Well I'm a woman and I think Rachel is great (and so is Lisa, and I also like Christine, although I don't rate her dancing as highly as Rachel's and Lisa's). I enjoy watching Tom's dancing and find him likeable too, but don't care for Austin or his dancing - although I reserve the right to change my mind before the end of the competition.

As for what Christa said earlier, that she finds women's bitchiness "disappointing" - I'm in my 40s and have met very few bitchy women. I would say I have met more bitchy men than bitchy women in fact. I find it sad when women seem to dislike other women and feel the need to try to dignify and justify that dislike by making spurious observations about women in general. I think women in general are great and I'm tremendously glad to be one!

I actually am starting to believe that she can win.
I knew before she could move and dance a bit, but that she was this good

She really amazed me.
I'm nervous but keeping it up like this, she has def a big chance of becoming the dancing queen of SCD

I don't see her beating either of the chaps.
If pitted against Lisa then I'm sure she'd win but other than that...I don't think she commands the popular vote needed to win the final.

Rachel is a dead cert into the final. She will be saved over anybody includig Austin and Tom in a dance off. But she won't beat anyone else in the final either.

Probably. I think the judges will see to it that she gets to the final. The public vote in the final will go against her...unless she ended up against Lisa, which is virtually impossible.
Rachel just does not have the appeal of previous female winners..even to blokes like me. I dont know why, she is attractive and talented but somehow lacks the "wow" factor.

I'm a bloke too and she don't do anything for me. Usually I'm the first to vote for a short skirt but Rachel is meh

Christine is all teeth but nice

Lisa is just not my cup of tea either.

I think the weekly favourite couple poll on here has been pretty on the mark (apart from J&K) and Rachel hasn't being doing badly as far as I can see, in fact she's in the lead at the moment. I'm taking The People count with a pinch of salt.


In your opinion. I can honestly say I've never thought that Zoe, Emma, Louisa or Kelly were better dancers than the celebs that eventually won. Maybe I'm a bit of a sheep as I've always been happy about the winner. And I've never voted for the celeb alone - it has always been about the chemistry between the couples.

Excellent post! I entirely agree. In fact - you've covered all the points I was going to make in repsonse to Buddy & more - so I don't really have much to add.

As long as a woman is clearly streets ahead of everyone else then she may win. If she has competition from fit men who she may equal or exceed in marks - the man will win.

Zoe, Louisa & Emma all deserved to get futher than they did. By rights - Zoe & Colin should have been the final two. Louisa certainly deserved to be in the final & and when people complain that Emma was dull - duller than Matt D? Are you sure? The men are simply not subjected to the same obsessive raking over of character.

Last year the anti-Kelly stuff on here was quite extraordinary - she was a really good dancer & a perfectly nice person. And the current thread about Lisa's age is a good spotlight on the Miaow factor.

I've already replied to thenetworkbabe's post.

We'll have to agree to disagree, although I would like to say your posts on this thread have definitely been refreshingly original, especially the one where you say "In real life I'm known for intolerance of people who don't come up to my intellectual standards. I like my friends to be highly educated, highly intellectual, funny & original.". I thought we were all original and don't think for one moment I'd ever make it into your circle of friends if were ever to actually meet!

Yep, your on the money with this, particuarly the highlighted section.

No............................. I'm not. I'm saying that the bitchy white females hold more animosity towards a sexy beautiful woman they identify culturally with: they identify more with Kelly than Alesha. Alesha also comes across as more girlie and smiley than Kelly - it was also stated by posters more than once, that Alesha is more 'umble (self-deprecating) than Kelly. That works a treat with plainer females - a dose of 'umbleness from a beautiful woman like Alesha goes a fair way with them.

Christine, although beautiful, is girlie and smiley, and self-deprecating. This allows the lumpenfemales out there to forgive her (and Alesha) their stunning good looks.

I made my views perfectly plain in my previous post. My mind is perfectly and logically "made up".

More obviously "Black" performers (like Don and Heather) don't get as many votes because the mainly white audience don't identify with them.

I personally find all these stupid prejudices cretinous. I don't care what sex, orientation or colour someone is. I like their dancing, or I don't.

I find Tom and Austin (Austin particularly) arrogant. Austin's reaction to the judges' critical comment is one example. Other female dancers have been castigated for this perception of them. Whereas when Austin and Tom display arrogance there is hardly any critical comment at all.

Austin and Tom's punching of the air (again, particularly Austin's) leave me "cold". I don't "warm" to this behaviour.

Really? I thought a lot of people had a problem with Kelly because they thought she was too giggly.

I agree with your remarks in para one. The people I would like to see in the final are: Rachel, Tom and/or Lisa. Followed closely by Austin. (I don't like his arrogance, but he's a good dancer). If he's edged out by Christine, I can't say I'd shed any tears for him though!!

