Freeform | Air Date: October 21, 2021
4.0
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 4 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1
Mixed:
1
Negative:
2
Watch Now
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this TV Episode
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
0
michellenycOct 23, 2021
The most disgusting episode of tv I have ever seen. So tired of the liberal BS. The way Christian pressured one girl to trade models when he was told she already said no. Then Megan getting upset that the dude waited 16 hours into theThe most disgusting episode of tv I have ever seen. So tired of the liberal BS. The way Christian pressured one girl to trade models when he was told she already said no. Then Megan getting upset that the dude waited 16 hours into the challenge to ask her to switch, RIGHTFULLY SO since she had already planned and cut her fabric. Disgusted from everyone being called a racist. Guilty of being white. The world has gone insane. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
expertinETHICSOct 26, 2021
I am a professional ethicist. Ethical questions abound in this episode, framed as questions: 1.did producers command cameras to badger (move in too closely, to insistently, to frequently) any contestants? : from what we know of tvI am a professional ethicist. Ethical questions abound in this episode, framed as questions: 1.did producers command cameras to badger (move in too closely, to insistently, to frequently) any contestants? : from what we know of tv production, they likely did! 2.when the issues of 'cultural representation' and 'cultural appropriation' came up why did contestants turn to criticize, blame, and later hatefully ostracize each other RATHER then the proper target: the producers?: obviously, the producers of a show that pretends mightily to be on some cultural cutting edge (pardon the pun) should have considered these important issues. why didn't they? from the host's surprise about the model swapping, at first, it seems that perhaps the producers were surprised and then aghast that they had made such a blunder! but later with the second occasion of model swapping they surely were no longer naive and we must ask: did they 'set up' situations intentionally to be confrontational? in the end it seems that the producers did do INTENTIONAL HARM to contestants!
3.regarding intentional moral harm we must especially cite the long time it took to release the woman-appearing person from constraints of the mic and wires and any other technology. THIS was intentional harmful. Furthermore, we must cite that the producers apparently commanded cameras to follow the women-appearing person while she/they/he undressed, sexually objectifying this person. This would appear to be INTENTIONAL SEXUAL HARASSMENT; and furthermore, gender based violence (GBV). GBV should not be permitted in any workplace. Where are the many voices of feminists, **** hat' activists, Me Too movement advocates?!
4. same women-appearing person made an important moral commentary that the show then breached: that many times women/women appearing persons are talked over, not allowed to complete their thoughts, attacked for their views as less worthy than the thoughts and comments of men-appearing persons. It is clear that the men-appearing persons were talking over, interrupting, and unequally criticizing the woman-appearing person. Where are feminist critics, Me Too critics?! we add that the producers did allow the woman-appearing person personal explanation time on the show. 5. again, we note that contestants FAILED in their primary moral duty to protect the humanity of other contestants: instead of banding together to protect one another they became models of wicked cut-throat capitalists and morally indefensible conspiracy theorists by making decisions unkind to others for the sake of their own 'fame', 'influencer status', and other aspects of marketable celebrity, while also creating self-righteous, self-praising narratives strategically worded and expressed to distract from the actual harms PRODUCED - likely intentionally?! - by the show. 6. were the judges actually naive to these situations leading up the the runway? from what we know of television production it is likely that they knew something and were not utterly naive, despite some judges comments. cleverly one judge used a deceptively worded phrase: 'I'm not understanding'. one should remember that phrase and use it frequently: when you violate an ethical standard at work, just say 'was that wrong, I'm not understanding', or to the security at the airport when you carryon something impermissible: 'oh, I'm not understanding what you mean', or to a partner you are cheating on or a friend you are stealing from: 'I'm sorry, was that wrong, I'm not understanding'. Finally, a high rating is deserved for showing viewers how ethically and morally perverse this production is.

Note1: without giving legal advice, it appears that a clever attorney might make quite a sum from litigation against the producers on a number of points for a complainant who was harmed in production of the episode. This is all the more apparent now that we see that unethical behaviors in production got people KILLED on the movie set (of actor Baldwin)! Note2: the man-appearing person who announced that their country was Haiti and created a fabric of a weeping 'mother' of the people was prescient: any Haitian with any morality of human kind is and should be weeping that aspects of Haitian society and culture - not imposed by colonizers since the Haitians cast that off centuries ago - are so cruelly violent that they abduct and brutalize 17 (or more) Christian aid workers and families including 5 (or more) tiny children.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
RejaMar 31, 2022
It's ok it's good great creative fun art and fashion !!!!!!!!!!! I like it it's good
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews