# Survivor - One World - 2/22/12



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

Colton has to be one of the dumbest, worst, pathetic players in Survivor ever!

He's wasting an opportunity of a lifetime. Why not take this strategy to the men:

Tell the men he's going to befriend the women in order to infiltrate their tribe and he'll win the men over. Simple!!

Sadly he's for real.


----------



## toddvj (Apr 22, 2004)

Colton is single-handedly setting back acceptance of gays at least 20 years or so.

I cannot believe Kat walked up and FARTED on that other girl! She must not have realized she was on camera.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

Colton is pathetic. What sort of gameplan is hanging out with the girls? How does he even think he's going to get a chance to merge with them when he's so transparent about it? And from the previews


Spoiler



"I'm a republican and I don't believe in handouts"
gay republican = I hate myself
don't believe in handouts = better give back that immunity idol



As regarding the girls, first what was up with Jeff at tribal saying something like (don't remember the wording) they're back AGAIN because they can't get it together. Huh? They were there last week because somebody broke their wrist. Second, what was up with obnoxious girl from last week's tribal talking about how the girl who got fire made herself look stupid at tribal? I think she got that completely backwards. Finally, the comment at tribal about doing it differently if they could...come on, it's only day 5. Why does everyone always make alliances really quick based on the most superficial information and then feel they have to stick to it until the end? If you realize you made a mistake, fix it.


----------



## Sadara (Sep 27, 2006)

I'm very disappointed in the women. They are pathetic as a tribe. They really can't get it together. Kat is beyond immature and should have gone home. What I really don't get is that if they "would have" chosen different alliances, why don't they do it now?! They need to strengthen their tribe, like stat! I do think they are going to get picked off and it's going to be quite awhile before the guys loose a reward challenge or an immunity challenge.


----------



## omnibus (Sep 25, 2001)

I get it! They perceive Nina as an ultimate threat, but they're only 5 days in. The flip side of course is that Kat is anything but a threat except that she singlehandidly lost the challenge. There must be something bad in the water.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Watching this makes me almost I am sorry I am a girl.


----------



## appleye1 (Jan 26, 2002)

omnibus said:


> The flip side of course is that Kat is anything but a threat except that she singlehandidly lost the challenge.


What she did was dumb I agree but I don't believe that was the deciding factor in the challenge. They were screwed from the start with the double touching.

It took no time for the guys to figure out that they needed to spread out so there wouldn't be a chance of touching two players. The girls never did figure it out and stayed bunched up the whole time. That's the main thing that caused them to lose.

And the initial attempt to blame it on the boobs was pathetic. We've got boobs! It's unfair!


----------



## latrobe7 (May 1, 2005)

[Butthead]That challenge was rad.[/Butthead]

[Beavis]Hehe...Yeah! Boobs. Yeah![/Beavis]


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

If the girls lose again next week, I predict a tribal shuffle. Maybe even if they don't lose. Survivor used to do that regularly, but it's been several years. I think that could be extra effective at breaking up alliances with them living on the same beach.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

One of Monica's fake boobs is larger than the other.

Technically, the women have only lost one immunity challenge. But they are a total mess. Voting off Nina was dumb. They need to keep people with some sense. They don't need athletes. The challenges this season are not going to be physical because the tribes are divided by gender.

Bill and his fake accent were weird. Here he his doing his "comedy":
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5y-cumWeqQ[/media]

Two episodes in and nobody has made an on camera offensive remark about whatshisnames height. I predict the first to do so will be Tarzan.

Speaking of Tarzan, what is in his speedo?


----------



## appleye1 (Jan 26, 2002)

tiams said:


> Speaking of Tarzan, what is in his speedo?


Two coconuts and a banana?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I'm getting tired of the producers misdirecting how TC will go. They sure did make us believe that Kat had a realistic chance of going home this week, when, it was pretty obvious by the voting that it wasn't going to happen. As soon as they started showing those scenes of the girls talking about possibly voting her off, I said to my wife, it's a red herring Nina is still going.


----------



## BradJW (Jun 9, 2008)

How stupid to even consider voting out Kat. She's way too hot to be kicked off this early!


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

How stupid of Monica to vote for Kristina (i think that was her name).


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

tiams said:


> Technically, the women have only lost one immunity challenge. But they are a total mess. Voting off Nina was dumb. They need to keep people with some sense. They don't need athletes. The challenges this season are not going to be physical because the tribes are divided by gender.


