I'm Going To Gae Land!
I admit that until last night, I didn't think too much of the amusingly-named Gaelan. He was purportedly the 'clear leader' of the House, according to the Housemates themselves. The 'alpha male'. The leader. The one most likely to win.
But what would they know?
They were basing most of their thoughts on their collective assumptions of what the public's perception of him was likely to be, but this is a fruitless exercise for them to even discuss, let alone come to a conclusion on. How could they possibly know?
So it came as no surprise to me that the public opinion was to evict him. In fact, I don't doubt that this happened largely because every evicted Housemate has said that inside the House, Gaelan is considered the one who will probably win. I reckon the public wanted to send a message that "he's not all that", and until this week, we haven't had the opportunity to do so.
The good things to come out of the eviction last night:
- Gaelan won't win
- Krystal is further unsettled by losing her 'boy'
- The Housemates might be a bit shocked that their 'alpha male' and 'sure-thing winner' is gone
- The House might be further 'rocked' that three males have left the House in the space of two days
- The girls now finally out-number the boys
The bad things to come out of the eviction last night:
- Krystal wasn't too fussed after all
- Gaelan actually seemed like a top bloke during his eviction interview (at least saying all the right things and even -- for the most part -- expressing himself clearly and honestly)
- Karen managed to get her face on my TV screen again
Of course, no account of last night's show would be complete without at least touching on the John/Ashley thing again. While I in no way condone their behaviour at all, I think it's clear that it was a case of three friends mucking around. Perhaps there was too much alcohol involved (not that that's an excuse; I just point it out to suggest that maybe Big Brother should be shouldering a share of the blame/responsibilty for the incident -- much like a pub would, for serving too much alcohol to an inebriated patron). It certainly went too far, and as many have said, it was a stupid thing to do under any circumstances.
The fact that their current circumstances happened to include being on a nationally-televised program that (a) kids watch; (b) contains strict behavioural rules; (c) moral groups attack regularly for low standards and its portrayal of base behaviour; and (d) is determined by popular public vote (mostly by teenage girls; let's not kid ourselves here), shows their even-stupider-than-normal thinking patterns at the time.
It was a stupid thing to do, whether they were mucking around or not. I'm not for a moment suggesting otherwise.
However, it was simply 'mucking around', and although this should never be excused or permitted to carry on (that's how sexual harassment and even workplace bullying are able to thrive; by people excusing it as 'a bit of harmless fun'), I think it's unfortunate for the boys in question that their profiles are so large at the moment that they will invariably be faced with the 'sexual pervert' stigma for a long time to come.
As Camilla, Claire and some of the others said (between sobs) in last night's Daily Show, they're good guys who don't deserve to be labelled in that way for all time. Unfortunately for everyone involved, they probably will be.
I hope you've read the above carefully and that I haven't painted myself as a 'typical male pig', because I still strongly deny that I am accepting their behaviour as okay. It wasn't. It was wrong, disgusting, offensive, pig-headed, bullying, stupid and creepy. They definitely should have been removed from the House. That was 100% the right decision.
But I don't plan to label the guys as 'sexual deviants' for life. They both seemed like great guys until this one mistake, and the anger I suspect they're going to face from the general public is probably going to outweigh anything else they contributed to the series. Is that fair? Maybe, maybe not. It's obviously a matter of opinion as to whether or not people choose to despise them on principle, or just despise their one act of stupidity. I think their public humiliation, embarrassment and shame (in addition to -- presumably -- receiving no prizes after all their time in the House) is possibly a stong enough lesson. I don't think they need to receive an angry tongue-lashing from every quarter as well.
(Naturally, if Camilla's stance on the whole thing was different ... or if she were to change it at any point and say that her initial reaction wasn't a reflection of her true feelings of the incident ... then my view would be very different indeed. But as long as she's maintaining that she was not in fear of her safety/virtue, and that it was all fun and games at the time -- and that the boys stopped when she said 'no' -- then I think the repercussions they and their families will be experiencing are going to drive the point home for them.)
