thats too big of a stretch. When Jason and Courtney broke up, the show had JUST put Sonny with Sam. Sonny and Sam were the rooting couple and GH was really pushing them. There were NO plans for her and Jason as a couple when all of this started. That didnt come till much later when Sonny/Sam didnt do as well as TPTB expected them too. Jason and Courtney were not split up for the intention of putting him with Sam nearly a year later.

It is a gigantic stretch. But who is to say that Jason wasn't their back up plan. Sam's pregnancy was used to put Jason and Sam together. But okay so Jason and Courtney were not sacrificed for Jason and Sam. My point is simply that part of soaps is breaking couples up and putting other ones together. Call it sacrifice or story telling. The end result is the same.

And you really don't see anything wrong with a toddler seeing two men point a gun at his mother? This is okay because they were paid actors. If we suspend soap fiction for a minute and pretend this was real, then it's okay for a jilted lover to play this sort of revenge games involving kids? If police had come along not knowing it was just a little lesson for Elizabeth, and they shot and missed and hit one of the kids, that would be okay. If Cam had nightmares because he saw men threatened his mother, that would be okay. Maybe you're looking at it from the point of view that it was a controlled situation and it made Sam look like a hero. Maybe other people are seeing it as problematic because innocent children were involved and there was a potential for the seemingly controlled situation to go out of control.

Yes, BUT, let's not forget that her motivation was to keep Liz away from Jason, which is temporaily working (I mean, we all know it won't last long, but theorietically). So in a way, I think Sam did those kids a huge favor. You think they wouldn't be surrounded by danger if they lived with Jason? There would be guns, guards, and occasionally having to hide out from men who target families. So yes, Sam showed them danger, but Jason will show them a whole lot more (well, again not technically, because Jason is God, but realistically).

And finally for the love of God shes not playing Lucky just for the fun of it. Shes doing it to protect her kids. And I don't see how that makes Liz a bad person or some kinda of villian. It may not be right and it may not be smart but it definitely doesn't equal the horrible crap that Sam or Lucky has pulled.

I would agree with you if she had kept the secret entirely to herself. I mean, it is definitely in the best interests of Jake and the whole family if everyone thinks he is Lucky's. But she *didn't*. If she really cared about Jake's safety, or her marriage, she should have literally not told a single soul.

Now probably about a dozen people know, the truth is bound to get out, and Lucky will be devastated, and her son put in danger.

This is not some recent terrible change in the history of GH either. There are probably people who will argue that Scotty and Laura were a sweet couple and they were sacrificed for Luke and Laura. Luke was pretty shady and he raped Laura with some good explanation mind you, and they called it a seduction. The two of them went off to have many adventures and they called them the first super couple on a soap and they have a place in US Soap history. Please tell me why the sacrificing of couples today is such a big deal when it's been going on for years and people seemingly enjoyed it for years when the ratings were stellar. They may not be telling the story as best they can but how is it not classic soap?

Yes, I agree that sacrificing one couple is certainly not a new phenomenon. And of course I don't have a problem with a couple ending temporarily. This is a soap opera, and they are all bound to split up at certain points. What I *do* have an issue with is when they pretend that the couple never reallly loved each other in the first place. IE, Ric's confession that he never really loved Alexis, pretending that Liz has loved Jason since they were teenagers and hasn't felt anything for Lucky in ages. That's how I define sacrificing a couple. The denial by TIIC that they had a real relationship to begin with, just so they don't have to look bad for the next relationship.

Edited September 4, 200718 yr by Graciecat

As for your explanation of Babe vs Elizabeth. Babe was in the dark up until a point but once she found out that wasn't her baby then she was obligated to return the child to her mother. Withholding a child from her mother is a whole lot worse and more painful than a lying about the paternity of a child. Neither is right, but if you are going to compare them and put them on the same scale then what Babe did once she found out the chiild was not hers was worse than Elizabeth lying to Lucky.

The difference to me is motivation. I don't understand why Elizabeth is lying to Lucky. I don't feel sympathy for the situation she has put herself in. I don't even feel as if Elizabeth loves Lucky. Rebecca's acting choices don't even have me believing that Liz has any sort of romantic feelings towards her husband at all over all in this entire triangle they have me seeing Elizabeth as using Lucky as a safety tool to protect the kids from Jason's mob life then anything else. The writing seems to suggest that she loves Lucky still but i'm just not seeing it.

As to Babe, I am really not sure what relevance this has to GH. But I'll say my thoughts on the subject. Babe didn't willingly steal Miranda. She didn't even know for several months and by the time she found out she fell in love with a child that she believed was hers as well as she was grieving for a son that she thought died and in her grief kept a child that she loved and believed was her own. Was that wrong. Yes. But IMO more understandable then Liz's current situation because I see no real motivation to her lies. All I see is her using Lucky I see none of her love for him nor do I really even see a conflict in her lying to him. Even when she is in the wrong she is still acting morally superior to him and she is acting as if she has a right to do what she is doing when she doesn't.

