I still think Susan is a bitch. Actually thinking she should be part of the whole process and trying to push Ross out of it. I've been married and had a couple of kids since seeing this and I can't imagine someone else trying to intervene in that.
sharecw_squared wrote:
I still think Susan is a bitch.I think you are not looking at it from Susan's point of view.Let me repost one of the several things that I posted on the subject in the past.
The entire situation would have been avoided if Carol had been impregnated by Bobo, the anonymous sperm donor. I believe that is what Susan wanted, but Carol insisted on Ross.What I am asking you to do is to look at this from Susan's point of view. If the father is an anonymous sperm donor, then Susan is an equal partner with Carol in raising the child. There are just the two of them who assume the obligation to raise the child together and are the parents.When you include the father of the child, Susan feels that her role is diminished because Carol is the biological mother, Ross is the biological father, and what is she? I'm not saying that it will ultimately play out that way, just that Susan feels that way now.She is insecure in her new relationship with Carol. I believe she is afraid that Carol will change her mind and go back to Ross, and now Carol's ex-husband is being included in the family unit. I think it's rather easy to understand why she is angry and why she does not want Ross to have the even greater claim on the child by having his last name.I believe that Carol imposed Ross as the father on Susan over her objections. Perhaps by giving Carol one shot to get pregnant with Ross while she still had stuff in his apartment.Carol very deliberately includes Ross in their family. There was absolutely no reason to take Ross to the very early sonogram if she was not trying to do that. But she also has to deal with an angry Susan who feels that she is being cut out.Ross's not only means absolutely nothing to Susan, he is her love's ex-lover. She doesn't want him around. She doesn't want anything to do with him. I hope you will agree those are quite normal human reactions.There is no reason in the world that she should respect Ross's wishes. She sees him as Bobo, the sperm donor, and she wishes that he were.Ross, by the way, becomes very possessive of the child who was almost undoubtedly deliberately conceived after his wife had left him, and that he almost undoubtedly would not have agreed to if he had been asked. Which was why Carol did what she did.I have a whole bunch more of these if you are interested. share
Interesting points and you have obviously put some thought into it. But it seems that you are overlooking or ignoring the fact that Carol and Ross were married. They had a prior committed relationship and they produced the child together with no help from Susan. And I get that Susan is a human with feelings for Carol but Carol had committed to Ross and Susan knew that. Man or woman, if you get into the middle of someone else's marriage then you don't get to be upset if things don't go your way. It's not the wanting to be involved that bothers me as much as the trying to take over and being resentful of Ross. Ross isn't a sperm donor. He was the spouse who was cheated on. And now the person who his spouse cheated with is acting like they have prior rights to a child who isn't theirs. I think he has the better claim to angry.
sharecw_squared wrote:
But it seems that you are overlooking or ignoring the fact that Carol and Ross were married.I'm sure that a judge would point that out, but this never ends up in court. Carol never asks for child support. There are no court ordered visiting rights.
And I get that Susan is a human with feelings for Carol but Carol had committed to Ross and Susan knew that.Carol committed to Ross before she realized that she is a lesbian. Her commitment to Ross is over. She and Susan have committed themselves to raise the child. That is a long-term commitment.
Man or woman, if you get into the middle of someone else's marriage then you don't get to be upset if things don't go your way.The problem is that Carol wanted Ross is the father of the baby. Susan didn't. But Carol insisted and prevailed. None of this would've come up if they had used Bobo, the anonymous sperm donor. I believe that is what Susan wanted.
It's not the wanting to be involved that bothers me as much as the trying to take over and being resentful of Ross.Of course she is resentful of Ross. Ross very quickly stakes out his position. He contributed a sperm cell and Susan didn't. He is insisting on his priority – and the court would agree with that – but Susan sees it as her and Carol's baby in large part because it was deliberate.
Ross isn't a sperm donor.From Susan's point of view, that is the unfortunate truth.
And now the person who his spouse cheated with is acting like they have prior rights to a child who isn't theirs.Susan has made a long-term commitment to raise the child with Carol. Ross, unknowingly, contributed one sperm cell. We all know how difficult that is to do. I don't blame Susan. I understand that Carol wanted Ross as the father and Susan didn't. But as Susan gets more confidence that Carol is not going to go back to Ross, she calms down and they work things out.
I think he has the better claim to angry.Ross certainly has reason to be angry, but so does Susan. This is not at all the situation that Susan imagined. Very, very few people want their lovers ex-lover to be a permanent part of their family group. But Carol ensured that that would be the case.What I am asking you to do is to see this from Susan's point of view and not just Ross's. She has no commitment to Ross. And she is paranoid that Carol will go back to Ross. She wants to raise a child with Carol, but just the two of them, no ex-husband of Carol's involved. That is what she thought she was getting, but somehow things changed over her objection.A number of people have this very strong idea that the contribution of one sperm cell gives the man all sorts of rights. I am a man, and I don't agree. share
Pretty simple solution for Susan if she wants a child of her own. Go get pregnant. As you have pointed out several times, all she needs is a sperm donor.
sharecw_squared wrote:
Pretty simple solution for Susan if she wants a child of her own. Go get pregnant.You are being ridiculous. Susan wants to raise a child with the woman that she loves and will shortly marry.
She let herself get involved in a marriage.Do you somehow have the idea that Carol was not really a lesbian but was just seduced into believing that she is by Susan? The marriage was over because Carol realized that she's a lesbian, not because Susan got involved.
then additionally try to interject yourself into a pregnancy that you had no part in toI don't think Susan sees it that way. I think the most likely scenario is that Carol and Susan made a deliberate decision to raise a child. So, Susan was very much part of what caused the pregnancy to happen. Susan just wanted a different father.Either Carol cheated on Susan with Ross – I find that unlikely – or Susan allowed Carol to sleep with Ross for the purpose of getting pregnant. My guess is that it was a compromise on the order of Carol gets one chance to get pregnant by Ross and then we go to a sperm donor.
My problem with Susan was that she seemed to want to replace Ross.She did not want Ross as the father in the first place. She wanted an anonymous sperm donor so that she would be an equal partner with Carol. With Ross in the relationship, there will always be a person around who can claim a more important position in relation to the child than she has.Please try to understand. I am not saying that Susan was right and that Ross was wrong. I am saying that Susan was most likely involved in and an important element of Carol's decision to have a baby right from the beginning. In that sense, it is very much Susan's baby too.Susan "signed up" to raise a child with the woman that she loves. But she did not "sign up" to raise the child of Carol's ex-lover with said ex-lover around as the father.Carol understands why Susan is angry, and she understands that Susan has very good reasons to be angry, and therefore if she criticizes Susan for the way she is treating Ross, and she will make the situation worse.If you believe that Carol got pregnant while she was still living with Ross, I would be interested in seeing if you can come up with a plausible timeline. Possible timeline, yes, but I think a plausible timeline is going to be difficult. share
And one more on why I believe pregnancy was deliberate.
