S14.E10: 8 Chefs Compete

[cooksdelight]

 

The Top 8 contestants compete to impress a high-school homecoming committee with their Mardi Gras-inspired cuisine.

 

[Jersey Guy 87]

They're setting the judging bar high this season.  First Cliff Claven and now a high school homecoming committee.

[Julia]

They're setting the judging bar high this season.  First Cliff Claven and now a high school homecoming committee.

 

It's pretty much a yearly event. The "guest" is a teenaged girl or group of teenaged girls from Cher's high school in Clueless planning an event. The chefs choose their submissions from the intersection of teenaged and rich in their mental venn diagram, which generally means expensive slabs of meat and sushi. The young ladies pretend to have regularly swallowed food and formed opinions about it. They end up with a steakhouse menu with fusion stuff on it, and whoever loses (hint: probably the men) has a collective temper tantrum and says sexist class warrior stuff about the guests, who spend their event sitting awkwardly around banquet tables like the youngest senior center dining club in California.

[cooksdelight]

I hope Josh gets his ass handed to him. Calling the women "Suzy Homemakers" and now he's on their team. With all of them thinking they are the next leader.

[Eolivet]

Ugh. And now we're clearly stuck with Josh's sexist...viewpoints until the end. Definitely at least until black jackets. Given his little convo with Megan, I'm thinking he's going to deprive me of my T. vs. Megan finale. As long as he doesn't win, at least.

 

That kid Max was a piece of work, my goodness. Can't believe they chose chicken fried steak over steak that actually tasted like steak. Kids these days...

[MrsEVH]

They were from Calabassas HS. The same school  Kylie and Kendall Jenner went to and were cheerleaders.

[Donny Ketchum]

Shoot.  And to think that I thought that Ramsay and FOX figured out that we were tired of non-elimination episodes (especially since there'd been absolutely none up to now).

 

I don't know why Ramsay said he was giving both Josh and Randy a second chance.  Both went up for elimination just two weeks ago, and Randy had to fight for his life just last week!

 

Well, this episode just put an end to any chance Josh had of winning, which makes me happy.  This season was lacking a real villain, but I think we've got one now.  Oh, and did he really label all of the women as Suzy Homemakers?  I'm pretty sure he just meant Nick, which is on a whole different level of disgusting.

 

What's with Alison's sudden utterances of "all day?"  That came out of nowhere.

 

I really want the women to win again.  The men didn't deserve that win at all.  Seems the more times they do win, the bigger Josh's ego gets.

 

Still think T and Meghan are the strongest of the women.  But the last couple of episodes are really exposing the chinks in Michelle and Alison's armor now.  I see absolutely no contenders on the men's team anymore aside from Milly, and even he had his struggles tonight.

[backformore]

I thought the "suzy homemaker"  comment was a gay slam at Nick.  

[ZoloftBlob]

I thought the "suzy homemaker"  comment was a gay slam at Nick.

 

Yeah, that doesn't redeem the fucking douche at all.

[cooksdelight]

I totally missed that, I thought he was referring to the women. Wow, Josh is worse than I thought.

[OlfinBedwere]

It wasn't necessarily a homophobic insult - Nick's background appears to be mostly as a personal chef, with little if any experience working at fine dining restaurants - but best case it just makes Josh a complete idiot for not thinking how it could be interpreted.

[Julia]

So in a dramatic twist, the most idiotic person on the prom committee was the guy (although he did manage to restrain himself from batting his eyes at the blue team, so he came out on top there). Seriously, spicy okra sank steak au poivre against chicken-fried filet mignon with lobster red eye gravy on top? Yeah, bet buddy was real popular with his classmates while they were scraping the greasy sludge with fishy eraser bits off of their dinners.

 

You know, I don't have to think Josh is a homophobe to be offended that his go to insult for a chef he doesn't respect is that he cooks like a woman. And then, to drive the point home, that he doesn't have the balls to be a chef (a thought he has not yet chosen to share with T, for some reason). So naturally he goes to red and declares himself the king. That should be fun.

 

They truly are desperate to keep these assholes on as long as possible, aren't they. 