I think Nina had it right. The younger players are all together and the older ladies are outside that. The younger ones are not seeing the help that the older women could give them. I am surprised that Chelsea and Sabrina voted as they did. They seem the most mature of that group of young players.


----------



## Jebberwocky! (Apr 16, 2005)

BradJW said:


> How stupid to even consider voting out Kat. She's way too hot to be kicked off this early!


yuck, far from hot. But her attitude saves the day for her!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Maybe this was edited out for some reason, but when a couple of the girls in the young alliance admitted they would change alliances if they could do it over again, why didn't Nina/Monica/Kristina jump up and say, "Vote out Kat and let's create some new alliances TONIGHT that will help our tribe get to the end, rather than remaining loyal to an alliance that will ensure that most of us are gone before the Merge."


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

BradJW said:


> How stupid to even consider voting out Kat. She's way too hot to be kicked off this early!


Women don't think (vote) that way.


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

I don't see the girls coming up with a win if they continue to make the same choices they are making. I don't know if the guys can sweep all the way to a merge, but unless the girls pull it together, I could see it happening. I think they are smart enough to not throw a challenge. There doesn't seem to be any sense of chivalry at all and I think the guys are chauvinistic enough that they'll make it a point to destroy the women. The only way Colton doesn't get voted out twice is if the guys are smart enough to get to the merge with numbers minus Colton. I think if they find the remaining idol, they'll figure out Colton is the one who has it and will need to blindside him. Either way, I think if Colton goes to tribal, he'll need to play the idol the first chance he gets.

He has to be the worst Survivor player ever in history. Not the dumbest (Erik?? James??) or arrogant (Russell), but worst. Even Russell knew he was a bull in a china shop, but Colton's whole schtick was to be a woman the whole time? And then to get out there, realize that isn't going to happen and continue to use his pre-arrival strategy? He said he's loved the show from the beginning and has seen every episode, yet he continues to do what he's doing?

Worst.Player.Ever.


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

I'm really liking Sabrina. It's too bad she's locked in to the young girls. I think she recognized that it would be better to ditch Kat, but she's just the leader of the tribe, not of the power alliance in the tribe.


----------



## BradJW (Jun 9, 2008)

Jebberwocky! said:


> yuck, far from hot. But her attitude saves the day for her!


You should see her mug shot!
http://starcasm.net/archives/139452









for the record, I think she's hot on the show and think her mugshot is hot too.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

Colton's problem is that he had this fantastic strategy in his head about how he was going to befriend the girls and blind side the guys and he'd go far in the game. Then he got to the island and got hit with One World and his plan was out the window. 

Apperantly he doesn't have the ability to now switch up his game based on the current situation.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

betts4 said:


> I think Nina had it right. The younger players are all together and the older ladies are outside that. The younger ones are not seeing the help that the older women could give them.


That's irrelevant the way Survivor is played these days. Now it's all about making it into the 5 person Day 1 Alliance and sticking with that come hell or high water once you're in.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

I did think the women made a good choice in telling him to get lost. He is not a member of their tribe. I am also amused that he says he is more comfortable around the women. Many gay men I know would just be sitting around eating up the eye candy those he-men are showing.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

pmyers said:


> Colton's problem is that he had this fantastic strategy in his head about how he was going to befriend the girls and blind side the guys and he'd go far in the game. Then he got to the island and got hit with One World and his plan was out the window.
> 
> Apperantly he doesn't have the ability to now switch up his game based on the current situation.


It's because for some reason, he thinks being gay means it is impossible for him to be friends with straight guys. So he doesn't even try. If he's got such a massive hole in his social skills, I don't know how he ever thought he'd do well in this game.

Also nobody has mentioned: Hooray for the return of separate Reward and Immunity Challenges. It's been a king time since we've seen that.


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

The rope challenge was lame. Maybe Probst needed some time off to attend to one of his other projects. If not then it's just a bad idea. Hopefully the Probstless challenges are not going to happen every episode.


----------



## Jebberwocky! (Apr 16, 2005)

BradJW said:


> You should see her mug shot!
> http://starcasm.net/archives/139452
> 
> 
> ...


I'm guessing here but you probably think Lindsay Lohan is hot as well.

The thing is that as soon as she opened her mouth she lost any claim to being hot.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

She is cute, but cute isn't the same as hot.