They weren't being malicious. They probably weren't even trying to be sexist. But of course it was a ridiculously dumb thing to do, and I'd say they're going to be paying for it for a long time to come. I'm not going to jump on the "kill them, kill them all" bandwagon, and I hope my views and opinions on this won't simply be disregarded on the basis of my gender.
Camilla is absolutely my new favourite. Until now, I was undecided between her and David, but (through no fault of David's and largely through a very unfortunate incident for Camilla), she is now destined to win Big Brother.
She won my support even before we'd reached the Ashley/John thing on yesterday's Daily Show. When she tried to communicate with Perry about her feelings and Perry continued to talk over her, get angry and bitchy with her, speak so rudely to her and then not allow Camilla to respond to her unfair accusations and belittlings, Wifey and I announced our intense dislike for Perry and our support for Camilla (there's a difference between 'stirring the pot' and simply being a bitch and starting trouble because you're too rude to respect anyone else's rights -- and while Camilla gets a gold medal for being completely upfront, gracious, fair and honest with everyone, even her biggest 'enemy', Perry is an abysmal failure at extending to anyone else the same courtesies she demands of those around her).
Then the Ashley/John incident went down, and Camilla's response all throughout that situation was (to our minds) exemplary. Not once did she wave the flag of women's rights in an unfair and biased way to gain any kind of advantage or level of public support. Not once did she turn on her friends and try to have them punished (nor certainly removed from the game). And after the full story was revealed to the Housemates, not once did she attack their integrity or paint it out to be anything worse than it was, even though they weren't there to defend themselves and she could have conceivably benefitted from playing the 'victim' card for sympathy.
And I'm oh-so-glad that Big Brother made it clear to all the assembled Housemates that not only did Camilla have nothing to apologise for or feel bad about (which of course is true, and a great lesson to any other victims out there), but that she did not request, and in fact specifically asked BB not to punish the guys for the incident.
If taking fifteen hours to contemplate the event before acting ensured that the right stuff was said to Camilla and the group, then I'm glad the time was taken. I'm sure Kris Noble would have stuffed it up in a major way (even if only for Camilla) if he'd knee-jerk responded to it straight away. He has a history of doing that if his script isn't carefully considered beforehand. For once, I was happy with how things were handled.
In fact, with the exception of John and Ashley themselves, I'm quite impressed with how everyone involved has dealt with the situation. Big Brother himself, Gretel's cue cards, Jamie (whose only problem afterwards was with David -- and that was just due to the two of them handling the shock differently; Jamie certainly said all the right things to Camilla even though he'd just lost his two closest remaining friends in the House), and especially Camilla herself. They all did very well with such a tough and intense unexpected development.
So Ashley and John are out of the House, and according to Gretel last night, we'll have the chance to hear from them at some point soon (details tonight). Hopefully by then any anger they'll feel towards the producers of the show for being removed will have evaporated, and they'll have seen enough of the public outcry to realise that they really need to do the right thing and accept their stupidity, apologise for their behaviour, and hopefully move on with their lives having learnt a big lesson about disgracefully unacceptable behaviour (if they haven't already realised all this).
Otherwise, we're all just a nation of stupid ignorant deviants.
.
14 Comments:
I quite liked Gaelan once he was evicted, but we saw bugger all of him in the house, so he came across as really boring.
Those guys were stupid, basically. And have probably killed BB forever - Stephen Fielding and his mob didn't need the extra ammunition to call for the show to be canned.
You're missing the point dear Mr Bevis.
Have you seen the footage on youtube yet?
If not, it does appear that Camilla was a willing participant up to a point.
However, once those boys HELD HER DOWN, they deprived her of her free will and liberty. A willing participant does not need to be held down. From that point on they forced their own will on her. And THAT is when it becomes an assault.
My other fear is their total lack of respect for women. If this is how they behave on national tv, then just what are they capable of behind closed doors?
I just read that Mr 1950's himself 'John Howard' has suggested that the show be axed because of the Ash & John incident.
Perry.
Jesus.
I want to go into the house with a knife and MURDER her. Camilla had dozens of arguments she could has used against Perry last night, but she didn't use a single one. instead she kind of tip-toed around and let Perry walk all over her. I felt my blood boil watching it!