Let me try to give you an overview and see if that helps.The first thing is the timing, and I agree that it is not certain, but here is what we have as far as I know.Carol moves the last of her stuff out of Ross's in the pilot. She could well have moved herself out two months or more earlier. It is easy for another person to move into a one-bedroom apartment with someone, but it is not so easy to move all of your clothes and other stuff in. So leaving stuff at Ross's makes sense.The very early sonogram occurs one month after the pilot. They are not able to determine the sex of the baby at that time.1:12 Ross: (pauses) I'm pretty sure that it is...(looks at Carol’s figure) Ha ha oooh. Ohhh. 19 weeks and the breasts are starting to swell…..according to the literature.Carol does not contradict him. That is the first point at which Carol knows the sex of the baby.1:24 Carol gives birth.I don't think that Carol can have gotten pregnant very long before the pilot.The gestation period in this series seems to be one season. I know it is a small sample size, but credibility is really being stretched if it is longer than that. (Every season has a Thanksgiving episode, and every season except the last has either a Christmas or New Years episode).The flashback in 3:6 is set three years earlier, i.e., something like Season 0, Episode 6. That is when Carol meets Susan. An undetermined amount of time later, Carol is doing things with Susan when Ross wishes that she were doing things with him. An undetermined time later, Carol tells Ross that she is a lesbian and, I assume, moves out and in with Susan.What we do know is that when Carol tells Ross, it is the last night that what we know as the coffeehouse was a bar. Was the coffeehouse a bar two weeks before the pilot. We don't know, but I think the indication is that some time has passed between Carol telling Ross and the pilot.My guess is that it took Carol some time to decide whether or not she is a lesbian and whether or not to change her life in that direction and leave Ross. I know that I cannot prove this, and people are all different, but I think it most likely that Carol and Susan had been having sex for an extended period of time — months — before Carol finally decided and got up the nerve to make the major break in her life.I think it likely that Carol and Susan had probably talked about wanting a child all along. After they have moved in together, and have more confidence that the relationship will last, I believe that the talks became serious.And there is a problem. Carol wants the man that she loved and married as the father. I can elaborate on that but I think it's clear.Susan absolutely, positively, definitely does not want her lover's ex-husband as the father. In addition to not wanting Ross in their relationship, she is aware that having Ross's one sperm cell involved may impact her position in all of this.If Bobo, the anonymous sperm donor, is the father, there simply isn't a biological father around, and Susan is the full partner of Carol with child. You put Ross into the mix, and Ross has a claim that Susan doesn't. This is quite clear in the sonogram scene.My guess is that they finally resolved this conflict by Susan giving Carol one-shot at getting pregnant by Ross, and if she does not succeed, Carol agrees to go to a sperm donor. Well, Susan did agree to it, but she really doesn't like it, and I think it's easy to understand why.The timing suggest strongly to me that Carol became pregnant after she left Ross. So does this Ross: . . .And Carol had some good times before she became a lesbian... and once afterward.I know that it is ambiguous, but Ross has no idea when Carol "became" a lesbian, but he does know when she told him, and I believe that is what he is referring to.Carol and Susan show great enthusiasm about having a child. There does not seem to be any ambivalence about that which might be strange if it was accidental. The only dispute is about Ross as the father and including Ross in the relationship. It is clear to me that Carol imposes that on Susan very much against her will, and that is why Susan is so angry.Why the haste. The Carol-Susan relationship is quite new. Well if Carol wants Ross as the father of their child, she is going to have to move quickly because Ross would probably not agree to be the father — although he is happy that it has happened — and once he is involved with someone else, he is simply not going to be available.Maybe Carol could have seduced Ross later on. Maybe that would just be leading Ross on for nothing. While Carol still has stuff in Ross's apartment, she has the perfect excuse to go there when she is most fertile, and I believe that is what happened.I'm not claiming that I can prove any of this, but I am claiming that it is a scenario that explains things that otherwise do not have a good explanation.Why is Susan trying to drive Ross away? She didn't want him as a father.Why does Carol let Susan behave the way that she is without saying anything? Because she knows why Susan is so angry, and she knows that Susan has a strong case.Why are Carol and Susan so enthusiastic about the pregnancy? Because they both wanted it, just not with Ross from Susan's point of view.I think that is enough for now although I'm sure I haven't covered all of your points. Let this settle in, and I encourage you to think about it and reply to it.There are always more things to say. A number of posters see Susan as a psychopath. But Carol loves Susan, marries Susan, and they stay together. I am suggesting there is another reason for Susan's anger than her being a nasty psychopath. And by the end of the first season, as she is feeling more secure, she definitely calms down.One reason that Susan feels that it is her baby too is that she agreed to let Carol have a chance to get pregnant by Ross. Pregnancy was not an accident. It was as deliberate as using a sperm donor would've been, but with more complications. share
That flashback at the bar was a year before the pilot. Because Rachel says it will be one year before she's Mrs Barry.
sharestarseed062 wrote:
That flashback at the bar was a year before the pilot. Because Rachel says it will be one year before she's Mrs Barry.That is what Rachel says, but it seems unlikely that that scene took place a year before the pilot. Perhaps the wedding was moved up. Perhaps the facility that they wanted became available earlier than they had expected.The real problem is that it means that Carol met Susan a year before the pilot. share
I love Susan
shareI loathed this storyline. I believe it was solely created to give the show an edge at a time when other programs weren't really dealing with this subject matter. Susan was a jerk. So was Carol. Ross had been completely betrayed, lost his wife and marriage, and then to really kick him in the nuts, Carol gets pregnant and doesn't advise her new lover (who she had cheated with) to back the ef off a d give poor Ross a break. It was HIS kid...not Susan's. He had it right when he said every day is lesbian lover day.
I have a toddler and would feel horrified to be in Ross's situation. Susan only made it worse by showing very little to no compassion.
SilverLexiGirl wrote:
I loathed this storyline.I strongly prefer storyline in which Carol's pregnancy was deliberate and not accidental.If it was just accidental, then Carol almost undoubtedly cheated on Susan, and Susan has every right to be angry over that. That sort of randomness happens in life, and people make the best of it, but I prefer the scenario in which it was deliberate.Carol loved Ross, and in some sense, still loves him. I believe she insisted that Ross be the father of her child, and she certainly went out of her way to include Ross in the child's life over Susan's objection. Circumstances beyond Carol's control meant that she could not have a child with Ross and raise the child with Ross, and given that she is a lesbian, this is the best that she can do.She still has an attachment to Ross, and she keeps Ross in her life by way of their child. She doesn't just abandon him as if they had never been married.I like that story. share
Either way, Ross was fuc#$d over.
