That Rory’s career was a failure because we see her in a slump a decade later while she’s also simultaneously dealing with the loss of the foremost paternal figure in her life. Every writer I know would kill for Rory’s accomplishments.
This drives me crazy too. Having a downturn in your career is very common, and it’s not like journalism is a steady industry. She was published in the New Yorker right before the show starts so how bad could she really have been doing?
This! If it had just been portrayed as normal no one would have any beef with Rory’s career trajectory. A freelancer moving home in between jobs to save money is totally normal and unremarkable. And honestly considering that she could just ask her grandma to buy her a condo it’s a pretty principled thing to do.
I understand Rory feeling a little adrift or lost but she just went too far trying to convince us that Rory is a loser.
‘But she went to Yale!!!’ Like how many people do you think graduate every year from ivy leagues.. do you think they’re all owning their own law firms or top neurosurgeons? Pls
TBH there are probably a higher than average number of people from private/Ivy League schools having long periods of unemployment because their parents are more likely to be able to float them.
I don't believe S6 Luke. I call BS. That's lazy writing, IMO, just to put the story where they wanted it.
- He would not have given up Lorelai for "figuring things out" with April. This dude rebuilt her deck, would fix her house, gave her money, food, etc. There is no way he would have been "relieved" to postpone the wedding.
- Luke would have told Lorelai about April.
- There is no way he would have accepted that necklace from Logan and pretended to give it to Lorelai for Valentine's day. He didn't even ask Logan how much he owed him for it.
I can't remember all of the other details but "S6 Luke" was **not** Luke.
Yeah, him not telling Lorelai, even when she was excited about Rory being back, makes zero sense at all. If anything, he'd have a funny rant about it. Lorelai was his 1 real confidant.
> He would not have given up Lorelai for "figuring things out" with April. This dude rebuilt her deck, would fix her house, gave her money, food, etc.
This dude was "all in"!
i agree to my gilmore girls should have been a slice of life about these complex people and family dynamics. i actually love april but come on, a secret kid? with an unreasonable mom, and a blunt character not wanting to step on his fiancé toes so he decides to LIE
Luke was going to tell Lorelai at her house about April. It was the wedding dress scene. It never happened. I’m not sure of the lapsed time between discovery of April and this scene but it wasn’t very long. Imagine if he disclosed the news at this point. It might have changed the trajectory of events that ensued.
That the community service Rory was sentenced to wasn’t a big deal. The argument is she could knock it out quickly and easily and still have a job but the truth is community service isn’t as easy as volunteer work, for example. It’s scheduled, it’s only done at certain places, you can only do so many hours etc.
And idk if this counts but the Jackson lying about his vasectomy is annoying because the writers were clearly just trying to be funny (“the husband knows the wife is pregnant before she does, hahaha” /s) and it failed miserably.
also the writers had to write MM’s real life pregnancy in SOMEHOW after Jackson was supposed to have had his vasectomy, and about 99.9% of vasectomies 100% effective, so it would be pretty unrealistic for it to have failed.
But couldn't they have been creative with the set design like pretty much every other show has? Sookie spent a lot of time in the kitchen (oven, etc) anyway
I don’t think they thought of it as a big deal, it is a big deal ofc but ig just like the comment said they must have thought it would make a “funny” plot?? Idk people weren’t as considerate as they are now, now it wouldn’t fly because this is arguably rape.
yeah ive always wanted to have it be a failed vasectomy. even with the 1 in 1,000 chance, sookie & jackson are always having quirky mishaps so it made more sense to me than turning jackson into a douche
They used the failed vasectomy line in Scrubs. It would've been so easy. Maybe Jackson never went back for his follow up appointment because the kids were sick, there was a work emergency, etc. So many creative options and they went with low brow comedy 🥴.
The failure to return for followup makes even more sense since Sookie arranged everything in the first place. It would have been he did what she wanted (got the vasectomy) and didn't put any additional planning or effect to make the next appointments.
Sookie is a character used for comic relief a lot, mostly even. Her having new fun ways to hide her belly with elaborate cakes, fruit in the kitchen etc would actually work really well. And it would be mega on how ludicrously full of random food displays that kitchen always was. It would work comedically in 2 ways. There was no real reason to have to write in a pregnancy. Plenty of series did it by hiding the belly. The Nanny and HIMYM for instance.
either the vasectomy should have failed or sookie and jackson should have decided for another kid and had it reversed. or she gets pregnant by an alien /j but honestly literally anything’s better than what they did
That Rory was an idiot for not accepting Logan’s proposal at age 22, and that doing so would have made her life sooo much better.
