[ElProximo]

BB is primarily a 'social status/dynamic' competition. There is no real objective measure for a 'deserving winner',
however,
We always consider how they handle themselves in there, in light of what social skills, social background and social status they came from.

A HM may win for being a transsexual and immigrant who is then 'rewarded' for somehow behaving/socially interacting well in their own context. From what they started with and how they were fit in the House.

Other HMs won for being attractive girls who were then 'dumped' by a scoundrel and therefore 'rewarded' for being the 'girl power' cause of the week.

HMs have won for being a bit simple-minded and then rewarded for how they overcame their disadvantage.

SO... ... Steve has as much right or reason to win because he has entered with a unique social status/situation,
and,
then how he deals with that disability and position throughout BB.

If you disagree then tell me how you would apply the same standard for Steve to any other HM?

Why should I accept that "he ought not win just because of his disability and heroic service".
Why not?
I say its as good a reason as any other and why not?

[BBDodge]

He ought not to win because he's boring.

[soleila]

Yeah, he's a dull hm. Winners are usually picked because the are kind and endearing, not boring lazy and borderline pervy. It's not a pity or worshipping contest.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by soleila

Yeah, he's a dull hm. Winners are usually picked because the are kind and endearing, not boring lazy and borderline pervy. It's not a pity or worshipping contest.

How you have the nerve to call him lazy is incredible! In case you haven't noticed - he has mobility issues and can't move around as easily and as often as others! It must be a lot more of a strain for him!

As for the pervy bit - that depends on your perspective - personally I believe he was just trying to have a bit of fun - but people misinterpret his actions because of his age and disability!

[fruit_cake]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

As for the pervy bit - that depends on your perspective - personally I believe he was just trying to have a bit of fun - but people misinterpret his actions because of his age and disability!

he doesn't perv over andrew or mario does he!!! he is a perv but i feel sorry for him he's a bloke at the end of the day must be hard for him with no legs and everything

[charmingmissc]

steve should not win just because he has a disability, regardless of how he got it.

for me it is their personality that matters.

the ones you could be friends and socialize with.

that is why i like josie and ben.

if you were in a room with all the housemates who would you interact with?

[billy123]

unfortunately the kids wont let him win because he hasnt got a tight ass
once they grow up they will see that that is the least of lifes trials.

[muchadoaboutnothing]

Pete Bennet won not because of his tourettes but because he was very entertaining. Mikey came second (not because of his blindness) because he was also a good housemate and all others who have won, won because of the way they appealed to the then audience. Steve could win on the sympathy vote with the media sprouting him as some sort of hero (as John McCirick did recently on BBLB) and that would be defeating the objective of BB. Yes if he was an entertaining HM and brought something to the show then he deserves to be at least in the top three. But just because he fought for Queen and country and then became disabled as a result should not be enough for him to win. The only good thing I could say about Steve is that he does prove that there is life after war and that it is possible to overcome difficult adversities, from that point of view he is an inspiration to young men coming back from Afghanistan with terrible injuries. But winning BB because of it - absolutely NOT.

[Blueisthecolour]

I understand the OPs point and agree in some ways...but.

Steve has said that he doesn't believe in using his disabilities as an excuse and wants to be judged the same as anyone else.

So on that basis I don't see him as a winner.

He isn't particularly pleasant, doesn't have a particularly winning personality and until Keeley's arrival had made little contribution to the overall dynamic of the house.

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by Blueisthecolour

Steve has said that he doesn't believe in using his disabilities as an excuse and wants to be judged the same as anyone else.

So on that basis I don't see him as a winner.

Sure but to turn that around - someone might vote for Steve BECAUSE he doesn't believing in using his disability as an excuse,
and,
that he insist he is not a 'hero' and he wants to be judged for himself.

I might say that is showing great character and admirable social graces in this BB situation.
That may be one reason we ought to vote for him?

[fruit_cake]

i dont think steve can win, he's too boring you vote to win at the end.. who's gonna vote for him to win??

[Niamh.]

He's dull and pervy.

[lime]

Steve has as much right to win BB as any other HM...but he certainly doesn't have more of a right because of his disabilities.

ATM he isn't a worthy winner ,nor has he done enough to make it to the final IMO.

His mobility issue does not mean he has to sit on sofa all day.
Doesn't he ply/manage a wheelchair basketball team ??It certainly wasn't a issue when he managed to farther 8 kids or bench press a couple of HM.

Mikey to an extent had mobility issues due to his vision loss but still was an entertaining HM

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by lime

Steve has as much right to win BB as any other HM...but he certainly doesn't have more of a right because of his disabilities.

ATM he isn't a worthy winner ,nor has he done enough to make it to the final IMO.

