Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Beebee111

Member
  • Posts

    78
  • Joined

Reputation

299 Excellent
  1. IMO that's harsh. Ultimately, it is a game show that involves enduring significant stress as a gamble that there will be a huge pay off at the end. If someone, upon embarking on the experience, decides that the stress isn't worth the gamble, that's certainly their right.
  2. I just don't evidence of misogyny in Jeremy's behaviour. THIS. This game move for me was a case of blowing up an alliance just for the sake of it. The only purpose it served was to feed Stephen's paranoia and ego. It would be interesting to see how Jeremy can come back from this. I think he's lucky he has two idols. Does anyone else hate this new advantage, i.e., the vote stealing twist? Really, I know this is a reality tv game show - but stealing another player's vote just seems like such overt unfairness. It's one thing to have an extra vote, but to essentially render another powerless at the same time regardless of the game they have been playing seems a bit much. I guess the only thing I can do is root for it to fail to work for Fishbach.
  3. In actual fact, Savage referred to Kass' account of what happened between her and Tasha as 'delusional,' which in my perception of Kass' behaviour/personality would not be far from the truth. Of course,YM(perception)MV.
  4. I don't dislike Savage either. Of course there are aspects to his personality that make him come across as jerk, but there are also aspects that I find endearing. He shows self-awareness about his weak spots, apologizes, and takes responsibility for his poor game moves. I really enjoyed his exit interview and his read on Kass seemed very much in line with who she presented herself as (in both seasons of the show). For the record, Kass didn't blindside him - she was eliminated before he was. He has mentioned that 'chaos Kass' is very much of Kass' personality and I can't blame him for disliking a qualities of a person that are so reviled by many. Part of his response was in defense of Tasha, who Kass has been disparaging in her exit interviews - he said her perception of what happened was very off and Kass was in fact the one who antagonized Tasha. As always, YMMV.
  5. I compeletely disagree with the assertion that the subtle, but powerful, UTR strategist game that Jeremy is playing is somehow "easier" than Ciera's current approach. It takes tremendous social skill, patience, and self-control (e.g., managing emotions when one disagrees) to wield that kind of influence. Anyone can stand up and shout their thoughts at TC. It takes real effort to actually build trusting relationships that you can rely on or influence for votes when it counts. That's why Kim, Cirie are so admired - because they were able to execute a style of play that is so difficult for others. What's interesting to me is that there are parallels to real life leadership here - and there's definitely a style that IMO wins you friends and influence and one that can get you despised - even if you end up getting your way. Interestingly as JudyObscure puts it, Jeremy's perceived style is much more typically associated with how women approach leadership roles than Ciera's. The only thing IMHO that Ciera could make that would justify why she is behaving as she is would be that she had exhausted all other options, and it was a Hail Mary pass. Agreed. I think what's frustrating is that there are many times when there is real bigotry at play and it gets a pass.
  6. THIS Kikaha. Well put. Kimber, I guess personal biases come into play in judging players because I much prefer the stealthy approach. Players who are able to make genuine relationships, leverage them strategically, while remaining somewhat UTR (not to mention treating others respectfully while at it) really appeal to me. I think something we snarkers from afar may not appreciate is just how hard it is to draw the line between making moves whilst not being perceived as overplaying. As Kikaha said, those who have played too aggressively have found themselves out of the game - I would argue that Savage too was a victim of this. That being said, maybe Ciera is out of options. Perhaps she is using that approach because it is the only angle she has left having been unable to garner allies due to earlier mistakes and/or bad luck. It just looks like a terribly ineffective from my vantage point.
  7. I thought this was pretty obvious given the edits about how Joe kept running back and forth between alliances trying to have his cake and eat it. We'll see whether this serves his game long term or hurts him. This behaviour has already cost him a strong ally in Andrew - whose pretty much overplayed his hand out of the game this week. Had he adopted the "anyone but me" strategy and kept his mouth shut and out of the Fishback-Joe feud, he might still be here today. But, that isn't Savage. What's funny is that this season highlights more than ever how people's "fatal flaws" lead to their demise. Just like Kass, Savage became his own worst enemy. Well, he is part of the majority. He voted with them and the edits clearly showed that he was included in their strategic discussions about who to vote out and actually made a point about why this was not the right time to target Fishbach. The fact that he actually is being given voice, however, small to participate in strategy talks rather than just being told who to vote for, shows that he has been at least some what effective in building new relationships. Now, of course we don't know how close he is to the "top" but it gives him a better chance of making plays since I think it is unlikely the "core 3/4/5?" will stick together till the end given they may all be threatened by each other. So she keeps grandstanding about how they should switch from the bottom of their alliance to the bottom of her alliance? This is one of my least favourite arguments from Survivor. If she really knew who was on the bottom she should approach them quietly and try to work them (like Tasha did with Abi on Angkor). I find the speeches annoying and insulting people proclaiming loudly how stupid you think their strategy is really doesn't seem to me like an effective way to win their friendship or influence.
  8. Thanks for posting the promo. I admit this season has me on the edge of my seat and I can't wait for next week's showdown.Do you think the edit is misleading and the real target will end up being neither one of the two? I think we will find out where Joe's real loyalties lie. I find it suspicious that in the promo video, he is bring out his 'evil side' with Ciera and Wentworth. Hmmm.
