posted on August 24, 2000 02:58:30 PM newSpazmodeus
You are correct in saying "never ONCE did he say, "I can't wait to get home to see my son." In none of the episodes I watched (the last five or six) did he so much as say he missed his son....."
OTOH, I had no idea that Gervase had 3 other children with one due at anytime, that Rudy missed his wife and her name was Marge, etc., etc., After all they only 1 hr of coverage per week.
I could keep going, but the point is that just because you didn't see or hear Richard say he missed his son, doesn't mean that he didn't. Just thought I'd give a different perspective.
posted on August 24, 2000 03:03:21 PM new
I have not heard when it starts but that it is a show where a group of individuals teams up on challenges and there is one that is a spoiler but no one knows who they are.
RainyBear -
Did you hear that at one of the fairs here they are having a Survivor/Big Brother contest. A group of people are going to live in a windowed house on the fair grounds and the group will vote off one person per day and the winner gets $10,000. They are looking for contestants now. I don't know if it was the Puyallup or which one though.
posted on August 24, 2000 03:05:47 PM new
boysmommy3 I couldn't believe my eyes when I read what you said. I really hope you didn't mean it. But, when we write the first thing that pops into our heads that is sometimes how we really feel. Maybe deep down you do believe that way, and you didn't even realize it until you saw it on a big screen.
I don't understand why there is a big deal about Rich being naked. We should be more concerned about the way teenage pop stars dress (or don't dress LOL)and how kids try to copy them.
Rich said the charges were dropped and he's sueing everyone envolved. Who knows!?
posted on August 24, 2000 03:14:31 PM new
Oh yeah! I did hear about that - and it is the Puyallup Fair. "Survive the Puyallup" or something like that, and they all have to eat food from the fair the whole time, too. That's a lot of pronto pups.
posted on August 24, 2000 03:23:54 PM new
Actually, in my opinion, it's inexcusable for any of those people who had little children (as some did, I understand) to say "bye bye" for 39 days.
posted on August 24, 2000 03:29:18 PM new
James,
I have to agree with you. I think there is a big difference from going to work or a short vacation to leaving your little ones for that long without contact.
posted on August 24, 2000 04:03:31 PM new
Maybe my rant should have been in another thread, but some of the things said just boggled my mind.
James and boysmommy3: What about people in the military? Many times they are deployed for months at a time. Heck, Rudy spent YEARS in the service, should we call HIM a bad parent?
I know darn well that there are parents who do abandon thier kids. Just *POOF* gone. However, leaving kids in the care of family (as in Jenna's case) is NOT abandoning them! Good lord, we have grandparents all over this county SUEING to be able to spend time with their grandkids (which is a whole nother can of worms, I know). Now we have people saying that parents who leave their kids with their grandparents are bad?!?!
posted on August 24, 2000 04:07:29 PM new
Lots: Heck no. Of course not. But people who dissapear to be pop culture stars are being bad parents. The one is doing your duty the other is a selfish option. There was no place for people with young kids at home on that island.
James.
And yes, in my opinion that woman had no good excuse to leave her daughters for 39 days. The other two guys had no good excuse either.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Aug 24, 2000 04:08 PM ]
posted on August 24, 2000 04:38:32 PM new
James: Maybe we have different perceptions of why the people were there. MY feeling is that every single one of them were there for the bucks. After all, the show could have tanked (a'la big brother).
I feel like the Survivor folks are/were just like the folks on Who Wants to be a Millionaire. They are there for the money.
If a parent has the chance to make that kind of money, shouldn't they try? Heck, last report was that Jenna made somewhere around $40,000 (of course, I don't know for sure). That is $2,000 a DAY. Where else would she (or any of the others, even the lawyer) make that kind of money?
If it were me and I had the chance to pay for my kids college with 40 days of work, I'd do it.
Lets take Rich as an example. Ok, he takes 40 days away from his kid. HOWEVER, how many MORE days do you think that million dollars affords him with his kid? Sure, you "could" make a million working a 9-5 (let me know how, would ya'?), but my guess is that it would take more than 40 days away from the family.
Also, aren't people in the military leaving their families for extended periods of time really doing it for the money? YES, there is of course the honor of serving involved and YES the military pay is piss-poor, but the people I know in the military are there for 1)The training (in hopes of a better job when they get out), 2) The money (both the pay AND the possibility of having their college paid). (PLEASE NOTE: They are also there because of the pride they feel in their service, however, my guess is that not a lot of people would sign up for the military if there were NO perks involved).
posted on August 24, 2000 04:53:58 PM new
Sooooooooo, when DOES The Mole start? We've got till January for the Outback Survivor to air... sigh
And Big Brother is inky stinky... caught snippets of one or two episodes as I was channel-surfing and it didn't do a thing for me.
I do remember hearing Richard mention his son on a couple of episodes... earlier episodes. I also remember Rudy's wife's name is Marge and the Gervase had several children including the newborn who arrived during one of the episodes.