shareSilverLexiGirl wrote:
Either way, Ross was fuc#$d over.That Carol turned out to be a lesbian was no one's fault, and Ross does not blame her. Only a real idiot would.Carol did not in any sense fück over Ross in that regard. It was beyond her control. To expect Carol to not have sex with Susan until she is sure that she is a lesbian and sure that she wants to leave Ross is more than you can ask of a person.So, did Carol fûck over Ross in getting pregnant by him without his permission? You can certainly argue that, but there is no indication that Carol asks for any sort of child support, and I'm quite sure that if you asked Ross later, say after Ben was born, Ross would be happy that Carol did what she did. I don't think there's really any question about that.Ross deals with evolution professionally, and I know it would make sense to him, but it may not to you. Carol getting pregnant by him increased his reproductive success without any cost to himself. He passed on more of his genes to the next generation than he would've otherwise and at no cost to himself. That is a big win if you think about this in terms of natural selection.If you want to say that Ross was fúcked over by fate, I won't argue with you. share
I mean that Ross was fuc$#ed over emotionally, regardless of intent. Carol getting pregnant may or may not have been intentional...but she either cheated on him or used him to have a baby. Both equate to fuc#$ing over a person. And her not asking him for child support is not the issue...The issue was always Ross's emotions. Just because a person doesn't have to be financially responsible for a kid doesn't mean they aren't emotionally invested and bound to that kid. This means poor Ross got trapped into a situation where not only would he be limited to being an every-other-weekend dad, but also have to deal with Carol and her new lover. Just because Carol's new lover was a woman doesn't mean Ross wouldn't have felt the same amount of hurt, betrayal and inadequacy as any person left for someone else.
That's what I really meant by him being fuc$ked over.
SilverLexiGirl wrote:
I mean that Ross was fuc$#ed over emotionally, regardless of intent.My problem with your formulation is that "fùcked over" implies to me that something or person was doing the fùcking over whether intentionally or not. Ross was hurt by Carol leaving him, but it was beyond her control, and I cannot see that as Carol fùcking over Ross.
...but she either cheated on him or used him to have a baby.Well, she may have cheated on Susan, and she certainly used Ross to have a baby.
Both equate to fuc#$ing over a person.Most of the time I would agree, but I'm quite sure that fairly shortly Ross was glad that Carol had gotten pregnant. That produced a result that she wanted and that ultimately Ross wanted.Ross buys into, and is very happy about, the "I am going to be a father" thing very quickly.
The issue was always Ross's emotions.Sure. It was just an unfortunate fact that Carol turned out to be a lesbian. Such things happen in life. They are unfortunate, but they aren't anyone's fault.Ross is very unlucky a number of times. He married a woman who later realized she is lesbian. At probably the psychologically lowest point in his life, and right after he said that he wanted to be married, in walks the woman that he had a crush on in high school. That was really bad luck.Probably the only time in Ross's life that a hot woman comes onto him aggressively, it turned out to be the worst possible time.I don't believe that Carol fûcked over Ross, but Rachel certainly did for seven years simply because she wanted him to be available if she wanted him when she wanted to settle down.
This means poor Ross got trapped into a situation where not only would he be limited to being an every-other-weekend dad, but also have to deal with Carol and her new lover.But the alternative was Ben not existing at all. Perhaps we disagree, but I think that finally Ross was very, very happy that Ben exists and would not change it if he could.. If Carol did get pregnant by Ross deliberately, and she later told Ross that, there would certainly be some initial shock, but don't you think that ultimately Ross would be glad that she did it? I certainly do.
Just because Carol's new lover was a woman doesn't mean Ross wouldn't have felt the same amount of hurt, betrayal and inadequacy as any person left for someone else.That I disagree with emphatically. Ross was certainly badly hurt by the fact that Carol left him, but under the circumstances there was no question of betrayal or inadequacy on his part. She left Ross because she had decided that she is sexually attracted to women and not to men. That is not a rejection of Ross as a person for another man. They are not the same thing at all. share
Yeah, I'll just have to disagree. Homosexuality or not, leaving your spouse for another human being is a betrayal. Sorry, that's just a thing I feel falls under the umbrella of betrayal.
Ben's existence was certainly a blessing, as I feel all children are (that's just me though :) but his being born into that whole confusing situation where he doesn't get to experience being raised by his father kind of sucks. It's fine and dandy for Carol...but not for Ross, not really for Susan, and not for Ben. It's great when children are born and bring joy to their parents' lives, but that doesn't mean the circumstances under which it transpired were not hurtful or wrong to one or more of the parties. Carol did a bad thing either way. Good that it all worked out, but it's a t.v. show...In real life, this would be a fuc#ed up family dynamic.
I agree with you overall, but the reality is this is a sitcom, and not one that was intended to be, or was, a tightly written show, with any particular depth in any of the characters.
I find it ironic that a show that was clearly intended to be a.sitcom, called FRIENDS, of all things, and was clearly about friendship in its ups and downs, but more often ups, would be the topic of such contention.
Agreed. I watch Friends purely for the comedy and try not to get sucked into these arguments...but I fail every now and again, lol.
shareSilverLexiGirl wrote:
I watch Friends purely for the comedySure.
and try not to get sucked into these arguments.The thing is that we're really not arguing about the show as much as we are using incidents in the show to argue about more general things. share
Agreed back atcha :). It was obviously intended and written to be a comedy and to be entertaining, so it makes perfect sense those are the reasons you watch it.
The number of arguments, and vitriol, shown on this board - primarily by 3-4 people - is shocking to me. I've gotten sucked into it as well, nor realizing some topics were obviously emotional triggers for some, who are oddly obsessed, for whatever their reasons.
Doesn't it strike you as especially ironic, given the name of the show is Friends? :D
10 or so years ago I had a close friend who loves the show, and always watched when it aired. I'd only watched it here and there. One night I called asking if she wanted to get together and do something fun. At first she said Friends was on, then thought a moment and said it was pretty stupid to skip spending time with an actual friend to watch a TV show called Friends, LOL! That kind of awareness and sense of humor is why we were (real) friends.
catbookss wrote:
It was obviously intended and written to be a comedy and to be entertaining,Sure, and if that is all that you find there and the only reason that you watch it, that is your prerogative. But the fact that something is a comedy and entertaining does not exclude there being more serious aspects to it. That is frequently the case with comedy. You seem to be arguing that because it was "obviously intended and written to be a comedy and to be entertaining," everything in it must necessarily be just comedy and intended to be just entertaining. Even though that is not what we are shown. You are trying to impose your conception of what the program should be on what we are actually shown.
Doesn't it strike you as especially ironic, given the name of the show is Friends?It certainly strikes me as ironic, given the title, that these people are frequently rather bad friends to each other. With friends like Joey and Rachel and Phoebe (particularly late in the series), one certainly doesn't need enemies.This is actually quite true to real life. If these people were not living on top of each other, they would not be friends except perhaps in a very casual sense. They won't see each other very often after the group disperses. They are more an in group than a group of friends. share
As you've undoubtedly noticed, weeks ago, I've stopped responding to your posts, until now, and this will be my last. It's pointless, a waste of my time and energy, which I need to deal with serious issues going on in my life now, and this is beyond trivial, if you have nothing in your life going on that trumps trivial happenings in an old sitcom, count your blessings. Info, and then some.
