S39.E08: We Made it to the Merge!

[Ms Blue Jay]

4 hours ago, seacliffsal said:

I will also keep watching.  However, I won't hate myself, but will hate some of the players.

Good Will Hunting voice:  It's not our fault.  (Okay, maybe it kind of is.  Without ratings they wouldn't air.)

Edited November 16, 2019 by Ms Blue Jay

[sara416]

16 hours ago, DEL901 said:

I wonder if Dan's anger at Kellee stems partially from the producer "talk"... if he knew that Kellee was the one who had the problem with him and talked to production... 

Of course it was. Which demonstrates precisely why women or people being bullied or abused in any way struggle with speaking up about it. Because the perpetrator always knows who did it. I was in a workplace bullying situation several years ago. It was bad. I cried at my desk several times a week for months before I finally got the hell out of there. I tried to talk with my supervisor about it but she was worthless and said it sounded like a personal issue. I could have gone up the ladder, but no way. I knew what would happen would be some generic meeting about how we all need to treat each other with respect, but the bullies would have known who said something and my life would have been even more miserable there. 

[EllenB]

14 hours ago, AZChristian said:

Hypothetical question.

Background:  Jeff Probst has a 15-year-old stepdaughter (true).  Let's say that we are 8-10 years in the future and she (different last name) manages to get onto Survivor on her own merits, and it is not known that she is Jeff's "daughter."  (Yes, I know there are rules against this level of nepotism, but this part is hypothetical.)  This same situation (Dan/Kellie) comes up, with the stepdaughter in the "Kellie" role.

Is Dan still on the show after the first day's concerns about his touching?

Kellie is someone's daughter.  She deserves the same protection, and Dan should face the same consequences.

It shouldn't matter if she is "someone's daughter." It should matter that she is a PERSON WITH AUTONOMY OVER HER OWN BODY.

I do get your point of view in light of your personal history, but the people on Survivor are adults.

Edited November 16, 2019 by EllenB

[watchingtvaddict]

35 minutes ago, sara416 said:

Of course it was. Which demonstrates precisely why women or people being bullied or abused in any way struggle with speaking up about it. Because the perpetrator always knows who did it. I was in a workplace bullying situation several years ago. It was bad. I cried at my desk several times a week for months before I finally got the hell out of there. I tried to talk with my supervisor about it but she was worthless and said it sounded like a personal issue. I could have gone up the ladder, but no way. I knew what would happen would be some generic meeting about how we all need to treat each other with respect, but the bullies would have known who said something and my life would have been even more miserable there. 

I've seen this several times in the workplace, too. Someone is bullied and HR or management decides both parties need to apologize to the other. 

What annoys me is Kellee was the only one who complained directly to Dan and I believe the other women felt uncomfortable addressing the issue directly. So, I think blame lays with the producers for allowing Kellee to be the fall guy. They should have stipulated that MULTIPLE WOMEN felt uncomfortable. Maybe they did but Dan decided to ignore that information.  

[OldButHappy]

On 11/14/2019 at 3:53 PM, Drogo said:

Brushing a hair out of someone's mouth while they're talking, throwing an arm over someone sleeping in your bed while you're both sleeping, touching someone's hair after they just told you how dirty their hair feels, tickling a foot hanging over your head etc. are all touches that wouldn't have been a big deal coming from a player they were closer with or one they didn't find as repulsive as they find Creepy Dan. 

In what universe??

Any man, any where, any time, who reaches out and brushes my hair out of my mouth while I'm talking to him is a creep.  This is how assholes get away with it and become emboldened..I mean, what's the harm, right???  If you don't see it as the power play that it is, then you are part of the problem.

[SVNBob]

On 11/14/2019 at 9:36 PM, pennben said:

I do wonder if the reaction to the apologies would be different if Aaron’s was just the printed word v video. Substantively, they really weren’t that different, Aaron’s just had visuals with him crying. 

I haven't seen Aaron's apology videos, but I have read a transcript (and seen the still thumbnails, without tears.)  And I read it after I read Elizabeth and Missy's statements.  His definitely reads differently.  It sounds more genuine than the two women's statements.  More like a real "I fucked up and am sorry" apology than a "stop hating on me on the Internet" apology.

21 hours ago, AZChristian said:

 Jeff Probst has a 15-year-old stepdaughter (true). 

Snipping your hypothetical to address this one fact.  She is probably the reason that Peachy latched onto this issue like a bulldog and would not let it go.

[JudyObscure]

9 hours ago, princelina said:

Ghandia and Ted were snuggly sleepers together every night, until one morning she felt his morning boner and freaked out about it. 

I Just found a clip of it and he did admit he did the grinding thing while he was half asleep, and she says he also put his hand in her hair and massaged her hair.  Eww.  Survivor is the last place I would expect people to be wanting to touch scalps.  Maybe this show should start having the tribes make two shelters.

I wont quit watching.  I quit watching "The Today Show" after it became pretty clear they had all been looking the other way for years while Matt Lauer  raped women in his locked office.

"Survivor," is the only show I know of (I don't watch Big Brother anymore)  to air rather than hide or edit out this sort of thing.  Maybe they didn't handle it as well as they should but they tried and I think every person who watched learned something.  Were they thinking of ratings?  Of course, always,  but they couldn't have been sure how it would go down, they took a chance and tried to address an important topic.

