her support of "the gays, the freaks, the misfits".. Ugh! Just UGH!”
I had absolutely no time for Michelle once she allied herself to Katie Gobshite but really?
Her kids were with their father and perfectly fine as far as we know - you do realise that there are millions of female service personnel who have to leave their children for months on end whilst they're on active duty, don't you?
It might be a cushy number that's aired for our entertainment but the celebs who go on BB are essentially working and unless you're a psychic I fail to see how you can extrapolate what you have, based on watching 45 minutes a day of edited HLs
While most of what you say I agree with OP I have to agree with Bunions bringing her children into it is unfair and very likely completely wrong assumption anyway.
Michelle was passionate about it. So much, she may have been a little blinkered or stubborn. I still liked her though. I thought her heart was in the right place.
I struggle to see the dislike for her. I know she got on with Katie H and some saw her a 'bit part' in those sequence of events. But I thought she tried her best to stand up for herself and her passion as well as try to consider other points of view.
I struggle to see the dislike for her. I know she got on with Katie H and some saw her a 'bit part' in those sequence of events. But I thought she tried her best to stand up for herself and her passion as well as try to consider other points of view.
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“Michelle was passionate about it. So much, she may have been a little blinkered or stubborn. I still liked her though. I thought her heart was in the right place.
I struggle to see the dislike for her. I know she got on with Katie H and some saw her a 'bit part' in those sequence of events. But I thought she tried her best to stand up for herself and her passion as well as try to consider other points of view.”
“Michelle was passionate about it. So much, she may have been a little blinkered or stubborn. I still liked her though. I thought her heart was in the right place.
I struggle to see the dislike for her. I know she got on with Katie H and some saw her a 'bit part' in those sequence of events. But I thought she tried her best to stand up for herself and her passion as well as try to consider other points of view.”
you didn't see any hypocrisy between what she stated as her raison d'etre and how she behaved?
Originally Posted by planets:
“you didn't see any hypocrisy between what she stated as her raison d'etre and how she behaved?”
“you didn't see any hypocrisy between what she stated as her raison d'etre and how she behaved?”
Only when she gave off this persona that she was a rational and fair person but perhaps joined in a little by laughing when Hopkins may have said something that seemed derogatory about another HM perhaps.
I'm not very good at remembering exact words and instances I'm afraid. But I'm happy for you to point some out..
Sorry that didn't answer your question. You mean beteen Perez behaviour and her strength of feelings about gay people? hypocrisy there?
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“Only when she gave off this persona that she was a rational and fair person but perhaps joined in a little by laughing when Hopkins may have said something that seemed derogatory about another HM perhaps.
I'm not very good at remembering exact words and instances I'm afraid. But I'm happy for you to point some out..”
“Only when she gave off this persona that she was a rational and fair person but perhaps joined in a little by laughing when Hopkins may have said something that seemed derogatory about another HM perhaps.
I'm not very good at remembering exact words and instances I'm afraid. But I'm happy for you to point some out..”
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“Sorry that didn't answer your question. You mean beteen Perez behaviour and her strength of feelings about gay people? hypocrisy there?”
“Sorry that didn't answer your question. You mean beteen Perez behaviour and her strength of feelings about gay people? hypocrisy there?”
How about:
her statement that she was there for the freaks and outcasts, yet led the attacks on Alicia who within the social strata of the house fell into that category.
the fact that she and Katie Hopkins stole and hid food and then gathered Chloe and CamiLi to attack Alicia for taking a banana "Dingbat's stolen the bananas". Not very pc is it?
her statement about doing it for "her gays" and then targeting Perez NOT FOR HIS BEHAVIOUR but making a point that he was "setting back the cause" decades so not supporting all gays just "her gays"
or being upset about having to ostracise Katie Price and Keith not because it was childish and wrong behaviour but because it meant she "had to get up".
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“Only when she gave off this persona that she was a rational and fair person but perhaps joined in a little by laughing when Hopkins may have said something that seemed derogatory about another HM perhaps.
I'm not very good at remembering exact words and instances I'm afraid. But I'm happy for you to point some out..”
“Only when she gave off this persona that she was a rational and fair person but perhaps joined in a little by laughing when Hopkins may have said something that seemed derogatory about another HM perhaps.
I'm not very good at remembering exact words and instances I'm afraid. But I'm happy for you to point some out..”
She started most of it and Katie followed through with the abuse, she absolutely started banana gate and called Alicia names. She tried to bribe people to get them on side too ! Such a lovely lady
On the walking machine atm! I will dig out laptop and reply as best I can soon. Not easy typing and walking...