AGH!
And RE the incident, which I am really tired of already, it was a moronic thing to do, plain and simple. they knew the rules, they broke them, they suffered the consequences. Although i am not fond of Camilla, I think she will win.
Hmm. If Steph is right than why doesn't Camilla view it in such a way? I thought you wrote with a sensitive, non-reactionary view of events.
I viewed the incident as another example of why most men aren't worth knowing until they are 30+; usually I hate to make such widesweeping judgements but it's how I've started to think. At university in the UK, there were so many guys like Ashley and John. They weren't malicious, just unthinking and immature and essentially pack animals.
But why should we blame Big Brother for their behaviour?
I'm so happy Mr. Howard is with me on this cause. Once I explain my case to him, he's sure to agree that not only Big Brother but also the news (on all stations bar channel seven, for which is merely picking up GMA's advertorial clients) contains filth and smut. Did you know I saw the blurred head of a pedophile on their filthy show the other night? How disgusting! THOUSANDS of people are going to see that shrowded man and instantly want to become a pedophile, because what is on TV is the right thing to do. WE MUST MOVE to eradicate the news from TV.
And is the penis puppet gone from The Book Shop yet? It often made me want to bury my head in someone's lap, often sans-book. It didn't help that it was on so early in the morning!
And does anyone else think "John" looks like a Muppet? "I'm just SAY-N'!"
CLaRue, welcome! Basically, I agree with everything you're saying. :)
Steph, I didn't mean to sound 'like a typical guy' about this, so it distresses me to think that this is how you might now view me. No, I haven't seen the footage and I don't particularly want to. The idea of it sickens me enough, I promise. I realise this makes my opinion relatively 'un-informed', but I'll wear that. I also promise you that I understand how her free will was removed by them holding her down, and I'm not arguing that they didn't or that it wasn't. However, the spirit of the 'incident' was not to rob her of her liberty, and I think it's only fair to take that into consideration as well. BUT NOT TO EXCUSE THEIR ACTIONS OR THE ACTIONS OF THE PRODUCERS TO REMOVE THEM FROM THE HOUSE. I'm not trying to build a case supporting their behaviour, but I guess I am saying they have learnt a valuable lesson in the finer points of indecency, and it was a crash course. They clearly didn't mean to rob Camilla of her free will, and now that it's been put into that perspective for them, I think they (and hopefully many viewers who might otherwise not have learnt this lesson) will never do so again, regardless of their intention at the time. I heard that the police have viewed the footage and deemed that there isn't enough in it to press charges, and as Pomgirl said, surely to a point the victim has to agree that a violation has taken place for it to be treated as such? But I really don't want to argue about this; not because I think I'm right and anybody else is wrong, but because differing, equally valid viewpoints on the situation would only frustrate and fracture friendships -- and nobody wants that. :) Love me?
Javatari, well that's it then. What he says goes, eh! :)
John Surname, you've hit the nail on the head in relation to Perry. Except for the bit where you call her Jesus. I don't see the similarity, sorry.
Pomgirl, thank you for saying so. I certainly didn't want or expect to upset anyone or ruffle any feathers. But hey, if I need to learn a lesson here too, I'm happy to admit it and grow as a result. Even Wifey (who gets extremely hot under the collar about such issues), and who was initially out for John & Ashley's blood when I told her what they'd done, has since looked at it anew (and in the context of the ten weeks we've "known" them) and said that she thinks they've been punished enough. The phrase "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" may sound inappropriate and condescending in this situation, but I think the general message behind it is valid. Have any of us not made a joke with friends that went sour? Add the alcohol, the BB House, the ten weeks without a break, the familiarity with which they all now treat each other, and whatever other elements you care to add, and I think it's far to say that all the carrying-on is kind of getting out of control. As for blaming Big Brother, not entirely, no. But I'd say they should carry part of the responsibility for what happened. The producers put them in there and set up events specifically to make them all act like horny teenagers (so they can get the best possible footage), supplying them with alcohol on Friday nights and then leaving them without anything to do to amuse/entertain themselves (the Daily Show even proved that they ASKED Big Brother for something to keep them occupied and he said no). The producers can't throw red meat in the lion's den and then sit back and shock and completely blame the lion for attacking the zoo keeper who walked through the den wearing red meat underpants. Or something like that. Pubs get fined and held legally responsible in a court of law for drunken patrons who were served too much and then go out and kill someone on the roads. Yes, the driver was at fault and made the decision to get behind the wheel while drunk, but the pub kept happily serving them drinks until they were barely able to stand up, so they shoulder some of the blame. By no means all of it, but they certainly aren't blameless. That's what happens when they create the kind of atmosphere they've INTENTIONALLY created in that House. Anyway, that's enough of that. Cheers. :)
Tyson, haha. You certainly know how to diffuse a moment, eh? In fact, I saw John Howard himself on the news the other night. Is this what we want to be encouraging our young people to become? International terrorists and mass murderers? (Or "politicians"; whichever term you're used to using.)