Edited November 16, 2019 by JudyObscure

[Jel]

14 hours ago, Drogo said:

"I'll never let it go, Dan!  But go ahead and keep grabbing Noura, because I'm clearly comfortable pretending that's not even happening." 

I'd say it was more a case of Jeff not even understanding that it was happening. Jeff thinks he's woke. He ain't woke.  

____

Women's bodies exist in this world as objects for Dan -- to keep him warm, amused, to act as a demo to make his point, etc. I can only imagine what some of his employees and clients must have to endure to keep their jobs or to get a part.

And if she objects to his cuddling/tickling/hugging/squeezing, he doesn't really care, and he'll do it anyway. And if she continues to object, then he'll find a way to make himself the victim of this shrewish woman who's misunderstood his intentions and is now trying to hurt him.  

[Drogo]

4 hours ago, OldButHappy said:

On 11/14/2019 at 3:53 PM, Drogo said:

Brushing a hair out of someone's mouth while they're talking, throwing an arm over someone sleeping in your bed while you're both sleeping, touching someone's hair after they just told you how dirty their hair feels, tickling a foot hanging over your head etc. are all touches that wouldn't have been a big deal coming from a player they were closer with or one they didn't find as repulsive as they find Creepy Dan. 

In what universe??

Any man, any where, any time, who reaches out and brushes my hair out of my mouth while I'm talking to him is a creep.  This is how assholes get away with it and become emboldened..I mean, what's the harm, right???  If you don't see it as the power play that it is, then you are part of the problem.

I'm part of the problem then, because I've brushed a hair out of someone's mouth before. We don't live in a universe where no one wants to be touched ever.  Human touch is healthy and skin hunger is real.  

I stand by my assertion that it wasn't the actual touches that were problematic- the problem was that the recipient specifically said to stop because they were uncomfortable, and the touching continued.  

[peachmangosteen]

17 minutes ago, Drogo said:

I stand by my assertion that it wasn't the actual touches that were problematic ...

The way Elizabeth described (in an earlier ep) him putting his arms around her chest from behind sounds pretty damn problematic to me. Stroking Missy's leg while she sat there having a conversation with someone else sounds pretty problematic.  And honestly why the fuck would he ever need to be touching a woman's toes?! Brushing hair out of someone's mouth, brushing by someone when you pass them, or in the case of Survivor even cuddling someone in their sleep might be non-problematic, but Dan did way more that that it seems. And just the mere fact that all of his 'harmless touching' is happening to only the women is quite problematic imo. But also I agree with you that the fact that Kellee specifically told him at least twice that she did not want him touching her and he continued to do so is the major problem.

[mojoween]

Before this episode really got into the meat of where it was going, they showed the merge feast and Dan, rather calculatedly it appeared at the time, laid on the floor and he absentmindedly reached over and stroked the calf of someone standing or sitting near him (Missy, I gather) and right then, I knew that the warning at the top of the show was going to be about Dan’s inappropriate touching. 

It was very quick, but it squicked me out A LOT, because you do not touch a women’s bare calf like that unless she is your significant other, because it’s gross, creepy and WAY too familiar for people who have known each other for two weeks.

I mentioned it before, but I don’t see Jamal peacing out without a backward glance as a problem.  He just got voted out.  He can no longer win a million  dollars.  The last few days were miserable because of what was going on, and he felt badly for Janet.  Why on earth would he want to say anything to these people?  The ones who are like “good game” or whatever are way more disingenuous.  Although if everyone were “I heard ‘em” like Chicken that would be funny.

[RescueMom]

I keep thinking about that clip of Dan throwing his entire leg over (Missy? Elizabeth?) in the shelter, and I am 100% confident he would never have done that to Aaron, Tommy, or any of the other men.

I also just tried to imagine anyone other than my husband stroking my leg like we saw Dan do and there is zero chance I would find that kind of touching OK. That type of touch is absolutely intimate and NOT OK without consent. Period.

Grabbing Noura to demonstrate. Tickling toes. Defensively trying to gaslight Kellee about touching her hair (implying there is something wrong with her for seeing it as anything other than innocent) and continuing to try to do it while she is literally running away.  Just wrong, all of it. And those were things we saw. 

I forget who posted this in a different thread, but it is perfect: either TPTB knew Dan was being highly inappropriate at best and left him in the game, or they did not think he was and chose to destroy his reputation. Neither are OK. I firmly believe it was the first, just saying the second would be appalling as well. Dan started it but they allowed this shitshow to happen. 

[Jel]

I'm a pretty pragmatic person, and I look at it this way: if you know a person is okay with touch, go ahead. If you don't know, then don't touch them first and find out later.

Anyone had any experience with the office "shoulder massager"? Some will ask if you want one. I don't. It's cool they asked. It's cool (or should be) that I declined. We all move on.

2. Some office massagers will just begin massaging your shoulders because they assume you want it (like they would). You recoil a little, or say please don't, and then get some type of defensive sounding comment back. This creates awkwardness. Best avoided.

3. If the office masseuse tries again a week later, you say no again, and he continues anyway, or makes some comment about how you should lighten up, well now we all have a genuine problem. Unwilling massagee feels some degree of violated/dismissed/unheard and massager is looking at a potential HR problem.

If you don't want to be touched by someone, their touch feels  uncomfortable and unpleasant.