The difference to me is motivation. I don't understand why Elizabeth is lying to Lucky. I don't feel sympathy for the situation she has put herself in. I don't even feel as if Elizabeth loves Lucky. Rebecca's acting choices don't even have me believing that Liz has any sort of romantic feelings towards her husband at all over all in this entire triangle they have me seeing Elizabeth as using Lucky as a safety tool to protect the kids from Jason's mob life then anything else. The writing seems to suggest that she loves Lucky still but i'm just not seeing it.

Liz's reasons are the very same reasons you used to justify Sam's terror plot in the park -- JASON'S LIFE IS DANGEROUS! Sam staged that kidnapping to play on the very fear Elizabeth has expressed as to why Jake's paternity is a secret... she's afraid Jake will be targeted to get to Jason. What is there not to get? Sam was hoping by playing on that fear, it would force the truth about Jake out.

And I don't think Elizabeth has any true romantic feelings towards Lucky. She loves him, but she's not IN LOVE with him, so I think Becky's choices are right on. She's playing it as if she's with someone who's familiar and share a past, but there's a distance between them. There is a lot of dirty, "mucky" (pun not intended, but so very fits) water that they've been trying to bridge for a year. Jason's her hero, but Lucky's her safety net. It's a human decision. A woman is making a decision she feels is the safe decision.

As to Babe, I am really not sure what relevance this has to GH.

Again, I brought up Babe because you're in love with the character and I was interested why you're able to justify and rationalize her actions until her precious COWS come home, but you wanna have Liz stripped and publicly flogged.

Yep Liz and Lucky are like an old shoe, comfortable. They haven't haven't had "it" since JJ left.

Yeah I'm curious to know that myself. Why Sam is practically cheered on, yet Liz is villified

The difference to me is motivation. I don't understand why Elizabeth is lying to Lucky. I don't feel sympathy for the situation she has put herself in. I don't even feel as if Elizabeth loves Lucky. Rebecca's acting choices don't even have me believing that Liz has any sort of romantic feelings towards her husband at all over all in this entire triangle they have me seeing Elizabeth as using Lucky as a safety tool to protect the kids from Jason's mob life then anything else. The writing seems to suggest that she loves Lucky still but i'm just not seeing it.

As to Babe, I am really not sure what relevance this has to GH. But I'll say my thoughts on the subject. Babe didn't willingly steal Miranda. She didn't even know for several months and by the time she found out she fell in love with a child that she believed was hers as well as she was grieving for a son that she thought died and in her grief kept a child that she loved and believed was her own. Was that wrong. Yes. But IMO more understandable then Liz's current situation because I see no real motivation to her lies. All I see is her using Lucky I see none of her love for him nor do I really even see a conflict in her lying to him. Even when she is in the wrong she is still acting morally superior to him and she is acting as if she has a right to do what she is doing when she doesn't.

Really, if Elizabeth had done what Babe did to Sam who is not even her friend, Elizabeth would be the scum of the earth and then some and you wouldn't make excuses for her. This is the way I see it and I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong. Just like if Elizabeth had hired thugs to threaten Sam and her children, you would be villifying Elizabeth for that. Because Sam did it then it's fine. If Sam were the one lying to Lucky, she would be justified end of story. It really boils down to who you like and who you hate. Hate them and any and everything they do is horrid. Love them and they're misunderstood or rightfully angry, etc. Now if you were a woman in a park with guns pulled on you in front of your kids and you later find out they were toy guns and some disturbed woman was trying to teach you a lesson, I'm sure you will empathize with her. Luckily, this is only soap opera silliness but I'm sure if a woman scorned did such a thing, people reading about it wouldn't all side with the nut job because children were involved.

I can't really say anything if yoiu think lying about a child's paternity is worse than letting a mother believe her child is dead.

Now we do agree in part on Elizabeth. There was a point where they could have had her tell the truth and elected not to (clearly because they want this to drag on longer). They invalidated her motivation being about protecting Lucky from a relapse when Ric planted the pills. They had her compound the lie when she remarried Lucky and it comes across as her being with him for her children and because she doesn't want to raise them on her own. It's both wrong and selfish because Lucky should be allowed to make that choice for himself.

I didn't really like Elizabeth when the character was introduced and that was because she was bad and Sara was the good girl. but then Sara was boring and there was more character development potential in Elizabeth. I did empathize with her as a character when she got raped and I did really like how they told her and Lucky's story. I saw a shift when she and Jason became friends and I noticed that all the trust, etc that she had with Lucky was given to Jason. Since then the show hasn't sold me on this enduring love of Lucky and Elizabeth because they skipped years where they could have worked on it. For the longest time they seemed to be suggesting that Elizabeth had this enduring love for Jason. They could easily have made her go back to Lucky and then let Lucky lead to some brief thing with Ric and Zander but they only chose to fall back on them as first love to jumpstart their addiction s/l.

