TWoP Forums > 4-4: "Ice Cream of Genie" 2005.10.13

Full Version: 4-4: "Ice Cream of Genie" 2005.10.13

TWoP Forums > Current TWoP Shows > The Apprentice > The Apprentice General Gabbery

Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14

Rabrab

Oct 17, 2005 @ 12:11 pm

A "Zip"-style costume is much closer to one-size-fits-all. There would possibly be height limitations, but that would be about all. In contrast, the Genie costume need to have both the shirt and pants more-or-less fitted to the person who would be wearing it.

LoneHaranguer

Oct 17, 2005 @ 2:28 pm

But why a genie?[/quote]

The execs told Trump that the guys had tied in with "the magic of Blizzard", which sounds like a DQ ad theme that may have been passed along offscreen (while the guys brainstormed, "magic" was said to be a good thing about the genie idea, but I don't recall anyone saying why).

Wallyhorse

Oct 17, 2005 @ 2:43 pm

Re:Kristi

Her "bullcrap" interview (and why was she wearing gloves in that interview? Wasn't this filmed over the summer???).[/quote]

I do remember seeing footage of Toral and maybe Rebecca outside chatting and it was snowing. I did wonder if Kristi was wearing Zips godawful gloves, however. [/quote]
We had some very cold weather in late April in these parts, and as I remember, New York did get some wet snow around the time of that task (and it's not the first time New York has gotten wet snow that late). That's why you had people wearing gloves.

Edited to shorten the gaps between quotes

marylou

Oct 17, 2005 @ 3:14 pm

As a non-former Heather, I'd like to say that the form of manipulation demonstrated by the Heathers last week is something one can't necessarily anticipate if one has not been schooled in the fine art of it. I'm not terribly surprised when other people get caught by it. It's completely learned behavior, and a lot of people, myself (and probably Toral, Rebecca and Marshawn) would consider manipulating someone like they did Toral to be "below" them. It's kind of like, well, cheating. Oh wait, Toral may be a cheater herself. You hopefully get my point anyway.

henry518

Oct 17, 2005 @ 3:27 pm

camelama

Oct 17, 2005 @ 6:14 pm

Ya know what makes this task so stupid to me? The fact that I actually LIKED those DQ commercials they had with the two "dudes" sitting outside the DQ, holding their blizzards upside down. Who needs a mascot? Just enlarge upon them - like Jared, or the "Can you hear me now" guy. Mascots. Shudder. They freak me out. I'd rather have real people any day, in ads.

(Tho I do like the Seattle Mariner's Mariner Moose - he doens't freak me out, I think because he actually looks like something real, or at least like a stuffed-animal-version-of-real)

ConanGrammarian

Oct 17, 2005 @ 6:38 pm

What manipulation? The so called Heathers sat Toral down and told her that they would be upset if she did not do anything to help the team win. Toral told them point blank that she would work hard to help the team win the task than proceeded to manipulate herself out of being PM. And when asked to contribute as a team member, Toral manipulated herself out of that too.[/quote]

Even though Carolyn noticed a "division" among the team members of Capital Edge, I'm going with the ostracizing and elimination of Toral as a more extreme version of the Social Darwinism the men practiced on Markus. A group cannot long survive with a "Gilligan" on the island - even with a brilliant professor they're going to run out of coconut radios at some point. Toral was beyond the bumbling Markus, she was poison.

The blondes are not Coven II...yet. Kristi and Felisha appear to be steering them that way, but JenM and Alla appear to want be resisiting. They seem to want to win a few tasks along the way - and J&A seem to know they'll need Marshawn and Rebecca as enthusiastic team members to get those wins. K&F instead of R&M won't get them a win.

Next week, we'll see if they can pull the team back together and function like a cohesive unit (like they nearly did in the Ferrari task).

GrinAndBearIt

Oct 17, 2005 @ 6:43 pm

I would agree with this except for the fact that there are career changers out there who may be over 30, 40 or 50 that would still be apprentices in their new professions.[/quote]

Add to this the fact that this is supposedly a job interview, which means they can't deny older wannabes the opportunity to participate as that would be age discrimination, which is illegal.

gianmatt

Oct 17, 2005 @ 7:02 pm

Add to this the fact that this is supposedly a job interview, which means they can't deny older wannabes the opportunity to participate as that would be age discrimination, which is illegal.[/quote]
I remember reading a Trump comment on the interview process for contestants for TA1. Can't remember the exact words, but I'll paraphrase: if someone hasn't "made it" by the time he's in his forties, he's not going to make it. In other words, "I don't hire old Apprentices."