I'd thought we were friends, for a year or more, albeit IMDb friends. Never did it occur to me that our friendship was based on agreement on all things. In real life Inhave friends, as well as family, whith whom don't agree on numerous things, yet never have they told me nor I told them, as you said to me, that I had no respect for them.
I find you completely unreasonable, unable and unwilling to find any kind of common ground, and very reactionary.
I'm certain you'll be unwilling to admit to ANY of the above, even though you admitted to me in priviate messages that you frequently thought your responses were absurd, having been made in the moment, for whatever emotional reaction you felt at the time. I don't blame you for feeling any of your feelings, but I fo expect you to take responsibility for them, and to realize this show is a sitcom, not a drama. Even if it WERE a drama, rather than a drama, it would be more understandable, although it would still be fiction and not to be taken anywhere NEAR as seriously as you (and 2-3 others) have taken it.
It's become very apparent to me that you have a serious problem with me disagreeing with your opinion while I have no problem with your disagreeing with mine.
I don't find replying to you, or you to me for that matter, to be of any value. This is why I haven't responded. You're free to respond further to me or not, although IMO the chances of there being any further exchange of any rationality and value is very low. As such , although I haven't yet put you on ignore, I'm very close to it
catbookss wrote:
It's pointless, a waste of my time and energy,That is exactly my position.
Never did it occur to me that our friendship was based on agreement on all things.It was never based on just agreement. It was based on the fact that we seemed to live in the same intellectual universe. And that we both seemed to agree about what constituts a legitimate argument, and that we both found the same crap to be crap.
yet never have they told me nor I told them, as you said to me, that I had no respect for them.I know a number of people that I have never told what I think of them or their opinions. Sometimes because I like them and don't want to offend them. Sometimes because I have to deal with them don't want to offend them.
I find you completely unreasonable, unable and unwilling to find any kind of common ground, and very reactionary.Very reactionary? I wonder what you mean by that?When it comes to whether or not Ross is a pathologically jealous, controlling person who has absolutely no reason to not trust Rachel, I don't think there is a common ground. Ross isn't. There is certainly no common ground about Mark. He is just an upscale Joey.
even though you admitted to me in priviate messages that you frequently thought your responses were absurd, having been made in the moment, for whatever emotional reaction you felt at the time.You are lying.What I recognize and have certainly cheerfully admitted is that I'm ridiculously persistent in dealing with people when I realized early on that there was no way to get through to them. But I keep trying for reasons that come out of my psychology.You have grossly distorted what I did say in a quite dishonest way, and I don't believe that you are just misremembering as I have reminded you of what I did say in this discussion. Lying is a very good reason to not have any respect for you.
and to realize this show is a sitcom, not a drama.It has much more drama in it that many sitcoms do. The core of the story is nine years of unrequited love. It is hard to make that funny unless it is a black comedy, and unfortunately, this isn't.
although it would still be fiction and not to be taken anywhere NEAR as seriously as you (and 2-3 others) have taken it.Again, you do not understand. I do not take what happens in the show seriously. I do take seriously that a number of people refuse to look at what is actually happening.I acknowledge that sometimes this is because they have never lived in a world anything like that in Friends. Some people seem to have never had the experience of being in the grip of compulsive, unrequited love, and almost no one is going to understand it unless they have experienced it as it doesn't make any sense.
It's become very apparent to me that you have a serious problem with me disagreeing with your opinionThe problem that I have is with the quality of the arguments that you use, and your refusal to acknowledge really simple things, such as Mark is after Rachel. And that Rachel did not make any serious effort to reassure Ross about Mark. She did not make the sort of effort that any normal person would make if they wanted to keep their relationship.I would be genuinely delighted to be shown a different and legitimate way to see what is going on, but instead I got from you a post that is almost identical in arguments, and sometimes even in phrases, to what probably more than a dozen posters have written, and that I've responded to in the past. You didn't say anything new; you just said all the old stuff that I have thought about and rejected for years.
As such , although I haven't yet put you on ignore, I'm very close to itWhatever. share
Yes. Sadly, these boards seem to be more interesting to many people when there is discord. The fun, funny or less dramatic posts don't seem to garner much interest. It's always the negative posts on here that you see with dozens of responses :(
shareI've noticed the same thing, in the short time I've been on this board, which is only because I've watched the whole series on Netflix, recently, because I'd missed quite a few episodes when it aired, and even in reruns.
I can only guess that this is for the same reason as people in general prefer dramatic and upsetting news on TV, versus news that's positive. Many people, for whatever their personal reasons, are attracted to the dramatic and negative, which is obviously the case for a few posters here. I can't say what drives them, because I don't know them well enough, but clearly something outside of and beyond this sitcom drives them, be it Immey, Pllkk, or Kodack, or anyone like them.
Maybe some have run out of things to say about the show, and I am surprised that a show this old is as active as it is, which must say something about its longevity and general appeal, but the vitriol so often shown here, particularly by these three posters is far beyond my understanding.
At least there are a few cool people here on this board. I'm just a big fan of the show and find myself drawn to this board because I don't know anyone else who really likes Friends, so it's fun to discuss it with other fans. Even if some of those fans are a bit obsessive :)
sharecatbookss wrote:
but the reality is this is a sitcom, and not one that was intended to be, or was, a tightly written show, with any particular depth in any of the characters.I am sure that the writers will be delighted to hear your opinion.
I find it ironic that a show that was clearly intended to be a.sitcom, called FRIENDS, of all things, and was clearly about friendship in its ups and downs, but more often ups, would be the topic of such contention.Except that the creators of the program included a lot of very dark material along with the comedy.If you just see a trivial comedy, I cannot help you. You are assuming that it is just a trivial comedy and arguing that therefore, everything in it must be comic rather than actually looking at what happens in the show. share
SilverLexiGirl wrote:
Sorry, that's just a thing I feel falls under the umbrella of betrayal.I do not understand how a person coming to recognize something about themselves – something that they have no control over – that makes their marriage false can be considered "betrayal."Ross does not consider it "betrayal." Ross is hurt by the situation, but he is not angry at Carol. He always gets along very well with her, and when he needs a shoulder to cry on, he goes to her. So, what do you think that Carol should've done? Remained married to Ross even after realizing that she is sexually attracted to women not men? Leave Ross because she is a lesbian but not get involved with a woman for some period of time even though she is in love with Susan?The world is a messy place, and things don't always work out according to ideal schemes. In leaving Ross for Susan, Carol did what almost all women would do under the circumstances, and I certainly don't blame her for it. Neither does Ross.Deliberately getting pregnant by man without his consent is a very, very questionable thing to do. In these particular circumstances, I do not blame Carol. She had been married to Ross for seven years, and she very badly wants the child that she is going to raise to be his. I understand how she feels, and I think that it is a quite legitimate thing to want. I like the idea that she is doing what she can to keep Ross in her life and not just discard him. I understand you see it differently.It would seem that you would prefer that Carol cut Ross out of the rest of her life. I don't think Ross would agree with that.
