Give it time. She has to formulate a plan. She'll get there.

And social media loves her even more for it! :P

There were clearly things about johns behaviour that Tiffany was aware of but Stephanie was not , hence her need to lead Stephanie towards a proper understanding of who the real culprit was in all of this

Ah that's a pity as you always liked her so much


How come she missed them last eviction Did she have her fingers in her ears and did she have them in her ears when they booed Gemma


Nail on head. She sees him as a manipulator and as it turns out she was right. He did instigate knicker gate by telling Chris not to hide them and he lead the others in their derision of the owner and their humiliation of her by telling them and saying 'name and shame'.

Tiff is actually very clever and I'm really surprised she's not getting the recognition she deserves for this.

I did, she was in my top 3 for the first 2 weeks. Since her meltdown about being nominated i have been going off her more and more.

She does the same things Gemma does but people let her off because they have already decided she is untouchable, the DS hypocrisy strikes again.

Maybe they think Tiff is an easy target as she's an outsider, and it doesn't matter how people like Tiff are treated, as the vote will get them( or her) out, could be what they want, so chopping that clip would show how awful Tiff is, which wasn't how it was at all.

I think this is seen in a variety of places dependent on who you like / dislike. All I can see are things being twisted and double standards being used where John is concerned

Actually not really. Just had a quick look and also on FB, most are saying Tiffany is just doing Gemma's stirring for her and is up her backside. A lot of love for John especially on FB as they felt Gemma had a lot more to do with Tiffany behaving that way.

Lets not forget that Tiff did the sme thing yesterday as well when she told Steph and Jeremy that it was John who had instigated all the drama in the house about their relationship.

Except she's not an outsider. She's second favourite to win.

To be honest, I feel the same about Tiffany these days.

I do like her but had Gemma done that, she'd have got slammed here.

All that, I understood the point she was making and I respect that she doesn't think it's right for any girl to get humiliated (even though I don't think that was Johnny's intent). It just irks me that she can't apply her code of ethics to the bitches of the house.... who IMO looked awful, compared to Johnny.

This exactly.

So if Gemma hadn't joined in with the House humiliation of Steph and tackled the instigator and leader of the humiliation she'd have got slammed She'd have gone right back up in people's estimation and rightly so. Gemma doesn't get slated because she is Gemma, she gets slated because she is horrible and John has had the riot act read to him by Tiff because he deserves it.


This is the double standards and twisting that I am referring to. The women, the men in fact everyone involved came out badly but to different degrees and how can the women look worse than John who stopped Chris from hiding the knickers, who brought the knickers to the women's attention and who said 'name and shame' Now if Gemma had done that . . .

I think people are forgetting that it was john that started it all. even if it wasn't intensionally to embarrass Steph He said "Lets name and shame them" after they had found the knickers.

So tiffany wasn't exactly shit steering because she went to straight to John after Steph clarified what she already thought.

Shit steering would have been her going to every other housemate telling them John started everything without her having any information at all.

No one can turn into Gemna not even if they put on a bodysuit of hers and tried. She's the only one talented at being a despicable creature!

No he was the one that dubbed it full of pigeon shit and then went around telling everyone else. John totally escalated it.


It doesn't fit the narrative so it's conveniently left out.

At the end of the day, they all want to win, so any chance to discredit, embarrass and humiliate another housemate to make them look good they will jump at the opportunity. They want Steph out, that much is clear, and she is the more vulnerable housemate left in the house and the easiest target.

What I'm saying is, if Gemma had approached John blaming him in the way Tiff did, she would not be getting defended as doing the right thing.


I'm not twisting anything. Can the majority on this forum hand on heart, honestly say that John came off worse than Gemma and Danielle yesterday... really...? He was wrong in the whole name and shame thing, I agree about that but it was Danielle and Gemma who took it upon themselves to laugh and poke fun on her all day to the point of ostracising her. Johnny treated her fine. They actually had a nice conversation that didn't make the HL show. Gemma and Danielle however were spiteful and nasty and it was them that reduced her to tears. However John should get the big telling off and Gemma and Danielle get a get out of jail free card....? It doesn't wash with me. I'd have respected Tiff more if she layed it on ALL of them.

This is what I mean about scapegoat. John has his faults and in no way am I saying he was blameless last night but he (along with Steph) are easy targets these days.

but would Danielle and Gemma have even done or said anything if John hadn't gone straight into the bedroom to tell them what he had found?

And she was spot on wasn't she?

You're opening post is completely untrue BTW

They probably would not.
In particular gemma actually said very little about the knickers, she was just going about stephs attitude. It was danni and to a lesser extent Megan who made disgusting remarks about the knickers.

Offering to be Gemma's mouthpiece is probably not the best starting point though.

Tiffany was looking to start something full stop. She started the day offering to take Stephanie down for Gemma. Maybe she thinks she needs a bit more coverage before she gets sidelined in the edits.

You've hit the nail on the head. I haven't really worked out her game plan TBH but - all this speaking up is part of it.

It's all very calculated.

Not clear at all. She may know something but equally she may not. She certainly didn't appear to be an eye witness to what occured.

It is just as likely that she has done what we all do in various degrees, which is to take the available information and filter it through her own perceptions and expectations to come up with an answer. Or if you like putting 2 and 2 together and reaching 5. Another word for those preceptions and expectations is prejudice.