LolaLilaLilly

Oct 17, 2005 @ 7:36 pm

Add to this the fact that this is supposedly a job interview, which means they can't deny older wannabes the opportunity to participate as that would be age discrimination, which is illegal.[/quote]

A "job interview" is more like it. This is a tv show first, and the show can discriminate between who they let on, which is probably how they could "legaly" get around the whole age-discrimanation thing. Although, isn't Marcus pretty close to his 40s?

Wallyhorse

Oct 17, 2005 @ 8:42 pm

Actually:

Markus is 41, and is actually old enough to be Rebecca's father.

yadayada

Oct 17, 2005 @ 10:59 pm

My apologies for my late post. Didn't want to seem that I was hiding after my comments about understanding Toral's behaviour in the episode prior to this one.

Toral is a nut job through and through. You are right, she is not as smart as she believes cause if she was, she would not have fallen into the mean girls trap. However, I still understand where she is coming from. Her use of the religion excuse in the BR is not complete BS IMO. In my experience as a Hindu, the line between culture and religion is blurry. I have caught numerous examples where God is used as an reason for cultural behaviours.

I understand her not wanting to wear the costume. I think sesstr said it much better than I could. This is what he/she said:

I do think there is something to Toral's culture/religion defense -- I just don't think she worded it properly and just generally made a sorry case for herself. I know many people, mostly immigrants like myself, who would consider it humiliating to wear that costume. Why? The line between what is funny and what is humiliating is very much culturally defined and varies greatly among human societies. There are cultures in which it is a shame to behave 'like a child', to be silly or self-deprecating. I think some sociologists call these "shame-based cultures" because the social rules have a lot to do with not doing what is 'shameful'.

Add to this the fact that many immigrants struggle to prove themselves, and to distance themselves from places of origin, both literally and figuratively. Many cultures are far more socially stratified than here in the US, and most immigrants do not come from the higher classes (since they have the most to gain from an equalitarian culture). Even if Toral is a 2nd generation immigrant, she's still greatly affected by her parents expectations, fears and aspirations. I think she may have been entirely honest about not wanting to shame her parents. [/quote]

I remember this one time as a high school student I decided to take on a job in a factory during the summer. I vividly remember my father speaking to my mother late one night about how he worked so hard so that his children would never have to work in a factory. He knew it was the only job I could get at that time but yet it broke his heart.

Regardless of her decision to not wear the costume, there was no need for Kristi to call her bitch in a professional setting, no need for Alla, Kristi, Felicia and Jen M to band together to harangue the woman either. I do not believe I have ever witnessed such an incident in professional work place. It was downright childish, immature and classless AND it warranted all of their firings as well. I don't know if Carolyn or George were present at that particular time, but if they were and didn't raise it in the BR, I am sorely disappointed in them.

But this is where my understanding of and sympathy for Toral ends. Unfortunately it seems from reports of her website that she has not learnt from viewing her obnoxious behaviour.

Finally, I have a big problem with DT giving Rebecca a pass in the BR this week. In TA2, DT fired Pamela for bad judgment and not being able to read people when she was forced to move over to the women's team (yeah, I'm still not over it). He made Rebecca admit in the BR that she had made an error in judgment and yet he did not fire her. Why? All I am asking for is a little consistency, is that too much?

legaleagle44

Oct 17, 2005 @ 11:27 pm

I do think there is something to Toral's culture/religion defense -- I just don't think she worded it properly and just generally made a sorry case for herself. I know many people, mostly immigrants like myself, who would consider it humiliating to wear that costume. Why? The line between what is funny and what is humiliating is very much culturally defined and varies greatly among human societies. There are cultures in which it is a shame to behave 'like a child', to be silly or self-deprecating. I think some sociologists call these "shame-based cultures" because the social rules have a lot to do with not doing what is 'shameful'.

Add to this the fact that many immigrants struggle to prove themselves, and to distance themselves from places of origin, both literally and figuratively. Many cultures are far more socially stratified than here in the US, and most immigrants do not come from the higher classes (since they have the most to gain from an equalitarian culture). Even if Toral is a 2nd generation immigrant, she's still greatly affected by her parents expectations, fears and aspirations. I think she may have been entirely honest about not wanting to shame her parents. [/quote]

If that had really been the case, then all Toral had to do was say just that when she was first asked to wear the costume, instead of waiting until the Boardroom, where it just came across as her reaching for an excuse (and a lame one at that) instead of a valid, irrefutable reason for not wanting to wear the costume when she was asked to.