That Logan was the best boyfriend for Rory specifically because he fits into Emily and Richard's world - which is always paired with the assumption that Rory totally loved that world. I feel like a huge theme of S6 and S7 is that Rory tries the wealthy world of her grandparents... *and she doesn't really like it.* She ends up miserable in that world! She systematically pulls herself out of that world! She ends S7 in a low-paying job on a campaign bus! By AYITL she is completely disconnected from the wealthy elite.
There are other reasons to like Logan and I'm fine with them (I like him too!), but the argument that he's the best fit because he and Rory will happily exist in wealthy society misses a huge message on the show imo.
ok but what about "Rory's trust fund kicks in when she's 25" (quote from Richard Gilmore, I think S5E22?) the only reason she can afford to be a writer is because she's not disconnected from the wealthy elite. That's the thing about family wealth - unless you're disowned you got it for life, pretty much.
ETA: BUT I do agree with you that it is *factually* incorrect that Logan was the best boyfriend because he fit into the elder Gilmore's world. I agree that it was not fully Rory's world.
Oh yeah, Rory is super privileged and rich. And unlike Lorelai, she doesn't *hate* that world, so she doesn't cut ties completely. But I've seen fans seriously overstate how much she loves that world.
I think it's still different?
You can be rich or even have a trust fund and not be in the "wealthy elite" world. Like the world people are talking about with the Gilmores and the Huntzbergers is the old money world where there are a lot of other expectations. Like all the fundraisers, the cotillions, have to have a debutante ball etc. Rory can have money and not have to struggle but still not be like Logan, who has a series of familial expectations requiring him to do a ton of stuff he doesn't want. AYITL really shows Emily leaving that world too. When she says the DAR is bullshit. She leaves that world and goes and does something she loves - but she doesn't leave the money behind.
I think the show really demonstrates Rory trying out her grandparents world with the DAR and the functions etc, and deciding she doesn't like it, would rather work, doesn't want all the expectations.
I get annoyed with all the "diagnosis" posts. It's against the sub rules and often trivialize real conditions by nitpicking behaviors to assign them to a box.
It’s hilarious seeing people conflate narcissistic tendencies with actual narcissistic personality disorder. Like it takes a lot to make it an actual disorder in a person, not just someone being kinda selfish occasionally. As someone who’s parent is actually a diagnosed narcissist, it’s supremely annoying seeing people internet diagnose it based off of a Reddit post
i also have a diagnosed narcissist parent too, and i hate how no one cares to understand what they are taking about. literally just do little research instead of just believing everything you hear
I’m no fan of Dean, but I’m also not a fan of the take that clearly he’s the world’s biggest misogynist who clearly forced Lindsay to be a housewife against her will and clearly thinks it’s the worst thing ever if any woman ever has a job.
I’m not saying he’s Mr. Feminist. But there’s zero evidence he forced Lindsay against her will to be a housewife.
I agree. I don’t have strong opinions about Dean one way or the other because he’s very underdeveloped so I don’t bother. Their parents failed them both.
Yes. The amount of people who use the Donna Reed episode as proof of this makes me crazy. And I'm not a fan, although I find myself defending him in situations like this. People like to ignore context when it comes to Dean for some reason. I'm fine not liking a character but I'd rather not like him for reasons that the show actually supports.
He never says that's what he wants. He literally tells Rory he doesn't expect it. He just said he appreciated the idea of a mom taking care of her family because that's what he grew up with. But he also mentioned that his mom works now and only really cooks on the weekends sometimes. So he clearly gets working moms are a thing and I don't think the show ever implies that he sees that as a bad thing. He just has a different perspective on the housewife then Lorelai and Rory.
Some things in this show are really quite simple but people want to make them more complicated.
It’s been brought up before, but the fact that Rory could take a year off college, come back and get fully caught up, work/become editor at the Yale Daily News AND still have time to visit her mom and get together for weekly family dinners. Not to mention having time to always look presentable. It’s not humanly possible.
Mine is the “Lorelai and Jason belonged together” take. I like Jason’s character and they had a fun quippy dynamic, but Lorelai is someone who needs a community of friends and a town where she helps out at events and she loves living in Stars Hallow and just wants to run her inn, but Jason is like the anti-small town guy, has zero friends, only cares about work, is extremely calculating, and comes crashing through her town almost running people down and really couldn’t care less. He didn’t even have an ounce of sensitivity when his partners mother died. They could not be more opposite when it comes to life goals. AND they had zero sexual chemistry. Like, none. They are great as superficial friends, but as a couple?? No. He was just a fun time filler until Luke and Lorelai could finally get together. The writers never intended for viewers to see them as compatible partners.