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

pmyers said:


> Colton's problem is that he had this fantastic strategy in his head about how he was going to befriend the girls and blind side the guys and he'd go far in the game. Then he got to the island and got hit with One World and his plan was out the window.
> 
> Apperantly he doesn't have the ability to now switch up his game based on the current situation.


I have a feeling he'll be ok if they have a shuffle, I think that will happen sooner rather than later if the men keep winning.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

It's interesting that the first three challenges we've seen have shown that the producers clearly tried to structure the challenges to not favor the men and to make things as even as possible for the women vs. the men, yet the women have still not succeeded in any of them. I wonder if things would be different with a purely mental challenge (puzzles, etc.) but I suspect not.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

JFriday said:


> I have a feeling he'll be ok if they have a shuffle, I think that will happen sooner rather than later if the men keep winning.


I disagree. I think the producers are going to hold onto "One World" for as long as humanly possible.


----------



## Jebberwocky! (Apr 16, 2005)

how would a shuffle impact the one world theme?


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

You can still have one world with a shuffle.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

gossamer88 said:


> Women don't think (vote) that way.


Have there been any out-from-the-start lesbians on _Survivor_?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Amnesia said:


> Have there been any out-from-the-start lesbians on _Survivor_?


Wasn't there one the last time they tried boys vs girls? I don't know if she came out right away, but there definitely was one identified


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

JFriday said:


> You can still have one world with a shuffle.


Yeah, I guess you're right. Regardless, I think they will keep the man v woman thing going as long as possible. Maybe even as long as they did it with Stephanie(?) that one season where she was the last person in her tribe.


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

DevdogAZ said:


> It's interesting that the first three challenges we've seen have shown that the producers clearly tried to structure the challenges to not favor the men and to make things as even as possible for the women vs. the men, yet the women have still not succeeded in any of them. I wonder if things would be different with a purely mental challenge (puzzles, etc.) but I suspect not.


I was thinking this when they had the rope untying challenge and the water bridge challenge. If they had worked together and even if they had seen what the guys were doing on the water bridge (spreading themselves out) and copying the guys it would be smarter.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Amnesia said:


> Have there been any out-from-the-start lesbians on _Survivor_?


Ami Cusack from Vanuatu and Micronesia was a confirmed lesbian from the start.


----------



## toddvj (Apr 22, 2004)

I don't know about that. Until they had the friends and family challenge, I don't think anyone knew. In fact, I remember the thread on this very forum, and as I remember, it was a surprise for everyone.


----------



## Kablemodem (May 26, 2001)

heySkippy said:


> That's irrelevant the way Survivor is played these days. Now it's all about making it into the 5 person Day 1 Alliance and sticking with that come hell or high water once you're in.


I miss the old strategy of voting off the weakest until the merge. Now there are basically four tribes from the start. They should have taken the One World theme even further and had one tribe from the start.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

Kablemodem said:


> They should have taken the One World theme even further and had one tribe from the start.


So no team challenges, just individual challenges? Or perhaps the one tribe is randomly divided into 2 before each "team" challenge and the winners get immunity and only the losers get to vote someone off?


----------



## VegasVic (Nov 22, 2002)

I don't like the idea of one tribe from the start that is randomly divided for each challenge. 

Alliances need to be part of the game. Yes sometimes it can get too predictable when an original alliance sticks together until the end (such as Coach's group last season) but alliances allow for some fun blind sides and drama (Cochrane last season). You wouldn't have that with one tribe from the start that you randomly divide for challenges/TC. Unless you think that the whole tribe goes to TC, with half having immunity from the challenge. And I don't like that idea either.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> Ami Cusack from Vanuatu and Micronesia was a confirmed lesbian from the start.


She also had a strong alliance of "girls". They almost succeeded, right? there was one guy left and he beat them in every challenge, IIRC.

One question: is it possible for women to have an Adam's apple? I could have sworn Kim (girl in black, behind Kat) has one.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

Anubys said:


> One question: is it possible for women to have an Adam's apple?


Wikipedia says "yes".


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

Anubys said:


> She also had a strong alliance of "girls". They almost succeeded, right? there was one guy left and he beat them in every challenge, IIRC.


Chris was actually the beneficiary of the women turning on themselves before finishing off the men. Chris escaped elimination as the last male, then he won immunity, then he lost immunity but still did not get eliminated, then won the final two challenges to put himself in the finals.


