Loose Women - ITV

Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
1 Sort by date Sort by reaction score 2
Renata said:
Yep - there was no need for his brother to be on there promoting his book. This tragedy happened a long time ago and he is using the “fame” to his advantage.
The panel today were acting very differently to when they are on a mixed panel.

this sort of segregation is very dangerous. Black people are still a minority group in this country and this all black panel is disproportionate to the audience it serves.

the others must be annoyed too.

why did they behave so naturally on an all black panel? Can they only relate to their own skin people?

a lot of the issues discussed today were relevant to a black audience.
Click to expand...


I'm a bit confused why you ended with this statement. You are complaining about segregation and yet acknowledging that the issues raised were relevant to the people you are complaining are present because of their race.
 
Phil Anne Throw Pee said:
I'm a bit confused why you ended with this statement. You are complaining about segregation and yet acknowledging that the issues raised were relevant to the people you are complaining are present because of their race.
Click to expand...

My point is the issues raised, the panel, the discussion were all limited to one audience. It wasn’t a diverse show, it was limited. It’s almost like they are discriminating against non blacks.

Today’s panel was diverse and worked very well. A range of topics, a diverse panel.
 
The show just uses the same type of subjects over and over again now.

for me, Kaye is by far the best anchor (probably followed bf Ruth), they are both professionals with heaps of background, can do serious and also humour too, and respected in their fields, and by other panel members.

Kaye and Nadia might have been best friends, but Kaye can see right through Nadia and all her lies to make her sound relevant. Annoys me how N always wanting to slag Kaye, jealous of her good career, nice house, and intelligence I suspect.
 
Renata said:
Yep - there was no need for his brother to be on there promoting his book. This tragedy happened a long time ago and he is using the “fame” to his advantage.
The panel today were acting very differently to when they are on a mixed panel.

this sort of segregation is very dangerous. Black people are still a minority group in this country and this all black panel is disproportionate to the audience it serves.

the others must be annoyed too.

why did they behave so naturally on an all black panel? Can they only relate to their own skin people?

a lot of the issues discussed today were relevant to a black audience.
Click to expand...
Agree. Last Saturday on Allan Carr's gameshow, all 6 contestants were black
 
There have been all-white panels on loose women for years yet when there's an all-black panel every few weeks, especially when talking about issues particularly sensitive to black people, ITV are discriminating against white people 😂 😂 do me a favour, white people don't need to weigh into every conversation, especially the white loose women who usually don't know what they're talking about when it comes to race issues (eg jane dismissing the microagressions black women have to endure purely for being black by comparing it to sexism she received for being a female journalist which of course is bad but can't she just listen to black women instead of making it about her??). White people aren't oppressed, especially when the biggest issue is them missing out a day on the loose women panel.
 
orlyb1310 said:
There have been all-white panels on loose women for years yet when there's an all-black panel every few weeks, especially when talking about issues particularly sensitive to black people, ITV are discriminating against white people 😂 😂 do me a favour, white people don't need to weigh into every conversation, especially the white loose women who usually don't know what they're talking about when it comes to race issues (eg jane dismissing the microagressions black women have to endure purely for being black by comparing it to sexism she received for being a female journalist which of course is bad but can't she just listen to black women instead of making it about her??). White people aren't oppressed, especially when the biggest issue is them missing out a day on the loose women panel.
Click to expand...
The playing field should be levelled at the point of the interview process. Black people should be considered for their employment based on their attributes and treated the same as white people, thus having the same chance of getting employment as anyone else.

My problem is ejecting white people from a job for the purpose of replacing them with a black person. That is not fair. It's discrimination. Someone who has contributed to a business, or a TV show, through no fault of their own, has essentially lost work through the colour of their skin. I know of atleast two white panelists who usually appear on the show that day and they will have lost work but why, because of the colour of their skin? Discrimination works both ways.

rivermonster said:
Did you think that N had lost weight?
Click to expand...
Yes, I thought she looked a lot larger last week in that pink shirt though. Her face looks thinner definitely.
 