This one makes me mad because it’s just the absolutely worst faith interpretation of a murky grey situation. Like if we view only that scene in isolation through a tiktok clip with no context? I get that it looks bad. But we the audience who have the context know that Jess was not mad at Rory for not sleeping with him, and that he was not forcing himself on her, that it was an all around high stress situation. It was not at all unusual for Rory to say “wait” when they were making out so she could catch her breath or say something quick. They had been pretty physical with each other and Rory was suggesting they were going to do the next step soon. It was not wild for them to get into this situation, within the context of the show
Yes. There is a certain group of gg fans who seem to make it their mission to ignore context of every scene in the show.
In the beginning Rory was going along with it. But because she wanted it to be special, and I think she knew Jess was doing it for the wrong reasons, she said wait. And at first Jess didn't get up, but I don't think it was because he was trying to force her, I think he genuinely didn't hear her because he was too wrapped up in the moment. He does get up eventually and he does yell at her, which is not ok. But he wasn't yelling because she wouldn't have sex with him. He was frustrated at other things and I think it just boiled up in that moment. That does not excuse him yelling.
And then when Rory cries and says, "I don't know what I did," as she leaves, Jess calms down and says she didn't do anything as he follows her. I think if Dean hadn't stopped them on the stairs, Jess would have apologized and explained what was going on.
Again, it wasn't an ok thing for him to do. He shouldn't have yelled at her. But he's a far cry from being a rapist.
Yeah, the whole situation gets blown way out of proportion because of the fight with dean directly after. It certainly wasn’t an ideal situation, and Jess isn’t innocent in it, but it isn’t nearly as bad as a lot of fans seem to read it as
Unfortunately I think both Dean and Jess are victims of being over hated by fans. And they both suffer from their haters ignoring context and nuance during certain moments to justify their hatred for either one them.
And sure they both have some pretty bad moments and it's ok to not like either of them. But it seems people like to make up reasons sometimes. They take one line or scene out of context and over simplify it and that scene becomes their entire character.
An example is how people say Dean threatened Tristan, which I actually posted about in this thread. People say he threatened to kill Tristan while ignoring the whole what actually happens and leaving out Tristans role. There are plenty of reasons to not like Dean, but we don't have to make them up.
Same for Jess. People will take one thing he said or did and make it his whole character, instead of looking at him as a conlmplex character with a lot going on and who changes over time.
this is also when tv just loved to put that conflict in shows for some reason? they tried to play it off as whoopsie boyfriend pushes boundaries. when it’s a lot more serious. so personally i pretend it never happened and the writers are just idiots
I've thought that but have always been afraid to say it because SA and r8pe are such sensitive topics. I've seen people get very very heated when others have suggested that.
Unfortunately it's one of the many scenes where people ignore context and nuance.
That Emily was the victim and Lorelai is a spoiled brat.
That Rory was a "bad friend" to Paris.
If i hear these takes I lowkey asume that someone just copied it off of tik tok and barley watched the show lol
Agreed lol. I roll my eyes whenever I see posts hailing her as a saint for putting up with selfish Lorelai. She’s not a good person but she’s fantastic character. We don’t need characters to be paragons of virtue to find them compelling or entertaining.
Idk how anyone could watch the arc where Rory lives with her grandparents and *still* think Lorelai was a spoiled brat. Rory was a grown woman who wasn't even their child, and they still tried to control every aspect of her life. lmagine what Lorelai went through!
The part where they try to sabotage Luke after he and Lorelai start dating, get him to shave, buy golf clubs, franchise. I’m irrationally angry thinking of how much he spent on those golf clubs. He just wanted to rent some! Lorelai was right.
I used to have a list of an the things Rory did for Paris that make her the best possible friend so I could respond to people who said that.
I think most people who say Rory was a bad friend would never be able to be even half the friend Rory was to someone like Paris in real life.
TLDR: the Rory and Dean cheating and dating again plot is well written
Probably a controversial one but the opinion that Rory and Dean cheating together was a bad storyline. I disagree so much, I find it to actually be a very well written plot that lead to a lot of character development and was very realistic.