His mobility issue does not mean he has to sit on sofa all day.
Doesn't he ply/manage a wheelchair basketball team ??It certainly wasn't a issue when he managed to farther 8 kids or bench press a couple of HM.

Mikey to an extent had mobility issues due to his vision loss but still was an entertaining HM

Mikey's disability wasn't related to physical energy - getting about must be a lot more tiring for Steve than Mikey!

[lime]

Originally Posted by WOMBAI

Mikey's disability wasn't related to physical energy - getting about must be a lot more tiring for Steve than Mikey!

Actually WOMBAI I remember Mikey telling HM's that getting around was tiring for him and a few of his HM"s discussing it that evening and agreeing that it would be the case if you had no vision.
So I disagree ,I think Mikey's disability would effect his physical energy.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by lime

Actually WOMBAI I remember Mikey telling HM's that getting around was tiring for him and a few of his HM"s discussing it that evening and agreeing that it would be the case if you had no vision.
So I disagree ,I think Mikey's disability would effect his physical energy.

Fair enough - but it seems obvious to me - that the physical energy required for Steve to get about - must be even more tiring for him - by the very nature of his type of injuries and his age!

[stonedape]

A. Steve is boring

B. Even if he weren't boring, a double amputee one eyed former soldier winning is boring in itself.

How I apply this standard to other HMs: I do not like HMs that are boring across the board, and I do not tend to root for HMs that are obvious wins before you hear them speak. It's like watching a bodybuilder in an arm wrestling competition with 16 average people on the street. Why do you even need to watch? That said, he has been a sloppy gamesmen lately, might actually have a few weeks of late nights/good sleep before final finals. But BB is never so kind.

[eye sea]

I'm gonna be Devil's Advocate here and say Steve never served much in the army. He joined at 18 and was blown up at 19. That's not my view, that's an alternative opinion.

[WOMBAI]

Originally Posted by eye sea

I'm gonna be Devil's Advocate here and say Steve never served much in the army. He joined at 18 and was blown up at 19. That's not my view, that's an alternative opinion.

Your point being what exactly! That just makes it worse - he was so young! Carrying out his duties as a soldier - cost him his whole future, including his career, at such a tender age - before he even had chance to experience adult life! He and every other person seriously injured whilst doing a dangerous job that benefits society, be it a soldier, fireman, policeman etc - is owed by society!

[Livia]

I don't think Steve will win because his personality isn't engaging enough. But I largely agree with the OP's sentiments.

Am I the only one who can guess the ages on this forum by the level of ignorance in the replies?

[joeysteele]

This is a misleading thread, no one I would safely believe thinks Steve should not win because of the disabilities he has,that is a wrong assumption that anyone thinks that.
The sad thing as to Stev is the more he talks about subjects the more extreme his views and also intolerance,as shown in the tasks he can still do a fair amount in them and he can still talk so there is lots to judge him on as to his being a good,fair or bad housemate.
For me his discussion with Ben as to the UK getting involved in foreign countries,his view that people should only be able to comment on such things if they were an MP or had been in the forces,showed Steve to have some odd and bigoted views,when he said if a child of his ever went to prison,that he wouldn't visit them left me stunned,what a pretentious and uncompromising person. He knows he snores and annoys many housemates with it but he does nothing about it,how very selfish,then he castigates Ben for not as he sees it being a team player,so he nominates Ben week after week for that,rediculous as Ben has done many tasks but okay he can be a bit non conformist and is always upfront about it, so Steve has no respect for honesty in people either.
However the reason people are now against Steve is because as Ben pointed out TO STEVE,since the new girls especially Rachel had come in the house Steve was like dog in heat.It is the combination of those few things,and I could have listed many more, that will likely stop the public wanting Steve to win, not his disabilities. The thing for me is that when he wants a laugh,he expects everyone to want to too, but when he cannot be bothered and the other housemates are having fun, being younger, he moans and groans and tells them to stop,like a grumpy old neighbour who always tries to spoil others fun.That is the reason he is more disliked and his really sick flirting with Keeley and Rachel when he knows his wife and kids could be watching makes me feel really sick indeed,he's a dirty old man and a very bad housemate indeed who gets more boring and irrelevant as the days pass.
Nothing to do with his disabilities,he is just not a nice man at all and thats starting to show more and more.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