The writing suggests that she loves Lucky and that's forever but she isn't in love with or passionate towards Lucky and that's been the case for years. The major problem in the writing was that they had this two or three year span where they decided to make it seem as if the Jason/Elizabeth friendship was either non-existent or not that serious for the sake of promoting their other storylines and now it appears to some people that they are coming out of the blue. Had they kept their relationship intact while showing them in their respective relationships then it wouldn't have been as shocking to some. But it might have affected their ability to tell their stories effectively.

Edited September 4, 200718 yr by Wales2004

This is the way I see it and I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong.

Just like if Elizabeth had hired thugs to threaten Sam and her children, you would be villifying Elizabeth for that. Because Sam did it then it's fine. If Sam were the one lying to Lucky, she would be justified end of story.

Now we do agree in part on Elizabeth. There was a point where they could have had her tell the truth and elected not to (clearly because they want this to drag on longer). They invalidated her motivation being about protecting Lucky from a relapse when Ric planted the pills. They had her compound the lie when she remarried Lucky and it comes across as her being with him for her children and because she doesn't want to raise them on her own. It's both wrong and selfish because Lucky should be allowed to make that choice for himself.

I definetely will.

I'm not saying that Sam wasn't wrong in trying to scare Liz. She very much was. She is the villian in this story no doubt. Me I perfer the villian then the heroine at this point and alot of it has to do with my hatred of how this story is written and how eveyone was detroyed to make Liz and Jason look better by comparision. Sam was wrong for scaring Liz. There's no way around that. She shouldn't have done it and she was morally wrong. ow that I got that out of the way, that doesn't make me not like Sam or not enjoy her character. I persoanlly am rooting for Sam because I want Lizzie's lies to be exposed and for her to be publically lashed for lying to Lucky about the paternity of Jake. I want Liz's entire life to explode in front of her doe eyes and I want to see her big fat masscare tears running down her face. I want her to beg and plead not for Lucky to leave and then watch as he walks out on her and leaves her a bumbleing hysteric mess just because I can't stand her character at this point and time and I think she is just as bad as Carly and Maxie are and she needs some type of emotional slap across her face.

Sam is clearly the villian. Elizabeth is the "heroine" however it's just not coming across that way for me (and other veiwers as apparent by this long discussion)

I see no motivation for Elizabeth and I see no real reason to feel sorry for her or to understand her. Ultimately she has no real reason to lie to Lucky about this and that's why I can't root for her.

I definetely will.

I'm not saying that Sam wasn't wrong in trying to scare Liz. She very much was. She is the villian in this story no doubt. Me I perfer the villian then the heroine at this point and alot of it has to do with my hatred of how this story is written and how eveyone was detroyed to make Liz and Jason look better by comparision. Sam was wrong for scaring Liz. There's no way around that. She shouldn't have done it and she was morally wrong. ow that I got that out of the way, that doesn't make me not like Sam or not enjoy her character. I persoanlly am rooting for Sam because I want Lizzie's lies to be exposed and for her to be publically lashed for lying to Lucky about the paternity of Jake. I want Liz's entire life to explode in front of her doe eyes and I want to see her big fat masscare tears running down her face. I want her to beg and plead not for Lucky to leave and then watch as he walks out on her and leaves her a bumbleing hysteric mess just because I can't stand her character at this point and time and I think she is just as bad as Carly and Maxie are and she needs some type of emotional slap across her face.

Sam is clearly the villian. Elizabeth is the "heroine" however it's just not coming across that way for me (and other veiwers as apparent by this long discussion)

I see no motivation for Elizabeth and I see no real reason to feel sorry for her or to understand her. Ultimately she has no real reason to lie to Lucky about this and that's why I can't root for her.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. I don't see Elizabeth as a heroine in this but if you're comparing Sam and Elizabeth in those terms then Ellizabeth comes out slightly better. Motherhood probably makes her a more sympathetic character at this point. I'm not rooting for any of the characters because they're all dishonest and I don't feel like justifying one of them over the other so I'll take the entertainment as long as it's there. I hope at the end of this they strengthen Lucky's character.

I can't see you getting your wish about Elizabeth though because if she is not in love with Lucky then losing him is not going to hurt her. You probably have a better chance at seeing her cry a river over not going off with Jason in the first place. Unless she sheds some fake tears for the demise of her marriage but let's face it, she's not trying to make it work. When the truth comes out it will set her free basically, Even if she gets hit with perjury charges and has to do time, she'll still be free and that will place her in heroine/martyr status.