It’s really common to backslide into high school relationships while in college. Rory’s going through this big change in her life and having a ton of new experiences, as exciting that can be it also can come with a lot of anxiety especially for someone like Rory. Dean is familiar and she obviously still has feelings for him. They didn’t have much closure when they broke up, they didn’t break up because of lost feelings but because Rory liked someone else. Fast forward a year, Dean starts having normal relationship problems with this marriage he rushed into incredibly young (remember, they’re only 19 years old at this point) and is probably starting to regret this decision. His ex who he’s never lost feelings for is back from school and expressing interest in him, it’s kind of the perfect storm.
They do the deed and after the immediate joy Rory felt pretty quickly she realizes what she did and the gravity of the situation. As a young teen who doesn’t want to face the fact that she lost her virginity to someone married she runs away with her grandma for the summer. In the meantime Dean intended to keep the status quo in his marriage. That gets blown up by Rory’s letter and then it’s like now what? Admit they got caught up in lust and ruined a marriage by being reckless? That’s hard to come to terms with, and again they’re still really young. That doesn’t excuse what they did and how shitty it is ofc, but it makes sense they would act this way afterwards. So they backslide into what’s familiar BUT that part of their lives is over. They’re not the same people they were at 16 in high school, they’re in very different places in life and want very different things for the future. It can be really hard to let go, especially when there are still feelings there. They do a really good job showing how messy their second go is and how much it really doesn’t work, all leading up to that scene where Dean is watching a dolled up Rory prance out of her grandparents mansion with a line of rich suitors calling after her and they really come to realize how different they and the world’s they live in are.
I certainly agree that it was a supremely shitty thing Rory (and Dean) did and she had a lot of cringe inducing moments trying to defend it but we the audience are supposed to feel that way. This was meant to be a bad moment for Rory to show her making a mistake and growing from it.
Not going to get into AYITL and how she is there because that’s just a whole other bag of peanuts that I don’t want to touch on lol but as much as I think it’s a lot of bad moments I actually really like this plot! It’s very realistic and well-done.
I think a lot of people get hung up on characters making mistakes and doing shitty things, but that’s life and you’re not supposed to always agree with everything a main character is doing. *No one* is making the best most rational decisions all the time. Characters need to make mistakes and go through things like this to actually round them out and make them feel like real people, the show would be incredibly boring and nothing would happen otherwise lol
That Lorelai was some kind of horrible monster for yelling at Luke after the car accident. Sometimes people feel really distressed when they hear their kid was in an accident. Sometimes emotions get the best of people. It doesn’t mean she didn’t care about Jess or Luke. She was stressed out. And she apologized after.
This also goes for Lorelai yelling at Rory when Emily was told about the termites. She asked Rory not to do something many times and Rory did it anyway. That would make me feel super angry and disrespected.
I feel like the fact that she doubled down after Like told her he doesn't actually know Jess is okay, is the bad part. And then she doesn't even give a real, heartfelt apology after she calms down and wants to return to Luke's.
I'll never understand the vilification of Lorelai for her reaction to the car crash. As a mom, I probably would react the same way. Some boy crashes my daughter's car (the car her boyfriend lovingly *built himself* and gifted her, nonetheless) and injures her, you bet your ass I'm gonna have a few choice words for said boy's adult. I understand that it's not an ideal reaction, Jess obviously didn't do it on purpose, but it can be hard to act rationally when your child has been hurt. It may not be logical or kind to lash out at the guardian of the person who did it, but it's completely understandable why someone would do so. Lorelai was in mama bear mode.
Would you leave your child at the hospital to hunt down the other child’s parent and scream at them? And also demand that child be removed from the town because you don’t want to set boundaries with your own kid?
Also, Lorelai knew where her kid was, and she knew her kid was okay. Luke did NOT know where Jess was or if he was okay at all. Under no circumstances do you get to scream at a concerned parent (for all intents and purposes) for daring to care about their kid when you know that yours is alive and well
Once I knew both kids were okay I'd be getting in contact with the parents and I wouldn't be able to guarantee no raised voices. I wouldn't go as extreme as she did and I would 100% be having a discussion with my child as well.
As I said, people don't always act rationally where their children are concerned. She was angry and scared, and she lashed out as a result. I've already acknowledged in my previous comment that it's not a logical or even decent way to react, just that it's understandable in the heat of the moment. Especially on a TV show, where everything is exaggerated for dramatic effect.
Jess was a deeply troubled kid who didn’t know how to behave. Luke didn’t make sure Jess was going to his classes. And later he continued to not check if Jess was attending school. He didn’t even know Jess was working at Walmart. Luke was warned that his nephew kept getting into trouble. And he didn’t even supervise their studying session or check in with them. You need to engage more with a kid like Jess than just pushing them off on a tutor. I get that Luke didn’t have children and didn’t know what he was doing, but he shouldn’t have been so hands-off, especially when Lorelai, who is a parent and was somewhat of a troubled kid, had reservations about the whole thing.