I didn't know katie H and Michelle stole food beforehand? I missed one episode. Maybe that was it? If someone could clarify that - be great
I didn't know katie H and Michelle stole food beforehand? I missed one episode. Maybe that was it? If someone could clarify that - be great
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“On the walking machine atm! I will dig out laptop and reply as best I can soon. Not easy typing and walking...
I didn't know katie H and Michelle stole food beforehand? I missed one episode. Maybe that was it? If someone could clarify that - be great”
“On the walking machine atm! I will dig out laptop and reply as best I can soon. Not easy typing and walking...
I didn't know katie H and Michelle stole food beforehand? I missed one episode. Maybe that was it? If someone could clarify that - be great
”
really?
there were threads and threads about it, so no i'm not going to endlessly repeat stuff. search back and find it for yourself the clips of Katie and Michelle stealing and hiding food were posted many many times. But nice way of avoiding answering any of the examples you asked me to provide about the HMs.
Originally Posted by planets:
“really?
there were threads and threads about it, so no i'm not going to endlessly repeat stuff. search back and find it for yourself the clips of Katie and Michelle stealing and hiding food were posted many many times. But nice way of avoiding answering any of the examples you asked me to provide about the HMs.”
“really?
there were threads and threads about it, so no i'm not going to endlessly repeat stuff. search back and find it for yourself the clips of Katie and Michelle stealing and hiding food were posted many many times. But nice way of avoiding answering any of the examples you asked me to provide about the HMs.”
Lol i didn't avoid answering.. I explained I would after I get off the walking machine!!
Your post raised some fair points but didn't want to try answering at this moment in time so I can give it a good shot!
I genuinely either never registered them stealing food or missed it.. And I haven't seen posts referring to it. But can search as you suggested..
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“Lol i didn't avoid answering.. I explained I would after I get off the walking machine!!
Your post raised some fair points but didn't want to try answering at this moment in time so I can give it a good shot!
I genuinely either never registered them stealing food or missed it.. And I haven't seen posts referring to it. But can search as you suggested..”
“Lol i didn't avoid answering.. I explained I would after I get off the walking machine!!
Your post raised some fair points but didn't want to try answering at this moment in time so I can give it a good shot!
I genuinely either never registered them stealing food or missed it.. And I haven't seen posts referring to it. But can search as you suggested..”
I think it was CH5 clips because I didn't know until I came on the forum and people were talking about it.
Originally Posted by molliepops:
“I think it was CH5 clips because I didn't know until I came on the forum and people were talking about it.”
“I think it was CH5 clips because I didn't know until I came on the forum and people were talking about it.”
Yeah, it was a clip not the HL I think.
Either way, very hypocritical. But not as bad as then bitching about Alicia's surgery and her intellect, supporting Cami when she made very hurtful comments during their row then lied about it, telling Keith to "pick a ****ing side", calling Alicia weak in the diary room then strongly advising her to ditch Perez her closest ally for her "empowerment", offering to 'help Calum on the outside' if he ignored Perez, telling KP towards the end that she liked Perez whilst at the same time telling KP she was now stuck with him since Nadia's eviction (in other words 'he's done nothing to me but I'm ignoring him anyway) THEN getting pissed off when KH started getting on with him...I could go on but you get my drift.
She was a mess of contradictions IMO.
[quote=planets;77051201]How about:
her statement that she was there for the freaks and outcasts, yet led the attacks on Alicia who within the social strata of the house fell into that category.
Did she lead the 'attacks'? Or wasn't that Hopkins? I thought it was Hopkins that would start with a controversial comment - then Michelle may have nodded her head or joined in a little?
the fact that she and Katie Hopkins stole and hid food and then gathered Chloe and CamiLi to attack Alicia for taking a banana "Dingbat's stolen the bananas". Not very pc is it?
Well apparently this happened, but I haven't seen the footage. I would probably have to see it in its context to make my mind up. But yes, that could be seen as hypocritical.
her statement about doing it for "her gays" and then targeting Perez NOT FOR HIS BEHAVIOUR but making a point that he was "setting back the cause" decades so not supporting all gays just "her gays"
I think Michelle was upset with the way Perez behaved and treated others in the first week or so. I don't understand 'her gays' - Im not sure what she meant by this. The gay people she knew? Or everyone that is gay? I could see that she felt so passionately about portraying people who are gay in a 'good light' for some reason. I am not sure why? Perhaps she felt this particular group of people have had to struggle in society? I think it was okay for her to think that Perez's behaviour was a bit unruly. Maybe she genuinely felt it reflected badly.. on him and therefore she thought this particular group of people?
or being upset about having to ostracise Katie Price and Keith not because it was childish and wrong behaviour but because it meant she "had to get up
I am not sure what you mean here 'had to get up' ?