----------



## dtle (Dec 12, 2001)

betts4 said:


> I was thinking this when they had the rope untying challenge and the water bridge challenge. If they had worked together and even if they had seen what the guys were doing on the water bridge (spreading themselves out) and copying the guys it would be smarter.


I just like to think their boobs just got in the way.


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

VegasVic said:


> I don't like the idea of one tribe from the start that is randomly divided for each challenge.
> 
> Alliances need to be part of the game. Yes sometimes it can get too predictable when an original alliance sticks together until the end (such as Coach's group last season) but alliances allow for some fun blind sides and drama (Cochrane last season). You wouldn't have that with one tribe from the start that you randomly divide for challenges/TC. Unless you think that the whole tribe goes to TC, with half having immunity from the challenge. And I don't like that idea either.


See, I think the exact opposite way. Except for the occasional blindside, alliances in general get boring. People form pretty much random alliances (like, whatever 5 people happened to be standing closest together when the first person mentioned an alliance) in the first hour of the game. Then usually once one alliance gets the upper hand in numbers, they get smug about it and you've got to listen to how great they are just because they were lucky enough to get the numbers advantage. Then when you get down to the end of the game, you end up with cases where the other team has more people on the jury, so you can't possibly let one of their players stay or they'll win based on numbers.

Having one tribe with random teams each week would be interesting, because now everybody has to try and build alliances with everyone else. Nobody could get smug because if you don't build a lot of alliances, you could always end up with no allies, and if you build a lot of alliances, you could end up with only your allies to vote for, even at the first tribal council. You don't end up with those cases at the end where you have to vote based not on how good or bad someone played, nor how good they are at challenges, but only based on what team they were pretty much randomly placed on when the game started.

I think the result is that we'd see a lot more interesting and less predictable game play. I could be wrong and it could flop. It can't be a worse idea than redemption island, and I think it has the potential to be an even more interesting element than the immunity idol has been.


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

It certainly would introduce a brand new aspect to the game.
Challenge #1 - ABCDEFGHI vs. JKLMNOPQR with the latter team winning. F goes home.

Challenge #2 - ABJKPNGR vs. CDEHILMOQ with the former team winning. From before, AB&G are the 3 remaining players with JKPNR from "the other side", but JKP&N really like A&G and don't like R because R was part of the LMOQR "power 5" alliance. So they now vote out R instead of the obvious choice of B due to numbers.

The deeper into the game this kind of method goes, the different levels of alliances there would be and it would really amp up the level of game play and options available at any one time. I think the first 12 days should use this tactic (almost a third of the game time) and then a more permanent team be established for the last two thirds of the game. I think it would encourage more of the "outwit" aspect instead of the "outlast" side of the game at the very least in the beginning.


----------



## WhiskeyTango (Sep 20, 2006)

On the balance beam challenge, couldn't the person trying to get across just push everyone else off the beam and keep going? Isn't that what happened when Kat jumped off the one time when she didn't have to?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

WhiskeyTango said:


> On the balance beam challenge, couldn't the person trying to get across just push everyone else off the beam and keep going? Isn't that what happened when Kat jumped off the one time when she didn't have to?


thank you for reminding me of that! That's exactly what I told my wife.

For those that didn't catch it, one of the stationary girls fell and then Kat jumped in and was told that she didn't need to start over if somebody else fell off.

As soon as that happened I said everybody should just jump off and let the person cross!


----------



## JFriday (Mar 20, 2002)

Maybe the logic was you'd all have to swin back climb the ladder everytime which could be tiring and take more time then doing it the correct way.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

JFriday said:


> Maybe the logic was you'd all have to swin back climb the ladder everytime which could be tiring and take more time then doing it the correct way.


perhaps at the very beginning of the challange when you have al 9 people, but by the time you got down to 4ish, I bet it would go much quicker.


----------



## Donbadabon (Mar 5, 2002)

pmyers said:


> For those that didn't catch it, one of the stationary girls fell and then Kat jumped in and was told that she didn't need to start over if somebody else fell off.


I was thinking that if a stationary person fell, then the moving person had to just stop and wait for the stationary person to get back into place. I don't think they could continue with no one there.

Kat didn't need to start over, but I would bet she would've had to wait for the fallen person to get back in place.


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

I could not understand why one person would not get down on hands and knees and walk under the person. Were they told they could not do that? the girls would have to balance on one leg for a few seconds, but I would think they would be better at that than the guys.