Gloria Rostron said:
The playing field should be levelled at the point of the interview process. Black people should be considered for their employment based on their attributes and treated the same as white people, thus having the same chance of getting employment as anyone else.

My problem is ejecting white people from a job for the purpose of replacing them with a black person. That is not fair. It's discrimination. Someone who has contributed to a business, or a TV show, through no fault of their own, has essentially lost work through the colour of their skin. I know of atleast two white panelists who usually appear on the show that day and they will have lost work but why, because of the colour of their skin? Discrimination works both ways.


Yes, I thought she looked a lot larger last week in that pink shirt though. Her face looks thinner definitely.
Click to expand...
In an ideal world, the playing field should be level but it isn’t. You can look up research of people with Black sounding names being rejected for jobs despite having identical experience to their white counterparts. We can’t suddenly just pretend that we live in an equal society when we don’t, as lovely as it would be.
I don’t see how when it’s four white women on the panel, nobody bats an eyelid but when it’s four Black women, suddenly the white women are out of work and being discriminated against. People clearly see white as the norm and are offended when there is no ‘normal’ on the panel. Like I said before, some issues require a certain demographic on the panel to talk about it meaningfully. I don’t need to see Linda or Denise try to relate to racism when they’re clueless. These women are NOT being discriminated against for not being on the panel on a certain day. The nature of loose women is that the panel changes daily so by that logic, Stacey or Nadia or Janet are in no worse of a position when they’re not on the panel on a day when it’s Colleen, Linda, Jane and Ruth compared to a day when it’s Charlene, Kelle, Brenda and Judi. They’d have been at home not making their 3k or whatever fee anyway so it doesn’t really matter who was on the panel instead of them.
 
orlyb1310 said:
In an ideal world, the playing field should be level but it isn’t. You can look up research of people with Black sounding names being rejected for jobs despite having identical experience to their white counterparts. We can’t suddenly just pretend that we live in an equal society when we don’t, as lovely as it would be.
I don’t see how when it’s four white women on the panel, nobody bats an eyelid but when it’s four Black women, suddenly the white women are out of work and being discriminated against. People clearly see white as the norm and are offended when there is no ‘normal’ on the panel. Like I said before, some issues require a certain demographic on the panel to talk about it meaningfully. I don’t need to see Linda or Denise try to relate to racism when they’re clueless. These women are NOT being discriminated against for not being on the panel on a certain day. The nature of loose women is that the panel changes daily so by that logic, Stacey or Nadia or Janet are in no worse of a position when they’re not on the panel on a day when it’s Colleen, Linda, Jane and Ruth compared to a day when it’s Charlene, Kelle, Brenda and Judi. They’d have been at home not making their 3k or whatever fee anyway so it doesn’t really matter who was on the panel instead of them.
Click to expand...
I have no problem with an all black panel, I have a problem with literally removing someone from the panel because they are white. I think it's only fair that everyone goes through the same channel and gets the same treatment of employment.

I'm afraid I disagree somewhat with the argument that white people can't talk about racism. Obviously, in terms of anti black racism, it helps to have someone on the panel who might have experienced that, but I don't think white people should have their opinions blocked on the matter. I watched the Stephen Lawrence interview and I don't think the panel really added much personal input to the subject. I think Brenda was actually rather unprofessional at one point. She seemed to lack tact, but I don't think that was her intention.

It's funny, as the Loose Women talk about many subjects that they don't have personal experience of, for example when they talked about gay care homes (with a panel of 100% straight women) and Nadia went on to discuss all of the gay stereotypes. They have also discussed trans issues, again with a 100% straight CIS female panel and no one seemed to complain that they didn't have personal experience then.
 
Last edited:
I agree with both sides of the argument (well articulated) . I feel that the white panel should also talk about racism as this is how you learn and this is how you understand what the real issues are.
If only black people talk about Stephen Lawrence/Goethe floyd - it’s representing a one sided view. Even though Denise or gloria may not have experienced racism, they might have a view about it that others have which then creates a wider discussion.

that way the issue is jointly “owned”.
 