I'm quite sure there is hypocrisy there which you can attribute to Michelle. Or you could see it as hypocrisy.
However, throughout the show I didn't personally feel that she was nasty. I thought she was likeable and could have won. But for those reasons you have mentioned, I didn't like her as much as time went by - you could question her reasoning. We could have seen a stronger Michelle. But I still liked her. I thought she was alright.
her statement that she was there for the freaks and outcasts, yet led the attacks on Alicia who within the social strata of the house fell into that category.
Did she lead the 'attacks'? Or wasn't that Hopkins? I thought it was Hopkins that would start with a controversial comment - then Michelle may have nodded her head or joined in a little?
the fact that she and Katie Hopkins stole and hid food and then gathered Chloe and CamiLi to attack Alicia for taking a banana "Dingbat's stolen the bananas". Not very pc is it?
Well apparently this happened, but I haven't seen the footage. I would probably have to see it in its context to make my mind up. But yes, that could be seen as hypocritical.
her statement about doing it for "her gays" and then targeting Perez NOT FOR HIS BEHAVIOUR but making a point that he was "setting back the cause" decades so not supporting all gays just "her gays"
I think Michelle was upset with the way Perez behaved and treated others in the first week or so. I don't understand 'her gays' - Im not sure what she meant by this. The gay people she knew? Or everyone that is gay? I could see that she felt so passionately about portraying people who are gay in a 'good light' for some reason. I am not sure why? Perhaps she felt this particular group of people have had to struggle in society? I think it was okay for her to think that Perez's behaviour was a bit unruly. Maybe she genuinely felt it reflected badly.. on him and therefore she thought this particular group of people?
or being upset about having to ostracise Katie Price and Keith not because it was childish and wrong behaviour but because it meant she "had to get up
I am not sure what you mean here 'had to get up' ?
I'm quite sure there is hypocrisy there which you can attribute to Michelle. Or you could see it as hypocrisy.
However, throughout the show I didn't personally feel that she was nasty. I thought she was likeable and could have won. But for those reasons you have mentioned, I didn't like her as much as time went by - you could question her reasoning. We could have seen a stronger Michelle. But I still liked her. I thought she was alright.
Originally Posted by molliepops:
“I think it was CH5 clips because I didn't know until I came on the forum and people were talking about it.”
“I think it was CH5 clips because I didn't know until I came on the forum and people were talking about it.”
Thanks Mollie for helping out there..
[quote=Jules_Thornley;77052700]
Oh, you know what? I can't be arsed. Too ridiculous.
Originally Posted by planets:
“How about:
I'm quite sure there is hypocrisy there which you can attribute to Michelle. Or you could see it as hypocrisy.
However, throughout the show I didn't personally feel that she was nasty. I thought she was likeable and could have won. But for those reasons you have mentioned, I didn't like her as much as time went by - you could question her reasoning. We could have seen a stronger Michelle. But I still liked her. I thought she was alright.”
“How about:
I'm quite sure there is hypocrisy there which you can attribute to Michelle. Or you could see it as hypocrisy.
However, throughout the show I didn't personally feel that she was nasty. I thought she was likeable and could have won. But for those reasons you have mentioned, I didn't like her as much as time went by - you could question her reasoning. We could have seen a stronger Michelle. But I still liked her. I thought she was alright.”
Oh, you know what? I can't be arsed. Too ridiculous.
[quote=postit;77052795]
I don't mind if you don't have patience with that comment. And I don't mind if you find it ridiculous the commment that I understand that you could see Michelle as being hypocritical... we all are from time to time.
Thats up to you.
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“
Oh, you know what? I can't be arsed. Too ridiculous.”
“
Oh, you know what? I can't be arsed. Too ridiculous.”
I don't mind if you don't have patience with that comment. And I don't mind if you find it ridiculous the commment that I understand that you could see Michelle as being hypocritical... we all are from time to time.
Thats up to you.
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“Lol i didn't avoid answering.. I explained I would after I get off the walking machine!!
Your post raised some fair points but didn't want to try answering at this moment in time so I can give it a good shot!
I genuinely either never registered them stealing food or missed it.. And I haven't seen posts referring to it. But can search as you suggested..”