To draw an analogy from personal experience: My religion expressly and flatly forbids me to use coffee, tea, tobacco, and alcohol. If I am in a setting where I would normally be expected to, say, drink coffee or tea or to toast someone with an alcoholic beverage, I simply politely decline to do so, with an appropriate explanation of the reason if necessary, and no one thinks the worse of me for declining to participate. In fact, I have had people express their admiration to me for standing up for my principles. By contrast. in not explaining her alleged cultural and/or religious reasons for not wanting to wear the costume when she was first asked to do so, Toral simply came across as someone who was determined to be arbitrary, combative, and uncooperative; I don't blame the other women at all for calling her what they did, nor do I blame anyone for not buying her excuse later when she tried to offer it in the boardroom.

yadayada

Oct 17, 2005 @ 11:33 pm

legaleagle44:

If that had really been the case, then all Toral had to do was say just that when she was first asked to wear the costume, instead of waiting until the Boardroom, where it just came across as her reaching for an excuse (and a lame one at that) instead of a valid, irrefutable reason for not wanting to wear the costume when she was asked to.
[/quote]

Unfortunately, Toral is neither articulate enough to express this concern, nor would the mean girls have listened. Also, how does one say, "my culture requires that I not demean myself by wearing a costume that belittles me, my education, my parents and my culture but you ladies go right on ahead and adorn such costime" without coming off as a complete bitch?

Hoola

Oct 17, 2005 @ 11:39 pm

I thought the excuse was bullshit. Toral is clearly articulate and has no problem lying fifty different ways if need be. I bet she came up with that reason after the fact, much like I think she researched some phrases about branding to demonstrate her supposed expertise in the boardroom. Expertise she never once hinted at or volunteered during the task. Felicia said she would have respected that reason, I don't know what says otherwise. Toral had not completed assignments in the past - in all three previous tasks. And she admitted to her team that she had chosen not to give it her all. Why wouldn't they be upset with her when she continued the same behaviors after being warned by Trump? She wanted her team to lose; Felicia and Kristi did not. I still find Kristi calling her a bitch horribly inappropriate, but I also think lying, sabotaging one's team, and acting like you are of a higher social stature than the rest was just as bad. And that's why Toral wouldn't do it. She thinks she's better than the other women on the team.

Rabrab

Oct 18, 2005 @ 1:54 am

Finally, I have a big problem with DT giving Rebecca a pass in the BR this week. In TA2, DT fired Pamela for bad judgment and not being able to read people when she was forced to move over to the women's team (yeah, I'm still not over it). He made Rebecca admit in the BR that she had made an error in judgment and yet he did not fire her. Why? All I am asking for is a little consistency, is that too much?[/quote]

I mentioned this in Toral's thread, but part of it carries over to this question.

Prior to the beginning of the season, Trump made the statement that after the trainwreck casting of Season 2 and the less-than-stellar casting of Season 3, he had personally selected the Apprentices for this season, so that he'd have people that he actually wanted to hire to choose from. MB also said in some article that Trump insisted on being involved in the casting this season.

If that's true (and I see no reason to believe that it's not, generally. He may not have vetted anything more than a short-list that the casting people prepared for him.) then Toral schnookered Trump, and convinced him that she was a viable candidate.

After seeing her attitude, he knew that he'd been snowed, and so he gave Rebecca a chance to admit that she'd also been snowed.

Shades of Season 1 and "You've never been duped? I've been duped." following the apartment task where Troy snowed Kristi (it was Kristi, wasn't it?) into giving him the better apartment to work with. Refusing to admit that she'd been ever been duped before got Kristi fired. Rebecca didn't like saying it, but she'd have been in deeper trouble if she had refused to acknowledge that Toral had sold her a line of bullshit deep, wide and consecutive.

From a business standpoint, while a serious error in judgement is bad, refusing to see/admit/allow that you've made one in the first place is worse.

blueguy

Oct 18, 2005 @ 5:46 am

Unfortunately, Toral is neither articulate enough to express this concern, nor would the mean girls have listened. Also, how does one say, "my culture requires that I not demean myself by wearing a costume that belittles me, my education, my parents and my culture but you ladies go right on ahead and adorn such costime" without coming off as a complete bitch? [/quote]

But lying and calling her team mates stupid is not demeaning to her, her family, or culture? She calls herself an investment banker. Given that alone, she should be more concerned with an image of honesty and integrity. Listen to what she said about her team to Rebbeca and Markus, and in her cab ride. For someone who works in banking you would think she would have a little more decency.

If she continues that kind of behavior, Elliot Spitzer may knock on her door one day.

natashapierre

Oct 18, 2005 @ 8:01 am

Trader Joe

Oct 18, 2005 @ 8:21 am

I not so worried about Rebecca having a "pass", he needs to stretch this thing out to last a certain number of weeks despite wanted to fire each and every one of them every week. It'll catch up with her.......I hope anyway.

Madhoo

Oct 18, 2005 @ 8:40 am

yadayada, to my family (who still live in India), acting in a Bollywood movie carries a lot more stigma since it involves touching and hugging strange men than wearing a silly costume does. If Toral's parents didn't mind her acting in one, they obviously wouldn't mind her wearing a costume.

