| Author |
Message |
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 1:00 pm 
RS is tweeting up a storm. Evidently Corinne has a boyfriend back home so the only reason she was on BIP was to drink, get camera time and get exposure.
She has also "lawyered up."
|
Babyjaxmom
Member
10-20-2002
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 1:21 pm
Wow. That sucks. I was so looking forward to this show. Guess it was inevitable that someone would cross that line, with all the alcohol present.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 1:41 pm
Before all of this happened, I had no question that I wasn't interested. Just knowing some of the people who would be seen. I am just hoping that Corrine isn't considered a best friend of Rachel in real life.. I mean, surely Rachel has some cool besties in her life, but the show insisted on four women from her season.
Corinne suing is such a joke, considering her past behavior and statements indicating that she would do anything, sexually, to win.
If she actually has a boyfriend, yet went on this show...
Ah.. Too much that never made sense anyway. Why would they cast someone who gets so drunk she naps through production on one show, to be put on a show like BIP.
Well, because they want ratings and attention.
Cynical? Yep.
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 1:58 pm
You had no question you weren't interested? I never would have guessed.  
|
Wilsonatmd
Member
01-23-2001
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:16 pm
This is why BB limits the amount of alcohol they give them- so there won't be any incidents like this (at least ever since the knife incident in BB2)...the HG's may get out of control sometimes, but the producers have intervened when serious incidents happen.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:45 pm
Well I never would have guessed you weren't trying to convince me it was fun.. But evidently I was wrong.
The link I posted is from a blogger I follow for a couple of shows, or I might not have heard of this snafu so soon.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:48 pm
Maybe that wedding will be a special?
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:50 pm
No I was trying to convince other people (who may be lurking) that it is fun so they wouldn't necessarily be put off by your comments. 
|
Kookliebird
Member
08-04-2005
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:52 pm
From ETOnline... It sounds like Corrine does not even know what happened.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/exclusive-corinne-olympios-doesnt-remember-much-of-anything-of-bachelor-in-paradise-incident-source-says/ar-BBCzEz7?li=BBnb7Kz
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:56 pm
It's convenient not having to take any responsibility for your actions and your life. It's not like she was unconscious. She must have been walking and talking. If she had proceeded to get in a car in the same condition and killed someone, she couldn't claim ignorance could she? Why are there different rules for that?
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:57 pm
I am clear that I don't watch and never have, so I wouldn't think my comments would enter into a decision.
I guess I will stop posting so no one feels the need to cancel my influence.
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 2:59 pm
Aw that's so sad, Sea. Although you've never watched it, you do seem to enjoy posting about it so why not.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 3:04 pm
I don't post about the show, just comment on people who are on Bachelor and Bachelorette, which I do watch, and said to be going on a follow-up show.
|
Kookliebird
Member
08-04-2005
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 3:49 pm
Another article I read said that the contestants get paid between $8,000 and $15,000 for their time on the show. That's 3 weeks of work people! And their lodging, food and adventures are paid for. No wonder why they quit their jobs to do this.
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 4:46 pm
$15,000 seems a little high. For some reason, I thought they get paid for each day they are out there, and they only film a total of 18 days. I thought the article said the most they can make is $7,000 if they stay out for 18 days. But I wouldn't swear to this.
|
Lexie_girl
Member
07-30-2004
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 4:51 pm
I don't think it has anything to do with money for them. They want a free trip, free board, free alcohol and lots of camera time. There is no way I would quit my job for a $7,000 gig. Good jobs with fabulous benefits in my field are hard to come by.
Also, it was on RS's Twitter timeline that 5-6 of the girls out there already had boyfriends back home - for whatever that is worth.
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 5:15 pm
LOL.. Not much, but it seems to be common with most shows where shoelaces showmances happen, or those specifically set up to couple people up.
I can imagine that it they just stopped filming and sent them home, those who quit jobs for exposure would be pretty ticked off.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 5:34 pm
If she had proceeded to get in a car in the same condition and killed someone, she couldn't claim ignorance could she? Why are there different rules for that?
Because it's against the law to have sex with someone who cannot consent.
People get drunk. It happens. That doesn't mean someone else can rape you.
I spent years trying to teach young men that simple concept, and that was 30 years ago. Guess we still don't get it.
|
Babyjaxmom
Member
10-20-2002
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 5:34 pm
The articles I read said that the producer who was Corinne's handler was the one who objected to her being filmed when she was so drunk. She's the one who filed the suit, not Corinne.
It's not like she was unconscious.
I take extreme objection to this attitude. Yes, it is like she was unconscious, if she was that drunk. It's like sleepwalking. She was still walking and talking, but the parts of the brain that control behavior are not functioning as they should. That's what consent is about. A woman can't give "consent" to sexual activity if she's that drunk, and any man who would take advantage of that deserves to face charges. That's called rape.
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 5:45 pm
I spent years trying to teach young men that simple concept, and that was 30 years ago. Guess we still don't get it.
~~~~~~~~
I take extreme objection to this attitude. Yes, it is like she was unconscious, if she was that drunk. It's like sleepwalking. She was still walking and talking, but the parts of the brain that control behavior are not functioning as they should.
I guess you're talking to me. Oh I get it! Wow ... sometimes I just don't know what to say!
I know it's against the law to have sex with someone who can't consent. I'm not talking about someone who is unconscious or so impaired that they can't move or speak and is being taken advantage of. That's wrong. Not only is it against the law, it is immoral.
But if she got in a car and drove, she would be capable of determining that she could operate a car and would be charged with a DUI or worse? So the law considers that she would be capable of deciding to operate a motor vehicle but she is incapable of deciding to make out?
A man and woman stupidly drink too much and have sex (with both conscious) and it's automatically the guy's fault. Why isn't the man equally impaired? Why is it his responsibility to determine that she is too drunk vs. her responsibility to determine that he is too drunk. Welcome to the 21st century and empowered women!
We're not talking about some sexual predator who maliciously preys on women. We're talking about TWO drunk people.
So the defense against a DUI is "I can't remember anything"?
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 5:57 pm
The woman is the only one who can become pregnant.
In our cultures, it is typically men who rape women, not the other way around.
In our cultures, the man is typically stronger than the woman.
In our cultures, men typically do not feel violated after ambiguous consent.
Is it a double standard? Yes. Sometimes they are appropriate.
In the case where both were drunk, it's not likely to end in a conviction.
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 5:58 pm
That's a fair response, Kar. Thank you.
|
Dipo
Member
04-23-2002
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 7:32 pm
Well TMZ is reporting that the guy said he was too drunk to complete the deal, for what it's worth.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 7:33 pm
Yeah, I don't think in the case where both are so drunk, that the guy will be found liable in any way.
However, those watching that were not drunk, that did not stop them - they could be at risk.
|
Wilsonatmd
Member
01-23-2001
| Monday, June 12, 2017 - 8:50 pm
The thing with production is that they have a duty of care. If they weren't drunk and were just fooling around in the pool, there's no issue. However, if there was any reason to believe that one or both of them were too drunk to consent, they have the duty of care to intervene- and since they had been filming them all day, production would know that they had been drinking heavily.
Yes, the contracts are probably set up to protect the show and the producers in a lot of ways, but if things ended up how they did because of production negligence, they could have a ton of problems...
|
Spoilers - 2017 Bachelor in Paradise 