she has a jesus complex, clearly.
It's a little known fact, but the scenario that occured on Sunday morning is actually how Little Johnny got into politics, and also how he got his nickname.
Sweet Mr Bevis, my feathers are far from ruffled. You know i adore and Idolise you. (Big, sloppy kiss)
Pomgirl, I fear that most victims of assault have the same guilt that Camilla suffered. It's because she willingly got into bed with them, and played along for a little while, that she doesn't want to press charges.
I agree, that his post was sensitive and non-reactionary, i was merely stating my opinion, and my own reaction to seeing the footage.
T'was a good post ;)
John Surname, ha! Good call. :)
AJ, that sounds about right. And now he's trying to close the door so others won't be able to come in and take over his job!
Steph, I'm very glad to hear that I didn't ruffle your feathers! (I wasn't referring exclusively to you, though -- don't worry.) Adore and idolise? I think you're goin' overboard there! I also acknowledge what you said about victims of assault often feeling guilty for those reasons, and frequently not reporting an incident (or frequently wanting charges dropped) for various reasons such as guilt, it all being too much bother, the fear of being accused of lying, being accused of having 'over-reacted', being told that she was 'asking for it', what people will think of her, her own discomfort with causing 'trouble' or 'a scene', the perpetrators are nice guys ordinarily, etc. My first thought went straight to this when BB called her into the Diary Room to discuss it the first time. But when she was talking with the Housemates about it later I figured she knew what she was talking about, and (in the absence of her changing her tune -- and as I said, if she does change her tune, my support will be with her entirely), I can only take her words on face value and be concerned for the reputations (or the remains of them, anyway) of the two guys involved. Maybe my own (very minor!) case of being accused by a flamer last year of being a paedophile fuelled me to support the guys somewhat (but not to excuse their actions or stupidity, or to fight their eviction), because I know how hard it is to shake such a dark cloud if it's even slightly unfair. But anyway, I know what you're saying and I certainly don't have a problem with you saying it. Even if we had completely opposing views (which we don’t) and things were getting angry here (which they aren’t … BITCH!), I'd still "defend to the death your right to say it". :) Who knows, your stance may turn out to be Camilla's own, as well, upon further reflection / time away from the House once she finally comes out. And thanks for the ‘it was a good post’ thing. I was trying to be fair to all involved. Perhaps to a fault.
Tyson's comment was hilarious. Particularly the reference to the penis puppet from 'The Book Shop (Place?)' who I always thought sounded drunk as well! ;-)
Nothing to do in the house? They can make bread, change what they are wearing 8 times a day and didn't they have those rubber ducks for a short while, which were amusingly thrown on the roof? Nothing to do? Pah!
Seriously though; I still wouldn't blame Big Brother for their behaviour. Of course they want the housemates to be so bored that they make their own entertainment but I doubt they could ever have expected an incident like this. Or be somehow prepared for it. John and Ashley are ultimately responsible for their own behaviour.
Steph, I didn't doubt for a moment that you were stating your own opinion. I've been really impressed with how Camilla articulates what she is thinking/feeling throughout the series and didn't see any reason to not think she was still doing that. It will be interesting to hear what she has to say about the incident once she is out of the house.
Post a Comment
<< Home