Gloria Rostron said:
It's funny, as the Loose Women talk about many subjects that they don't have personal experience of, for example when they talked about gay care homes (with a panel of 100% straight women) and Nadia went on to discuss all of the gay stereotypes. They have also discussed trans issues, again with a 100% straight CIS female panel and no one seemed to complain that they didn't have personal experience then.
Click to expand...
For the record, I think a huge problem with the show is that the women often have no experience of what they're talking about though some of them are more articulate so manage to cover it up better. I don't like the fact that they talk about LGBTQ+ issues with nobody present who is actually a part of the community. There needs to be more diversity beyond black women though when you look at the pool of celebrities who would be elligible for loose women, there aren't very many from ethnically or religiously diverse backgrounds. Also I don't think that white people can't be a part of racism discussions ever, I just don't think that its the end of the world when we aren't because on loose women as we've seen in recent times, the white panelists often get defensive and speak over the experiences of their black colleagues. Until they get less ignorant white women on the panel, I much prefer the idea of an all-black panel and I don't see it as discrimination because LW hasn't sacked any white women in order for them to hire more black women and Stacey or Janet won't be turning up to work in the morning to be told to go back home because they're not welcome on the show on that particular day.
 
Anna Richardson was great and she is also bisexual, I believe. She didn't last long on the show, nor did India Willoughby, but I was glad about that as she's annoying as hell (nothing to do with her being a trans woman). It would be great to have an LGBT representation on the panel, when a vacancy comes up, I'm not saying someone should lose their job for the sake of it.
 
Last edited:
Gloria Rostron said:
Anna Richardson was great and she is also bisexual, I believe. She didn't last long on the show, nor did India Willoughby, but I was glad about that as she's annoying as hell (nothing to do with her being a trans woman). It would be great to have an LGBT representation on the panel, when a vacancy comes up, I'm not saying someone should lose their job for the sake of it.
Click to expand...
Well get rid of Charlene, Nadia, Gloria, Stacy, Kellie & there'll be plenty of vacancies.
Oh & Frankie....her voice is like nails down a blackboard 🙉😖
 
I get the feeling that Kellie and all the other black panelist’s approached the producers for an all black panel.

Brenda and Judy are the same whichever panel they are on but Kellie and Charlene were different personalities on there. It was almost as though they were subdued on the diverse panel and let loose on the black panel.

I think the blm movement has definitely worked in their favour - Charlene is a great reporter and got the chance to interview Trevor McDonald!
 
Renata said:
I get the feeling that Kellie and all the other black panelist’s approached the producers for an all black panel.

Brenda and Judy are the same whichever panel they are on but Kellie and Charlene were different personalities on there. It was almost as though they were subdued on the diverse panel and let loose on the black panel.

I think the blm movement has definitely worked in their favour - Charlene is a great reporter and got the chance to interview Trevor McDonald!
Click to expand...
Brenda and Judi are great. I wasn't keen on Brenda at first but I think she has come out of her shell a bit more now.

Charlene is great as a news anchor/reporter but not a Loose Woman and Kelle is great in Hollyoaks but subdued on Loose Women. When she was dancing and pressing herself against the screen it seemed very forced and awkward.
 
Gloria Rostron said:
Brenda and Judi are great. I wasn't keen on Brenda at first but I think she has come out of her shell a bit more now.

Charlene is great as a news anchor/reporter but not a Loose Woman and Kelle is great in Hollyoaks but subdued on Loose Women. When she was dancing and pressing herself against the screen it seemed very forced and awkward.
Click to expand...
I agree. Love Brenda, like Judi. Used to like Charlene as news presenter but can't stand her in LW. And,Kelly just seems devoid of personality
 
Status
Thread locked. We start a new thread when they have over 1000 posts, click the blue button to see all threads for this topic and find the latest open thread.
Back
Top