Edited May 6, 2015 by Julia

[ZoloftBlob]

You know, I don't have to think Josh is a homophobe to be offended that his go to insult for a chef he doesn't respect is that he cooks like a woman. And then, to drive the point home, that he doesn't have the balls to be a chef (a thought he has not yet chosen to share with T, for some reason). So naturally he goes to red and declares himself the king. That should be fun.

 

I think my problem with this is several fold.

 

1. This happens EVERY year. There's always that one jerk who insists his penis makes him king shit of cook mountain and funny how he almost always ends up on the girl team.

 

2. The very fact that the dynamic is always "girls against men" or "ladies against men" is an issue.

 

3. Not once are any of the grunting boors ever called on their misogynist speech by Ramsey - Ramsey, who while a foul mouthed angry fellow, manages to check himself before he says something *really* out of line (at least on television).

 

I know, I know, all Gordan cares about is the food. But you'd think he'd wonder about a chef who thinks half the population is less deserving.

[AZChristian]

I just took a quick look at prior winners.  6 men, 7 women.  Ramsay definitely recognizes that women can hold their own in restaurant kitchens.  If a man wins this season, my money is on Milly.  If a woman wins, Meghan.

 

And I'm thinking neither one would hire Joshua as dishwasher.

[Julia]

I can't think of a time when a sexist asshole won (Top Chef actually promotes their douchebros way harder), but Fox sure does seem to think they're good TV. Of course, they also kept Robyn way past her sell-by date and gave her to the boys.

[Eolivet]

Well, this episode just put an end to any chance Josh had of winning, which makes me happy.  This season was lacking a real villain, but I think we've got one now. 

 

From your lips to Ramsay's ears...here's hoping he put Josh on the women's team to sink him and expose his true sexist colors. I thought he was being set up to be a contender -- I would be beyond thrilled to see him being set up for a fall. Ever since he ogled the cheese models, I've wanted him gone.

[CoyoteBlue]

If someone was actually calling me "little one" during a service, there would be a clear and immediate reckoning.

[BogoGog24]

I feel like next season the men vs women thing should just be done with. It's just very boring now. For seasons the viewers have been asking for a mixup, like young vs old, east coast vs west coast, line cooks vs caterers, whatever. It would eradicate that gender thing that happens every season and it would also just be a nice change for once.

[Julia]

I feel like next season the men vs women thing should just be done with. It's just very boring now. For seasons the viewers have been asking for a mixup, like young vs old, east coast vs west coast, line cooks vs caterers, whatever. It would eradicate that gender thing that happens every season and it would also just be a nice change for once.

 

What I'd really like to see is a competition between a team of culinary school grads and a team of people who were trained on the line. That would be some fierce competition.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Julia

[cooksdelight]

The only problem with siding up contestants like that is that you'd wind up with a blowout on one side. Often, that is. It's bad enough with men vs. women. I just wish he'd put an equal amount of men and women on each team and let them go at it. To me, it would be more interesting to see the dynamics of who is the leader vs. who follows along without raising a word of dissent.

[Julia]

The only problem with siding up contestants like that is that you'd wind up with a blowout on one side. Often, that is. It's bad enough with men vs. women. I just wish he'd put an equal amount of men and women on each team and let them go at it. To me, it would be more interesting to see the dynamics of who is the leader vs. who follows along without raising a word of dissent.

 

I just always think it's interesting watching the people who came up on the line (Tom, Hughnibrow, the lesser Volt) and the ones who went to school (Blais, Harold Dieterle, the greater Volt) on Top Chef, because they're all clearly pretty fierce (not to say defensive) about the path they took.

[DropTheSoap]

I'm not sure why Josh has to be either a sexist douche or a homophobe. From what I've seen, he's both. I was very sad to see him stay tonight. He thinks he's being put on the women's side to be the top dude, because obviously they have no clue. I think he has a reality check coming his way.

 

Gotta be honest. If I was stuck with Michelle, I'd most likely be shutting her down whenever she spoke, also.

 

The only thing sadder than the homecoming tasting committee was the blue team's excitement over their reward.

[backformore]

I feel like next season the men vs women thing should just be done with. It's just very boring now. For seasons the viewers have been asking for a mixup, like young vs old, east coast vs west coast, line cooks vs caterers, whatever. It would eradicate that gender thing that happens every season and it would also just be a nice change for once.