It is quite likely that the mindless "John" votes might be transferred to Christine - making her a force to be reckoned with. To justify this, she'll have to crank up her rehearsal time!!

From secondary school to middle age, I have met many bitchy women, a number of them among those who called themselves my "friends". Having observed this sort of low behaviour over many decades, I feel obliged to comment.

Men are not so much "bitchy" - more callous in their perception of women: commodities rather than real rounded people.

As I'm sure you are aware, there ARE exceptions to any rule.

I didn't see or follow Jill and Natasha's SCD performances so I don't know. I can only surmise.

Perhaps Natasha (as a beautiful woman) was 'umble enough to get past the "sexy-ometer" of the female voters?

As for Jill - perhaps she was not seen as "sexy" by viewers?

Kelly did get some criticism for being giggly. Alesha did not. I personally, didn't find Kelly "giggly".

Criticisms of Kelly that I remember were that she was not "grateful" enough for praise and high marks. Where Alesha might say "Oh my God! Thank you!!" Kelly might smile slightly with pleasure. This reaction was seen as smug.

There might be a Rachel-Lisa dance-off next week, which I expect Rachel to win 3-1 on a split decision (since Christine will probably be kept out of the dance-off by the viewers - cue nasty comments from the judges saying
Christine should have been given the boot).

Then if Christine survives again, a Rachel dance-off against Austin or Tom.

If the judges want her in the final, they will have to sacrifice one of the men.

A lot of females out there, consider good looking females who look like them (or with whom they identify culturally) as more of a threat than women from other cultures or women who are mixed race.

If a good looking woman is 'umble enough or if they see her as a non-threatening, non-sexy girl next door tomboy type -then they will like her.

What is a "lazy" argument? Why is that particular argument "lazy"? My theories are based on experience, observation and common sense. Why my argument is "lazy" argument needs to be explained in simple more full English.

When posters say they can't "warm" to someone - I want to know in simple English what the word "warm" really means. But I so far, I have failed to see reasons explained more fully.

Not all the women out there are "jealous" or "bitchy" - but huge numbers of them are, unfortunately. There is thread after thread criticising female performers - do they look old? Do they look their age? Are they just a tad too fat? Does their bum look big in that? Are they arrogant? Are they not 'umble enough? Are they smug? Are they too competitive? Why do I not "warm" to her?

Yet barely any criticise male performers in the same way? Why is this, if it is not bitchiness?

Did the sight of Austin and Tom punching the air in a triumphalist display, make you want to throw up also?

I hope Rachel wins it this year - but there is a fair chance she will lose out to Austin and Tom.

It is with me. Kelly is tall, long legged, shapely, beautiful.

Rachel is short, with short heavy legs, and not quite pretty. There is less to be jealous about. But she does have a girl band cutesy-sexy image, so there will be those that don't like her, and won't vote for her.

What an interesting debate.

Every person in a mob is an individual with their own way of thinking. That doesn't mean that observations about mob behaviour can't be made or conclusions drawn. Whatever an individual's thinking process is, it really can't be disputed that when considering the public at large, female celebrities are judged far more harshly than their male counterparts. Read any forum for a TV show. It's perfectly legitimate to wonder why that may be the case, particularly where the group being considered, such as the voters on SCD, are predominantly female.

It's not misogynistic to comment on this phenomenon. It exists and the real misogyny, in my opinion, is failing to recognise it in ourselves and work to change it.

One other factor that hasn't been mentioned is anonymity, whether in voting for celebrities or posting in forums. If any of us were face to face with our peers, or if we were leaving our names with our comments, our greater sense of responsibility would, I suspect, lead us to be less judgemental about people we cannot possibly know, such as Rachel. To judge her personality on what she says on the show, for example, takes no account that what we see isn't what she is, but what tiny portions of her words and behaviour are selected to be screened. Our opinions, if we were not anonymous, would, more likely, be better thought out. At least, I'd like to think so.

That's just your opinion. Rachel Stevens has finished in more top ten sexiest female polls than I can list. She's the or at least a fantasy woman of thousands of men.

I agree with the poster who said that for a woman to win a show like this she needs to be streets ahead of an attractive man. I'm not saying all women are like this but a lot of female voters will vote for an attractive male ahead of a female even if the female is slightly ahead on ability. I'd say a fair amount of males would do the same for a female as well (think of the joke about employing barmaids and the reason one of them gets the job) but fewer males vote.

Obviously last year's final was an exception but then so was Alesha. And if I really wanted to irritate, I'd agree with a previous poster who said that part of the reason Alesha won was because Gethin's fans regarded Matt Di as the reason their man wasn't in the final so voted for Alesha to ensure he didn't win. But I don't want to do that. So I won't mention it.

That's a straw man. These things are always statistical; no one's saying the female population is all alike.

Just so.

That's answering a different question than the one I asked.