For whatever that's worth.
posted on August 24, 2000 05:10:03 PM new
With Rich, it wasn't just 40 days away from his kid. It was 40 days away from a kid who had been booted out of 8 homes already. A kid for whom abandonment had to have been an issue in his array of emotional troubles.
I agree with James wholeheartedly -- they were all bad parents for leaving. But Rich, especially, because his child had already been left behind by so many other people before. The fact that the boy put on 30 pounds in Rich's absence says something about that, I think.
edited to correct a typo and to add that the parents on Survivor are not like those on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. At the very most, Millionaire requires people to be away from home for 5 days (see the official rules at their website if you want to know my source) -- not 40 days.
posted on August 24, 2000 05:32:27 PM new
Oh, come ON!
What about others who have left their children and families for extended periods of time:
- Fishermen (did anyone condemn those persons portrayed in “The Perfect Storm”?)
- Seafaring men. Whalers would often leave their families for up to two years. Those in the merchant marine may be at sea for months.
- Explorers. Did anyone condemn Columbus, La Salle, Lewis & Clark, etc. for leaving their families?
- Astronauts.
These are all persons who freely exercised a choice to follow this path for whatever reasons (mostly economic or to achieve fame), unlike those in the military who may have had little or no choice.
posted on August 24, 2000 05:33:17 PM new
Spaz: But what about that fact that the 40 days away now affords Rich the chance to be at home more than he ever could have been without the 40 days?
Not to mention the amount of therapy a million bucks can buy.
Just because you can't stand the guy doesn't mean every decision he ever made was wrong.
posted on August 24, 2000 05:35:08 PM new
Corndogg: Ahhh, but don't you see....most of your examples are MEN! Of course the men should be off hunting while the women folk stay at home chained to the stove.
posted on August 24, 2000 05:45:47 PM new
Do you like Rich? Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha--does he really care? He is now on his way to his bank cashing in the mill and driving around in his new-----cute car---.
Survival of the fittest---that was it--and he got it.
Do I like how the program ended---no, no, no. But--boy oh boy--what a microcasm(SP?) of our humanity.
So dissappointed in Rudy at the end---a good soldier to the end---"my word is my word." Yea Right. Dang--Richard knew this and abused it.
Rudy was the good Navy Seal--retired or not. Kelly ( a woman) won the last challanges--so what? (SO WHAT?????)
It was a high stakes game--that's it. Captivated us--made us want to watch each week. Will I tune in to the next? Probably not. Just too damn depressing.
Wanna find that mountaintop and list
posted on August 24, 2000 05:46:38 PM new
I see nothing wrong with the children that were left at home with the other parent. I do, however feel the single parents should not have left their children for that long -without contact. Children do not understand -well it was for the money - at least not the 2-5 year old set.
And now that Richard has the money he claimed on several shows that he is now moving to LA to pursue a tv career as did his neices who were interviewed. So how is the money enabling him to stay home - that does not appear to be the choice he is making. Don't get me wrong - he played the game the right way and he won the pot but to stick up for him and say he will now spend the time home with his son is not his plan and he has no qualms in telling everyone so.
The best line yet - other than Gervase's was Kelly's dad today. He was questioned as to how he felt about Susan when she was laying into his daughter. He said, "Well, I would bet she was the one in school who's parents were always told that she does not play well with other children!!"
Don't know when the mole starts but Big Brother is sure a Big Yawn
posted on August 24, 2000 05:49:43 PM newWhat do any of us know what provisions for care giving was provided for the children left for 39+ days.
Weak. Lame. Self rightous.
I'm not going to make the assumption that all of these kids didn't have healthy meals and loving attention by caring relatives during these 39 days, and I have no reason to assume that the contestants are not good parents in general. I must agree with Spaz though. Having been a ten-year old boy myself, I know full well that boys don't gain 30 pounds in six weeks under normal circumstances. Something isn't right.
I don't typically feel the need to second-guess the parenting skills of others, but the general topic of their kids came up and these people are public figures for the moment, of their own doing.
The keyword here is young children. It's just wrong for a parent to leave their young children for that length of time -- to be on a TV game show.
Do you think that woman's 3-year old twins have any concept of 39 days? Or do you think it felt like ten years for them and maybe they didn't even know that Mommy was coming back? How about that guy who had a child born while he was on the island? Do you think it's appropriate for a man to tell his wife/ girlfriend "I'll just be over there, on that game show while you're having our child"?
posted on August 24, 2000 06:01:48 PM new
Do you think it's appropriate for a man to tell his wife/
girlfriend "I'll just be over there, on that game show while you're having our child"?
Hell, if it were my husband I would have said, "I'll video tape all the icky stuff. You bring home 'da money!!" Really though, men miss the births of the children all the time for many reasons....not saying that is the BEST scenero, but it sure ain't the worst! Now, if daddy had been out playing golf, that is one thing, but if daddy is at work and can't get away (as is the case many times in the military) that is different. Gervias was a work.
Using your example about Jenna's kids: Ok, how do the kids know what 8 hours is? Are they abandon when she goes to work?
BM3: I have not heard that Rich said that, but it sure does not change my position one bit (Aside: Last I heard he said he was going to start a boys camp like the one he credits for saving/changing his life when he was 18).
