I wasn't twisting anything. when earlier posts talked about Cameron in all likelihood being quite happy to see kids get *a good leathering* or not caring about the plight of abused children, what else did that mean? how did I twist it?

forget the fact that its an irrelevant question because I didn't watch BB 24/7 for 9 weeks - do you think those comments were really called for.

try and have a go at answering it without an obtuse, flippant remark (they really don't come across very well) - its not that hard a question.

Iain

No I did not. Re Lisa I said I would have bitched too meaning that if someone of her character type , as she came across, came to live in my house it would have driven me up the walls and I would probably have bitched to let of steam rather than have a ding dong with her.

No doubt you will now want some protracted, semantic squabble over what constitutes bullying...where does bitching end and bullying begin ..... Quite frankly I can't be bothered.

I only started this thread to let any Cam fans know, who may browse these forums ,that he will be on Scottish telly on Friday (albeit for 5 mins). I'm amazed that people had such a problem with it.

There it is. The BB house doesn't belong to Stout, despite his proprietary attitude evinced with his petulantly jealous piece on the participants of Teen BB. It was not his house and it was not for him to decide who was welcome there and who wasn't and there is no way you can justify his behaviour towards her.


No. You don't want to "dance to someone else's tune" and acknowledge anything that could put your poster boy in a bad light. That's right, just gloss over it and maybe it will go away.


It doesn't look like there are any Stout fans here, apart from you. I wonder why?

now who's being pedantic?

suppose Disnae had said :

*No I did not. Re Lisa I said I would have bitched too meaning that if someone of her character type , as she came across, came to live in the same house as me it would have driven me up the walls and I would probably have bitched to let of steam rather than have a ding dong with her.*

would that have been better?

it seems to me the point is the same either way.

Iain

Go and watch some BB and maybe your posts might have some credibility to them.

Oh, and don't make "obtuse, flippant remarks". They don't come across well, you know...

thats very nice, but suppose Disnae had said :

*No I did not. Re Lisa I said I would have bitched too meaning that if someone of her character type , as she came across, came to live in the same house as me it would have driven me up the walls and I would probably have bitched to let of steam rather than have a ding dong with her.*

would that have been better?

that seemed like *a good question* not *a flippant remark*.

Iain

yes, but he was still living in it.


so you are wanting a protracted, semantic squabble.....

That means nothing. He was a contestant in a filmed environment. He didn't own the place, despite what he thought.

its not about who owns the house, its about how people might reasonably be expected to react when they're living in the same house.

you can see that tho'?

Iain

But he was still living there wasn't he ? What happened with Lisa is very typical group behaviour. The newcomer upsets the status quo and has to show they won't rock the boat to be accepted. It doesn't make it right but it happens.

You're rather like someone who turns up at a book club meeting having only skim-read a couple of chapters of the book under discussion. I'm finding you rather amusing now.

And?

Lisa came into that house with an agenda to "rock the boat" and "liven things up" because of the wide perception that the group of people in there were not interesting enough.

And she was treated appallingly by the others. Neither Stout nor Scott seemed prepared to give her a fair go right from the start. Fortunately, Lisa is a tough cookie and bounced back, but you could tell that she was upset and affected by it.

You are not seriously suggesting that the behaviour such as the vile bitching sessions that went on for *hours* during the night meted out to Lisa primarily by Stout and his equally disgusting "consort" Steph is acceptable?

Yes, this is classic territorial pack mentality and therefore fairly interesting to note from a quasi-anthropological perspective. In terms of seeing how it affects a real human being with feelings however, it was downright unpleasant to watch.

You really don't have a leg to stand on over this - either intellectually or morally. You can *explain* Stout's behaviour, but you cannot *excuse* it.

i don't think thats a very good analogy ben.

we're not discussing a book.

we're discussing how people who live together are likely to act if they don't particularly get on. despite your protests it has diddly squat to do with who owns the house.

for example - disnae made the point about Cameron just acting as he did because he was sharing a house with someone who was, lets not kid ourselves, really quite annoying.

are you suggesting that people should act differently because its Big Brother and not a *real* house?

if so, why? especially given that they have no real reason to get on with these people in the long term, and are competing to win £70,000?

