They mainly attack Christians as well. You don't see them jumping down the throats of other faiths because of their views on homosexuality. I suppose one could say that Christians are the majority in the UK and attacking other faiths might be seen as picking on minorities that have enough to be dealing with already. It doesn't sit well with me though. Treat everyone the same.

It feels like a fox hunt.

I'm not watching the show, but ironically, this whole issue about people having their own opinion but not being allowed to express it unless it conforms to group think, reminds me of the original book 1984 and the thought police and neighbours snitching on neighbours.

Winston may have very archaic and old fashioned views, but he's not committed any crime apart from answering a question put to him by the press (not even an opinion he stated in the house). Big Brother set him up so that the house would turn on him. Well done BB - anything for a bit of contrived controversy..

Totally agree.

Again, like most, I do not agree with his views, but he has his views and opinions like we all have. Should he be annihilated for them?

That was an odd watch. The contrast between shouty condemnation in the first half of the show to the (somewhat forced) light hearted banter with Winston in the second half was strange.

I agree and said as much in another thread. Blatant contrived below the belt controversy

I just signed in to see if I was the only one who found tonight's BOTS uncomfortable viewing and I'm glad to see I am not alone. I was glad Winston was booted as I found him a bit creepy. However; I found Rylan so unprofessional tonight it actually put me off him.

Why are those who constantly preach tolerance the ones who have the least amount of tolerance with those who don't agree with them? They seem to go into bully mode when someone has a different opinion.

+1. Bang on. Forget freedom of speech or expression if your view doesn't coincide with the prevailing PC one, expect zero tolerance and bullying. Fascism, anyone?!

Good 1984/Big Brother linkage ... and the book's hero was called ...

His freedom of speech was not violated. When will people get it through their thick skulls that freedom of speech does not mean people have to respect or tolerate your opinion? It just means you are entitled to express it which he did. It does not mean that people will not attack you for it, after all, that is their freedom of speech.

and LOL @ "fascism". Well done on using as many buzz words as you can.

Isn't that just as well?

And we have all these rules put in place now where we are not allowed to throw the Christians to the lions.

I thought we lived in a democracy - free speech???

Yawn. PC trendies are desperately easy to wind up. Take a chill pill.

LOL I am as chill as I can be. Better to be a PC trendie than a bigot.

"Most people do not really want others to have freedom of speech, they just want others to be given the freedom to say want they want to hear."

No one stopped him from saying anything ,He was allowed express it .Just as they were allowed express that they didnt agree with .If you are speaking of freedom of speech it applys to all . People are quite entitled to say they dont like what he said .

What is frustrating is that routinely nastier, more poisonous people get a much easier ride.

Vile behaviour is fine as long as they avoid certain 'trigger issues'.

The whole point is - he didn't say it in the house. He wasn't being offensive to anyone but BB decided to drag up a comment he made three years ago to cause friction.

The production team obviously knew he had this view when he was 'booked' - quite why they chose to hire him and then castigate him for who he was is unbelievable. Had he have been offensive or homophobic in the house I might have understood (a bit).

He was set up - it was wrong to bring up comments from three years ago to stir up trouble. Winston wasn't responsible for causing offence (in the house) - BB were.

Has he never seen big brother before then?

You seem to expect tolerance towards Winston. Why is it so hard to expect Winston to show tolerance towards gay people. Also noone has restricted his right to free speech but you seem to be calling for others right to respond to be curtailed.

Spot on.

Well firstly he made the back against the wall comment on his entry VT into the House so he made his homophobia fair game from then on. Secondly if he had explained that the comment about Gay parents was from some time ago and he felt pressured into giving it and he no longer agreed with it things would have gone very differently but he didn't because he couldn't because he does in fact believe that gay parents are akin to child abusers.

He has to deal with the justifiable consequences of holding such outrageous and disgusting views.

However, you're right the actual comment was from some time ago and BB of course knew about it. When BB found out abut comments etc made by Tequila in CBB they booted her out so it does appear that BB want this all ways and it is indeed BB that should have to explain themselves as well as Winston.

I suspect they knew full well about Tequila's comments and would have been waiting for an opportunity to set up a similar scenario ti this one.

Winston is quite clearly an ill educated, inarticulate man - he wasn't able to express himself and it was all a bit pathetic really.

BB knew his views - on his entrance VT they chose to include that comment - it was all part of the bigger plan.

There is far too much manipulation in BB - over time W inston may or may not have expressed these views - if he had have done it may have been the source of an interesting conversation and exchange of views. Maybe the outcome would have been the same - maybe Winston may have learned something. We'll never know because BB can't stop meddling.

Very true. It certainly is no longer a social experiment if it indeed it ever was

What? Winston WAS tolerant of gay people, he lived in the house with Jonathan and Darren and he said he liked them both. He's entitled to think whatever he wants about adoption as his personal opinion, it's not as if he actually decides who is allowed to adopt