It's kind of an unspoken thing about people, but many, many people assume others think like they do and want the same things they do. And so it can be an honest mistake (as in case 2 above). But Dan was clearly in the case 3 zone. I bet he's been in that zone for a long, long, loooong time, too.

[ProfCrash]

44 minutes ago, Drogo said:

I'm part of the problem then, because I've brushed a hair out of someone's mouth before. We don't live in a universe where no one wants to be touched ever.  Human touch is healthy and skin hunger is real.  

I stand by my assertion that it wasn't the actual touches that were problematic- the problem was that the recipient specifically said to stop because they were uncomfortable, and the touching continued.  

I agree that the one instance is not a problem but the entire body of work combined with the multiple no’s is the problem. 

And I agree that the one might be a problem for one person and not another. Dan ignored the multiple no’s from Kellee and was touching multiple women in ways that are problematic, ie stroking the calf.

[ProfCrash]

5 minutes ago, Jel said:

I'm a pretty pragmatic person, and I look at it this way: if you know a person is okay with touch, go ahead. If you don't know, then don't touch them first and find out later.

Anyone had any experience with the office "shoulder massager"? Some will ask if you want one. I don't. It's cool they asked. It's cool (or should be) that I declined. We all move on.

2. Some office massagers will just begin massaging your shoulders because they assume you want it (like they would). You recoil a little, or say please don't, and then get some type of defensive sounding comment back. This creates awkwardness. Best avoided.

3. If the office masseuse tries again a week later, you say no again, and he continues anyway, or makes some comment about how you should lighten up, well now we all have a genuine problem. Unwilling massagee feels some degree of violated/dismissed/unheard and massager is looking at a potential HR problem.

If you don't want to be touched by someone, their touch feels  uncomfortable and unpleasant.

It's kind of an unspoken thing about people, but many, many people assume others think like they do and want the same things they do. And so it can be an honest mistake (as in case 2 above). But Dan was clearly in the case 3 zone. I bet he's been in that zone for a long, long, loooong time, too.

I admit to being the office massager but have learned to ask and accept the no. I tend to do a shoulder tap on occasion now. I work with a lot of Veterans and there is a high PTSD rate so I have learned to modify approach and touch. 

I have ADHD and impulse issues so I slip from time to time but I get no and try to remember.

[Jel]

Just now, ProfCrash said:

I admit to being the office massager but have learned to ask and accept the no. I tend to do a shoulder tap on occasion now. I work with a lot of Veterans and there is a high PTSD rate so I have learned to modify approach and touch. 

I have ADHD and impulse issues so I slip from time to time but I get no and try to remember.

I'm not trying to be the scolding school marm here, honest! And truth be told, for some people, the office massager is the office hero. It's just that not everyone feels that way. And while I'd never want the masseuse to stop doing his/her good works for those who appreciate it, I'm just reminding that not everyone does appreciate it, and it's best to know who does and who doesn't before going in for the full Swedish.  Know your audience, is all I;m saying 🙂

Same advice for any kind of touching really. If you know it's welcome, great. If you don't, it's better to find out before beginning. Because for some people, maybe a minority(?), it's genuinely unpleasant, and I'm sure that's not any Primetimer's intention,

Dan on the other hand...

[Lsk02]

25 minutes ago, mojoween said:

Before this episode really got into the meat of where it was going, they showed the merge feast and Dan, rather calculatedly it appeared at the time, laid on the floor and he absentmindedly reached over and stroked the calf of someone standing or sitting near him (Missy, I gather) and right then, I knew that the warning at the top of the show was going to be about Dan’s inappropriate touching. 

It was Elizabeth’s calf he grabbed while he was lying behind the table. I think a lot of what Elizabeth said was true, but apparently it did not bother her or creep her out the way it did with Kellee, and I think Missy, too. 
 

But I do keep thinking of a couple episodes back where they were joking about it after he snuggled up to Elizabeth at night. Even if it didn’t bother her, the fact that she even brought it up shows that she knew it was odd behavior, at a minimum. 

[Eolivet]

I keep thinking about Jeff Probst in all this, and his daughter and his reference for a "strong, confident woman." And I come back to his admiration of Angelina last year. I believe he's categorized "strong, confident women" as "Angelina." Angelina was a prototypical Strong, Confident Woman. She spoke her mind! She took no crap from anyone! He thinks of Strong, Confident Women as badass, take-no-prisoners characters, never realizing that strong, confident women can be vulnerable and emotional, and the ability to internalize pain and survive are strengths in their own rights.

Janet is a strong, confident woman. Kellee is a strong, confident woman. Just because these women aren't emotionless robots that don't take crap from any man doesn't diminish their strength. But I think it's what makes Probst able to wash his hands of the whole thing. Because he doesn't see his Angelina prototype in any of these women. He sees real women, real humanity, and he shuts down because he wants to believe his daughter will be "stronger" and "more confident" than these women, when there's a good chance that she won't be.

Because the Strong, Confident Woman prototype is a male fantasy that doesn't really exist (even Angelina was an edited character). Men like Probst want to defend this fantasy, to believe they would proudly stand behind this Strong, Confident Woman, who proclaims that she is to be respected. When women don't do that, men assume she's not worthy of being defended because she didn't stand up for herself or she said it was okay or she didn't ask him to be removed, so how can she be a Strong, Confident Woman?