Pundit

Oct 18, 2005 @ 9:34 am

Yadayada, thank you for lending your perspective. I am trying to be sensitive to cultural stereotyping (another example, the contact lens dead horse discussion). Yet, I have a problem with believing Toral because of the way in which she expressed herself... she did not offer a sincere, clear explanation that any rational person would accept. Instead she expressed her disdain for the concept/costume and seemingly played the religion card as an afterthought.

Re Trump finding Rebecca attractive, I have gotten that impression, too. And he obviously fancies himself in the role of mentor - likes the idea that he can mold her during this process by his comments.

I know that with other tasks, we've seen the participating company's final product or decision via a commerical - such as the Target toy box, etc. I'm sure they are not going to use the wacko magic genie, but in this case, do we know the actual identity of the Blizzard mascot - or the advertising angle? If there was a commerical, I missed it. BTW, would they be launching a Blizzard campaign this time of year, anyway?

I've found the ideas some of you have expressed here interesting to read. I'd be interested in hearing more Blizzard mascot suggestions, just for fun. I will if you will.

hissyfit

Oct 18, 2005 @ 9:52 am

Even if her claiming it was for religious reasons that she would not wear the costume (which I think is a load since what she said is that it would be embarrassing to her family and her employer and clearly thought that it was stupid for anyone to wear it), her nasty attitude was a major detriment to the team. She gloated when they lost. Even if they did not see that, it would show in her work and general attitude. And as for her claims that no one listened to her ideas, when did she offer one. I think the blonde who tried to get the DQ logo on the weird cup creature was ignored and I thought that was an amazingly stupid oversight, but Torel just sat back and coasted on the grandiose vision she has of herself in her head.

I don't particularly like any of these people, they all seem rather bland and nasty. And no one seems to be very much fun.

scarletsmith

Oct 18, 2005 @ 10:15 am

Shades of Season 1 and "You've never been duped? I've been duped." following the apartment task where Troy snowed Kristi (it was Kristi, wasn't it?) into giving him the better apartment to work with. Refusing to admit that she'd been ever been duped before got Kristi fired. Rebecca didn't like saying it, but she'd have been in deeper trouble if she had refused to acknowledge that Toral had sold her a line of bullshit deep, wide and consecutive.[/quote]

It was Katrina, not Kristi, IIRC. And, FWIW, Trump fired Tammy for little more than actually having the guts to admit that Katrina had been duped. (Trump's reasoning, at the time, was that he hates disloyalty more than he hates overconfidence and exaggeration.)

Miss Alli

Oct 18, 2005 @ 10:58 am

It was Katrina. Who was mad as a wet ham.

As you were.

henry518

Oct 18, 2005 @ 10:58 am

The blondes are not Coven II...yet. Kristi and Felisha appear to be steering them that way, but JenM and Alla appear to want be resisiting. They seem to want to win a few tasks along the way - and J&A seem to know they'll need Marshawn and Rebecca as enthusiastic team members to get those wins. K&F instead of R&M won't get them a win.[/quote]
I hope you're right. I think Kristi and Felisha are very unprofessional and I'm starting to like JenM so I hope she's not part of them.

auntiemame

Oct 18, 2005 @ 12:01 pm

But lying and calling her team mates stupid is not demeaning to her, her family, or culture? She calls herself an investment banker. Given that alone, she should be more concerned with an image of honesty and integrity.[/quote]

She didn't call them stupid, she called them (essentially) unqualified. She said their educations and work experience were subpar. That's not a personal insult, but a professional estimation. Or perhaps a 'professional' estimation, given its debatility. The point is, it has enough plausible deniability in it to be passed off as a concern with the integrity/quality of the competition and Trump's businesses. But screaming "Bitch" at a team member? Not professional. Not useful. Not acceptable. It's just shitty, thuggish behavior and I would love to see the person who would try that in a real work environment. And then I would tip security a few extra dollars for carting her badly socialized ass out.

Torel just sat back and coasted on the grandiose vision she has of herself in her head.[/quote]

I think many rational people would also take her approach, though: if they know nothing they say will be heard -- will really be heard -- then they take their marbles and go play somewhere else. Even if that somewhere else is inside their heads. The more you fight it, the more you increase resistance. And in this case, the team dynamic was so frayed that it was waaaay too far gone for Toral to change it with a few "Blizzmatics" or "Blizztastics" or "Blizzuccinos." That was just a convenient cover for the Heather's essential dislike of Toral.

BibiBella

Oct 18, 2005 @ 12:20 pm

It was mentioned up-tread that Rebecca is young enough to be Marcus's daughter.[/quote]

henry518, only if Markus had been a teen-age dad. Markus is 41, Rebecca is 23, which would make him only 18 years older than her. Yeah, old enough to be a parent (look at Kristi, she had her daughter at 16), but not completely likely.