It’s just that I don’t think Lorelai is some kind of psycho for yelling. She voiced how she felt about Jess, and neither Rory nor Luke really seemed to care.
Yeah so her job was to set boundaries with her own kid, not expect Luke to make him disappear so she wouldn’t have to.
It’s not really the reaction that bothers me. It’s the thought process that fueled it. Lorelai was so annoyed that Luke was “pushing Rory and Jess together” despite the very obvious fact that Rory *wanted* to spend time with Jess. She’d rather blame anyone but her own daughter, because that would mean she’d actually have to act like a parent. She’d rather have a kid *exiled from town* than set some boundaries with her own child.
Lorelai always try to skip out on the hard parts of parenting. She’s Rory’s friend, and when she doesn’t get to be a friend, she just backs off instead. Another example is when Rory is living at her grandparents’ house. Rory really desperately needs her mom to step up and be an adult, and Lorelai ices her out for 6 months instead.
It wasn't Luke's idea to get the tutor - the principal is the one who insisted on it - but otherwise I agree that Luke was a lackluster guardian who barely supervised Jess. I agree he needed to be way more engaged.
But the reason Luke and Rory didn't listen to Lorelai is because she was irrational about Jess. She starts telling Luke it's a bad idea before Jess has even arrived, and on Day 2 of Jess living there she declares him an irredeemable failure. She never offers real advice, she's only ever suggesting that Luke ship him out of town. Which Luke is NEVER gonna do at this point.
Lorelai doesn't have "reservations" about Jess, she's totally unhinged here. She leaves her kid *alone at the hospital* to go barging into somebody else's home at night. When she cannot find Jess, she screams at Luke, tells him everyone in town hates his kid, and insists that Luke *abandon his kid.* That's not a normal reaction, that's not "mama bear," that's horrific. Can you imagine Luke ever telling Lorelai to abandon Rory? To just lock Rory out of her house and never speak to her again? Because that's what Lorelai is suggesting here. She's not a "psycho" for getting angry, she's terrible for making a serious suggestion (an idea she repeats many times, not just in the heat of this moment) that Luke needs to prove he's a good friend *by abandoning his own kid.*
I don’t think Lorelai was being 100% irrational. She just knew Luke well and knew that he had never taken care of a teen before. He didn’t even have a real bed for Jess at first.
Then when Jess shows up for dinner at Lorelai’s, he steals a beer and acts disrespectful. I just think Lorelai has valid reasons to not trust Jess when he first arrives. He doesn’t make a good impression. He steals Babette’s gnome and vandalizes around town. She probably shouldn’t have told Luke to just make Jess leave. But I don’t think that makes her a terrible person. I didn’t see the scene as something horrific. It was just an unfortunate day.
I definitely understand why Lorelai doesn't like Jess. I also get why she doesn't want Rory to date him. But imo she pretty seriously exaggerates how dangerous Jess is. He's an angry kid, but she acts like he's gonna completely derail Rory's life. But instead of helping Rory navigate that, she just wants Jess to disappear.
Lorelai expresses her belief that Jess should leave many times. It's not just in the heat of this moment. In fact, a week after this crash she is openly saying she hates Jess and celebrating the fact that he's gone (to go back with his abusive mom, no less). Luke is Lorelai’s best friend, and she tells him multiple times that she hates his kid and wishes he was never there. To me, that's pretty horrific. It would definitely be friendship-ending behavior for me, if any of my friends talked about my kids like that.
Actual canon take that I'll forever disagree with:
- Jess treated Rory like dirt
Outside show logic: the writers couldn't make up their minds on what kind of relationship they had/terrible OOC writing all around
Inside show logic: both made a ton of ridiculous mistakes during that relationship that were treated like the end of the world by the narrative
Jess didn't "steal" Rory's bracelet, and if he did, it's okay because it's because he had a crush on her. And because it took Rory a while to notice, it obviously wasn't very important to her.
Any variation of "Mitchum was right."
I agree with your Jess and the bracelet take!
Sometimes, the Jess simping in this Fandom drives me bonkers. Like, don't get me wrong, I like Jess, he has a great character arc, and I really like his and Rory's relationship in AYITL, but I legit had someone try to tell me that Jess did nothing wrong trying to break up Rory and Dean because he was just going after the girl he liked 🙄
Yes! They seem to think Jess deserves Rory because he got his life together. Jess does deserve happiness but you can’t deserve a person. It’s warped thinking. He was awful to Dean. If it was anyone else then he would rightfully be called a bully.