but his being born into that whole confusing situation where he doesn't get to experience being raised by his father kind of sucks.It is certainly far from ideal, but an awful lot of children are born into situations that are far from ideal. A number of children are raised without a father. Sometimes it is simply the woman's decision that she wants to do that. Sometimes that decision is because biological father is a rat. Sometimes the father leaves for another woman. These things happen all the time, and I'm not saying that they are trivial because they happen all the time, but it does put the situation in a certain perspective.Do you think that lesbians should never have children because it will never be a male-female household. If a lesbian uses a sperm donor, the biological father is completely out of the picture, so do you think that shouldn't happen.If a woman discovers that she is pregnant, but she has no intention to be involved with the father – let's assume she has good reasons for that – what should she do? Should she have an abortion because the child won't be born into an ideal situation. Should she have the baby and give the baby up for adoption – not a trivial thing to do physically or emotionally. Again, the baby is not going to know it's biological father.In this particular situation, things worked out as well as they could given that Carol is a lesbian. She raises the child of the man that she loved and married and I believe still, in a very real sense, loves. Ross becomes a father which he is delighted by. The circumstances aren't ideal from his point of view, but he is given the choice of being as involved or uninvolved as he wants to be and he chooses to be very involved.It is not as if Ross and Carol having a child and raising that child was ever an option.And Ben is raised in a stable household and knows his biological father.
...In real life, this would be a fuc#ed up family dynamic.I don't understand why you think that. Similar family dynamics occur all the time, and sometimes they are screwed up and sometimes they aren't. It depends on the people. I have a lot of confidence in both Ross and Carol and even Susan – after she calms down and has more confidence in her relationship with Carol. share
SilverLexiGirl —I believe that in time, probably not that much time, Susan will agree that Carol was right and that it is much better for Ben to know his father.But at the time, Susan is very afraid that Carol will go back to Ross, so of course she does not want him around.Before the sonogram scene Carol is telling Ross that she is pregnant:
Ross: Ah, well, in here, anyone who... stands erect... So what's new? Still, uh...Carol: A lesbian? Ross: Well... you never know. How's, um.. how's the family?Carol: Marty's still totally paranoid. Oh, and, uh-"Marty" does not exist in Friends. I think what has happened is that when Carol told Ross that she is a lesbian, she told Ross she is leaving him for someone named Marty to deflect possible anger from Susan.Ross has figured out that it is Susan, but he does not know what name to use when asking how she is and so he says "how's the family?"The point is that Carol responds that the woman she is involved with is "still totally paranoid." And that woman is Susan. share
I forgot to mention that I'm not interested in "your problem" with anything I wrote. This is a damn internet board...Anyone who has a problem with what someone else wrote here needs to get a life quick.
shareSilverLexiGirl wrote:
I forgot to mention that I'm not interested in "your problem" with anything I wrote.I was trying to explain to you what the formulation that you used means to me, and if you mean the same thing by it, why I disagree with your characterization.
Anyone who has a problem with what someone else wrote here needs to get a life quickLOLWOW. My dear, that is the nature of the Internet. To disagree with what someone else wrote. Or sometimes agree. I know that there are some of you who think that the Internet exists so that you can "express" your "opinion" which is important because it is your "opinion" and you do not like to have someone argue with you or expect you to defend your opinion.I have no interest at all in your opinions except in so far as you can defend them. I see the Internet as a place to debate things. A place to defend one's opinions and not just a place to express one's opinions.For me, unless it is an entirely subjective matter, an opinion is precisely something that you defend. It is not something that you just state although I know that there are quite a few of you who see things that way.I have heard it argued that this is a result of an educational system that stresses to children that they are unique and what they think is important. Even if their opinion is crap. I do not have an opinion on the accuracy of that theory, but things have changed dramatically since I was growing up as far as what having an opinion means.Someone actually wrote to me, "How can I possibly be wrong. It's my opinion." share
It was beyond her control. To expect Carol to not have sex with Susan until she is sure that she is a lesbian and sure that she wants to leave Ross is more than you can ask of a person.
Am I wrong in remembering that Carol and Susan told Ross he could be as little as much involved as he wanted to be?
The name thing yes, I can definitely see his point there, it should be Willick - Geller, or just Willick, but other than the name issue he was involved in prenatal check ups, visits to Susan's place to talk to the baby in utero and was allowed all the access he wanted after Ben was born.
Hello there!
I think that was the case. My problem with Susan was that she seemed to want to replace Ross. She let herself get involved in a marriage. Ok, it happens. That's a subject all it's own. But when you do that and then additionally try to interject yourself into a pregnancy that you had no part in to the point of trying to push one of the parents out of a place they wish to be in then I have a problem. Susan was perfectly capable of having her own child if she wanted one.
sharebarrabas wrote:
Am I wrong in remembering that Carol and Susan told Ross he could be as little as much involved as he wanted to be?That is exactly what Carol told Ross, and she then got Ross to come to a very early sonogram in, I believe, in an attempt to hook him on the idea of being a father. She succeeded.
The name thing yes, I can definitely see his point there, it should be Willick - Geller, or just Willick,I can certainly see Ross's point of view, but I can also see the point of view of the woman who is committed to raise the child and feels that she is being pushed aside because of Ross's one sperm cell. share
because of Ross's one sperm cell
x-wing_pilot —I remember you. I should've put you on ignore a long time ago but better late than never.
sharecw_squared wrote:
I've been married and had a couple of kids since seeing this and I can't imagine someone else trying to intervene in that.You are interpreting what happens in Friends in terms of your own situation, but your own situation probably has nothing to do with the situation in Friends.Let me suggest a situation that you have not been in that may help you to see this from Susan's point of view.You are not married. You don't have any children. And you meet a woman that you fall in love with and vice versa. She has recently ended a long term relationship in part because she wants children very badly, and her ex-boyfriend doesn't.You also want children, but it turns out that your sperm count is low and being able to father a child is problematical. You suggest using a sperm bank and your girlfriend agrees, but then she suggests that she could easily get pregnant by her ex boyfriend. He is intelligent, good looking, athletic, and she does not know of any genetic flaws in his family line.Would you be happy with that, or would you say "NO WAY." I would certainly not be comfortable raising the child of my girlfriends ex-lover if it was easily avoidable.Your girlfriend seems to accept that, but sometime later she announces that she is pregnant by her ex-boyfriend. You are willing to accept that, but it turns out that she intends to not only tell the ex-boyfriend but to include the ex-boyfriend in your family unit as the child's father.That is very close one view of the situation here. Would you sympathize with the rights of the ex-boyfriend as father? They are the same as Ross's. Or would you feel completely betrayed and walk? I am sure that I would. That is why I believe that Susan compromised and agreed to Carol having sex with Ross, probably only once, but did not expect her to actually get pregnant by Ross.Does that help you see things from Susan's point of view? Once again, I'm not saying that Ross is in any sense wrong; just that Susan has a legitimate position. share
Unless you have proof that Susan couldn't go get pregnant on her own then it makes no sense. If they planned the baby then why not find Susan a sperm donor and get pregnant with no attachments. And as gas as my own situation, I'm a father and step-father so I've seen this from more than one point of view. I respected the rights of my wife's ex and expected my rights as a father to be respected (thankfully I had no problem with that) One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the child. He deserves to know both parents and not have that decision made for him unless someone can show that one of those parents is dangerous.
sharecw_squared wrote:
If they planned the baby then why not find Susan a sperm donor and get pregnant with no attachments.Because you silly twit Carol very much wanted Ross to be the father of their baby. That shouldn't be that hard to understand.