Quiddler

Oct 18, 2005 @ 12:24 pm

It was mentioned up-tread that Rebecca is young enough to be Marcus's daughter. So wouldn't that makes her old enough to be Trumps girlfriend? [/quote]
You owe me a new keyboard, henry. And I'd appreciate it if you'd write a letter to my boss taking responsibility for your actions. <snerk>

did not offer a sincere, clear explanation that any rational person would accept. Instead she expressed her disdain for the concept/costume and seemingly played the religion card as an afterthought. [/quote]And...agreed. Even after promising that she would "step up" and put forth more effort in the tasks, she didn't. And then began looking for items to cover her ass. Frankly, she reminded me a little of John Lovitz's "Liar" character on SNL.

"Why didn't I wear the costume? Um.... it was ... um ... cultural... er ... my parents ... um ... myyyyy religion! Yeah, yeah, that's it! My religious beliefs forbid me from wearing costumes! Yeah, that's the ticket!"

But, my fondest memory from that epi will always be the look on Toral's face when Trump uttered those famous words: "I wore a chicken suit on Saturday Night Live." Hee! I've replayed that many, many times ... on the TiVO in my mind...

blueguy

Oct 18, 2005 @ 12:32 pm

[/quote]She didn't call them stupid, she called them (essentially) unqualified. [/quote]

She did call them stupid to Rebecca and not very intelligent at that.
That it what I wsa referring to.

Lisetta

Oct 18, 2005 @ 12:39 pm

She said their educations and work experience were subpar. That's not a personal insult, but a professional estimation. [/quote]
If Trump or D&C said it, it'd be a professional estimation. Regardless of her opinion of herself, on this show Rebecca's just another candidate, like the rest.

When she and Toral make comments like that to the boss, announcing that the other candidates in the room are inferior in education and job skills to them,...yes, it's definitely a personal insult. If I were Trump, I would have fired Rebecca on the spot for trash talking her teammates that way.

(Not to mention that nothing she or Toral contributed to TA so far supports, in any way, their high opinions of themselves).

And count me in on the "if Trump finds you attractive, he'll keep you around longer" group. He doesn't like older women who are confident, professional and not flirty with him. Rebecca's strongwilled, but in some ways, still like a girl, not a woman (like Pam). I suspect that when Carolyn first started working for him (back in her early 20's, pre-marriage and kids), she was probably much the same.

But, like with Erin, Rebecca can get overly confident and go too far, and erase her advantage. (As someone who dislikes her--for that comment about her teammates and being BFF with someone like Toral--all I can say is....one can hope....).

charleyhorse

Oct 18, 2005 @ 12:59 pm

Is it just me, or do most of these women seem better suited to be contestants on "The Bachelor" than "The Apprentice?"

auntiemame

Oct 18, 2005 @ 1:10 pm

If I were Trump, I would have fired Rebecca on the spot for trash talking her teammates that way. [/quote]

I would too. But it was Toral who said it, not Rebecca. And I would have fired Kristi for...trash-talking her teammates that way. And I would have fired Felisha for...trash talking her teammates that way. And I would have fired Jen W. for...trash-talking her teammates that way. And I would fire Alla for... trash-talking her teammates that way. Not too many left, then.

Is it just me, or do most of these women seem better suited to be contestants on "The Bachelor" than "The Apprentice?"[/quote]

Felisha would be better for The Swan.

Lisetta

Oct 18, 2005 @ 2:04 pm

I would too. But it was Toral who said it, not Rebecca. [/quote]
I don't have the exact quote, but I'm talking about what Rebecca said, the comment that George (hurray for George!) took exception to (and then got interrupted and stomped down by Trump).

Rebecca said something like "I'd like to see you choose a woman as your apprentice, Mr. Trump. And Toral is the only (other) woman here who has enough education and skill to work for you."

I don't mind if someone criticizes specific performance on a task, since that's pretty much what it's all about. But I really dislike Toral and Rebecca's snobbishness based on what school they went to.

Especially since Rebecca has contributed nothing special to any task so far (and was a disaster as PM on the Tethno Expo). Rebecca's ally Toral not only was even more of a snob and -contributed- even less....but, incredibly, that was actually her stated strategy for winning.

I'm sure BFF Rebecca had heard Toral talk about her strategy, too. And certainly Rebecca'd seen Toral's nasty attitude toward others and her complete lack of work ethic or contribution to any task.

So her effort to "sell" Trump on Toral as the "only one" good enough for him...just makes me think even -less- of Rebecca.

Madhoo

Oct 18, 2005 @ 2:13 pm

Exactly, Lisette! We have seen Marshawn lead the team to the win - we have Kristi, Alla and Felisha do the video that actually helped them win the car task. I am still waiting to see what Rebecca has done so far except break her ankle.