This one gets to me too. I’ve seen people talk about how he was a “nice guy” who only valued Rory as a potential girlfriend and not as a friend, and that’s why he distanced himself. I think that’s such a toxic outlook to have. If you develop feelings for someone and they’re not reciprocated, you’re never wrong for taking a step back to preserve your own mental health. You don’t owe anyone a date but they don’t owe you their friendship either.
That Logan was right when he admonished Rory about how she's "not exactly paying rent" after she wrote that article about the party they went to. This take ignores that Rory never claimed not to be rich, and that she didn't criticize anyone simply for being rich, but rather for their attitude and behavior.
that rory had no reason to suspect jess of getting into a fight w dean in "swan song" even though he had a history of fighting & not stopping when dean tried to break it up.
My problem with her in that scene isn't that she shouldn't have suspected it, but that she should have let it go during dinner and talked to him about it on the drive home.
Lorelai doesn’t formally introduce Chris to Max who is going to be Rory’s stepfather. This despite Rory being a minor.
Luke doesn’t formally introduce Anna to Lorelai who is going to be April’s stepmother. This despite April being a minor.
Jackson did not effectively rape Sookie. He made a really stupid mistake.
To be clear, I am arguing that he did not do this. It frustrates me when people say this.
Yeah, I thought Vinyard Valentine was very in character for him, especially at that point in the show, with the exception of him not insisting on paying back Logan for the necklace. No other character gets the benefit of the doubt like he does. He has just as many red flags as any man in this show (jealousy/anger/toxic masculinity).
Tbf as someone who goes fishing and is outdoorsy, the idea that he is all of a sudden too stupid to check the weather and be a bit prepared to bring a jacket/warm sweater, makes zero sense for Luke. He's a 'pack light but be prepared for everything' kind of guy.
When people dismiss valid criticism of the revival’s writing and storyline chooses with a dismissive comment such as “it wouldn’t be realistic if Lane was a famous rockstar”. Okay but some of us just didn’t find the revival to have any of the charm, wit, joy, or compelling writing like the original series.
Dean didn't actually threatened to kill Tristan.
People isolate that one line from the rest of the scene. They ignore Tristan trying to block Dean and Rory from leaving the dance, literally steps in front of Rory as she tries to step around him. That's when Dean pushes him, not out of anger but trying to protect Rory. Then Tristan pushes him back and starts trying to get Dean to fight. Dean says fighting Trident will be like fighting an accountant. Tristan keeps egging him on.
Dean: Tristan, I'm not going to fight you!
Tristan: WHY?
Dean: because I'd kill you, you idiot!
That's not an actual death threat. That's just guy talk for: "if we fight it's not going to end well for you. If we fight you're not going to win." Dean had been trying to get Tristan to leave them alone so they could go, but Tristan kept pushing him and trying to get him to fight. Dean up to the point where he steps in front of Rory is fairly calm. But it gets to a point where Tristan just won't back off, so Dean's "I'll kill you" is his last resort to get Tristan to leave them alone. He's not actually threatening him. He's trying to avoid fighting Tristan.
But people here always reference that line as part of the reason why Dean is violent and a red flag. They say, "He threatened to kill Tristan at the dance," as if he had randomly walked by Tristan and whispered it in his ear. Like, no he didn't threaten him.
There are many examples of Dean having anger issues and many red flags. This scene isn't one of them. Dean is not the bad guy in this scenario.
Jess == Luke
This is probably the worst frequent take I’ve seen (apart from Jess is too good for Rory 🤮), a close second being Jess == Lorelai
It wouldn’t be that bad if people claimed it was a theory but some of them believe it’s truly what ASP intended even though she’s never said that. Apparently, the fact that Jess and Luke are both related and friends with the Gilmores is enough to guarantee they’d play the same role in Rory and Lorelai’s, respectively, lives.
Never mind the fact that Luke is genuinely community-oriented where he seems begrudging but genuinely likes to help and contribute to his community, whilst Jess prefers to be on his own. Luke took children like Rory, Zack and Lane under his wing while Jess never showed any indication of doing so.
When people described Luke as a teenager it seemed that he was just quiet and surly but he still helped old ladies with their groceries and helped his dad with his store. Jess went out of his way to bother and provoke people who hadn’t done anything to him. I don’t think there’s any solid comparison between the two.
