Nope - not seen any of those.
I like Rachel an Vincent - GREAT COUPLE!

I haven't seen the "tantrum" either - Rachel and Vincent are lovely together and I hope they do well - they are quetly getting on with business it seems to me.
I agree it is very open this year, though Austin seems to be the favourite but I haven't warmed to him yet.

On account of having the same partner Vincent as well as similar body shape and face, Rachel inevitably reminds viewers of her predecessor Luisa. But bubbly and thriled teenager Luisa was 17.

Rachel is 30 and falls between two stools, neither a wide-eyed innocent nor a simmering temptress.

I'm not that keen on Rachel, I don't know why because she seems like a nice enough person, maybe it's because she's quite boring and doesn't really contribute to the entertainment of the show (although I'm sure plenty of guys will disagree with me!). However, since she's partnered with Vincent I'm quite happy for her to stay!

Rachel is very good looking, while Louisa is very average looking. I think that's one of the major differences.

Funny how most of the original posters have disappeared in the face of logical argument!!!

So based on the above quote we have Lisa, Cherie, Heather and various others also in this category.

What a silly example to use for your post.

I wouldn't say no apparent reason. Tom and Austin have been good from the start and if you're a bloke that's not allowed.

Kate got up every day at 3am, had great difficulties learning the dances, carried a painful foot through many weeks, was ridiculed and shredded in the forums, TV, press and radio, but Kate smiled and cracked jokes through the difficult times, exiting SCD5 with a gracious speech, then afterwards thanked Craig for his straight talk with a bottle of champagne. Her comradeship with Anton reflected credit on both.

Colin Jackson was like that and look what happened!

Mark was good from the start, that turned out alright for him Emma & Zoe were good from that start but it didn't work out so well for them.

A non- tantrum?
I think Rachel is doing well, thanks.

Mark has some kind of vulnerability going for him. He stumbled in a few weeks, rhumba week, the foxtrot week, the jive week came to mind. He was at the bottom region of the leaderboard. When he's down, he suddenly became the underdog (not according to the betting sites though), so on those weeks sympathy/underdog votes came into play. And then after the blips, he bounced back stronger, which appeals to viewers that he's a fighter (cue in the 'j' word).

And truth be told, Mark is arguably better in his latin than his ballroom so he's not quite an all-rounder like Colin (of series 3), and thus far in this season, Tom and Austin (who seem to be good both in latin and ballroom from the start).

You can't appear to be too good (men or women celebs, women especially). You must show your human side with some falls and stumbles here and there. Otherwise, be rubbish from the start, and then had a turning-point week, like Matt Dawson or Gethin, and you'll definitely going to become the contenders for the finals.

I agree, I felt so sorry for her last year but she certainly didn't feel sorry for herself.

No, they just have to breathe.

It's the same every year...

As British Rail knows, there is a wrong kind of breathing.

Rachel has become stressed and upset with herself, as have all the celebrities at some point. It doesn't constitute a tantrum. It just shows she's human and is giving her heart and soul to this competition.

I would also like to address the argument that young, attractive, wealthy females cannot be liked.

I disagree.

I'm a huge fan of Rachel, Alesha, Jodie, Zoe and Christine who all fall/fell into this category.

I didn't, however, take to Kelly or Emma, but that was for entirely different reasons.

I agree Sid (although Zoe would be with Kelly or Emma for me).

We don't all like the same people in real life so it is hardly surprising that we don't all like the celebs (male and female), but when it comes to shows like SCD we seem to interpret the actions of celebs in a completely different way to how we would if we actually knew the person!

If I worked with someone who I knew left the room to cry, I'd have to really not like them before thinking badly of them.

I think it depends on the kind of person you are as well - unless there were exceptional circumstances (like sudden really bad personal news) I'd think less of someone unprofessional enough to burst into tears and leave the room while working.

Mind you, I'm not being filmed while trying to do something with which I'm not familiar, knowing millions of people are waiting for me to muck it up in six days' time

Well, I liked all of them.

And I don't see the point of disliking people you don't know...

Women have a problem with women (for the most part).

I don't think the idea is that they can't be liked, or that no one will like them.

Nor is it that those who dislike one of them will think their reasons are that the woman is young, attractive or wealthy.

Instead, they will think it was for different reasons.

(Which is not to say that other reasons never have any role, or that their looks etc are always a factor with everyone who dislikes them.)

Imo a good way to think of it (due to Villa) is that such women have a tiny margin of error with some viewers.

Like it or not, it is human nature to form impressions of people's characters.

And I think we get to know the celebrities pretty damn well over the course of 3 months.


Well my reasons for disliking people are always related to their personality.

Gender, looks and wealth never play a role. Thankfully, I don't consider myself that shallow.

Doesn't this presuppose that people find her attractive? It may be that as I am a woman her appeal passes me by, but I'm afraid I can't see it. Nor 'successful' - what has she done after her pop group broke up several years ago?

It's just that some people find one person appealing, other people will not agree. Doesn't have to be any ulterior motive on anyone's part.

I tried to phrase my post so that it didn't apply anything about any particular individuals, because that would be a different, and probably unpleasant, discussion, and also one that's probably not allowed on this forum.

But even if you're right about your own case (and I'm in no position to say you aren't), that wouldn't refute the general point which is meant to be "statistical" rather than about every single person who dislikes one of the young, attractive, etc women.

If that means that they consciously believe she's attractive, then imo no. Thinking she's not all that good looking often goes with the dislike.