“Lol i didn't avoid answering.. I explained I would after I get off the walking machine!!
Your post raised some fair points but didn't want to try answering at this moment in time so I can give it a good shot!
I genuinely either never registered them stealing food or missed it.. And I haven't seen posts referring to it. But can search as you suggested..”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGOa6acLaC4
Shortly before they ganged up on Alicia and bananagate.
Jules you said earlier you don't look at links but they are often helpful and posted for a reason. Also some of the C5 clips, in particular, don't make it onto the main show.
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“
I am not sure what you mean here 'had to get up' ?”
“
I am not sure what you mean here 'had to get up' ?”
Her problem upon being informed by Katie Hopkins that she must now leave the room to spite Katie Price was not that it was childish, or stupid, or bullying, or just plain wrong, but that it would mean she would have to get up off her fat arse in order to comply.
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“her statement that she was there for the freaks and outcasts, yet led the attacks on Alicia who within the social strata of the house fell into that category.
Did she lead the 'attacks'? Or wasn't that Hopkins? I thought it was Hopkins that would start with a controversial comment - then Michelle may have nodded her head or joined in a little?”
“her statement that she was there for the freaks and outcasts, yet led the attacks on Alicia who within the social strata of the house fell into that category.
Did she lead the 'attacks'? Or wasn't that Hopkins? I thought it was Hopkins that would start with a controversial comment - then Michelle may have nodded her head or joined in a little?”
Michelle started the attack I even gave you the sentence which started the attack below "Dingbat's stolen the bananas" she then rallied CamiLi and Chloe. The video of it has been posted again and again.
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“the fact that she and Katie Hopkins stole and hid food and then gathered Chloe and CamiLi to attack Alicia for taking a banana "Dingbat's stolen the bananas". Not very pc is it?
Well apparently this happened, but I haven't seen the footage. I would probably have to see it in its context to make my mind up. But yes, that could be seen as hypocritical.”
“the fact that she and Katie Hopkins stole and hid food and then gathered Chloe and CamiLi to attack Alicia for taking a banana "Dingbat's stolen the bananas". Not very pc is it?
Well apparently this happened, but I haven't seen the footage. I would probably have to see it in its context to make my mind up. But yes, that could be seen as hypocritical.”
Since you implied i was making that up please find the vt attached HERE it is
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“her statement about doing it for "her gays" and then targeting Perez NOT FOR HIS BEHAVIOUR but making a point that he was "setting back the cause" decades so not supporting all gays just "her gays"
I think Michelle was upset with the way Perez behaved and treated others in the first week or so. I don't understand 'her gays' - Im not sure what she meant by this. The gay people she knew? Or everyone that is gay? I could see that she felt so passionately about portraying people who are gay in a 'good light' for some reason. I am not sure why? Perhaps she felt this particular group of people have had to struggle in society? I think it was okay for her to think that Perez's behaviour was a bit unruly. Maybe she genuinely felt it reflected badly.. on him and therefore she thought this particular group of people?”
“her statement about doing it for "her gays" and then targeting Perez NOT FOR HIS BEHAVIOUR but making a point that he was "setting back the cause" decades so not supporting all gays just "her gays"
I think Michelle was upset with the way Perez behaved and treated others in the first week or so. I don't understand 'her gays' - Im not sure what she meant by this. The gay people she knew? Or everyone that is gay? I could see that she felt so passionately about portraying people who are gay in a 'good light' for some reason. I am not sure why? Perhaps she felt this particular group of people have had to struggle in society? I think it was okay for her to think that Perez's behaviour was a bit unruly. Maybe she genuinely felt it reflected badly.. on him and therefore she thought this particular group of people?”
Michelle was "doing it for The Gays", "her gays": her is a proprietary pronoun.
She was quite clear about Perez dancing about in the garden damaging "The Cause" of "The Gays" by decades, nothing to do with it damaging Perez' reputation, she sobbed about it in the diary room. It was laughable. In faact many of the gay FMs laughed and ridiculed her being "The Voice of The Gays".
Originally Posted by Jules_Thornley:
“or being upset about having to ostracise Katie Price and Keith not because it was childish and wrong behaviour but because it meant she "had to get up"
I am not sure what you mean here 'had to get up' ?
I'm quite sure there is hypocrisy there which you can attribute to Michelle. Or you could see it as hypocrisy.