----------



## DreadPirateRob (Nov 12, 2002)

Anubys said:


> I could not understand why one person would not get down on hands and knees and walk under the person. Were they told they could not do that? the girls would have to balance on one leg for a few seconds, but I would think they would be better at that than the guys.


How do you get down on hands and knees on a balance beam?


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DreadPirateRob said:


> How do you get down on hands and knees on a balance beam?


very carefully?


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

Colton is the worst stereotype gay man you could put on the show. Lazy and self centered, he despises the guys around him, makes no effort to fit in, and wonders why he doesn't get along with them. I've known plenty of gay men, and only one was like Colton. Unfortunately, people not exposed to gay culture think they are all like Colton.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

Philosofy said:


> Colton is the worst stereotype gay man you could put on the show.


No, it could be worse---he could be hitting on all the straight guys.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

Philosofy said:


> Colton is the worst stereotype gay man you could put on the show. Lazy and self centered, he despises the guys around him, makes no effort to fit in, and wonders why he doesn't get along with them. I've known plenty of gay men, and only one was like Colton. Unfortunately, people not exposed to gay culture think they are all like Colton.


I know plenty of gay men and lots are just like Colton.


----------



## dfergie (Aug 27, 2006)

Colton is even getting on the Women's nerves...


----------



## betts4 (Dec 27, 2005)

Philosofy said:


> Colton is the worst stereotype gay man you could put on the show. Lazy and self centered, he despises the guys around him, makes no effort to fit in, and wonders why he doesn't get along with them. *I've known plenty of gay men, and only one was like Colton.* Unfortunately, people not exposed to gay culture think they are all like Colton.


This.


----------



## jpcamaro70 (Nov 23, 2011)

Philosofy said:


> Colton is the worst stereotype gay man you could put on the show. Lazy and self centered, he despises the guys around him, makes no effort to fit in, and wonders why he doesn't get along with them. I've known plenty of gay men, and only one was like Colton. Unfortunately, people not exposed to gay culture think they are all like Colton.


He's the token gay guy this year. But they went over the top in choosing him, he's making me nuts. AND he's got an idol, WTF!


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

jpcamaro70 said:


> He's the token gay guy this year. But they went over the top in choosing him, he's making me nuts. AND he's got an idol, WTF!


I wonder if the black guy is also gay...


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Anubys said:


> I could not understand why one person would not get down on hands and knees and walk under the person. Were they told they could not do that? the girls would have to balance on one leg for a few seconds, but I would think they would be better at that than the guys.





DreadPirateRob said:


> How do you get down on hands and knees on a balance beam?





Anubys said:


> very carefully?


The beam was narrow enough that they had to stand sideways to get both feet on. How do you propose someone crawl underneath the person when the crawler would have to go directly through the standing person's only support? It's not like they could spread their legs out and let the person crawl between them.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

Philosofy said:


> Colton is the worst stereotype gay man you could put on the show. Lazy and self centered, he despises the guys around him, makes no effort to fit in, and wonders why he doesn't get along with them. I've known plenty of gay men, and only one was like Colton. Unfortunately, people not exposed to gay culture think they are all like Colton.


A stereotype is a generalization about a group of people. Colton is not a stereotype, he is a person. Are you saying someone with his personality traits should not be cast? That would be ridiculous.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

tiams said:


> A stereotype is a generalization about a group of people. Colton is not a stereotype, he is a person. Are you saying someone with his personality traits should not be cast? That would be ridiculous.


Colton embodies all the stereotypical traits of an extremely effeminate gay man. By casting such a stereotypical gay man, the producers are actually doing a disservice to the homosexual community, because they're helping to perpetuate the stereotype, when the truth is that many, if not most, gay men are not like that at all.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

What's wrong with being effeminate? Just because you don't like the way he acts doesn't mean there is anything wrong with him or that he shouldn't be shown on TV. And I think Americans are smart enough to realize there are all types of gay men. You can't go around saying I don't like the way this individual reflects on a wider group, therefore he should be hidden.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

tiams said:


> What's wrong with being effeminate? Just because you don't like the way he acts doesn't mean there is anything wrong with him or that he shouldn't be shown on TV. And I think Americans are smart enough to realize there are all types of gay men. You can't go around saying I don't like the way this individual reflects on a wider group, therefore he should be hidden.