Look at the unnamed male producer and his babbling. "uh, well if it bothers you, uh, you can always talk to me ..." But because Kellee didn't stand up, Angelina-style, and roar, "YES, this behavior is unacceptable, and I will not stand for it!" that means she was okay with it? That production decided because none of the women vociferously objected, that it was fine to continue with a slap on the wrist? That they based their decision not on if a man's behavior was unacceptable, but if multiple women were okay with a man's unacceptable behavior? Just ... what?!

This is why I continue to think (especially in light of the tone-deaf tweet the Survivor account sent about tolerance and bullying) that production is no better than Dan. Their deflection and finger-pointing and reframing the story to paint themselves as blameless is no different than Dan's performance at tribal council.

Because they both decided if a woman wasn't demanding respect at the top of her lungs, then she deserved no respect.

[fishcakes]

2 hours ago, Drogo said:

I stand by my assertion that it wasn't the actual touches that were problematic- the problem was that the recipient specifically said to stop because they were uncomfortable, and the touching continued.  

2 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

The way Elizabeth described (in an earlier ep) him putting his arms around her chest from behind sounds pretty damn problematic to me. Stroking Missy's leg while she sat there having a conversation with someone else sounds pretty problematic.  And honestly why the fuck would he ever need to be touching a woman's toes?! Brushing hair out of someone's mouth, brushing by someone when you pass them, or in the case of Survivor even cuddling someone in their sleep might be non-problematic, but Dan did way more that that it seems.

I think you're both right. A person can be a toucher in a completely innocent way and as soon as someone asks them to stop or even just reacts in an uncomfortable way, they stop. And even if the recipient doesn't mind, then it never goes further than a shoulder pat or an arm squeeze or whatever. Then there are people like Dan, who start out with the innocent touching to see how much he can get away with. He probably touched all the women (well, all the young women -- there's no indication he ever touched Elaine or Janet) in a more or less benign fashion and then went further with Missy and Elizabeth because they never said anything. Kellee did say something, but he still didn't stop; he just kept it "innocent" and if she hadn't continued to object, by, for example, literally running away from him into the ocean while telling him to stop touching her, then he would have escalated. He was never going to leave her alone though.

[Blondie]

I know this has been discussed to death but if you are with someone who doesn't want to be touched YOU DON'T TOUCH.  This episode sickened me.   Missy and Elisabeth are pathetic.  To use something so serious as this just to get ahead in the game is pathetic.  I hope the get the boot.  There are some lines you do not cross yet they crossed it!  Dan is a creep. The video proves it.  I hope is wife was watching, and if not his wife then the president and human resources person in his company, or maybe just all of them.  I am on the fence about even watching the rest of the season.

[Otherkate]

2 hours ago, mojoween said:

I mentioned it before, but I don’t see Jamal peacing out without a backward glance as a problem.  He just got voted out.  He can no longer win a million  dollars.  The last few days were miserable because of what was going on, and he felt badly for Janet.  Why on earth would he want to say anything to these people?  The ones who are like “good game” or whatever are way more disingenuous.  Although if everyone were “I heard ‘em” like Chicken that would be funny.

Oh god, I don't blame him either. Who would want to look back at that awful crew in that moment and say a single positive thing? I don't even want to look at them and I wasn't even there.

[JudyObscure]

3 hours ago, peachmangosteen said:

The way Elizabeth described (in an earlier ep) him putting his arms around her chest from behind sounds pretty damn problematic to me

I may be wrong, but I didn't think that really happened.  They were laughing and doing a sort of comedy sketch of escalating touch, sort of "Is this okay?" then  "Is this okay?"  until they were exaggerating for comic effect.  I thought. I'd like to know for sure, about that.

If Dan really puts his hands on women's breasts from behind like that and they don't  knock his teeth out with their elbows, I would be very surprised. I know from experience that I would do that, not as as a "strong woman" thing, but as a reflex.

1 hour ago, Eolivet said:

Because the Strong, Confident Woman prototype is a male fantasy that doesn't really exist

I agree and it's a fantasy among a lot of women, too.  The idea that a woman has to act like a drunk redneck in a bar, to be strong has always bothered me.  I'm getting really tired of the stereotype.  Kellee was incredibly strong to look Dan in the eye and tell him calmly that she didn't like to be touched and Janet was even stronger to put her own interests aside and stand up for what was  morally right.  No one needed to raise her voice or break a rock over Dan's head to be "strong."  Not that, that wouldn't have been enjoyable to watch.

[TheFinalRose]

22 hours ago, Eolivet said:

Hey, is anyone else starting to think Lynne Spillman (recently fired Survivor casting director) wasn't so bad after all?

From day one of this season I thought something was "off" with the casting, and that has only gotten worse as the season drones on.  I even said to myself, "Did they get a new casting director?" -- not knowing the above had occurred.

The cast is so uninspiring and so not made-for-tv that for the first time in Survivor history, we are not watching it on Wed night. We've watched every season faithfully but between the personality-free cast, the idiotic IOTI and the destruction of Kellee for ENTERTAINMENT/RATINGS (who was one of the lone good casting decisions) all I can say is that Jeff is ruining the show so he can say it ran its course and he can move on to something else.

But just because Probst is bored with it doesn't mean its loyal viewers are. I'd take an all newbie cast with no idols and some good ol' fashioned live cricket/caterpillar eating again and be more than delighted.  

I guess Janet is the only one left worth rooting for in this dumpster fire season. Although I am expecting a "twist" where they let Rob and/or Sandra back into the game at final four and then one of them wins.  