He deserves to know both parents and not have that decision made for him unless someone can show that one of those parents is dangerous.Carol agrees with you. I believe that later on Susan almost undoubtedly agrees with that. But if you simply cannot understand why at that point Susan doesn't want Ross involved, you are showing remarkably little understanding of human psychology. share
Oh, I understand why she did what she did. But let me make my last statement. It doesn't matter why you do bad things like sleep with a married person or try to push the innocent person in a situation out of a space they have a right to be in then you're the villain in that situation. You are what you do.
And I might let that slide since all of us do a bad thing at some point in our lives but what puts the nail in the bitch coffin is the fact that she seems to feel no guilt or remorse about it. She instead has utter contempt for Ross when she should be backing off and maybe offering an apology. Sure, she got better later but never really apologized. It was Ross that offered the olive branch.
Just because she loved Carol and wanted to be involved in the birth it doesn't give her the right to be there over the father and former husband and it certainly gives her no right to treat him badly.
cw_squared wrote:
it doesn't give her the right to be there over the father and former husbandThat is how Susan feels betrayed by Carol. Susan did not want that situation to come up at all, but it did.Susan is having to deal with a situation that she wanted to avoid and that could've been easily avoided.Ross claims at least equal status with Susan – one of the women who has committed to raise the baby – very quickly.
Carol: No, I mean it's not Geller.Ross: What, it's gonna be Helen Willick?Carol: No, actually, um, we talked about Helen Willick-Bunch.Ross: Well, wait a minute, wha- why is she in the title?Susan: It's my baby too.Ross: Oh, 's'funny, really? Um, I don't remember you making any sperm.Susan: Yeah, and we all know what a challenge that is!Carol: All right, you two, stop it!Ross: No no no, she gets a credit, hey, I'm in there too.Ross thinks that he gets credit because of his one sperm cell. Susan thinks that she gets credit because she was in on this deliberate enterprise from the beginning and because she has made a very long-term commitment to the child.
and it certainly gives her no right to treat him badly.Susan certainly doesn't have any right to treat Ross the way that she does. The person that she is really angry at is Carol, but in a very human fashion she displaces that anger to the person that she doesn't want there even though it is not his fault.All I've been asking you to do is to see this from Susan's point of view and to understand that it is not as simple as "Susan is a bitch." If you understand what I have been saying, then you understand that Susan has a legitimate complaint and legitimate reason to be angry. True, not at Ross, but she has quite good reasons to not want Ross around. That seems to have been imposed upon her over her objection.Some people are able to put themselves in someone else's position and see the situation from that person's point of view. A surprising number of people who post here aren't. Even in very simple cases.Seeing the other person's point of view does not make that point of view right, but typically understanding a person's motivation, if you understand that it is legitimate, will soften one's judgment of the behavior.And realize that it is not as simple as the person is a bitch share
Ppluk you may still have me on ignore but everyone else can the see point i am about to make.
You have stated more than once that Carol wants Ross to be involved in the childs life.
You are also stating in every other post that Ross is a SPERM DONOR who contributed one sperm cell, and that Carol sees him as such.
You cant have it both ways. Stop contradicting yourself, and taking the show far too seriously.
More important stop treating it like its real life. It's MADEUPLAND and although you might think you do you don't live there and you can't read all the situations because the situations DO NOT EXIST.
it's getting silly now, the level of obsessed that some of these people are, and the way they discuss these characters as if theyre their next door neighbours or something and they know it all. Sheesh. Read a book or something instead.
**cArNiVaLs oF fAyGo**
Some people do take it too far and make things up or ignore things in the show or guess what a backstory is and consider that proof. Seeing as Carol told Ross she was pregnant early in the pregnancy, if she just viewed him as a sperm donor, she probably wouldn't have told him. We also don't see her asking for money, so I think you can gather that since she asked how involved he wanted to be and let him know when her doctor appointments were, from what happened on the show, she obviously wanted him to be involved.
It's like when people claim Carol only slept with Ross to get pregnant on purpose. There's nothing in the show that supports that, but that doesn't stop people from claiming it as fact. It's weird.
-
Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that I'll be over here looking through your stuff.
Moonlighty wrote:
or guess what a backstory is and consider that proof.Just for the record, I have never considered my speculation about the back story to be any sort of proof of it, and I have been clear about that frequently. I do think that my back story explains what is going on in the conflict between Ross and Susan, in particular how Susan feels about it, better than anything else that I know.I find it a much more satisfying and interesting explanation than, "Susan is a bitch."
from what happened on the show, she obviously wanted him to be involved.We are in complete agreement, for once. Can we agree that Susan did not want Ross involved?
It's like when people claim Carol only slept with Ross to get pregnant on purpose.The timeline suggests that is extremely unlikely that Carol got pregnant before moving out and in with Susan. If Carol slept with Ross without at least some sort of consent from Susan, she was cheating on Susan. Not impossible certainly, but I don't regard it is likely, and if that were the case, I believe Susan would be even more angry than she is. She probably wouldn't still be around.
There's nothing in the show that supports thatCarol and Susan are both very happy about the baby. They are both very happy about raising the baby. That could be the case even if the pregnancy were accidental, but their enthusiasm for raising a child suggests to me that it most likely wasn't.I don't believe we get any hint of ambivalence on their side. Not even the normal ambivalence, "Oh my God, we are going to have a baby. This is going to completely change our lives, and we aren't ready for this." The disagreement was about who the father should be.I don't know of anything in the show that makes it clear that the pregnancy was accidental. People assume that it was because Carol is leaving Ross, but she is entering into what she expects to be a long-term stable relationship with Susan.We know that Ross had sex with Carol once after she "became a lesbian" because Ross said so. I believe that Carol stopped having sex with Ross when she started to have sex with Susan and that was sometime before she moved out. Ross only knows that Carol is a lesbian when she moves out.If Carol wants Ross as the father, she has to move quickly before Ross acquires a girlfriend and would not have sex with her. Also, while she still has stuff in Ross's apartment, it is particularly easy to be alone with Ross in circumstances in which they can have sex.We are told in the pilot that Carol has just moved the last of her stuff out. share
Based on the dynamics in the season 1 relationship, it always seemed to me that Carol and Ross had a last romp when they were divorcing sometime prior to the pilot, resulting in the pregnancy.
This would mean that Carol did cheat on Susan, and that Susan was probably angry with Carol, but worked through it because of the way the whole thing went down (Them meeting when Carol was married to Ross, Carol discovering that she was a lesbian and cheating on Ross with Susan, then eventually leaving Ross FOR Susan).