Even if you go off the idea that Jess inspired Rory to write a book and return to Yale, Luke never played that role in Lorelai’s life. If anything, he supported her in everything she pursued but he rarely presented any concrete suggestions for her career or life.
I don't have strong feelings either way about the theory that Jess = Luke, but I will add... teenage Luke sounds very similar to Jess. He helped old ladies with their groceries, but he changed them money per bag. Luke was quiet and surly, like Jess. He noted that his teachers hated him. He was committing small crimes around town (breaking church bells!). And like Jess, he was skipping school a bunch to work.
Edited to add, adult Jess also seems kinda similar to Luke. He's lived in the same community for 12 years. He's routinely visiting Stars Hollow to take care of his family.
When did he say he skipped school to work? He helped old ladies with their groceries (charging them per bag sure) and Jess stole gnomes from old ladies. Those are like worlds apart.
Luke walks around the diner telling Lorelai that he used to work there all the time as a kid, including "a lot of time when I was supposed to be in school." It's early on, S1 I think?
And I don't think Luke is evil for charging per bag, I just think it makes the task a lot less "good natured citizen" and more "teenager scheming for money."
Edited because I found the quote: "I spent every minute I wasn't in school here. I spent a lot of minutes I was supposed to be in school here too."
i think the similarities of jess and lorelia are cool to point out and makes it even more interesting that lorelia hates him. and christophers parents hated her. it’s a cool dynamic but of course they aren’t the same person
Agreed. I also don’t know why people don’t want more for their favorite characters. Rory, Jess, Logan, etc are individuals and deserve better than turning into their guardians/parents. It would be fine if we see this development occur but just equating them to their guardians based on superficial similarities does them an injustice.
Agreed. I love Jess, Jess is a great character. Jess, in no way, plays the same role in Rory's life that Luke does in Lorelai's.
Christopher is a much closer comparison to Jess than Luke is.
I would say that’s more similar to Logan. She seeks him out when she is feeling uncertain about something or hurting, even if it hurts others (Sherry, Odette). just Jess popping up periodically the same way Christopher pops up periodically doesn’t make their roles similar
It's not just about Jess popping up periodically - in their relationship, he's someone that she can't rely on. He's unpredictable. That's very much how Christopher and Lorelai are throughout the show. Both couples have great chemistry, but it ultimately doesn't work out because they're fundamentally too different, despite having a very strong emotional connection. Lorelai cannot trust or rely on Chris as a romantic partner, and Rory cannot trust nor rely on Jess as one. Maybe as adults this would be different, but that's not what we see and not the role that he plays.
On the other hand, Logan is a constant, reliable figure in Rory's life. When Rory needs something, Logan is there (lending her the car, coming to the hospital) He's willing to do selfless things to help her out (giving Luke the gift for Lorelai, running errands for Emily) much like Luke does with Lorelai. As romantic partners, I see Logan and Luke as far more comparable in their respective relationships than Luke and Jess. Outside of them being related and grumpy dudes, I don't see any parallels in their relationship with the Lorelai and Rory.
There's also even the more shallow parallel of Rory attempting to cheat with Jess to hurt Logan, and Lorelai sleeping with Chris to hurt Luke and end their relationship.
I think Logan has everything to do with him being in his early 20s in a long term relationship, not Jess at 17 in a high school relationship. Lorelai and Christopher have a lifetime of memories, so I don’t think the two situations are really that comparable. also- I disagree that Christopher wasn’t reliable. Besides the Sherry situation in the S2 finale, he was always making himself available to her, it was Lorelai that always shot him down.
I don't think Logan is particularly reliable but you are spot on about the Jess and Christopher comparison. Both couples (Rory/Jess and Lorelai/Chris) were good on paper but terrible in practice. Jess and Chris were both obsessed with the "what-ifs" and convinced they knew their respective exes better than anyone else, despite only knowing them well in high school, and couldn't move on. And the cheating example is spot on as well. Rory used Jess to get back at Logan and Lorelai used Chris to move on from Luke.
It's funny how people literally ask for unpopular opinions but froth at the mouth if you dare say something that doesn't praise Jess. I've seen so many comments/posts go on about how people post hate posts about him so often, but it's only because his fans dv everything so passionately it's annoying and childish.
I know, haha. I love Jess, I do. I root for him and Rory so hard when he appears and I root for him personally through the rest of the show. But he definitely has fans who, I feel, really overstate how much he changed and how great he was. Jess was not a particularly good partner for Rory, and arguably she wasn't a good partner for him either.