Yeah, I always wonder if some production assistant has the job of revving up the gender-based competition -  telling the men to prove they're better than the women, to not let themselves be beat by a bunch of girls;  telling the women that the men feel entitled to the win just because they're guys, you have to prove them wrong.  I don't know why, it just seems like they're encouraged in that direction. 

 

The only thing sadder than the homecoming tasting committee was the blue team's excitement over their reward.

 

Yeah, what WAS that?  Looked like Medieval Times restaurant, only with pirates instead of knights.  Is that a thing?  maybe it's just me, but it seems like a great venue for a 10 year old boy's birthday party.  

 

was that this week, or the week before?   This show is so boring, so repetitive, I have a tough time remembering any of it.  

 

it's like there's a script, and each season they use the same script, just change the players.   the point-awarded competitions always come down to the FINAL POINT, a team never wins by more than 1.   If one dish is left out, it ends up being the "best of the night", and that team would have won if they had included it.   Which means it's almost always the team without an extra person that wins, in order for the extra person to have all that drama about how they would have won for their team, but nobody believes in them.  

 

 All the food is either "RAW!"  or "BURNT", and Ramsey is always asking them to "touch this"  to show them meat is too rubbery, too soft, too  hard, or "taste this"  to say it is under - or over-seasoned.    His "IT"S RAW"  is really "it needs another minute in the pan".  His "UNDER-SEASONED"  is really "needs a tad more salt". 

 

So, the novelty has worn off, it's predictable at every turn, I end up not really caring. 

Or, In Ramsey- speak   - OH MY GOD!   THIS SHOW IS PATHETIC!!

[cooksdelight]

I've been to Los Angeles many times and I've never heard of a pirate themed dinner theater. Maybe someone who's local can tell us what/where it is. Or maybe it's training school for Disneyland employees?

[beesknees]

I just always think it's interesting watching the people who came up on the line (Tom, Hughnibrow, the lesser Volt) and the ones who went to school (Blais, Harold Dieterle, the greater Volt) on Top Chef, because they're all clearly pretty fierce (not to say defensive) about the path they took.

 

Ahhh, the Voltaggio brothers.  Instead of referring to them as "lesser" and "greater" I prefer to reference them as "the normal one" and "the dickhead". 

[AZChristian]

I've been to Los Angeles many times and I've never heard of a pirate themed dinner theater. Maybe someone who's local can tell us what/where it is. Or maybe it's training school for Disneyland employees?

 

I've spent many happy hours in the Buena Park/Anaheim area (Knott's Berry Farm and Disneyland) on vacations.

 

There is, indeed, a pirate-themed dinner theater on Beach Boulevard, right next door to Medieval Times.  I have been to the latter; it was so cheesy that I declined to go to the former.  "Oh, you'd like to actually breathe during your dinner and show?  That will be an upgrade to the premium ticket for just another $9.95 each."  (Hyperbole, but you get the picture.)

[cooksdelight]

I've spent many happy hours in the Buena Park/Anaheim area (Knott's Berry Farm and Disneyland) on vacations.

 

Likewise, when I was a kid and it wasn't as built up as it is now. Didn't they do a thing with the Medieval Times on a previous season? 

 

The fried chicken at Knott's is still almost as good as my Granny's. I wonder why they don't have them try their hand at cooking dinner for those folks?

[ari333]

ALL DAY!!!!!

[Lillybee]

I think that someone turned off Millie's flattop  and oven on purpose to sabotage him. It might of been Josh.

[Julia]

Gotta be honest. If I was stuck with Michelle, I'd most likely be shutting her down whenever she spoke, also.

I'm sure she's being asked all the questions about how dewy fresh and springlike she is and how the yolk has barely dried behind her ears because she's just that young young young young recently born and young, so maybe the talking heads aren't all her fault. But seriously, what 22 year old actually believes they're "on the same level" as a sixteen year old, and how tragically dim do you have to be to use that as the basis of a power grab with teammates who actually have experience and skills and, unlike the teenagers, actually get to decide who goes up for elimination?

But then, she also threatened to go upside T's head, which I think she'd need to stand on a chair for, so a sensible appreciation of her limitations doesn't seem to be her strong suit.