While I don't think money is everything, I honestly think that the million dollars will make the families life much easier.
(Lets not forget, Rich adopted this kid before there was any mention of a million bucks. Now, WHY would someone do that JUST so they can ignore them later?)
posted on August 24, 2000 06:14:18 PM new
ltf,
I don't think anyone said he had the intention of ignoring his son. However, money does change people and Rich obviously loves the spotlight.
But, the bottom line is that we only saw what the producers chose us to see. Rich made for controversial TV as far as we saw but we really have no idea what went on over there or what his true personality was.
I still agree with spaz and co though - and comparing 39 days without contact to an 8 hour workday with contact is not a close comparison.
I have two very young children and you had better believe they understand when mommy or daddy isn't there. Do they understand hours, no, but they certainly do understand going a day without their parents. My 2 year old asks every night - Daddy home? I know 39 days of no daddy and mommy are both not home and you cannot talk to them on the phone either would definatley affect them.
I guess time will tell how the money is spent and I am sure we will know as Rich is not going to fade into the sunset. I hope he does as you say he has said - a camp for children - I haven't heard that one but that would be great as there are many needy children out there.
Did you hear that Rudy applied to Survivor II ?!?
*******************************************
Edited to add:
Spaz -Papers were filed for defamation of character against both CPS and the police department by Rich. However, a CPS spokesperson claims that the case is still pending - not closed or dropped. He was arrested two days after returning so the investigation must have brought up something.
posted on August 24, 2000 06:38:52 PM new
Of course he was arrested after returning...he returned with buku bucks. Im sure someone will think of something to sue him now that he has the dough. The key word here is ALLEGED. I thought that one is innocent until proven guilty? Its nice that folks who dont even know the situation, only what they HEARD via the media (oh yeah...thats proof in itself, if THEY said so, eh?) can condemn this man to be unfit, as well as others who went, because they didnt do what WE thought they SHOULD have done.
posted on August 24, 2000 06:48:41 PM new
I feel that leaving your young child to be on a game show for 39 days is neglectful. Since I feel that parents shouldn't neglect their children I have no problem condemning them.
posted on August 24, 2000 06:56:24 PM new
Thats cool. To each his own.
edited to add...James, what if you HAD to go somewhere for 39 days and had to leave your child? Job duties, business, whatever. For the best interest in the family, you chose to go because it WOULD benefit the family. Would you be a neglectful father for doing it to HELP the family once you returned? Or should someone come in here and say you are BAD...you DONT CARE about your child...you are SELFISH. See what I mean? Who are WE to judge what anyone does, or WHY they do it?
posted on August 24, 2000 07:42:21 PM new
'tweren't survival of the fittest
'twas survival of the most cunning and conniving ...
that's why Rich won.
IMHO it should have been Kel as evidenced by her 5 consecutive immunity challenge wins and the fact that before the jury vote, she did not have any votes against her.
I feel bad that Rich used Rudy to his own advantage and that Rudy played right into his hands. If Rudy really knew what was in Rich's mind and heart .. would he still have voted for him?
Survivor my behind!
And I wont comment on Riches son except to say that I feel for him .. even with his "Dad's" millions bucks.
And one last thought ... Susan bites! What a nasty, mean spirited sore loser. I loved what Gervace said!
The only thing worse than Rich winning would have been Sue winning!
In response to jeanyu"survival of the fittest".
If the Survivor from Down Under is like this one was ... I won't be tuning in.
posted on August 24, 2000 08:01:03 PM new
Nobs, if it was survival of the fittest, then it WOULD be cool to watch, eh? Turn all 16 loose with what they can salvage when dumped off...and the one that shows up on the 39th day, wearing kangaroo booties and painted like an aboriginal person, then THATS the winner, because they SURVIVED without being voted off, or kickin from being ate by a croc, lol. Now THATS surviving, yes?
posted on August 25, 2000 04:50:10 AM new
Piffle....wow that felt good!! Haven't done that in a while.
I've been checking up on the net on the ECO-CHALLENGE--also done by Mark Burnett--the guy who did Survivor. The race started on Monday and there are 76 teams of 4 on a Survival Race . So far 20 of them have been eliminated--one team member was flung off his mountain bike on a jungle path and got impaled on a tree. Punctured his lung--and had to rushed out of the jungle. After he got settled in the med facilities the remaining members of the team set out to finish the course even though after losing a member they will not be ranked.
There is even a team called 'Playboy Extreme'--3 ex-playmates (in very good physical condition) and their token male---sadly they got disqualified today as they didn't reach a check point before the cut-off time.
The top three teams are within an hour of each other--and this is the 4th day of racing--and they should finish in about 2 days. Some of the following teams are days behind them. They have to swim, paddle, bike, trek, scuba dive, sail, rope climbing during the race. It will be televised later this year---they don't keep the winner secret---and this is the 5th year of the race.
This year the race is in Borneo--same part of the world that Survivor took place--last year it was in Argentina, and a few years ago it was near where I live--Whistler, BC