I would even venture that Susan and Carol expected that when Ross found out about the pregnancy, they expected him to not be interested at all, hence the as little or as much involvement comments that were made.
They likely reasoned that he wanted nothing to do with them, and as an extension, nothing to do with the baby.
But regardless of the intentions, hows, or why's of how Carol came to be pregnant with Ben, she and Susan obviously knew about it before Ross, and they had decided that they were Ben's parents equally before Ross was informed or involved. This is where Susan's problem with Ross is formed.
Because Ross shows up and quick asserts his place in the situation as the father, and though Ross has that right, it does force Susan to move aside to make room for him. Raising Ben will no longer be 2 people making decisions, but 3. That's difficult.
It's even more complicated when you stop to realize that most of the time, it is Carol and Susan doing the day to day during the pregnancy, and thus, making decisions about names and such. They make the decisions and are happy with them, feel that they are done with that part, and then when Ross comes around, Susan is reminded, again rightfully, that Ross cannot be overlooked just because they don't feel like consulting him.
So yes, you can certainly sympathize with Susan on this. I never got the impression that she signed on for Ross' baby with Carol, or having Ross as a Co-Parent. Ross made sure that he got to be a Co-parent and did not let either Carol or Susan just walk all over him when they made a decision he disagreed with. I can see how this could leave Susan questioning her place in the parental role and in her relationship with Carol.
However, that also never gave her the right to try to push Ross out of his rightful role either, and this is where I think a lot of people have a problem.
The-Doll-Face —Thank you. We are definitely on the same page, and I cannot remember ever getting that much understanding of what I'm saying before.There are some details that we disagree about, but I will get back to that later. Hopefully not too much later.
However, that also never gave her the right to try to push Ross out of his rightful role either,Oh, I agree. But given that she didn't want Ross, or any man, to have that "rightful role," it is a quite normal and understandable human reaction.That is really what I'm saying. Susan is not just a bitch. She has a quite legitimate complaint, although it is with Carol not Ross.Susan seems to be quite afraid that Ross will go back to Carol, and having Ross around all the time as the biological father, does not reassure her.Very few people in a new relationship want their lover's ex-lover be a permanent part of their family group. Here that feeling overrides any sense of Ross's rights from Susan's point of view.I'm not saying that Susan's point of view is right; just that I find it easy to understand. share
And now the minor disagreements. The-Doll-Face wrote:
it always seemed to me that Carol and Ross had a last rompIn general, "goodbye" sex is quite a real possibility, but here, Carol is leaving Ross because she has come to realize she is not sexually attracted to men. I think that makes a romp less likely in addition to its being cheating on her new relationship.(Once, long after the break, when Rachel is trying to have sex with Ross, she actually argues that they never had" goodbye" sex and so they have the right to have it now. Ross doesn't go along with it.)
when they were divorcing sometime prior to the pilot, resulting in the pregnancy.I agree completely about the timing.
This would mean that Carol did cheat on Susan, and that Susan was probably angry with Carol,It is certainly possible, but if that were the case, Susan would have a lot of leverage to say, "Just don't tell Ross that you're pregnant." I don't feel the tension between Carol and Susan that would be there if Carol had gotten pregnant by Ross without some sort of agreement from Susan.
Carol discovering that she was a lesbian and cheating on Ross with Susan,I do not judge Carol for "cheating" on Ross given the circumstances. I don't know what else she could've done, and I am sympathetic about the situation that she found herself in.
I would even venture that Susan and Carol expected that when Ross found out about the pregnancy, they expected him to not be interested at all,I don't know. Carol knows Ross very well, and if she became pregnant deliberately, it was probably justified by knowing that Ross would quickly be enthusiastic. Carol certainly did everything that she could to hook Ross on being a father. She took him to a very early ultrasound. So early that they cannot determine the sex. There was no need for that except to hook Ross.
This is where Susan's problem with Ross is formed.Yep.
and though Ross has that right, it does force Susan to move aside to make room for him.It tends to put Susan in third place because she is the one without a biological relationship to the child, and Ross reminds her of that. If Susan was part of the original decision to have the baby, it is easy to understand why she is put out. She has certainly made the very serious and long-term commitment to raise the child, and I do not detect any ambivalence in her about that.
I can see how this could leave Susan questioning her place in the parental role and in her relationship with Carol.And realizing that Ross might well question her place in the parental role. I never got the impression that she was questioning her role with Carol, which is a major reason why I think the pregnancy was deliberate and with some degree of Susan's acceptance.I like the possibility that Carol and Susan were locked in disagreement over the father, and since Carol had to move quickly if Ross was going to be the father, one of them suggested the compromise that Carol gets one crack at getting pregnant by Ross, and if that doesn't work, they use a sperm donor. I believe that fits what we do know. Susan is not complaining that she was completely betrayed by Carol, but she did not expect, and is not happy, with the result. share
Susan would have a lot of leverage to say, "Just don't tell Ross that you're pregnant
I do not judge Carol for "cheating" on Ross given the circumstances. I don't know what else she could've done, and I am sympathetic about the situation that she found herself in.
I don't know. Carol knows Ross very well, and if she became pregnant deliberately, it was probably justified by knowing that Ross would quickly be enthusiastic. Carol certainly did everything that she could to hook Ross on being a father. She took him to a very early ultrasound. So early that they cannot determine the sex. There was no need for that except to hook Ross.
The-Doll-Face wrote:
In fact, I'm pretty sure it would have hurt their relationship should something like this have occurred.Oh, absolutely. As far as leverage goes, "You cheated on me and got pregnant. You know I don't want Ross is the father. Make it as right as you can or I am walking."
This is not the kind of ultimatum that normal people give in a healthy relationship.Well, if Carol did cheat on Susan and get pregnant by Ross knowing that was not what Susan wanted, that is not the sort of thing that happens in a normal healthy relationship.
I would like to think that Carol was honest with Ross pretty quickly when she realized what her orientation was.I don't know. I suspect it is highly individual. It may have taken Carol a long time to be sure and a long time to be sure that she wanted to change her lifestyle and that way.
Ross would have been devastated by losing his wife, but I don't think he would be angry with her because she was born with her sexuality.I agree completely, and he doesn't blame Carol. I'm always surprised that people who do.
I would be more inclined to judge Carol if the story was that she knew or suspected prior to Susan, and then spent the year prior to the pilot cheating before leaving Ross.The flashback in 3:6 is three years earlier. Carol has just recently met Susan then.
If Carol and Susan decided to have a baby, and Carol insisted that it be Ross' with the intention that Ross be an involved father, why wasn't he told up front?Because he might well have refused and then there is nothing that Carol could do. Susan was adamantly insisting that the father could be anyone but Ross.
