Hi, as a long-time lurker on these pages, I’ve been waiting for something I know about to comment on.
Before saying anything I have to say that I’d read k-punk’s analysis of the media reaction to GG going into the BB house and found it spot on. And for all those GG haters out there (and I’m one of them) I think K-P shows pretty clearly why Galloway will probably recover from the BB experience a lot quicker than people expect (idiots who think BB is worse than HIGNFY and think that pretending to be a cat on a national TV show is the worst thing you can do are the best friends GG has got).
Having said that, have you people actually been watching the programme??
The first thing, why are people grouping Rodman with Burns and Galloway against Preston, Chantelle and Barrymore? For most of the series Barrymore was the third ‘ugly sister’ and the other two only really turned against him once he sided with the youngsters in the house (and before that they were sycophantic about him in a way that the others would never be). Rodman didn’t really do anything in the house as far as I could see and was well put in his place by Chantelle and Barrymore in the ‘Big Fight’. Apart from acting as the house sex pest in the first week, the only other impression I was left with was that he was some sort of weird celebrity snob – but when you come down to it, over here in ‘London’ (as he calls this country) he’s only famous for being famous in America (so not much better than that kid…. er … what’s her name …. Chantelle….. , isn’t that right Dennis?). So why exactly would you want to know this guy – oh yeah, I forgot, he’s black and has 43 brothers and sisters (nice one George).
Anyway, moving on to Burns and Galloway:
Bulllying – K-P said that : ‘This bullying thing is clearly coming from people who have never been bullied. Bullying isn't about being called an idiot when you are behaving like an idiot; it's about being put-down, degraded and humiliated WHATEVER you do, for no reason and without provocation’.
I agree with this. But how can you say that Pete Burns isn’t a bully? He systematically sought out what he thought to be the weakest person in the house and found some reason to attack them – Jodi; Rula; Chantelle; Traci. The only time he didn’t get anywhere was with Chantelle who was too clever to get in his games. And misogynist (this applies to George as well who tended to join in Pete’s attacks once Burns had cleared the way)? Why didn’t he pick on any of the men – you’re telling me that Preston, Maggot, Dennis , Barrymore and George are better than those women? The only reason he started picking on Preston is that Chantelle would have whupped him in a fight and there was no other men left!
People say about Pete that he’s funny and a ‘straight talking bastard’ and all that shit. ‘Funny’ is difficult to argue for one way or another but I can honestly say that I can’t remember a single funny thing that Pete has said (there’s a review of a biography of Mourinho in a recent London Review of Books: ‘Barclay would have us believe that Mourinho is funny, too, but most of the time he is simply unpleasant, in a vaguely humorous sort of way’ - this sums up Pete Burns’ ‘humour’ for me, much prefer Mourinho though).
But anyway – ‘straight talking bastard’ – with Burns, the ‘straight talking’ is always an excuse for him to be a bastard. And his straight talking is *what* exactly? – Jodi’s annoying (true), Rula’s a bit mumsy (hmmm?), Traci’s fake (who knows), Chantelle’s thick (bollocks – she’s 100x smarter than Burns), Preston has shifty eyes (fair enough I guess) – thanks for those insights – and Galloway is what? – the daddy you never had by the sound of it. I’m sure people could justify his attacks against all of the housemates but tell me what exactly was the point of his rant against Preston and Chantelle? He accused them of lying in a task where they had to lie in order to get food for the house. What is straight talking about that? What is the point in that? (And does *anyone* believe Galloway’s claim that he wouldn’t have accepted the food, champagne, etc (can’t be bothered to look up the quote) – what absolute bollocks!!!- and what does that show exactly?) (obviously where deniis grew up they woiuld have got a punch in the face)
Anyway, George:
Coming into BB was a smart move (and still could be). Going in to the BB house is only negative as far as being a ‘career politician’ goes and even from an ideological point of view is clearly positive in terms of wider audiences, blah blah blah.
It doesn’t help though if you go into the BB house and act like a complete cunt.
How so:
(1) "Not at all; not at all...as is obvious now; now they admit that. He was hated by political opponents as he suppressed all opposition political forces, but he wasn't hated by the ordinary Iraqi - no, not at all".
(2) ‘you are a wicked person who has corrupted this young girl and there’s a 55-year old man crying out there and it’s all your fault!”
(3) ‘The aplomb with which you became a lying plutocrat'
(4) ‘you are a sneak and a cheat and have been revealed as a sneak and a cheat’
(5) ‘what the hell kind of men are they?’ – GG on men crying in the house
(6) saying that he’ll make no bones about it that he wants Michael to win, and later admitting that he’s ‘damaged’ but still wants him to win before laying into him less than a day after
(7) what did he say on the nominations? (can’t find it on the internet) but it was something to do with Faria having done anything to get on the programme – have you watched the programme you fool?
(8) Loads more I’m sure but very late and going to bed I’m sorryy
I don’t know, I really don’t care about George (and I've got to go to bed).
I’m annoyed that there’s so much dismissal on this thread of Chantelle! She is so obviously the best in the house by a long way but just treated here like an attachment to (the pathetic) Preston. In short, she’s better than the rest of them because: (1) she stands up for herself; (2) she’s the only one who’s shown that she can get on with someone who is different from herself; (3) she’s FUNNY! (and funny in that she doesn’t make bitchy remarks but has made me laugh out loud TWICE! Which is two times more often than anyone else – ask me and I’ll tell you)
Anyway, sorry for the long message.
Cheers!
PS – Why does showing that Rumsfeld went to Iraq invalidate evidence showing GG went to Iraq? The point of that is that Rumsfeld went there to sell arms. Okay, I understand that but why was GG there? Why does everyone say ‘I’m sympathetic to GG’s politics’ as if GG can’t be extracted from the anti-war message. Obvious point but anti-war campaigners should ditch GG straight away, might show seriousness.