[Ms Blue Jay]

I don't know if casting is to blame.  How could they know if Dan was like this?  If they knew, and cast Dan anyway then yes that's disgusting.  

Whoever is in charge is to blame for not booting him, IMO.  People quit the game all the time!  We've seen it!  This could be like that, but the reverse.  What's the big deal?  I'm sure the contestants sign a contract that allows production to kick them out for reasons like this.

[TheFinalRose]

34 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I don't know if casting is to blame.  How could they know if Dan was like this?  If they knew, and cast Dan anyway then yes that's disgusting.  

My point is separate from Dan's character (or lack of it). I think this group is lacking in must-see-tv personalities that make the show interesting. 

[BK1978]

I really do not have much to say about the situation, because my opinion would just echo what everyone else has been saying.  

I will add that this whole thing reminds me of the Jussie Smollett incident.  Insomuch that they used this for their personal gain, they preyed on the good will of others.  To use a situation like this for personal gain is just reprehensible.  I am glad that nearly everyone was pissed off at Missy and Elizabeth, unlike the Jussie thing where you have people still defending him.

[LizBug]

Wondering ...

What happened to the chickens?  Were all of them killed?  

Is anyone fishing these days?  Is the rice being replenished regularly?

Does it seem like there are way too many full moon nights for 39 days? 

[Caseysgirl]

All of the conversation about this current Survivor season has brought me back to what  I’ve been thinking about recently.  I’m a big follower of Reality shows ( hate watching some of them) it does seem that the ideology of most of them (“I didn’t come hereto make friends” “ Yeah, I lied and shit on you but it’s the game”) has bled into society in general. Not to take this point farther than it needs to, when you are rewarded for being sneaky, lying, abandoning your allies, what does that say to young people who learn many of their values from the media?  Many of the people who are castaways have said that they have been watching this show since they were young kids. They’ve learned these strategies over the years and are thrilled to use them, in fact as an audience we cheer for this. Should we be surprised that people have been doing slimy things to win?

[deirdra]

On 11/15/2019 at 7:35 PM, jabRI said:

Having seen the episodes, I think this sums it up.  CBS is playing us and making a profit off of sexual harassment.  I say we match them by boycotting the rest of the season.  Hit them where it hurts, with your remote. I know I won't be watching, I have no respect for this show anymore.

And complain to and boycott Survivor's sponsors - the only way to get to TPTB is through their pocketbook.

[Bryce Lynch]

On 11/16/2019 at 9:31 AM, Drogo said:

I'm part of the problem then, because I've brushed a hair out of someone's mouth before. We don't live in a universe where no one wants to be touched ever.  Human touch is healthy and skin hunger is real.  

I stand by my assertion that it wasn't the actual touches that were problematic- the problem was that the recipient specifically said to stop because they were uncomfortable, and the touching continued.  

There may be exceptions, but women generally don't want to be touched in those ways by anyone they are not in an intimate relationship with or at least close friends.   

A man knows what women he has permission to touch and the rest are off limits until such time as the woman has made it clear it is OK.

[Lsk02]

1 hour ago, Bryce Lynch said:

There may be exceptions, but women generally don't want to be touched in those ways by anyone they are not in an intimate relationship with or at least close friends.   

A man knows what women he has permission to touch and the rest are off limits until such time as the woman has made it clear it is OK.

Amen. I have crazy naturally curly hair that gets in my face if not pulled back. My spouse, children, parents, and a few close friends will push it back for me. No one else has ever tried. Co-workers, grocery checkers, and even more distant friends have pointed out when I have a crazy stray curl, but none have ever physically moved it for me. 
 

But none of that matters. Even if he felt close enough to Kellee to do that, she had already asked very nicely not to touch her. And he kept touching her! All of the excuses he blabbered at the tribal council have no weight when the woman asked you not to touch her! 

[Lamima]

So anyone else that is not watching Wednesday's episode, like me, don't forget to remove or cancel your DVR from recording. I think it's important for ratings to make a statement that this show should not play around with such topics like this. JMO.

[princelina]

2 hours ago, Caseysgirl said:

All of the conversation about this current Survivor season has brought me back to what  I’ve been thinking about recently.  I’m a big follower of Reality shows ( hate watching some of them) it does seem that the ideology of most of them (“I didn’t come hereto make friends” “ Yeah, I lied and shit on you but it’s the game”) has bled into society in general. Not to take this point farther than it needs to, when you are rewarded for being sneaky, lying, abandoning your allies, what does that say to young people who learn many of their values from the media?  Many of the people who are castaways have said that they have been watching this show since they were young kids. They’ve learned these strategies over the years and are thrilled to use them, in fact as an audience we cheer for this. Should we be surprised that people have been doing slimy things to win?

I think of that too - for me more with the attitudes on non-competetive reality shows of "I am who I am and that's how I am!"  Self-reflection, attempting to see the point of view of others, and a desire for self-improvement used to be considered good things!

On 11/16/2019 at 2:06 PM, TheFinalRose said:

But just because Probst is bored with it doesn't mean its loyal viewers are. I'd take an all newbie cast with no idols and some good ol' fashioned live cricket/caterpillar eating again and be more than delighted.  

I've been saying this for years!  And if they need a gimmick they can just repeat all of the food and challenges and rewards of season 1 to see how the game is played differently now.