If the idea was for him to be involved from the beginning,Carol certainly intended to involve Ross as soon after she became pregnant as she could. Carol strongly suspects how Ross will react to the fait accompli, but she cannot have been sure. Also, she has to deal with Susan who doesn't want Ross as the father.Carol wants Ross as the father, preferably as an involved father. Susan does not want Ross as the father and certainly not as an involved father. In time, this resolves itself, but at the beginning of the show, there is no way to reconcile these opposing points of view and have everyone be happy. Carol is doing the best she can to balance them, but she knows how Susan feels, and she knows that Susan has a legitimate complaint. I believe that is why Carol does not criticize the way that Susan is treating Ross. share
Well, if Carol did cheat on Susan and get pregnant by Ross knowing that was not what Susan wanted, that is not the sort of thing that happens in a normal healthy relationship.
It may have taken Carol a long time to be sure and a long time to be sure that she wanted to change her lifestyle and that way.
The flashback in 3:6 is three years earlier. Carol has just recently met Susan then.
Because he might well have refused and then there is nothing that Carol could do
The-Doll-Face wrote:
I'm simply saying that once she knew for sure, I don't think she would have prolonged the relationship while she had an affair with Susan.When do you know for sure? And even when you think that you are sure, it is a big step to come out as a lesbian, leave Ross, and completely change your lifestyle.
Which again suggests that two people who decided to trick Ross into this whole thing has something wrong with them.Not two people at all. One person, Carol. I believe that Susan was completely opposed to it, but somehow went along with it. I am quite sure Susan wanted Bobo, the anonymous sperm donor, as the father.I have a lot of sympathy for Carol who left Ross for reasons that came out of her own psychology, not out of their relationship, wanting Ross to be the father if she is going to raise a child. I don't see anything wrong with that.So, she did what she had to do to bring about that result, being sure that Ross would ultimately be all right with it. I'm certainly not saying that Carol had the right to do that, but I believe the results were better than if Bobo had been the father.Carol has the father that she wants for her child and maintains a relationship with Ross. Ross has a child that he is delighted to have and would not have had under other circumstances. And Ben has his father in his life which would not have been the case if his father were Bobo.Carol would hardly be the first woman who intentionally got pregnant without the man's agreement. There is even an example in the Bible.It was certainly questionable from an ethical point of view, but ultimately it was a win for everyone. share
The-Doll-Face —One way to summarize my attitude toward all of this is that Carol has been given lemons, and she is doing her damnedest to make lemonade. Some people criticize her because she's not making lemon chiffon pie, but she just doesn't have the ingredients.Part of my bias in this is that I simply prefer the story in which Carol wants the father of her child to be the man that she loved and married, and to keep him in her life in this way.That the pregnancy was accidental and the result of cheating is just not a story that I am interested in. I believe the evidence supports the former, but I admit my own bias may well be a factor.
share[deleted]
NatalieWoodForever wrote:
Like Ross said, Susan was not there when the baby was conceived.No, but if I am correct that the pregnancy was quite intentional, and that Susan reluctantly agreed to give Carol a chance to get pregnant by Ross – otherwise Carol was cheating on Susan – then there is a sense that it was as much her enterprise as Carol's. Ross really had no part in it except for one sperm cell. There was no intention on his part to produce a child.The two women wanted a child to raise and Carol insisted that Ross be the father. That was not what Susan wanted.There are earlier posts in this thread that will explain that point of view to you. share
[deleted]
NatalieWoodForever wrote:
If Carol didn't want Ross to be the father then she should not have told him she was pregnant.Oh, I think that Carol definitely wanted Ross to be the father and to be actively included in the child's life.It was Susan who did not want Ross to be the father or be included in the child's life. She did not want her lover's ex-lover included in their family unit as the father of the child that they are raising. Very few people would.Part of this is that Susan is very insecure in her relationship with Carol. She is terrified that Carol will go back to Ross. As Susan comes to have more confidence in her relationship with Carol, she calms down.Another part of this is that if Bobo, the anonymous sperm donor, is the biological father, then no one has a claim on the child except Carol and Susan, and they will have to work out things between themselves. But when Ross comes in for having unknowingly contributed a sperm cell, Susan is afraid that it pushes her into third place as the one who does not have a biological relationship with the child.I believe the conflict over who the father is going to be goes back to before Carol became pregnant. They decided that they wanted to raise a child together, probably after they've been living together for at least a little while, and Carol wanted the father to be the man that she loved, married, lived with for seven years and still very much cares about.Susan does not want a third person in their relationship, not unreasonably. Thus she wanted Bobo as the father.Somehow Carol prevailed and got pregnant by Ross, but Susan is really not happy about it. She doesn't want Ross there, and she doesn't want Ross in her relationship with Susan. It is not fair that Susan takes her frustration at the way things worked out on Ross – it was certainly not his fault – but it is a very human reaction that I find easy to understand.Susan would've been quite happy if Carol had not told Ross. That was one possible compromise, but Carol very much wants Ross in the child's life – and I believe to some degree in her life – thus she took Ross to a very early sonogram, Episode 2 – they do not know the baby's sex until Episode 12 – in order to hook him on the idea of being a father. She succeeded. Susan is pissed.She committed to raising a child with Carol, but I don't believe she expected it to be the child of Carol's ex-husband. share
Same here. I've watched the show many times and I still hate her. She was just an irrational character in my opinion.
sharesimbaforlyfe wrote:
She was just an irrational character in my opinion.Do you understand what Susan is angry and upset about? I have spent a certain amount of time above trying to explain that, and I believe she has very good reasons to be angry and upset.If you actually understand why Susan is angry and upset about the way things are going, and you still think that she is just irrational, I would suggest that is the way that human beings are. As I said, Susan has very good reasons to be upset and angry. Not at Ross, it is true, but she did not want Ross to be the father of the baby, and does not want Ross there. That is completely rational from her point of view. share
I already read some of your responses, so I'm aware of your point of view. However, I still don't like her and I still think she's a controlling irrational bitch. You don't have to agree, but I'm not going to debate with you about this.
sharesimbaforlyfe wrote:
However, I still don't like herThat is your right.
and I still think she's a controlling irrational bitch.Then I believe you don't understand the situation she is in. Or, if you do, you are the irrational one.
but I'm not going to debate with you about this.I am glad to hear that. share
You can understand a situation and still think the person is disgusting and wrong.
Susan was in a tough situation. It in no way excuses her behavior. That's all there is too it.
Precisely!
shareCursedchild13 wrote:
You can understand a situation and still think the person is disgusting and wrong.Of course you can. Or it can make you more sympathetic about the person if you understand the situation. For me, it all depends on the situation. I think that Susan has been systematically maligned by people who don't understand what's going on because they only see it from Ross's point of view.
It in no way excuses her behavior.I don't think that I've ever said "excused." I believe it does "explain" her behavior in a way that just calling her a bitch doesn't. It may well be that I am less judgmental and more tolerant of less than ideal human reactions to difficult situations than you are.For example, I do not regard Carol having sex with Susan while still living with Ross as "cheating." At least not as something that I condemn. I believe you disagree.Life is messy. We do the best that we can with what we have. And it is not always ideal. share