However, throughout the show I didn't personally feel that she was nasty. I thought she was likeable and could have won. But for those reasons you have mentioned, I didn't like her as much as time went by - you could question her reasoning. We could have seen a stronger Michelle. But I still liked her. I thought she was alright.”
“or being upset about having to ostracise Katie Price and Keith not because it was childish and wrong behaviour but because it meant she "had to get up"
I am not sure what you mean here 'had to get up' ?
I'm quite sure there is hypocrisy there which you can attribute to Michelle. Or you could see it as hypocrisy.
However, throughout the show I didn't personally feel that she was nasty. I thought she was likeable and could have won. But for those reasons you have mentioned, I didn't like her as much as time went by - you could question her reasoning. We could have seen a stronger Michelle. But I still liked her. I thought she was alright.”
well Jubadi has answered that very succinctly:
Originally Posted by Jubadi:
“Her problem upon being informed by Katie Hopkins that she must now leave the room to spite Katie Price was not that it was childish, or stupid, or bullying, or just plain wrong, but that it would mean she would have to get up off her fat arse in order to comply.”
“Her problem upon being informed by Katie Hopkins that she must now leave the room to spite Katie Price was not that it was childish, or stupid, or bullying, or just plain wrong, but that it would mean she would have to get up off her fat arse in order to comply.”
If you missed all of that, i don't know what you were watching
Originally Posted by Bunions:
“I had absolutely no time for Michelle once she allied herself to Katie Gobshite but really?
Her kids were with their father and perfectly fine as far as we know - you do realise that there are millions of female service personnel who have to leave their children for months on end whilst they're on active duty, don't you?
It might be a cushy number that's aired for our entertainment but the celebs who go on BB are essentially working and unless you're a psychic I fail to see how you can extrapolate what you have, based on watching 45 minutes a day of edited HLs”
“I had absolutely no time for Michelle once she allied herself to Katie Gobshite but really?
Her kids were with their father and perfectly fine as far as we know - you do realise that there are millions of female service personnel who have to leave their children for months on end whilst they're on active duty, don't you?
It might be a cushy number that's aired for our entertainment but the celebs who go on BB are essentially working and unless you're a psychic I fail to see how you can extrapolate what you have, based on watching 45 minutes a day of edited HLs”
Isn't that what we all do all the time watching BB
So what 😊
Originally Posted by Reeta_Taker:
“Isn't that what we all do all the time watching BB
So what 😊”
“Isn't that what we all do all the time watching BB
So what 😊”
We all?
I think you mean 'I' - you don't speak for anyone but yourself.
There was nothing I saw that made me think or believe that Michelle's kids are a fashion accessory.
So what indeed.
Michelle wasn't insincere at all, she was clearly very passionate about it all.
Why I don't know, but it's clearly something she's devoted a lot of time to and feels strongly about.
Personally I think she goes a bit over the top with it. There is homophobic discrimination of course and it does need to be paid attention to, but being so full on about it is a bit much.
Why you think her children are a 'fashion accessory' is truly baffling tho.
Why I don't know, but it's clearly something she's devoted a lot of time to and feels strongly about.
Personally I think she goes a bit over the top with it. There is homophobic discrimination of course and it does need to be paid attention to, but being so full on about it is a bit much.
Why you think her children are a 'fashion accessory' is truly baffling tho.
Originally Posted by Bunions:
“..you do realise that there are millions of female service personnel who have to leave their children for months on end whilst they're on active duty, don't you?
... I fail to see how you can extrapolate what you have, based on watching 45 minutes a day of edited HLs”
“..you do realise that there are millions of female service personnel who have to leave their children for months on end whilst they're on active duty, don't you?
... I fail to see how you can extrapolate what you have, based on watching 45 minutes a day of edited HLs”
I extrapolated that Michelle isn't planning to see her children until May. I do realise that millions of personnel have to leave their children. Therein lies the difference: there was nothing forcing Michelle to create a schedule which didn't make room for her dependent youngsters.
That said, I did express my feelings rather strongly, lol, for reasons of diisliking her behaviour as described elsewhere in this thread,. particularly her attitude to "her gays". It was an afterthought to mention her children. I just hated the fuss she made about the letter from home, when she knew she'd be out and Skyping them in a few days anyway, and had made choices which involved not seeing them until May. She seemed so bitter that Cami took and got hers, and I didn't really see why she made so much fuss about it.. I wondered if it was because she'd lost the opportunity to have that emotional vote-winning breakdown sobbing over her kiddies artwork. Sorry - I think BB must be turning me into a hard-bitten cynic. It's not like me.
1 of 3