[biakbiak]

I am in the Josh is both sexist and homophobic camp. When the guys were deliberating he kept saying Nick was not man enough, didn't have the balls to be a chef and was Susie homemaker. Women can't be chefs and because he is gay Nick is womanly.

Edited May 7, 2015 by biakbiak

[Jersey Guy 87]

I'm not sure why Josh has to be either a sexist douche or a homophobe. From what I've seen, he's both. I was very sad to see him stay tonight. He thinks he's being put on the women's side to be the top dude, because obviously they have no clue. I think he has a reality check coming his way.

 

 

Agreed.  A sexist homophobic douche.  I can't wait to see him cower before T, and I don't even particularly like T.

 

I've spent many happy hours in the Buena Park/Anaheim area (Knott's Berry Farm and Disneyland) on vacations.

 

There is, indeed, a pirate-themed dinner theater on Beach Boulevard, right next door to Medieval Times.  I have been to the latter; it was so cheesy that I declined to go to the former.  "Oh, you'd like to actually breathe during your dinner and show?  That will be an upgrade to the premium ticket for just another $9.95 each."  (Hyperbole, but you get the picture.)

 

Remind me to never go to Beach Boulevard.  I can't imagine ever setting foot in a Medieval Times or a pirate-themed restaurant.  I remember being on a business trip years ago and someone suggested we go to Medieval Times for dinner, the idea was quickly shot down and the person who made the suggestion was constantly shamed until he finally left the company.

[Alapaki]

Yeah, what WAS that?  Looked like Medieval Times restaurant, only with pirates instead of knights.  Is that a thing?  maybe it's just me, but it seems like a great venue for a 10 year old boy's birthday party. 

was that this week, or the week before?   This show is so boring, so repetitive, I have a tough time remembering any of it.

 

 

This show is so formulaic that you can set your watch by it.  BTW, last week's reward (I think) was the roller-rink.  Which I'm pretty sure only exists for hipster doofuses to be ironic.

 

I think that someone turned off Millie's flattop  and oven on purpose to sabotage him. It might of been Josh.

 

 

My money would be on TPTB.  The mistakes on this show are just so rudimentary that I think there's got to be producer intervention to cause them.

 

I am in the Josh is both sexist and homophobic camp. When the guys were deliberating he kept saying Nick was not man enough, didn't have the balls to be a chef and was Susie homemaker. Women can't be chefs and because he is gay Nick is womanly.

 

 

Up until this point, I'd actually be pleasantly surprised that Nick hadn't gotten more shit from all the "bro" personalities on the Blue Team.  He's certainly not toning down who he is.  And I'd peg more than a few of these guys (especially in the context of a reality show) as likely to have a problem with such . . . flamboyance (and maybe that's my prejudice against the other guys).  But it really seems that Nick's sexual preferences have had no impact on their interactions.

 

But this week Josh definitely showed that when his back is against the wall he goes right to that level of attack.  

 

Josh also needs to ease off the cocaine.

[Neet]

Why get so mad about some random guy on TV's opinions on women and gays? I swear some people want to feel victimized whenever possible. Still, I'd prefer to label Josh as an idiot. He's always saying something moronic and has a deer in the headlights look when asked a question. I would've sent him home weeks ago, he definitely isn't the strongest chef.

[mlp]

 

Still think T and Meghan are the strongest of the women.  But the last couple of episodes are really exposing the chinks in Michelle and Alison's armor now.  I see absolutely no contenders on the men's team anymore aside from Milly, and even he had his struggles tonight.

 

I also think T and Meghan are the best on the women's team even though I can't stand Meghan.  She does seem to know what she's doing - unlike Michelle who is beginning to drive everyone nuts including me.

 

I think Milly was sabotaged, probably by the male sous chef who looks like a naked mole rat.  Milly has been a straight shooter all along and, when he said that the burners had been on, I believed him.  The other men have never even suggested putting him up for elimination so I assume they have no real problem with him.

 

I "taped" the show and just watched it tonight.  There was a quiet female voice describing the action on screen during the entire show starting with the jungle scenes at the beginning.  It was odd and also annoying.  Did everyone hear that or did my DVR do something weird?  

