• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • TV
  • Big Brother
Mine was art - Sam Fox
<<
<
4 of 6
>>
>
nomad2king
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by kitkat1971:
“As I said on another thread yesterday, we have no idea what Sam would have done if she'd been born early/mid 90s rather than early/mid 60s.

The Page 3 path no longer exists but then she retired from very early (when she was about 21 I think) so don't think it was ever really her thing. She wanted to be a singer. So, probably, she'd have auditioned for X Factor or Britain's Got Talent and might actually have done okay. At leasy got noticed at Audition or Boot Camp stage.

We can't know that she would have gone down the reality route or webcam porn route.”

A referred to a "Sam Fox", not meaning her personally but that path/route in general. She would have only wanted to be a singer later on, after her previous career. IIRC It was her father who set her off on her P3 career.
Wainy84
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by nomad2king:
“A referred to a "Sam Fox", not meaning her personally but that path/route in general. She would have only wanted to be a singer later on, after her previous career. IIRC It was her father who set her off on her P3 career.”

Most fathers are against there daughters doing this sort of thing. I find it wierd that her dad set her career off.
nomad2king
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by Wainy84:
“Most fathers are against there daughters doing this sort of thing. I find it wierd that her dad set her career off.”

He sent a topless picture of his 16 year old daughter to The Sun.
jaycee331
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by Wainy84:
“Most fathers are against there daughters doing this sort of thing. I find it wierd that her dad set her career off.”

Yeah, how does that work? Hey you've got great tits daughter, you should get them out for the papers
Wainy84
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by nomad2king:
“He sent a topless picture of his 16 year old daughter to The Sun.”


Speechless.
nomad2king
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by Wainy84:
“
Speechless.”

IIRC it was an "innocent" beach shot, not an indoor posed one.
Wainy84
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by nomad2king:
“IIRC it was an "innocent" beach shot, not an indoor posed one.”

I still think it's strange.
nomad2king
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by Wainy84:
“I still think it's strange.”

The former is less strange than the latter. People might have unfairly assumed it was the latter.
lotty27
11-08-2016
It was her mum who sent pics of her in lingerie to a different paper (sunday mirror? people?) trying to kick start a modelling career in a competition they were having so she came to the notice of other papers that way and The Sun snapped her off once they got permission off her mother for her to pose topless (I believe it only took one signature). Of course she wouldn't be allowed to pose at all now until she was 18. Thinking about it (I'm a year older than Sam) it was all bloody sleazy and left a bad taste in some people's mouths back then especially when she posed in school uniform with her tits out! Can you imagine the fuss nowadays? lol!

Her father, who she must have trusted with her finances, stole a lot of money from her and she sued him. When he died they hadn't spoken for years.


Perhaps she meant 'art' compared to what Chloe was doing, does on her webcam? It's no doubt the pictures she posed for were professionally done, proper lighting, proper trusthworthy photographers etc. They were good, professional pictures - just of women with their tits out lol!
Wainy84
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by lotty27:
“It was her mum who sent pics of her in lingerie to a different paper (sunday mirror? people?) trying to kick start a modelling career in a competition they were having so she came to the notice of other papers that way and The Sun snapped her off once they got permission off her mother for her to pose topless (I believe it only took one signature). Of course she wouldn't be allowed to pose at all now until she was 18. Thinking about it (I'm a year older than Sam) it was all bloody sleazy and left a bad taste in some people's mouths back then especially when she posed in school uniform with her tits out! Can you imagine the fuss nowadays? lol!

Her father, who she must have trusted with her finances, stole a lot of money from her and she sued him. When he died they hadn't spoken for years.


Perhaps she meant 'art' compared to what Chloe was doing, does on her webcam? It's no doubt the pictures she posed for were professionally done, proper lighting, proper trusthworthy photographers etc. They were good, professional pictures - just of women with their tits out lol!”

Nice family. Not.
Jim_Bob5
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by lotty27:
“It was her mum who sent pics of her in lingerie to a different paper (sunday mirror? people?) trying to kick start a modelling career in a competition they were having so she came to the notice of other papers that way and The Sun snapped her off once they got permission off her mother for her to pose topless (I believe it only took one signature). Of course she wouldn't be allowed to pose at all now until she was 18. Thinking about it (I'm a year older than Sam) it was all bloody sleazy and left a bad taste in some people's mouths back then especially when she posed in school uniform with her tits out! Can you imagine the fuss nowadays? lol!

Her father, who she must have trusted with her finances, stole a lot of money from her and she sued him. When he died they hadn't spoken for years.


Perhaps she meant 'art' compared to what Chloe was doing, does on her webcam? It's no doubt the pictures she posed for were professionally done, proper lighting, proper trusthworthy photographers etc. They were good, professional pictures - just of women with their tits out lol!”

She got her vagina out too. She said it's art because she didn't want to be bracketed with Chloe but if she's not quite in that bracket then she's in the one right next to it.
trevor tiger
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by kitkat1971:
“I don't think it is po faced by housemates or viewers.

