Members Mr. Vixen Posted February 1, 2011 Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 +1. This character means nothing to any of us. She never needed to be created, and if they insisted, she should have been left in Ireland. It would have made FAR more sense for the Balkan to go after Liz. Becuase even if Lucky is still pissed at her, they share a special connection (and children). It's not very believeable that Lucky would care this much about someone he met less than six months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted February 1, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 Hey, I love new pets as much as the next, but come on! The actress who plays Siobahn is dull, the character is dull, the story is dull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mr. Vixen Posted February 1, 2011 Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 Agree. The only thing she has going for her is looks. She's cute. Maybe if they have her loose that accent (not likely, though look at Mac, LOL), she would be better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted February 1, 2011 Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 LOL I agree, but when aren't Guza's pets dull? Jason, Sonny, Carly, Brenda......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members quartermainefan Posted February 1, 2011 Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 Because the character was burdened with too many kids to star in a story. When was the last time Liz was in a scene and did not mention one of her boys? We have to go back years probably. This is just what happens to soap characters who have kids that remain on the show. Carly got a brood, and when was the last time she had a story not about Michael or Josslyn or giving birth in general? Alexis ditto. When was the last time she had a story that was not about her daughters? And this isn't really a new event. Ten years ago Felicia would star in little stories and inevitably it turned into her getting grief from Mac for abandoning her girls. Screw the girls, she needed a story. Tracy had a kid, who ever saw Ned before he was an adult? Soaps had it right years ago. Monica had kids, they got shipped to boarding school. Erica Kane had a kid, and she lost custody and Bianca moved out west with her father, only to return periodically. I just don't see any way a character like Liz can star in stories without having to address in literally every scene that while she is starring in a story, her kids are home alone. GH needs to kill the kids or do a rapid SORAS like DOOL did with Belle or Chelsea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cheap21 Posted February 1, 2011 Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 Ignore the kids. They conveninetly get left with Audrey whenever necesary. If they were to use Liz in this Balkan story, they could have easily written them out by having Liz sending them off to spend a few months with grandma Laura to protect them. Kids are a burden but saying they are a reason she has no viability is an excuse bc there are ways around them. Unfortunately GH doesnt know how to handle them and instead only seems to portray women as being bad mothers. Liz could have easily been used in Siobhan's place, but instead they are wasting her on Brook and Nik which is doing her no favors at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted February 1, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 I don't get why it's a bad thing for soap characters to raise their kids and have a story that may/may not revolve around their children? I'm not saying that what they are doing to Liz and other female characters with kids isn't awful, but the answer to kids on soaps isn't always "Put 'em in boarding school! They're a burden!" I don't agree with TIIC's baby crazy breeder mentality, but not everyone wants to watch female characters in a string of endless conversations about lame adultery and lame spy adventures while wearing furs and diamonds for brunch. I think both sets of thinking are misogynistic and hackneyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted February 1, 2011 Members Share Posted February 1, 2011 The problem I have with the kids = no story is that Carly has three children and she has dominated airtime for years and years. She has stories about Michael, yes, but only superficially - they use her relationship with Michael in order to justify having her as a plot device (going after Dante and Brenda "for Michael"). And most of the women who don't have kids still are not getting any real storyline. The women on GH are incredibly weak and exist only to be fluffers for dull, emo male characters. Sam, Siobhan, Brenda, Lulu, they are just wan and when they're not wan, they're shrill or stupid. Then you have other characters like Maxie who are just off in the wild somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted February 2, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 But CarlD2, do you agree or disagree that female characters having kids on the canvas isn't the problem, it's the way those stories are written? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DRW50 Posted February 2, 2011 Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 I agree that having kids isn't the problem. It's just lazy, offensive writing from people who have no idea how to write for any women, childless or not. I also don't think that Felicia was damaged as a character by having children. She was damaged by trashy stories and by the show's need to endlessly punish her by having her children rake her over the coals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members dragonflies Posted February 2, 2011 Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AllMyDaysatGH Posted February 2, 2011 Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 So wait, all this drama over Brenda and this baby, and all the while she miscarried it? I don't understand why she had to lie to Sonny about this, something that significant and painful. Especially if the baby was Alexander's. Dante's only involvement is that he signed the papers. Maybe there's more to this, like why did she even pass out in the first place and how far along was she in the pregnancy? Is she lying about something? Who knows Don Dimples has been M.I.A for a mighty long time!! It's been great! Watch him be on tomorrow, LOL. I can't believe that troll baby is still lying to Lulu even after they broke up! He had the chance to tell her everything and he still continues to lie. What a loser! Lulu needs to stay away from him. She is humiliating herself by still even interacting with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alexisfan07 Posted February 2, 2011 Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 Just watched the Michael rape confession scenes on YouTube...HOLY CRAP. SOMEONE GIVE CHAD AN EMMY IMMEDIATELY. Burton was great, too. Was Jason raped at some point, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members R Sinclair Posted February 2, 2011 Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 It's "end-stage" babes , as in the END! And you're right, it's not a one-shot deal. The PEP regimen is prescribed for 28 days. I was disappointed with the fact that they didn't address this, but then again, Jason may be lots of things on this show, but he's no doctor. No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bellcurve Posted February 2, 2011 Author Members Share Posted February 2, 2011 It was END-STAGE? Ineptitude has a name on February 2, 2011 and he's indeed bellcurve. LOL. I thought it was N-Stage for some reason. Shows how much this homo knows about HIV/AIDS beyond Trojanisms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.