 

Edited May 8, 2015 by mlp

[ZoloftBlob]

Why get so mad about some random guy on TV's opinions on women and gays?

 

Because he's saying something ugly about what are essentially his coworkers - that by dint of being gay, or female, his fellow chefs are automatically beneath him. He has a cock and he likes to put it in vagina so he is the better chef... and unfortunately his face won't be rubbed in it every time he loses. Personally I'd be a lot better with the rampant sexism if the boys bragging how their cock and balls and liking vagina got called on to explain why their dish was shitty . I mean, why aren't these *men* forced to explain on camera how they have shamed their sex by not cooking as well as a gay man or a woman? Why don't we see Josh forced to stand up and say "My dish lost and therefore I am no longer a straight man since being a straight man is why I get to knock the gay man and the women for sucking. I no longer have the balls of a woman or a gay man since they cooked better than me."

 

Nope, when Josh loses, he just whines like a little bitch but somehow his fucking women makes him a shining star and women and gay will ALWAYS be under him and he will always be better and he will never be called out for calling himself a better shelf all because the primary requirement for being a chef is having a penis and fucking a woman with it.

 

I assume there's a class in culinary school on this.

 

More seriously - people get upset because mad because when you're a woman or a gay man, it really sucks to have to listen to someone shit on you and insist their dick makes them better at any career, and then have authority figures like Gordon say nothing, especially when the prick fucks up. If the "I have a dick and fuck vagina" rule was valid - the final eight should all be big swinging mancocks. It's not. But the women and gay men on this show, and the audience, get to continue to listen to how much women suck and gay men suck compared to a straight man because no one in authority on this show gets mad when they hear it. I seriously question how Gordon would feel if someone told his daughter she'll always be the shittier cook because no matter what, she's a woman and will never equal a man... In fact, I suspect he'd have a fit.

Edited May 9, 2015 by ZoloftBlob

[Julia]

Why get so mad about some random guy on TV's opinions on women and gays? I swear some people want to feel victimized whenever possible. Still, I'd prefer to label Josh as an idiot. He's always saying something moronic and has a deer in the headlights look when asked a question. I would've sent him home weeks ago, he definitely isn't the strongest chef.

No, he's not the strongest, and he's trying to. cover for it by being an abusive moron. Because the people who make this show think that particular strain of ugliness is good television, they not only let him stay, they put him where he can cause maximum offense. They do it in every season. It's an established trope. And nannying the whole intarwebz into not talking about the elephant in the living room doesn't make it go away.

Edited May 9, 2015 by cooksdelight

[Neet]

Zoloft, I'm not disagreeing with most of what you're saying. Josh is being sexist, I'm not questioning that. I'm not defending him. However, this is ONE guy. The whole blue team doesn't need to walk with their tail between their legs and confess their masculine sins over shit Josh said. If the other guys have said things about being better than the girls, I don't care. It's a competition. Gordon Ramsey does not need to play the role of a Dad telling certain people to apologize for hurt feelings when there's rude, hateful comments said on every episode of the show. I'm sure he isn't prejudiced over the genders of his chefs, since about half of the winners he's picked are women. The dialogue about "how much gay men and women suck" is once again coming from one guy, who is clearly being made out to look like an asshole by the producers. If HK results were determined by fan voting, nobody would be putting Josh through. I can't remember him even saying anything outside of those brief shots where a chef is talking to the camera or when everyone's upstairs after a service, so at least in those instances, it makes sense Gordon wouldn't lecture him since he's not there.

I'm not nannying the internet, I am wondering why anybody gets offended on behalf of someone else. The red team generally fires back insults to the blue team or whoever is being a prick to them, so it's not like they either a) can't take it or b) stand up for themselves and insult back and/or tell Ramsey to speak to Josh. They don't appear to be doing too much, which makes me think they don't care. (good) I said I don't get the self-victimization because I'm lost on why so many people take the opinion of someone they don't even like as guidance on how to feel. The comment about Nick being a "Suzy Homemaker" was rather harsh because being gay has nothing to do with cooking skills, and I'm assuming Josh's reasoning behind insulting the red team is because there are more famous chefs who are male (although he was being an ass instead of ever stating facts), but still, he's not any of these people's boss or anyone whose opinion matters, he's a jerk that they all want to beat in a competition. The show needs drama to thrive and this is part of it, keeping Josh on as long as possible for him to keep irritating viewers makes a whole lot more sense than having one of the bland guys stay on by scripting him to not serve up as many raw appetizers or whatever. You've got to wonder how much of the show is real, especially with GR admitting he amps up his real personality severely for the cameras.