Housemates, well they're house mates and people might not like having that floor show or feel that she isn't doing herself any favours. Note they might have talked about it (as i would if i saw somebody topless poledancing in the garden at a friends house, I'd probably say something about their lack of self respect as well. They didn't complain until it was taken into the bedroom.

Viewers are just commenting on her being so affronted at being talked about for 'massaging' Bear and being compared to a prostitue and then pole dancing and maybe having sex in a shower only hours later.

I'd have more respect for her if she'd decided to pole dance topless herself rather than being asked:told to do it by Marnie.

She is making herself a sexual object, to the Housemates and Viewers and then getting upset when she is called on that and stating that it 'iSn't any of their business'. Yes it is when she made it their business by doing it in front of them.

Sam took her fair share of flack back in the 80s and ever since and with better grace than Chloe showed today.”

Yes but the thread is about Sam sneering at Chloe for dancing topless and calling her own Page 3 antics art. I don't have any respect for Chloe or any of the HMs for that matter but when she was dancing on the pole topless she was clearly tipsy and having a laugh. I do think the HMs and some on here are being po-faced specifically in this context.
CupidStunt2010
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by Paace:
“I wonder did all them blokes buying the Sun for page 3 realize they buying works of art

Sam did have nice natural breasts though . I wonder would the sales have dipped if all those blokes knew Sam was only interested in women .”

It makes no difference as long as shes not too butch
CupidStunt2010
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by Jim_Bob5:
“She got her vagina out too. She said it's art because she didn't want to be bracketed with Chloe but if she's not quite in that bracket then she's in the one right next to it.”

that was back in the hairy 80's when you couldn't see the kebab meat hanging out with the bush hiding all the juicy stuff
kitten59
11-08-2016
I thought I'd like Sam, but she's been a bit disappointing thus far. I remember when the song "Touch Me" came out way back when and thought it was a cheesy piece of crap (I'm sorry, but she can't sing)...but at least I've heard of this washed up UK celeb. She's been a bit dull, in my opinion.
Vicky8675309
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by trevor tiger:
“Yes but the thread is about Sam sneering at Chloe for dancing topless and calling her own Page 3 antics art. I don't have any respect for Chloe or any of the HMs for that matter but when she was dancing on the pole topless she was clearly tipsy and having a laugh. I do think the HMs and some on here are being po-faced specifically in this context.”

I think it is because Chloe is part of "the squad". I remember a lot of FMs defending Harry, Stephanie and even Laura's antics but Chloe doesn't get much support because (imo) of her association with Bear. I like Chloe....she seems nice. I'll really like her if she stood up to Renee (she did to some degree in the HL show then deflected more onto Saira).
Jane_Lee3
11-08-2016
I like Sam, but what she said was utter bolleaux!
Wainy84
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by CupidStunt2010:
“that was back in the hairy 80's when you couldn't see the kebab meat hanging out with the bush hiding all the juicy stuff”

Lovely put.
purplepercy
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by kitkat1971:
“There is a huge difference between becoming famous for doing a mainstream, topless photo shoot with god knows how many people around to topless poledancing and simulating (or actually committing) sex on National TV”

Why do people keep banging on about "on National TV"? .Not just this thread, the phrase seems to be brought out quite often here. BB is a niche program now with crap viewing figures( ~1.5m if they are lucky?). In the 1980's, the Suns' circulation was almost 4m copies. Then when you take into account that more than one person would often read that copy after it had been passed on, or the gang of stereotype builders all crowding round to gawp at who was on page 3 that day, Sam would have exposed her tits to probably ten times the amount of people that Chloe is showing hers off to "on national TV"
Stegan
11-08-2016
Sam Fox has been a real let down so far on CBB and the 'mine was art' comment was laughable.
Flo71
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by nomad2king:
“He sent a topless picture of his 16 year old daughter to The Sun.”

Her mother sent them into a modelling competition in the Sunday People. She first appeared in underwear in the Sunday People and was expelled from school. The Sun picked her up after that.
ahoyy
11-08-2016
One thing should be remembered. Sam Fox was FIFTEEN when she first let various "artists" photograph her nude. The Sun kept her on ice until she was sweet sixteen, very chivalrous.
Heyyouoverthere
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by peterstone:
“Do me a favour. A bunch of middle aged labourers perving over a 16 year old in a cafe every morning is not art.

”

So flashing your bear breastd wearing nothing but underwear on page 3 of the Sun is art. What on earth is she on??
Heyyouoverthere
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by DUNDEEBOY:
“She is very bitter now”

I don't think she is bitter at all. She is like most people trying to cover up their past that is all but page 3 and art does not even go hand in hand.
Heyyouoverthere
11-08-2016
Originally Posted by vald:
“Paintings or pictures of nudes can be considered art. Jigging about naked and having sex in full view of others is porn.”

Even if it is page 3 of the Sun? Okay!
<<
<
4 of 6
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map