On 11/16/2019 at 12:02 PM, Eolivet said:

I keep thinking about Jeff Probst in all this, and his daughter and his reference for a Angelina was a prototypical Strong, Confident Woman. 

Haha I watched her entire season and I did not get this 😄 I thought she was more of a clueless goofball.

[JudyObscure]

5 hours ago, Caseysgirl said:

“I didn’t come hereto make friends” “ Yeah, I lied and shit on you but it’s the game”) has bled into society in general. Not to take this point farther than it needs to, when you are rewarded for being sneaky, lying, abandoning your allies, what does that say to young people who learn many of their values from the media?

You make good points.  I think one of the things that has encouraged this on Survivor is that they no longer have to face angry jury members like they once did.  Instead of, "You lied to my face and I know that's fair game play, but It's also fair game play for me to vote for someone else to win." The jury is now just compliments and pre-planned  questions to set the finalists up for bragging about their big moves.  We called the ones who were hurt or angry "bitter" and encouraged them to reward the ruthless.  

[NurseGiGi]

On 11/15/2019 at 8:35 PM, jabRI said:

Having seen the episodes, I think this sums it up.  CBS is playing us and making a profit off of sexual harassment.  I say we match them by boycotting the rest of the season.  Hit them where it hurts, with your remote. I know I won't be watching, I have no respect for this show anymore.

Same here. I will not be watching the rest of the season.

[nutty1]

For those saying no one would tell the producers they wanted Dan out....they have every second of footage. They don’t need a contestant’s permission to remove him from the show. 

[nutty1]

I finally got to watch Wednesday’s shows last night. I agree with all said in this thread. I was fuming by the end. But, on a different note, was anyone else shocked that Karishma lasted as long as she did in the immunity challenges?? I thought she’d be first out in each. 

[watchingtvaddict]

1 hour ago, nutty1 said:

But, on a different note, was anyone else shocked that Karishma lasted as long as she did in the immunity challenges?? I thought she’d be first out in each. 

I was amazed! Made me think maybe she was pretending to be weak pre-merge so people wouldn't see her as a threat. 

[Drogo]

8 hours ago, nutty1 said:

For those saying no one would tell the producers they wanted Dan out....they have every second of footage. They don’t need a contestant’s permission to remove him from the show. 

Kellee was clear to the producer that she felt everything would work itself out and she didn't want the show to intervene.  She felt similarly the next day when they met with everyone again privately and off-camera. 

Why would any of us be fine with the show intervening after Kellee was clear that she didn't want them to?  Kellee is allowed ownership over her own life and surroundings without a bunch of NBC guys stepping in to make decisions for her that she's already made.  She didn't want Dan to go because she had bigger fish to fry, but it didn't work out because that fish (Missy) fried her first.     

Dan's a creeper and a half, but he hasn't done anything criminal here.  If they eliminated him without a complaint lodged by another contestant, they'd set precedent to eliminate everyone who touches someone (in any way) after being asked not to.   If someone punches Jim in the head and Jim doesn't file a police report or press charges, no one is getting arrested. 

My only issue with production is that following Dan's "official warning" to stop touching women, he grabbed Noura right in front of Probst at TC to make a bullshit example, and it was allowed.  Don't give out warnings then whistle and walk the other direction as the problem child ignores them.  

[laurakaye]

On 11/15/2019 at 11:17 PM, Ms Blue Jay said:

Good Will Hunting voice:  It's not our fault.  (Okay, maybe it kind of is.  Without ratings they wouldn't air.)

I will continue to watch this season play out, but it's no longer going to be my popcorn-and-cheap-wine, don't talk to me while it's on appointment viewing as it has been for the past 38 seasons.  It's not going to be the night I look forward to for my dose of good reality entertainment - instead, I am going to be watching with the question - what are you going to do, CBS, to fix this?  

On 11/16/2019 at 10:10 AM, mojoween said:

Before this episode really got into the meat of where it was going, they showed the merge feast and Dan, rather calculatedly it appeared at the time, laid on the floor and he absentmindedly reached over and stroked the calf of someone standing or sitting near him (Missy, I gather) and right then, I knew that the warning at the top of the show was going to be about Dan’s inappropriate touching. 

I watched this twice.  What I found super interesting is that when Dan touched Missy's leg, she didn't respond except to shift away from him (unless this was clever editing, it looked real to me).  That tells me that he's done this to her before, possibly several times.  If it was the first time, I feel like she would've jumped and looked around for the source of the touch.  She didn't, and she knew that Dan was on the ground next to her, so she knew exactly where the touch came from.  She was probably trying to pretend it hadn't happened, and didn't want to call attention to it during the merge feast.  I can understand her mindset here, sad as it is.

On 11/16/2019 at 12:02 PM, Eolivet said:

Because they both decided if a woman wasn't demanding respect at the top of her lungs, then she deserved no respect.

This makes me recall the episode where Sue Hawk screamed at Probst for what Hatch did to her.  It was several years ago, but Probst cannot possibly be clueless to the potential for this to happen again, and now it has, and he and CBS left the perpetrator in the game, and those of us who will continue to watch have to look at Dan's smug face probably until Final 3.

On 11/16/2019 at 2:06 PM, TheFinalRose said:

But just because Probst is bored with it doesn't mean its loyal viewers are. I'd take an all newbie cast with no idols and some good ol' fashioned live cricket/caterpillar eating again and be more than delighted.  