AlmondEyes

Oct 18, 2005 @ 3:20 pm

I'd appreciate it if you'd write a letter to my boss taking responsibility for your actions. <snerk>
[/quote]
"Taking responsibility" is grammatically correct, so . . . since this is Apprenticespeak, I presume you meant "take accountability?" Heh.

Felisha would be better for The Swan. [/quote]
Hee!!!

LolaLilaLilly

Oct 18, 2005 @ 3:30 pm

Ew. Ew. Ew. Ew!

I had a dream about Marcus last night.

He was in the board room with the guys and lost as PM.

Trump fired him for being an idiot and Marcus refused to leave, Trump eventualy told him to leave, he did, and Trump did his usual comments to the Viceroys and Marcus walked back in and tried to negotiate with Trump saying he'll do better on the next task or he'll quit.

Ahh!!

I'm afraid to go to bed tonight now.

yadayada

Oct 18, 2005 @ 3:37 pm

Madhoo I understand the Bollywood comment, however, I am not so sure that is true these days. All I hear these days at the social functions are how someone's mom is trying to get their daughter's face on the cover of some Indian magazine back home.

auntiemame:

She didn't call them stupid, she called them (essentially) unqualified. She said their educations and work experience were subpar. That's not a personal insult, but a professional estimation. Or perhaps a 'professional' estimation, given its debatility. The point is, it has enough plausible deniability in it to be passed off as a concern with the integrity/quality of the competition and Trump's businesses. But screaming "Bitch" at a team member? Not professional. Not useful. Not acceptable. It's just shitty, thuggish behavior and I would love to see the person who would try that in a real work environment. And then I would tip security a few extra dollars for carting her badly socialized ass out. [/quote]

Thank you. Regardless of Toral's piss poor attitude, the CovenII's behaviour was completely uncalled for and I am sad to see that they weren't reprimanded for it. Additionally, when Rebecca and Toral made those comments in the BR, they were asked for their opinion and they gave it. Mind you, it might have made more strategic sense to have responded in a more diplomatic manner (e.g. well Mr. Trump, as you are aware from meeting me and discussing my resume, I have participated in X million dollar deals, been an investment banker for several years in a cut throat business, etc etc and you are also quite aware that Kristi has made quite a name for herself selling golf memberships, and is athletic. The question you need to ask is who do you believe is a better fit for a your company.)

My biggest problem with the Coven is the fact that they did not let it go after Toral said she had a personal problem with respect to wearing the suit. Granted Toral was an idiot to claim she wasn't giving it her all in the prior task and the Coven had some reason to doubt her reason, a follow up question such as "is it really a personal problem?" should have sufficed. The reason it is a called a personal problem is because it is personal and Toral is neither required to explain herself nor does the team have enough time to listen a to discourse on the overlapping cultural and religious beliefs of various Hindus.

An example. I once dated an Aussie boy and we moved in together. Growing up, I was brought up told that I was required to immediately take a shower after cleaning the bathroom, lest I bring dirty toilet water and other human waste material into cleaner areas of the home. This was not in keeping with our culture and our religion it was explained. This Aussie boy one night cleaned the bathroom, washed his hands and proceeded directly to our bed room. I did not let him enter, I begged and pleaded with him to take a shower. At first he did not understand but after my tears started flowing, he hopped right in. I immediately lysoled every surface he touched after cleaning the bathroom and took a shower right after. I didnt cry because I was afraid he was insulting my religion but rather, this mode has been ingrained in me for such a long time and the fear of fecal material crawling all over my bed, yikes! After my explanation, he still did not understand but let it be known that all I had to do was let him know that I had a personal problem and he would respect my wishes (I never should have let him get away :( )

What I am trying to say is that Hinduism is a complex subject and it is not fully understood by the western hemisphere (or by me either). There have a been a handful of posts warning fellow posters interviewing with female Indian bosses, they way that the caste system will make us treat others like slaves and requesting bosses of indians to buy them tickets back to India. With such little understanding, I honestly believe it is wrong for one to disbelieve someone when they say that they have a personal/religious/cultural reason for not wanting to do something even if they are horrible person such as Toral.

illogic

Oct 18, 2005 @ 3:45 pm

It was Katrina. Who was mad as a wet ham.[/quote]

Wasn't it, "mad as a wet hen?" Although I like the ham image more.

LolaLilaLilly

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:01 pm

The adage is "mad as a wet HEN", not sure why. But I like ham too, it's funnier.