Edited May 9, 2015 by cooksdelight

[Julia]

I'd point out how many squares on the bingo card you just filled by 'splaining why the subject you don't want to discuss is not worth discussing, but that way lies madness, so, sure. What you said.

However, if you look at the conversation with an eye past that particular idee fixe, you'll notice that a significant amount of the conversation has been precisely about the producers manipulating the situation for precisely this outcome. At least give the lesser minds a cookiie for that.

Edited May 9, 2015 by Julia

[cooksdelight]

Please snark at the people on the show, not each other. It's a touchy subject all the way around, and I want everyone to be mindful of that, and respectful of each other. Thanks.

[ZoloftBlob]

I'm not nannying the internet, I am wondering why anybody gets offended on behalf of someone else.

 

My prior post was too angry.

 

If no one ever got angry or offended on behalf of someone else, we'd still be locking the mentally challenged in mental hospitals and women still wouldn't be allowed to vote.

Edited May 9, 2015 by ZoloftBlob

[BogoGog24]

I do think Josh's comment towards Nick was very obviously a gay slur, however Josh is hardly the worst villain to ever be cast. Elise from season 9 I think it was was far more annoying (although at least she could cook) and Jason from season 4 was a truly sexist misogynistic douche. I honestly don't believe because Josh "ogled" some attractive women that that makes him sexist and I haven't heard any other comments from him that imply he thinks he's above the women simply because he's a man (he may think he is because of cooking skills). He even said in a talking head during the challenge that going up against Meghan is really hard, basically acknowledging she's a good chef. So I really don't see where these sexist comments are coming from. It seems like people take everything these days as some kind of slight against women. Like sometimes when the red team is referred to as "girls" and people call that sexist, however I've heard the women refer to the guys as "boys" just as often. Double standard much? If you want to find a real sexist douche to complain about, watch Jason from season 4. Josh is hardly that bad in comparison. I really think Josh is just an idiot in general and one of those contestants that thinks he's a leader and a better chef than he really is.

Like how he asked Nick if he thinks he's a better chef and then acted all shocked when he said yes. He just seems like an idiot in general to me. And he's probably not even going to make black jackets, definitely not final 2, and definitely won't win, so it's not like he'll be there that much longer anyway.

[Julia]

I do think Josh's comment towards Nick was very obviously a gay slur, however I haven't heard any other comments from him that imply he thinks he's above the women simply because he's a man 

 

Well, he called Nick by a woman's name to insult him, and then repeated it to Ramsay and added that Nick "doesn't have the balls" to be a good chef. That's a pretty specific statement of what he thinks qualifies someone to be a good chef.

[ZoloftBlob]

Yes, and funny how Gordon didn't correct Josh on how two balls between one's leg did not a chef make and that no one in blue had those magical qualities so what exactly was Nick's point?

 

Oh right, by dint of having a cock and balls, he is automatically better than the women cooks because yup, being a man makes him better automatically. And of course, as a real man, its perfectly acceptable for him to call a gay man a woman since well, that's ok in the workplace. Gosh I have no idea why half the audience if not more might be offended to know one contestant on this show considers himself head and tails above them since two balls makes him the better chef. I mean, for me, what makes this extra offensive is the reality that there's no gender advantage here.

[BogoGog24]

I think people are taking the "balls" comment extremely literally. That's generally just an expression used to mean that you've got the skills, the strength, the guts, etc. I don't think he meant Nick literally doesn't have a penis and that having a penis is a requirement to be a chef. It was a poor choice of words and I think if what he meant was that he doesn't think Nick has the skills or has "what it takes" to be a chef, he should have said that instead of "He's a Suzy homemaker and doesn't have the balls." He may not have meant anything sexist or homophobic by his comments, but like someone else said, he should have realized how those comments would be interpreted. And it was even dumber to repeat them in front of Ramsay. 

 

Anyway… other thoughts about the episode.