I guess Janet is the only one left worth rooting for in this dumpster fire season. Although I am expecting a "twist" where they let Rob and/or Sandra back into the game at final four and then one of them wins.  

Your first paragraph?  I agree 1000%.  I want to keep loving this show but CBS sure seems to be doing everything in its power to push away the loyal, long-time viewers.

Your second paragraph - that twist has played itself out.  Jamal's exit made that clear.  I don't care to see them anymore.  If/when they have the big reveal, I think it's going to fall flat on its face due to the issues that are now so much bigger than the game.  Although sending Dan to IOTI and leaving him with Sandra and Rob (who has four young daughters) could be interesting as well............

[Ms Blue Jay]

43 minutes ago, Drogo said:

Kellee was clear to the producer that she felt everything would work itself out and she didn't want the show to intervene.  She felt similarly the next day when they met with everyone again privately and off-camera. 

Why would any of us be fine with the show intervening after Kellee was clear that she didn't want them to? 

"Clear" is a subjective opinion.  It wasn't clear to me at all.  She seemed tortured by the whole thing.  

I would be fine with the show intervening because adults know what is right and wrong.  The producers can use their eyes and see.  In my opinion keeping Dan on the show was wrong and it wasn't Kellee's responsibility to point that out.

This isn't jail.  It's "Survivor".  It's a show for entertainment for someone to win a million dollars.  There is nothing worth letting Dan torture those women for 33 days.  Nothing worth it at all.

Keeping Dan on the show prioritizes his life over the women's.  Not the other way around.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Ms Blue Jay

[Bryce Lynch]

3 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

I will continue to watch this season play out, but it's no longer going to be my popcorn-and-cheap-wine, don't talk to me while it's on appointment viewing as it has been for the past 38 seasons.  It's not going to be the night I look forward to for my dose of good reality entertainment - instead, I am going to be watching with the question - what are you going to do, CBS, to fix this?  

I watched this twice.  What I found super interesting is that when Dan touched Missy's leg, she didn't respond except to shift away from him (unless this was clever editing, it looked real to me).  That tells me that he's done this to her before, possibly several times.  If it was the first time, I feel like she would've jumped and looked around for the source of the touch.  She didn't, and she knew that Dan was on the ground next to her, so she knew exactly where the touch came from.  She was probably trying to pretend it hadn't happened, and didn't want to call attention to it during the merge feast.  I can understand her mindset here, sad as it is.

This makes me recall the episode where Sue Hawk screamed at Probst for what Hatch did to her.  It was several years ago, but Probst cannot possibly be clueless to the potential for this to happen again, and now it has, and he and CBS left the perpetrator in the game, and those of us who will continue to watch have to look at Dan's smug face probably until Final 3.

Your first paragraph?  I agree 1000%.  I want to keep loving this show but CBS sure seems to be doing everything in its power to push away the loyal, long-time viewers.

Your second paragraph - that twist has played itself out.  Jamal's exit made that clear.  I don't care to see them anymore.  If/when they have the big reveal, I think it's going to fall flat on its face due to the issues that are now so much bigger than the game.  Although sending Dan to IOTI and leaving him with Sandra and Rob (who has four young daughters) could be interesting as well............

I doubt Rob and Sandra are going to join the game.  It would violate the Oath of the Idols.

Plus, even if they did enter the game, would anyone vote for them at FTC?  The way the season is playing out, I guess one or both could end up at FTC with one or two despicable characters.  But, I still don't think they a previous winner (who had 4 shots at Survivor plus 2 on TAR) or a two time winner, who suddenly parachuted into the game could win.

I guess you could say something sort of similar happened with Chris, last season.  But, that was different because he spent a lot of time on EOE with most of the jurors.  

[Ms Blue Jay]

49 minutes ago, Drogo said:

Dan's a creeper and a half, but he hasn't done anything criminal here. 

Quote

Sexual assault is an act in which a person intentionally sexually touches another person without that person's consent, or coerces or physically forces a person to engage in a sexual act against their will.[1] It is a form of sexual violence, which includes rape (forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration or drug facilitated sexual assault), groping, child sexual abuse or the torture of the person in a sexual manner.[1][2][3] - Wikipedia

Dan did the bolded repeatedly.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Ms Blue Jay

[laurakaye]

45 minutes ago, Drogo said:

Why would any of us be fine with the show intervening after Kellee was clear that she didn't want them to?  Kellee is allowed ownership over her own life and surroundings without a bunch of NBC guys stepping in to make decisions for her that she's already made.  She didn't want Dan to go because she had bigger fish to fry, but it didn't work out because that fish (Missy) fried her first.     

With all due respect, it shouldn't have been her choice to make.  CBS had the footage.  They had three or four women discussing it.  They had Kellee in tears during her confessional.  Kellee was struggling to explain how difficult a decision this would be for her, as she is, in fact, still playing a game for a million dollars.  You could see her internal struggle, and it was heartbreaking.  I just don't think that placing a person in what was clearly an uncomfortable situation, watching it play out for days, and then asking that person to make the ultimate decision as to how to handle it was a wise choice on CBS's part.  Kellee is not producing the show, she's participating in it.  It's not her decision to make.

Edited November 18, 2019 by laurakaye

[Ms Blue Jay]

54 minutes ago, Drogo said:

 If someone punches Jim in the head and Jim doesn't file a police report or press charges, no one is getting arrested. 