Nutjob

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:06 pm

It is "wet hen", but it sounded like Troy said "wet ham" when he made the comment. Which made it that much funnier.

yadayada, I understand what you're saying about the cultural and religious upbringing being ingrained in you. However, Toral is supposedly a professional, in a professional environment. I am strongly religious myself, but if I am asked to do something that is against my beliefs, I can professionally explain why. For example, my Christian values do not allow me to lie. When I first got my current job some 10 years ago, my boss asked me to lie for her regarding her whereabouts. I politely refused and diplomatically explained why, and everything was fine. If Toral is going to be in a professional environment, she needs to be able to do the same. That's why I think her religion argument was pure, unadulterated bull.

yadayada

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:17 pm

Nutjob (love the name hee!), it may be easier to explain Christian values in North America than Hindu values. It took a long time for me to find the words to explain my ingrained germaphobia and I am still looking cause after I am done explaining, there are still quizzical looks on my audience.

I think Toral took a professional route that wouldn't require her to explain any personal/cultural/religious problems that may arise. If such is the case, I wouldn't expect her to articulate her concerns well when she hasn't given much thought to the matter or how to explain it to people. She came off more so of a bitch when she couldn't diplomatically say "Look wearing this suit is demeaning to me personally, culturally and religiouslly, but one you guys go right ahead and do so." Even I can't think of a diplomatic manner of stating that which is why I think she labelled it a "personal" problem first hoping that the others would just drop it.

ETA: Dude, I am finally a couch potato, only 650 posts away from being a Fanatic!

ETAA: To the poster who asked who wore the hooker shoes to BR, it was Alla. When they show the shoes, you get a glimpse of a black lace border of the skirt that the contestant was wearing. The only person in a black outfit that was not pants was Alla.

Nutjob

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:18 pm

No, I get that. I just think that if it were her real reason, Toral should have at least tried to explain it. Plus, I just don't think she's genuine. (And yeah... the name came from a friend who knows that I can be a bit loony sometimes.)

jlatels

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:27 pm

However, Toral is supposedly a professional, in a professional environment. I am strongly religious myself, but if I am asked to do something that is against my beliefs, I can professionally explain why. [/quote]

Exactly. It's not good enough that she played the "personal issues" card. To stand up for your personal convictions means being able to explain them as well. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the Blondes demanding to know why, and given Toral's attitude I can even understand the Blondes' frustration. Toral.simply.didn't.want.to.do.it. It went from "personal" to "religious" when no one would take that as an answer to "cultural" when she realized no one was buying the religion argument.

blocked writer

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:36 pm

Nutjob (love the name hee!), it may be easier to explain Christian values in North America than Hindu values.[/quote]

yadayada, I'm sure there are some things that don't translate easily from one culture to another. But I don't think in this case, it really required a lot of detailed explaining. I think that if Toral had just said from the begiining that it was against her religious beliefs with no equivocation, Trump would have accepted that later in the boardroom, even if the bitches Felisha and Kristi didn't.

Her condescending attitude, especially in the interviews, gave me the feeling that she just thought the entire enterprise was beneath her, especially the costume, and she came up with the excuse about religion later. I think she left herself without a leg to stand on.

There's been a lot of discussion about Kristi & Felisha's treatment of Toral, which I agree was horrible. But some people seem to think that they got away with it, because Toral got fired and they didn't. I don't think they got away with it, I believe it's just a matter of time for them.

I think that Toral deserved firing more this week, epsecially because she actively rooted for her team to lose, but that doesn't mean I condone Kristi or Felisha's actions. It's just not an "either/or" matter to me.

Kristi and Felisha might have helped to get rid of Toral, but they probably ruined their own chances in the long run with that nasty shouting match over the costume.

yadayada

Oct 18, 2005 @ 4:42 pm

Her condescending attitude, especially in the interviews, gave me the feeling that she just thought the entire enterprise was beneath her, especially the costume, and she came up with the excuse about religion later. I think she left herself without a leg to stand on.[/quote]

blockedwriter , the problem here is that she might have found the entire enterprise beneath her because of her religion and culture. sesstr, who I quote on page 38, states an explanation quite well.

ETA: Perhaps, Nutjob, she thought she would be in a team of people where once the claim of personal reasons came up, they would drop it?

Who the hell knows anymore, the more I hear about Toral the more I dislike her but I still think the Coven should have dropped it when she raised a personal objection to it rather than be all Mean Girls about it. And kudos to the editors for including the shot of the 4 blondes storming back from the costume designer all bitch like. And kudos to you guys for an awesome discussion on the topic.

Nutjob

Oct 18, 2005 @ 5:00 pm

But then, if the costume was beneath her because of her religion and culture, I can't understand how it is OK for her to go on a reality show where past contestants have been asked to do similar tasks. Again, I understand your point of view. I just don't agree that Toral was coming from that same place, and I find it even worse that she would use that as an excuse after the fact.

I can't assume what Toral's values are, or how strictly she follows the religion she claims, because I know a lot of "religious" folks who adhere to the parts they like and disgard the parts they don't whenever it's convenient. For me, all I can go on are what she said and did, and how it unfortunately made her look like a total liar.