I don't think you're understanding what's being said. Nobody said there was anything wrong with being effeminate. It's just that being extremely effeminate is one of the gay stereotypes. You are the one that took issue with Colton being called a stereotype. While you're correct that he is an individual and not a stereotype, you can't deny that he portrays most of the traits that would be present for gay men in the standard book of stereotypes. It would be like them casting an Asian person who can't say the "R" sound properly, or a Native American who was constantly drunk. It's just cartoonish.


----------



## tiams (Apr 19, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think you're understanding what's being said. Nobody said there was anything wrong with being effeminate. It's just that being extremely effeminate is one of the gay stereotypes. You are the one that took issue with Colton being called a stereotype. While you're correct that he is an individual and not a stereotype, you can't deny that he portrays most of the traits that would be present for gay men in the standard book of stereotypes. It would be like them casting an Asian person who can't say the "R" sound properly, or a Native American who was constantly drunk. It's just cartoonish.


It is a fact that some Asian people have difficulty with the L sound because it doesn't exist in their native language. So don't cast them? 
Colton is an individual and he acts the way he acts. Lots of gay men are effeminate. Most of us don't equate that with being "cartoonish".


----------



## gossamer88 (Jul 27, 2005)

Having been friends with a gay man for close to 30 years, even he squirms with the likes of Colton. I do too. 

The producers just want people who will bring drama to the table. Richard Hatch certainly did and he was not stereotypical.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> Colton embodies all the stereotypical traits of an extremely effeminate gay man. By casting such a stereotypical gay man, the producers are actually doing a disservice to the homosexual community, because they're helping to perpetuate the stereotype, when the truth is that many, if not most, gay men are not like that at all.


Michael embodies all the stereotypical traits of an extremely confident alpha male jock. By casting such a stereotypical jock, the producers are actually doing a disservice to the alpha male community, because they're helping to perpetuate the stereotype, when the truth is that many, if not most, jock men are not like that at all.

Hmmmm...


----------



## Anubys (Jul 16, 2004)

DevdogAZ said:


> The beam was narrow enough that they had to stand sideways to get both feet on. How do you propose someone crawl underneath the person when the crawler would have to go directly through the standing person's only support? It's not like they could spread their legs out and let the person crawl between them.


You never stood and walked on a railing of a balcony? walked on a bricked edge of some lawn where the bricks are the width of a 2x4 or a 4x4? it's actually not that hard to stand and walk it. The difficulty is the height and the fear of falling.

A thin girl can easily also get low and use her hands to "walk" straight on all fours. All the other girls have to do is stand on one leg and switch to the other leg as Kat crawls through. Hell, as long as Kat doesn't touch anyone, the girl standing on one leg can be supported by the girl standing next to her!

Wait...as I was explaining my idea, Kat just jumped into the water for no reason whatsoever!


----------



## Doggie Bear (Jan 16, 2008)

tiams said:


> It is a fact that some Asian people have difficulty with the L sound because it doesn't exist in their native language. So don't cast them?
> Colton is an individual and he acts the way he acts. Lots of gay men are effeminate. Most of us don't equate that with being "cartoonish".


Pretty much all of us Asian-Americans who were born in the USA speak English without any accent at all, so obviously if producers wanted to cast Asians, they would have plenty to choose from who do not have trouble with L sounds. In fact, in the season that started off with the tribes divided by race, you'll recall that Yul and Becky had no accents. (Can't remember the other two Asian contestants.)

DevDogAZ is correct. There is an unfortunate stereotype of gay men as being effeminate, and Colton fits that stereotype perfectly. As to whether the viewing public is discerning enough to realize that it's just an inaccurate stereotype, I wouldn't bet on it.


----------



## jpcamaro70 (Nov 23, 2011)

tiams said:


> It is a fact that some Asian people have difficulty with the L sound because it doesn't exist in their native language. So don't cast them?
> Colton is an individual and he acts the way he acts. Lots of gay men are effeminate. Most of us don't equate that with being "cartoonish".


You are missing the point. Taking the most extreme "stereotypical" gay man is a disservice to the gay community.

It's akin to casting a black man that can't speak proper english (ghetto talk) and wears his pants down to his ankles. Not a good representation.

By casting such extremes you are portraying a certain group in a bad way.

I don't like him because he is a drama queen/king, not because he is gay.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

tiams said:


> What's wrong with being effeminate? Just because you don't like the way he acts doesn't mean there is anything wrong with him or that he shouldn't be shown on TV. And I think Americans are smart enough to realize there are all types of gay men. You can't go around saying I don't like the way this individual reflects on a wider group, therefore he should be hidden.