You are talking about assault, which is still against the law.

If you murder someone, the victim cannot press charges.  It's still against the law.  If someone steals your car, and you have no idea who did it, it's still against the law.  Etc. I could go on forever.

Edited November 18, 2019 by Ms Blue Jay

[Special K]

Does the Survivor contract really not have a clause that unwanted touching isn't allowed and grounds for ejection?

In all the bajillion pages of their contracts?!?

[Drogo]

4 minutes ago, laurakaye said:

They had three or four women discussing it.

Two of whom were (known to the producers) exaggerating their own experience and knowingly using Kellee's experience to further their own games, one who explicitly told them not to intervene, and one who was only going by the other's word and didn't really agree that there was bad intent.  Unfortunate, but true. 

5 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

You are talking about assault, which is still against the law.

If you murder someone, the victim cannot press charges.  It's still against the law.  If someone steals your car, and you have no idea who did it, it's still against the law.  Etc. I could go on forever.

You could go on forever, but neither physical assault nor car theft nor murder etc. are brushing a hair out of someone's face / putting an arm around someone.  The point is, even with an actual crime committed, a complaint typically needs to be made for an arrest to happen.  Police aren't trying to send a case in front of a judge with no cooperating complainant which will just waste time and money.  

Just now, Special K said:

Does the Survivor contract really not have a clause that unwanted touching isn't allowed and grounds for ejection?

There is no doubt something about ejection if you're harassing other contestants, but likely not enforced without corroborating footage (which they had here) and a formal complaint (which they didn't have here.)

[Bryce Lynch]

2 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

"Clear" is a subjective opinion.  It wasn't clear to me at all.  She seemed tortured by the whole thing.  

I would be fine with the show intervening because adults know what is right and wrong.  The producers can use their eyes and see.  In my opinion keeping Dan on the show was wrong and it wasn't Kellee's responsibility to point that out.

This isn't jail.  It's "Survivor".  It's a show for entertainment for someone to win a million dollars.  There is nothing worth letting Dan torture those women for 33 days.  Nothing worth it at all.

Keeping Dan on the show prioritizes his life over the women's.  Not the other way around.

Kellee seemed torn between game play and stopping the harassment by Dan.  She was ready to vote out Missy and keep Dan, despite how uncomfortable he made her feel, even after her 2 hour talk with Missy.  She said she didn't want to make an "emotional" decision.  It was only after the apparent (but fake) groundswell of support to boot Feely Dan.  

I'm not sure what production should have done.  But, the women in the tribe had the power to get rid of Dan and half chose not to, Two actively used the sexual harassment as a strategy and two others knew it was being used as a strategy and went along.  

Sometimes I wonder if the idea that we need to protect women from their own bad or questionable choices is sexist.   If a woman decides she would rather endure unwanted touching than mess up her game, or domestic abuse, rather than press charges, maybe we should defer to the victim's wishes.   

Women are not children, who lack the maturity to decide what they believe is in their own best interests   When they are victimized they should be backed up and  empowered to say, "Fire his ass!" or "Lock him up!".  But, I'm not sure we should force that on them.  

[Special K]

I think this is more analogous to a workplace situation than a criminal complaint situation.  I don't think Dan needed to commit an actual crime to violate the rules of the game (whatever those may be) and be ejected. Does the Survivor "workplace" require a formal complaint?  Maybe.

On Project Runway years ago, someone was ejected for using pattern books, which is against the specific rules of that competition.  Obviously that is not a crime in the outside world. I think some other contestants tipped off production and Tim Gunn investigated and summarily dismissed the guy on the spot.  How "formal" that complaint was, who knows?  But it seems like other shows act more forthrightly when rules are violated.

[Drogo]

4 minutes ago, Bryce Lynch said:

Kellee seemed torn between game play and stopping the harassment by Dan.  She was ready to vote out Missy and keep Dan, despite how uncomfortable he made her feel, even after her 2 hour talk with Missy.  She said she didn't want to make an "emotional" decision.  It was only after the apparent (but fake) groundswell of support to boot Feely Dan.  

I'm not sure what production should have done.  But, the women in the tribe had the power to get rid of Dan and half chose not to, Two actively used the sexual harassment as a strategy and two others knew it was being used as a strategy and went along.  

Sometimes I wonder if the idea that we need to protect women from their own bad or questionable choices is sexist.   If a woman decides she would rather endure unwanted touching than mess up her game, or domestic abuse, rather than press charges, maybe we should defer to the victim's wishes.   

Women are not children, who lack the maturity to decide what they believe is in their own best interests   When they are victimized they should be backed up and  empowered to say, "Fire his ass!" or "Lock him up!".  But, I'm not sure we should force that on them.  

All of this, x 100.  Thank you for saying what I've been trying to.  

Producers ignoring what Kellee said in her on-camera and off-camera interviews and deciding that "they know better" would've been sexist and infantilizing.  

If a bigger guy like Aaron came away from TC angry with a smaller guy like Dean and began following him around menacingly and hovering over him to intimidate him and make him uncomfortable but not technically breaking any rules... and a producer interrupted one of Dean's TH's to say "Do you want us to intervene?" and Dean said "No, I think it'll all play out" and then reinforced that in a later private meeting, would we be saying the producers should have eliminated Aaron anyway?