ETAA: To the poster who asked who wore the hooker shoes to BR, it was Alla. When they show the shoes, you get a glimpse of a black lace border of the skirt that the contestant was wearing. The only person in a black outfit that was not pants was Alla. [/quote]

And good gravy, those WERE hooker shoes. I realize that Alla owns dayspas and has made a lot more money than I have, but I would still never wear shoes like that in a corporate environment. Ack!

LolaLilaLilly

Oct 18, 2005 @ 5:03 pm

I thought it was funny that Jen M. tried to convince Toral to wear the costume by telling her they (her parents, employers, clients, her God, and whoever else she chooses) wouldn't even know she's in there.

Umm.

Jen?

They're watching the show, they'll know.

auntiemame

Oct 18, 2005 @ 5:28 pm

ETAA: To the poster who asked who wore the hooker shoes to BR, it was Alla. When they show the shoes, you get a glimpse of a black lace border of the skirt that the contestant was wearing. The only person in a black outfit that was not pants was Alla. [/quote]

Yay! Thank you yadayada! That's been killing me for days. So it's another piece in the Alla Closet of Blingtastic Fashion Faux-Pas. Brill.

I think you explained your point about Toral very succinctly and well. Even if there are no widely known taboos in East Indian culture about that sort of thing, there may be something specific to Toral's upbringing. In the boardroom, she also declined to delve into the reasons, saying, "I don't want to get into the specifics of the culture," etc. Which, yes, could have been bullshit, but at that moment I thougth I saw a different side of Toral: maybe she didn't want to make a big deal out of her culture or beliefs, or acting like some sort of emissary to the White World about What Indians Believe, as she was being attacked. Explaining in a polite situation is one thing, but I know plenty of people among our friends who don't want to go through the whole "Oh, you don't eat pork? That's so funny! Everyone eats pork!" "No, we're Jewish." "Oh, I didn't know you were Jewish [ensuing 10 billion questions about Jews and Israel starting with Abraham, moving on to circumcision, and ending with Ari Sharon's domestic policy].

Like, sometimes, people just don't want to even fucking go into it, and if Toral didn't want to wear the damn costume -- which was not even a costume, since no one doubts it was just a tool and external manifestation of her humiliation at the hands of her dim-bulb teammates -- the team that was so allegedly focused on rehabilitating their losing asses should have found something else for her to do.

I can envision a BR session where Felisha whines, "Toral didn't want to wear the COSTUME, Mr. Trump." And then Trump would ask, "why didn't you wear the costume," get the answer, and turn viciously on the project manager, like "Well, if you knew she wasn't going to wear the costume, why didn't you find something else for her to do? Aren't you the project manager? Didn't you want to win? Would you rather be one team member down rather than just thinking about it for like, one fucking second and finding a better solution so that you could, like, have the rare experience of actually fucking winning rather than the two-second-long thrill of embarrassing a team member to falsely bolster your weak sense of self and prove that your underqualified, badly socialized ass is worth even one penny more to my organization than roughly, zero dollars?" (Um, I'm paraphrasing, actually). But it could have played that way, very, very easily. Her biggest sin so far is pointing out to a bunch of potentially underqualified people that they are potentially unqualified. There are worse crimes out ther.e Toral could use a few months in a gulag taking diplomacy and HR courses, sure. But every single person on this show, up to and including Trumpidiot, could as well.

druish princess

Oct 18, 2005 @ 6:26 pm

remember reading a Trump comment on the interview process for contestants for TA1. Can't remember the exact words, but I'll paraphrase: if someone hasn't "made it" by the time he's in his forties, he's not going to make it. In other words, "I don't hire old Apprentices."
Kelly is no spring chicken.

momo

Oct 18, 2005 @ 7:16 pm

I have some questions:

1. Why excactly was Toral fired without even bringing the PM+1 or 2 back in? I mean she screwed herself up with all the lying and double talk that she was doing but the issues of the task were not addressed. Trump has fired many people for lesser mistakes than not branding the mascot. And in many of those occasions the "guy or girlm you know should be fired because no one can stand him/her" is in the boardroom.

2. Why give Clay the unanimous exemption. He treated them like crap, voted down ideas that they worked on like a dictator, etc. They did win bit I thought at least one guy would like to see him unprotected next week if they lose.

3. What's with this blonde clique? Isn't Carolyn or George going to say/do something about this? Let's face it, once Toral half assed accepted then rejected being PM the blondes took over, handled everything, and when Toral refused to be the mascot they were all over her case. I think that it was not that big a deal to step into a costume, or to refuse to do so, and Toral couls have done more. In the end she should have taken the PM, then either won and prove that she's worth a shot, or lose and blame someone else.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.