Skip to main content

Big Brother Australia 2022 - Back To The Future - Pre-season build up

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can confirm as someone who was in an elevator with tully not that long after the first show she always was hot... and tall! Although maybe that cos she had heels on and I am really short
 
From what we've seen so far I'm thinking probably not but ut would be cool if they were able to rework some of the classic tasks into challenges for the new series - not just as shopping tasks but reworking some as "Nomination Challenges" too.
 
Tully was obviously never unattractive, she was a finalist in the Girlfriend modelling competition and was signed with a few major agencies. Doesn’t even seem right to say she has had a glow up because she went from looking good to looking even better.

But possibly her mopey and grumpy moods in the house made her less attractive? She might be happier now. And maybe she has better posture.

She did get veneers and presumably various injectables.
 
jessy_girl said:
Tully was obviously never unattractive, she was a finalist in the Girlfriend modelling competition and was signed with a few major agencies. Doesn’t even seem right to say she has had a glow up because she went from looking good to looking even better.

But possibly her mopey and grumpy moods in the house made her less attractive? She might be happier now. And maybe she has better posture.

She did get veneers and presumably various injectables.
Click to expand...
Probably her change in style too. The pseudo-goth hipster look didn’t really do it for me. New Tully does.
 
Kingston said:
I say this in the nicest way possible Tully’s look in 2013 was very lipstick lesbian. Pretty but still somewhat butch.
Click to expand...
Kingy, could you explain this reference for a troglodyte like me please. Lipstick lesbian? As in affectation not real application of feeling and demonstrating who she was? Or just purely a surface facade thing?
Genuine question. I live to learn.
 
Not sure we need to get too over analytical about Tully's appearance and how her lifestyle choices may affect that. We're better than that.


So 9th May - not too surprised as it sounded like The Voice would switch to weekly for the performance stages.
 
Brekkie said:
Not sure we need to get too over analytical about Tully's appearance and how her lifestyle choices may affect that. We're better than that.


So 9th May - not too surprised as it sounded like The Voice would switch to weekly for the performance stages.
Click to expand...
Fair enough brekkie. And quite right. But id hate for you to have to take the onerous task of revisiting all forum posts about housemates appearances and deleting them. One million at a time.:D
But seriously. Without being outrightly judgemental and being scornful about ones appearance, it is worthy of discussion in a sense of maturity, demanour and attitude which obviously changes for any individual over time. As a collective of personality rather than just shitposting as to ones appearance.
But I agree. Singular references simply as to appearance have no benefit or provide any valid or interesting point of discussion.
 
Fuzz said:
Kingy, could you explain this reference for a troglodyte like me please. Lipstick lesbian? As in affectation not real application of feeling and demonstrating who she was? Or just purely a surface facade thing?
Genuine question. I live to learn.
Click to expand...
“Types” in the LGBTQ+ community is hard to explain to non-members of the community. A type can be strictly appearance based, it can be strictly an attitude, or a nuanced combination of both. Also a type doesn’t necessarily need to tick all the stereotypical boxes to still be considered that type.

My comment was based strictly on Tully’s appearance… That said I think she was a combination of both an apperance based type and attitude.

It’s probably best you don’t try and understand the “why?” behind it and just understand the face value meaning.

7B40157C-F027-42F7-A6FC-A4F1F9D8E190.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Appreciate the response. I can only ascertain even within such apparent distinctions there are highly personalised examples and individual circumstances which cannot be labelled or catergorised. As most plebs think everything can be . Ive never thought that way about people.
Box labelling is disengenous and shows a need for an inherent immediate comprehension to a situation other than your own. and trying to make a logical sense of it to suit an apparent discomfort with which you dont understand. We are all highly individualistic beings from a wealth of differing backgrounds and experiences. And as such, impossible to tick a box in explanation.
Cheers kingy.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top