  9. Unfortunately, I find it difficult to be swayed by Kass's perspectives. Having watched both her game play and her exit videos, I find her to be completely lacking in self-awareness, and not particularly insightful. In fact, her continued obsession with blaming her downfall entirely on Tasha makes she thinks she has a serious case of projection going on. Granted, Tasha could have handled the conflict with more grace and finesse (which we know she's capable of because of her expert handling of Abi). However, I find Kass so incredibly grating and I am only watching her from a distance on TV. I can only imagine the strength of will that would be required to deal with her gracefully in person.
  10. It's not about dignifying a job. It's about dignifying a person, many of whom have few choices and end up in undesirable situations because of unthinkable hardships and injustices. LOL. I agree. On the other hand, those who say reality TV is trash that can't elicit any form of challenging intellectual dialogue on current political/social issues clearly don't visit this thread after watching the Bachelor/ette. I am happy to move on from this now. I admit to fast forwarding through much of this season though - the show is really deteriorating for me into something that's almost unwatchable. There used to be at least a small part of me that would root for a few characters even as I watched for the 'wrong reasons' but that's becoming impossible.
  11. [snip] The term 'whore' is derogatory and even those who have sex for money should have the dignity of being called commercial sex workers. Aside from that, I do think there are legitimate criticisms or concerns about Kaitlyn's behavior (and that similar concerns have been leveled against male leads) that are not sexist - but rather about "what is the decent and kind way to treat others" and is Kaitlyn doing that? Although as an adult Kaitlyn is entitled to have all the sex she wants with whomever she wants, I think adults have the responsibility to be open and honest with sexual partners for both sexual health safety and moral reasons. First, there is no such thing as 100% safe sex - condoms break and don't protect from all STDS so there are always risks when you have multiple partners. Second, sex has a strong emotional component for both men and women. Is it it fair to have sex with someone knowing they have different expectations from you about what it means? Is it fair to keep information from a dating partner who cares for you deeply emotionally (see Shawn in this case) while you (see Kaitlyn) are having secret sex' with other people (i.e., Nick). YMMV. I think the slut-shaming bit comes in where the producers have most likely hidden (edited out) this type of behavior from male leads whereas in Kaitlyn's (a woman's case) they are highlighting it. Of course, for all I know this could all be fake and Kaitlyn and Nick received a 'bonus' for pretending to do it on camera - so I try not to take it too seriously. Definitely not abnormal. I will say though, that teens/young adults who have multiple partners may grossly overestimate the extent to which "others are doing it too." There's research that shows men over-estimate sexual partners, while women often underestimate when asked. Not surprising given different societal standards for men and women.
  12. I'm not sure I saw this at all, because he did question why she wasn't taking her Adderall if it had been described and she was having symptoms of inattention. I am of two minds about this. On one hand, I see this point and really question whether it was appropriate. On the other hand, I don't think we should be hiding away mental illness and that mentally ill people have as much a right as anybody else to participate in society. She wanted to be on the show and be heard - and she probably doesn't have the resources to get help by herself rather than through surrendering some dignity on a reality show. I think our society always wants to "hide mental illness" as some form of shameful thing and I thought that under the circumstances (a sometimes questionable reality show) Dr Phil was very kind & I appreciated the repeated comments that just because one has a mental illness, that doesn't mean they can't parent. If she gets the right help and medications, she may be able to be a more active participant in her children's lives.
  13. THIS. Sigh! I watched Russell Hanz's seasons and I am finding the combination of characters on this one, just that much more detestable. It's not fun to watch misogynistic, hateful, ignorance coupled with unkindness. Watching Dan and Rodney, each week is a constant reminder that people like them exist, and that does not make for a fun viewing experience. That being said, I do agree with whoever said that they would "leave their kids with Rodney before Dan." It's the epitome of a choice between a rock and a hard place, but I would choose Rodney as well. To be honest, I can't stand Carolyn and Tyler either. Carolyn has shown that she is capable of letting her dislike of a somewhat socially awkward (but otherwise decent individual) irrationally influence her game play (i.e., her attitude toward Shirin), yet she seems to find Dan & Rodney acceptable company and alliance mates. Tyler on the other hand seems to have no clear game play of his own other than to play second fiddle to BC and serve as Mike's stooge. Will . . . who's Will? I predict the goat of the season.
  14. Tyler actually said, "This chick is nuts" followed later by a reference to Hayley as the "wicked witch." Both comments were deserved and now that other racers are commenting on her behaviour, it's probably the case that she gave them (and the editors) a lot of fodder to work with. I actually defended her on the first episode or so, but at this point I am thinking Blair has the patience of a saint. A different racing partner would have given her a tongue lashing to put her in her place in no uncertain terms, but he just tries to be diplomatic and work around her. Hopefully, watching herself on TV will allow her to develop some self-awareness.
  15. I admit my perspective has also shifted since last week. Blair may just be tuning out Hayley to maintain his sanity. Of course, it then appears that he's ignoring her which makes her even more of a nag. Who knows? I may shift loyalties again next episode. I concur. Jenny does not seem to be a particularly pleasant companion - she is unable to compose herself enough through tough times to gain perspective. My favourite racers are always those who can be calm and maintain perspective through a storm - perhaps because it's so tough to do, I find it very admirable. BTW, what happened to TAR? I really miss the tough challenges of the old TAR that really gave an opportunity for racers to apply themselves to difficult tasks - it was fun for the audience to watch how the racers adapted. After skipping out on 1 or two seasons for lacklustre challenges, I'm back and disappointed that TPTB haven't addressed this issue yet.
×
×
  • Create New...