This is a misleading thread, no one I would safely believe thinks Steve should not win because of the disabilities he has,that is a wrong assumption that anyone thinks that.
The sad thing as to Stev is the more he talks about subjects the more extreme his views and also intolerance,as shown in the tasks he can still do a fair amount in them and he can still talk so there is lots to judge him on as to his being a good,fair or bad housemate.
For me his discussion with Ben as to the UK getting involved in foreign countries,his view that people should only be able to comment on such things if they were an MP or had been in the forces,showed Steve to have some odd and bigoted views,when he said if a child of his ever went to prison,that he wouldn't visit them left me stunned,what a pretentious and uncompromising person. He knows he snores and annoys many housemates with it but he does nothing about it,how very selfish,then he castigates Ben for not as he sees it being a team player,so he nominates Ben week after week for that,rediculous as Ben has done many tasks but okay he can be a bit non conformist and is always upfront about it, so Steve has no respect for honesty in people either.
However the reason people are now against Steve is because as Ben pointed out TO STEVE,since the new girls especially Rachel had come in the house Steve was like dog in heat.It is the combination of those few things,and I could have listed many more, that will likely stop the public wanting Steve to win, not his disabilities. The thing for me is that when he wants a laugh,he expects everyone to want to too, but when he cannot be bothered and the other housemates are having fun, being younger, he moans and groans and tells them to stop,like a grumpy old neighbour who always tries to spoil others fun.That is the reason he is more disliked and his really sick flirting with Keeley and Rachel when he knows his wife and kids could be watching makes me feel really sick indeed,he's a dirty old man and a very bad housemate indeed who gets more boring and irrelevant as the days pass.
Nothing to do with his disabilities,he is just not a nice man at all and thats starting to show more and more.

Great post.

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

..when he said if a child of his ever went to prison,that he wouldn't visit them left me stunned,what a pretentious and uncompromising person.

This has been a common view held by parents who love their children enough to discipline them (as in teach lessons, guide).

This used to be understood as a GOOD POSITION and the sign of a good parenting.
This was (and still is by some) considered an admirable and noble and 'righteous' thing to do.

The idea here is that he is informing his children that IF they are in the wrong, get arrested then they will have to pay the consequences in full.
Its sometimes called 'tough love'.

Not only did parents NOT visit (and forget helping) their children in jail,
but,
even inmates considered it 'morally wrong' to allow their parents to visit as they were ashamed to put the parents in that position and just have them be seen in prison for what they (the child) had done.

To really give you the idea here - when my Dad was arrested (as a younger lad) my Grandfather got a call from the police.
"We have your boy here.. caught doing some crimes.. what would you like us to do with him?"
My Grandfather sternly instructed them to hold him accountable to the MAXIMUM the law would allow and to lock him up for as long as they could.
To this day my father is still thankful for that 'tough love' and respected his father for it.

So that from Steve is one of the reasons I would consider voting for him to win BB11.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by ElProximo

This has been a common view held by parents who love their children enough to discipline them (as in teach lessons, guide).

This used to be understood as a GOOD POSITION and the sign of a good parenting.
This was (and still is by some) considered an admirable and noble and 'righteous' thing to do.

The idea here is that he is informing his children that IF they are in the wrong, get arrested then they will have to pay the consequences in full.
Its sometimes called 'tough love'.

Not only did parents NOT visit (and forget helping) their children in jail,
but,
even inmates considered it 'morally wrong' to allow their parents to visit as they were ashamed to put the parents in that position and just have them be seen in prison for what they (the child) had done.

To really give you the idea here - when my Dad was arrested (as a younger lad) my Grandfather got a call from the police.
"We have your boy here.. caught doing some crimes.. what would you like us to do with him?"
My Grandfather sternly instructed them to hold him accountable to the MAXIMUM the law would allow and to lock him up for as long as they could.
To this day my father is still thankful for that 'tough love' and respected his father for it.

So that from Steve is one of the reasons I would consider voting for him to win BB11.

I much rather the whole compassion and forgiveness thing myself, rather than hackneyed ye olde parenting tactics that never brought on much positives. But whatever floats your boat.

[ElProximo]

Originally Posted by Stu

I much rather the whole compassion and forgiveness thing myself, rather than hackneyed ye olde parenting tactics that never brought on much positives. But whatever floats your boat.

Steve might argue that the real compassion is in letting the child pay the harshest penalty.
The child might say that it is out of compassion for their parents they do NOT want them visiting them.

Forgiveness. If the child is remorseful then you certainly can forgive them for whatever the crime but that is not the same thing as having them pay the debts and consequences.
Two different things.

As for your hackneyed new parenting ideas I don't think there is any debate on this anymore when you only need to walk around the UK as see what totally disrespectful criminally-minded little pukes run rampant vandalizing and spitting,
and,
Yes, the mentality of these scallies and chavs is straight out of being deprived of any sort of discipline or understanding there are real consequences.

I suggest that your tactics are uncaring, unloving and show no compassion for victims.
Steve is more advanced than you on this one.