If Nigel does have issues with Christine then I think she will handle it better than Rhona. I believe she will either diffuse the situation with humour or some other tactic. Rhona, I believe, deliberately winds Nigel up - knowing he does not have the verbal dexterity to respond.

Afterall Nigel and Darren did say they weren't going to make up with Rhona - but both did in the end.

It lost out to Christian hypocracy!

Yeah, but it's not sincere is it? How many times over the past week have they "made-up" only to have a blazing row 10 minutes later?

*applaudes* Well said, man!

LOL

Must have been the 1st time that christine's underwear was wet for about 30 years.

oh how true... Oh Nigel, you great big plonker...

So it seems that Nigel is perfectly entitled to be aggressive towards Rhona but how dare he be aggressive to Christine (who has been rumbled)......It all makes sense....Not...

The difference is that Rhona did more than enough to warrant a few angry words from Nigel.
Christine though, in her own way, is only trying to help smooth things out.

Then you can not have been paying proper attention. Her hesitation was an clearly an act. She was deliberately fishing for them to ask her, just so she would then have that as a defence for having passed on the poison that she so wanted to spread. Hence her very clear vocal declaration that all 3 had asked her.

Its the classic stirrers trick of "I have a secret but I dont want to tell you".

yes - absolutely agree - right snake in the grass is Christine

Spot on - Yesterday with Rhona and now today as well - She seems to love loading the bullets and letting others fire the gun. She proberly loves acting all upset so people can comfort her.....All a clever attention getting scheme perhaps?

that's my take on it too. And and Dec were out of order suggesting she was stirring - the others asked what the hell was going on between Darren and Tara - why all the upset - she knew, she was asked to explain, and she did, and what she said was hardly a BIG deal? I think it helped Rhona see that Tara had a nice side to her, that she was genuinely trying to make peace not war, and that Darren was the plonker, but Rhona knew that already. There was no world war 3.

Mossopp, maybe it is sincere at the time, or maybe it is done for the benefit óf the group. I think each time a row is started it is done so by Rhonna - she is either extremely tactless or deliberately provocative.

Or people don't like her and violently overreact - Look how Darren behaves to people he does like......

Very true, but don't forget that Rhona is a very caustic, self-centred, insulting, uncaring person so anyone out there pretty much has a right to dislike her.

Still not saying Darren had the right to act the big kid, but just to even up the scales.. it's not a black & white scenario.

I would ask them why they belived that to be so. I would listen, I would consider what they had said. I would then decide if I agreed with them or not.
See no calling them 'Whatever F*cking Wa*kers' involved.

Then again it is perfectly possible to believe in God and still be somewhat sceptical about the contents of the Bible.

How *dare* you suggest rational, logical discussion as a solution to opposing points of view?
That just doesn't fit in with the religion of Rhonaism!

So - If you were gay and a christian came up and told you were a sinner you'd be happy to think about it and agree with him. You are a better stronger person than anyone on the planet if you can. (Don't forget to do it after a bit of food and sleep deprivation and after being sent to coventry by the two alpha males).......

Born again Christians are anything but sceptical about the Bible..I beieve literal is more the word.

Two alpha males? LOL, what tv show are you watching?

Besides, Nigel didn't go up to her and call her a sinner at all. In interchanges between the two of them, it was Rhona bringing the homophobia card into play first... and the religion one too.

This alleged card you speak off was dealt from Christine's pack. There is a high chance that she'd borrowed them from Nigel in the first place.

Oh quite possibly, yes.
But surely it's the person to pull the trigger that's at fault rather than the one who handed them the gun? (Or the card, whichever the current metaphor of the day is)

Yes as well - But to get to trigger (card throwing) point diplomacy has to have gone out of the window. It's irresponsible to add bullets (cards) into an already hostile situation.

(this is a better discussion by the way)