Iain

no-one is saying its right or acceptable - simply that its what people do. you've simply tried to argue that because it wasn't their house, or because it was BB it shouldn't have happened, when of course there's absolutely no reason for it not too.


thats right - its what people do.


who's trying to?

all disnae originally said on this was :

*No I did not. Re Lisa I said I would have bitched too meaning that if someone of her character type , as she came across, came to live in my house it would have driven me up the walls and I would probably have bitched to let of steam rather than have a ding dong with her.*

to which you started talking about who owned the house :

*There it is. The BB house doesn't belong to Stout, despite his proprietary attitude evinced with his petulantly jealous piece on the participants of Teen BB. It was not his house and it was not for him to decide who was welcome there and who wasn't and there is no way you can justify his behaviour towards her.*

don't you ever bitch about people? perhaps in conversation you might bitch about what a pain in the arse you think I am.

but hey! i have feelings too, and such behaviour on your part would be inexcusable....

Iain

Just what does this have to do with whether Cam appears on CinN ?

I am not trying to excuse his behaviour re Lisa. I agree it wasn't nice. I think it can be explained and understood to a certain extent...that is all......I think it has no bearing on whether Cam does CiN. That is all.

Apart from 'in your eyes' making him out to be a despicable person are you saying that because of this he should not be appearing in CiN ? Otherwise its not relevant.

*We* are not discussing anything, Iain.

Stop backtracking. This thread has moved on from CiN and has become a more generic Stout thread.

Okay, I'll bite. Whatever the circumstances, they do not excuse bullying.

Oh, a straight question. Did you watch anything of the period that Lisa was in the house?

Then how you can support a bully is totally beyond me. Then again, I suppose some of us have scruples and some don't perhaps...

For the record, I do not see people in terms of black and white as you might think, but in shades of grey. Sadly, much of Stout's behaviour leant more towards the black side.

Ian - "see - this is what its come to.
Cameron goes on CiN and people aren't happy unless his entire history is dredged up to qualify this appearance to those who would rather take a simple comment about smacking and condemn him for it.
how absurd is that?
Iain"


How absurd is that? Not as absurd as you reading things into my posts that aren't there.

Excuse me, i'm replying to disnaespeakmuch about Camerons visit to the orphanage, there is nothing in any of my posts in this thread about accusing him of child abuse, smacking or anything of that nature. The only other comment i have made is, about him being in Aberdeen too much for my liking.

well, now that the obligatory ,disparaging exposition of my character has taken place and another unwelcome character trait has been identified and added to my ever growing list of faults .....since you are not saying that Cam shouldn't appear on CiN is it too much to hope that we have reached that stage in the proceedings where someone puts the kettle on ?

Well, if you choose to support someone who is so unpleasant.......

I'm afraid that you really *are* a Stout apologist.

no - but when people are in such close proximity, and they don't get on - thats whats going to happen.

you said yourself thats why they put Lisa in - to stir it up a bit.


as it happens - yes - i watched the first week or two, got a bit bored with it, then started watching it when Lisa went in.

and, as it happens, I thought she was very annoying.

Iain

Hammy -

I certainly didn't mean to imply that at all.

I just meant generally that such a detailed resume had had to be dredged up.

Iain

The central premise of this thread is that, given someone like Camoron has displayed on more than one occasion his less than altruistic behaviour towards his fellow man, despite spouting to the contrary, we find his presence on something like CIN spurious in the least. That is, he is the LAST person we might wish to have endorse outwardly genuine gestures of compassion and respect for his fellow man, an aspect of his character manifestly significant by it’s absence in BB4.