 

I wonder if the kids judging the challenge were told how to vote. Both the girls seemed to love everything but the guy was Ramsay Jr. I wonder if that kid knows anything about cooking and that's why he was being so picky, or if he thought it would be "cool" to be picky like Ramsay, or if he was told by producers to be picky. It didn't add up that he was being so picky but chose chicken-fried steak over real steak. The reward obviously seemed more geared towards the men (not that the women wouldn't have probably also enjoyed it) so they were told to ensure the men won. Speaking of the reward, I can't imagine the kids had any involvement in choosing it. And it seemed like a pretty lame reward. Better than the roller skating rink, for sure, but it didn't seem like something grown men would really enjoy. This season has been really stingy with the rewards.

 

Also, if we're going to bring up offensive comments, why hasn't anyone mentioned Meghan's "little one" comment to Michelle? It's obviously not the same as calling her a "midget" or something like that, but as a short person myself, I took far more offense to Meghan's comment and the overall treatment of the red team to Michelle than anything Josh said. I don't particularly like how the red team treats Michelle simply because she's the youngest, least experienced, and smallest. T also told Michelle to shut up during the punishment which I didn't think was called for. Why is no one calling the red team out on their behavior towards Michelle?

 

I also remembered something when I thought of all the past "villains" on this show and remembered the terrible trio of Season 10 that was Robyn, Kimmie, and Tiffany and their awful treatment towards Barbie. Those 3 were the worst that I think has ever been cast on the show. Like I said, I think Josh is just dumb, but not necessarily malicious. Those 3 were blatantly malicious and disgusting. Josh is the stereotypical HK contestant that comes in thinking he's a leader and is going to win, but doesn't have the skills to back it up. I don't see much out of the ordinary with him, except he may be the first HK contestant to make a gay slur towards a fellow teammate. Also, I find it a bit strange that in a talking head Nick said in the beginning he and Josh were "bromance" buddies (which I don't remember seeing any evidence of) but I guess as the competition got more intense their relationship changed, or something like that. So it's interesting how Josh would go after Nick considering they used to be good friends. 

[Julia]

I think people are taking the "balls" comment extremely literally. That's generally just an expression used to mean that you've got the skills, the strength, the guts, etc. 

 

My point exactly.

[ZoloftBlob]

If he didn't mean it, why not only refer to Nick as not having balls but also refer to him as a woman, aka Suzy Homemaker? Sorry - but that is clearly a sexual slur . Women don't have balls, they aren't strong, they don't have the skills or the guts to win... only people with *balls* are winners.  You have to have *balls* to succeed and trust me, you're making the point very clear that success is equated to manliness. When Josh calls Nick "Suzy Homemaker" and says he hasn't got the *balls* to succeed, he's clearly making the point that Nick isn't man enough to win, he lacks the skills, the strengths, the guts of a man. Men have *balls*. Woman don't have balls... and again, that's why I would love to see the tables turned  - and it will never happen - where a woman wins a challenge and Gordon asks the men to put their hands between their legs and squeeze since they don't have the balls as men to win against a woman. And make them call themselves "ball-less" since they didn't have the guts, the strength or the skills to prove they could beat a woman.

 

Nope, that particular humiliation won't happen. But it is ok to call the gay guy a woman and insist your balls make you better than a woman.

Edited May 9, 2015 by ZoloftBlob

[BogoGog24]

My point exactly.

 

What? That by Josh saying he doesn't have the "balls" means he doesn't think Nick has the "skills, strength, guts" etc.? He's entitled to think that of his opponent, regardless of whether it's true or not. Every one of them thinks they are better than their competitors. They all walk in there thinking they're the best. Josh may very well believe that Nick is not a skilled chef or that he isn't capable of handling the business. Whether it's true or not, he's allowed to have that opinion of Nick, just as Nick believes he's a better chef than Josh. The only issue I see with the comment is he just used a poor choice of words. Not that Josh believes he's a better chef.

[Julia]

No, that he's equating the possession of those things to the possession of testicles. Words mean things.

[ZoloftBlob]

And when you mean "you lack guts, you lack skills, you lack strength" and describe it as "You don't have balls" - you are equating those character traits to just men since only men possess balls.