<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Learn How To Enhance Relationships &#8212; Celebrity Big Brother Style	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://adam-eason.com/learn-how-to-enhance-relationships-celebrity-big-brother-style/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://adam-eason.com/learn-how-to-enhance-relationships-celebrity-big-brother-style/</link>
	<description>Hypnosis, Hypnotherapy and Cognitive Behavioural Hypnotherpy as taught by Hypnotherapist Adam Eason</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:22:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Marty Drury		</title>
		<link>https://adam-eason.com/learn-how-to-enhance-relationships-celebrity-big-brother-style/#comment-4009</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marty Drury]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 13:22:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://LearnHowToEnhanceRelationships--CelebrityBigBrotherStyle#comment-4009</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Celebrity Big Brother. Only Channel 4 would have the audacity to bring it back after the whole Jade incident. Mind you, this year they really were struggling to find celebrities. I think there’s a strong case for arguing that Ulrika won because she was the only vaguely famous person on the show. I mean, they had the leader of one of the socialist fringe parties in Scottish politics on the show for goodness sake.

I’ve never managed to “get into” Big Brother (be it the celeb version or the narcissistic wannabes wanting five minutes of fame version). People sitting in houses watching other people sitting in another house. Whilst they watch these people sitting in another house far away, they make judgements on people they’ve never met and base their ideas about what’s going on solely on edited material in the TV programme and what some hack writes in the national press. All the while you have the relentless shouting machine that is Davina McCall.

Ulrika won because more people could be bothered to ring up and vote for her. Each to their own and the reality TV genre must have some redeeming features hidden somewhere. But I think ascribing deep meaning to who wins celebrity Big Brother is a difficult task when the whole concept is shallow enough for an amoeba to wade through it.

The viewing public saw Ulrika through carefully edited segments of a TV programme. The rest of the house saw her all the time. That might just be enough to explain the different ways Ulrika was viewed. Again, looking for deep insight in something that was cooked up by a Dutch television network in 1998 as a way of making an incredibly cheap TV show is a difficult task.

Relationships are about communication and good communication is essential in any good, lasting relationship. But how far can any of us take the pursuit of good communication in our relationships? Failure to communicate effectively results in emotional distance and possibly even divorce or separation. Too much communication results in the establishment of the family life of The Waltons. I’m not sure which is worse.

Language is important in relationships. It’s very rare these days to see any couple sending each other love letters. As Derrida pointed out, we privilege speech over writing. What we say and the way we say it matters a lot. But what is the meaning of any communication? Does the meaning of a vocal statement lie in the meaning ascribed to it by the speaker or does the meaning lie in the response that the communication receives?

My head is full of so many different phrases in so many different languages thanks to my language learning challenge (www.joinmartin.wordpress.com). In Mandarin, if you get the tones wrong in what you’re saying you can still be understood but you can also end up asking for a cup of “black” or “death” if you’re not careful instead of ordering your favourite, refreshing hot beverage.

Talking of communication (apologies for the play on words there), you can now follow the Join Martin Challenge on Twitter: http://joinmartin.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/follow-join-martn-on-twitter/]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Celebrity Big Brother. Only Channel 4 would have the audacity to bring it back after the whole Jade incident. Mind you, this year they really were struggling to find celebrities. I think there’s a strong case for arguing that Ulrika won because she was the only vaguely famous person on the show. I mean, they had the leader of one of the socialist fringe parties in Scottish politics on the show for goodness sake.</p>
<p>I’ve never managed to “get into” Big Brother (be it the celeb version or the narcissistic wannabes wanting five minutes of fame version). People sitting in houses watching other people sitting in another house. Whilst they watch these people sitting in another house far away, they make judgements on people they’ve never met and base their ideas about what’s going on solely on edited material in the TV programme and what some hack writes in the national press. All the while you have the relentless shouting machine that is Davina McCall.</p>
<p>Ulrika won because more people could be bothered to ring up and vote for her. Each to their own and the reality TV genre must have some redeeming features hidden somewhere. But I think ascribing deep meaning to who wins celebrity Big Brother is a difficult task when the whole concept is shallow enough for an amoeba to wade through it.</p>
<p>The viewing public saw Ulrika through carefully edited segments of a TV programme. The rest of the house saw her all the time. That might just be enough to explain the different ways Ulrika was viewed. Again, looking for deep insight in something that was cooked up by a Dutch television network in 1998 as a way of making an incredibly cheap TV show is a difficult task.</p>
<p>Relationships are about communication and good communication is essential in any good, lasting relationship. But how far can any of us take the pursuit of good communication in our relationships? Failure to communicate effectively results in emotional distance and possibly even divorce or separation. Too much communication results in the establishment of the family life of The Waltons. I’m not sure which is worse.</p>
<p>Language is important in relationships. It’s very rare these days to see any couple sending each other love letters. As Derrida pointed out, we privilege speech over writing. What we say and the way we say it matters a lot. But what is the meaning of any communication? Does the meaning of a vocal statement lie in the meaning ascribed to it by the speaker or does the meaning lie in the response that the communication receives?</p>
<p>My head is full of so many different phrases in so many different languages thanks to my language learning challenge (www.joinmartin.wordpress.com). In Mandarin, if you get the tones wrong in what you’re saying you can still be understood but you can also end up asking for a cup of “black” or “death” if you’re not careful instead of ordering your favourite, refreshing hot beverage.</p>
<p>Talking of communication (apologies for the play on words there), you can now follow the Join Martin Challenge on Twitter: <a href="http://joinmartin.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/follow-join-martn-on-twitter/" rel="nofollow ugc">http://joinmartin.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/follow-join-martn-on-twitter/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