Read my original post. I said nothing about being effeminate. He's lazy and self centered, makes no effort to get to know the people around him or fit in, yet despises them because he doesn't fit in. You can be effeminate and be an honest, caring person. Colton is not. Colton is like Jack from "Will & Grace." Yeah, he's funny, but would you actually want someone that selfish and undependable for a best friend?

Colton reminds me of that one gay guy I worked with. It was very busy, we each had a line of about 8 people to wait on, and he throws up his hands and says "I just can't take it! I'm going on break!". He then leaves me with 16 people to wait on. Of course, I didn't like that at all. So, a couple weeks later, in a group of people, he says to me "Phil, you don't like me because I'm gay." I replied "Neal, I don't like you because you're a lazy *hole."


----------



## Johnny Dancing (Sep 3, 2000)

martinp13 said:


> Michael embodies all the stereotypical traits of an extremely confident alpha male jock. By casting such a stereotypical jock, the producers are actually doing a disservice to the alpha male community, because they're helping to perpetuate the stereotype, when the truth is that many, if not most, jock men are not like that at all.
> 
> Hmmmm...


Thinking about it, you could often exchange "dumb blond", "angry black women", "hot chick", "old lady", "old man", "stupid southern hick", "lazy black man", New Jersey Guido" etc... and your paragraph still works. Survivor is all about mixing the stereotypes and hoping for the fireworks.

I'm just waiting for the midget to start juggling coconuts, now that will make my day.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Johnny Dancing said:


> Thinking about it, you could often exchange "dumb blond", "angry black women", "hot chick", "old lady", "old man", "stupid southern hick", "lazy black man", New Jersey Guido" etc... and your paragraph still works. Survivor is all about mixing the stereotypes and hoping for the fireworks.
> 
> I'm just waiting for the midget to start juggling coconuts, now that will make my day.


Precisely my point. I'll go get the coconuts.


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

Dalton's recap - http://tvrecaps.ew.com/recap/survivor-one-world-kat-nina/

Q&A with Jeff - http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/02/23/jeff-probst-episode-2-survivor-one-world/


----------



## LordKronos (Dec 28, 2003)

Philosofy said:


> He's lazy and self centered, makes no effort to get to know the people around him or fit in, yet despises them because he doesn't fit in.


It's not just that he despises them for not fitting it, but didn't he almost seem to be looking down on tarzan, the midget, and someone else when talking about how they we misfits and didn't fit in (or whatever language he used)?


----------



## Necromancer2006 (Jan 26, 2008)

Anubys said:


> A thin girl can easily also get low and use her hands to "walk" straight on all fours. All the other girls have to do is stand on one leg and switch to the other leg as Kat crawls through. Hell, as long as Kat doesn't touch anyone, the girl standing on one leg can be supported by the girl standing next to her!
> 
> Wait...as I was explaining my idea, Kat just jumped into the water for no reason whatsoever!


I think that the length of a body crawling is going to be longer than one would be able to side-step. The balance beam appeared to be 4"-6", I still don't understand how you think this strategy could work? Sure, you can crawl on all fours on a balance beam, but how do you crawl through somebody's leg(s)?

I think it would have been interesting if there was a way to crawl under the beam. It certainly would have taken a lot more energy and strength, but no chance of knocking someone off. The people on top would just have to avoid the hands/arms and the feet as the person passes underneath them.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Necromancer2006 said:


> I think that the length of a body crawling is going to be longer than one would be able to side-step. The balance beam appeared to be 4"-6", I still don't understand how you think this strategy could work? Sure, you can crawl on all fours on a balance beam, but how do you crawl through somebody's leg(s)?
> 
> I think it would have been interesting if there was a way to crawl under the beam. It certainly would have taken a lot more energy and strength, but no chance of knocking someone off. The people on top would just have to avoid the hands/arms and the feet as the person passes underneath them.


I'm not sure if this is what Anubys originally had in mind, but when reading his follow-up post, I pictured the "mover" down on all fours, and each of the other team members could sit on her back, shimmy to the other side, and then stand up again. The mover could then crawl forward to the next person, and that person could sit on her back, shimmy to the other side, and stand up again, etc.


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

heySkippy said:


> Dalton's recap - http://tvrecaps.ew.com/recap/survivor-one-world-kat-nina/
> 
> Q&A with Jeff - http://insidetv.ew.com/2012/02/23/jeff-probst-episode-2-survivor-one-world/


Interesting tidbit from Probst in the Q&A:



> Weve seen, like on last season, how important making a day one alliance can be. Yet as Chelsea and Sabrina openly admitted last night, it also locks you into an alliance of people that may not be the best to further you and your tribe in the game. Whats your take? Lets say you were in their shoes: Would you have stayed true to the alliance and kept Kat, or switched course and broken up the alliance?
> 
> Its a really tough choice because if you switch someone out you risk losing your power in the game because the others might seize the opportunity, and if you stay with a wild card like Alicia in your alliance you risk her blowing it with her big mouth. In this case I think the women are probably taking it day by day and assessing the damage.[bold] Our big job in upcoming seasons is to make it more difficult to get a strong alliance of five right off the bat and keep it.[/bold]


Could they be thinking about what's been suggested here and mixing up the tribes before every challenge?!? /hopes


----------



## Combat Medic (Sep 6, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'm not sure if this is what Anubys originally had in mind, but when reading his follow-up post, I pictured the "mover" down on all fours, and each of the other team members could sit on her back, shimmy to the other side, and then stand up again. The mover could then crawl forward to the next person, and that person could sit on her back, shimmy to the other side, and stand up again, etc.


Would have been cool to have every mover hang from the beam by their legs and arms and shimmy across like that. Then it is simple for the non-mover to step over their limbs.


----------



## Philosofy (Feb 21, 2000)

I would have faced the guy trying to get past me, give him a big hug, pick him up, and place him on my other side.


----------



## bryhamm (Jun 30, 2004)

pmyers said:


> Interesting tidbit from Probst in the Q&A:
> 
> Could they be thinking about what's been suggested here and mixing up the tribes before every challenge?!? /hopes


I sure hope so. Been wanting this for a LONG time.


----------



## Magister (Oct 17, 2004)

If they mix up the tribes before every challenge, then it wouldn't be a tribal game any more. I figure it would work as individual challenges/strategy with random teams for challenge and only that weeks losing group would be in danger of being voted off. That would negate the traditional first half of any season. I just don't see it happening.

Part of the fun of Survivor is teams working together, or even better, in-fighting. If you knew your team was going to be different tomorrow, you wouldn't worry about fixing it to make a stronger tribe. Just keep voting with your individual strategy of getting rid of stronger players. You would never try to keep strong challenge folks because tomorrow he will be on the other team and be against you. Only the weakest (Coltan and Kat) would be super safe the WHOLE time.

Camps wouldn't be built up. Permanent group rewards would have less meaning if you might not have that blanket tomorrow.


----------



## martinp13 (Mar 19, 2001)

Big Brother is done like that for some early food challenges. Two or three teams, equal numbers, usually chosen by "grab a shirt from the box, and its color is your team". At that point the players don't know what the game is, so having all the athletes or all the women or all the smart people might not be the best strategy. The winning team(s) can eat regular food, the losing team can only eat "slop", and it lasts one cycle of the game (1 week). I don't think they've done anything like this for immunity, only for rewards.

I agree with Magister that I don't see how that works for Survivor tribal council. Why would you not always vote off the biggest available threat each week?


----------



## pmyers (Jan 4, 2001)

martinp13 said:


> Big Brother is done like that for some early food challenges. Two or three teams, equal numbers, usually chosen by "grab a shirt from the box, and its color is your team". At that point the players don't know what the game is, so having all the athletes or all the women or all the smart people might not be the best strategy. The winning team(s) can eat regular food, the losing team can only eat "slop", and it lasts one cycle of the game (1 week). I don't think they've done anything like this for immunity, only for rewards.
> 
> I agree with Magister that I don't see how that works for Survivor tribal council. Why would you not always vote off the biggest available threat each week?


And I love that about BB and they still have alliances just like in Survivor. You don't always vote out the biggest threat because maybe they've created a larger alliance and you can't, or you are also a big threat and have formed an alliance with the other big threats for mutual protection.


----------



## Einselen (Apr 25, 2006)

pmyers said:


> And I love that about BB and they still have alliances just like in Survivor. You don't always vote out the biggest threat because maybe they've created a larger alliance and you can't, or you are also a big threat and have formed an alliance with the other big threats for mutual protection.


The thing is with BB everyone votes each time (except the nominees and HOH, who breaks the tie). Survivor though could do a twist like this which even with immunity you still vote each and every time.


----------