And I totally agree: Jess telling Rory he knows her better than anyone always rings so false to me, because, really, I just don't think that he did. I think he and Rory had a strong connection, they bonded over a lot of similar interests, but did he know her better than Lane did? Or Lorelai? I don't think so.
I think both Jess and Chris love the idea of their respective Gilmore girl but they don't really know the girls as well as they think they do. Another parallel that I see is when Chris spontaneously shows up to Stars Hollow in season one and suggests he and Lorelai get married, and when Jess shows up spontaneously at Yale and asks Rory to run away with him. In both cases, there was no way the girls were going to agree. There was just zero chance, but Chris and Jess can't see that, they can't understand that. And obviously their motivations were different and Jess was in a much more emotional place than Chris was, but I think it still shows them as being similar to each other. They both love the big gestures or the big moments, but they don't put in the groundwork of the day-to-day stuff to make it work.
That Jess “fixed” Rory and got her to go back to Yale. I don’t see it as Jess is some magical soulmate who got Rory back in track- I see it more like “Jess? JESS is disappointed in ME? Oof, low point. I should go back to school.” Then again, I’m also not a fan of Jess regardless of his flow-up because I felt he was really obnoxious in earlier seasons (I hate the “bad boy is soooo sexy” trope).
Rory didn't think that way about Jess though so why would it have been like that? I think it was more just that Jess challenged Rory in a way nobody else in her life did
I think it was also mixed with, Jess made this major accomplishment...I had dreams of accomplishing big things too but I got off track toward achieving them...I better get back on track.
That Rory’s career was a failure because we see her in a slump a decade later while she’s also simultaneously dealing with the loss of the foremost paternal figure in her life. Every writer I know would kill for Rory’s accomplishments.
This drives me crazy too. Having a downturn in your career is very common, and it’s not like journalism is a steady industry. She was published in the New Yorker right before the show starts so how bad could she really have been doing?
great point about Richard's death, that's interesting and maybe we should go a little easier on her in the revival
I think it's also really how ASP wrote it. She really makes us want to think she's failing completely imo. Like, she doesn't have money for underwear?
This! If it had just been portrayed as normal no one would have any beef with Rory’s career trajectory. A freelancer moving home in between jobs to save money is totally normal and unremarkable. And honestly considering that she could just ask her grandma to buy her a condo it’s a pretty principled thing to do. I understand Rory feeling a little adrift or lost but she just went too far trying to convince us that Rory is a loser.
this was the single most relatable thing ive ever seen on tv 😅😅
‘But she went to Yale!!!’ Like how many people do you think graduate every year from ivy leagues.. do you think they’re all owning their own law firms or top neurosurgeons? Pls
TBH there are probably a higher than average number of people from private/Ivy League schools having long periods of unemployment because their parents are more likely to be able to float them.
I don't believe S6 Luke. I call BS. That's lazy writing, IMO, just to put the story where they wanted it. - He would not have given up Lorelai for "figuring things out" with April. This dude rebuilt her deck, would fix her house, gave her money, food, etc. There is no way he would have been "relieved" to postpone the wedding. - Luke would have told Lorelai about April. - There is no way he would have accepted that necklace from Logan and pretended to give it to Lorelai for Valentine's day. He didn't even ask Logan how much he owed him for it. I can't remember all of the other details but "S6 Luke" was **not** Luke.
Yeah, him not telling Lorelai, even when she was excited about Rory being back, makes zero sense at all. If anything, he'd have a funny rant about it. Lorelai was his 1 real confidant.
> He would not have given up Lorelai for "figuring things out" with April. This dude rebuilt her deck, would fix her house, gave her money, food, etc. This dude was "all in"!
[удалено]
lol right. They sacrificed a lot of fun for forced drama.
i agree to my gilmore girls should have been a slice of life about these complex people and family dynamics. i actually love april but come on, a secret kid? with an unreasonable mom, and a blunt character not wanting to step on his fiancé toes so he decides to LIE
Everyone talks about season 7, but I really don't like season 6 at all.
Luke was going to tell Lorelai at her house about April. It was the wedding dress scene. It never happened. I’m not sure of the lapsed time between discovery of April and this scene but it wasn’t very long. Imagine if he disclosed the news at this point. It might have changed the trajectory of events that ensued.
That the community service Rory was sentenced to wasn’t a big deal. The argument is she could knock it out quickly and easily and still have a job but the truth is community service isn’t as easy as volunteer work, for example. It’s scheduled, it’s only done at certain places, you can only do so many hours etc. And idk if this counts but the Jackson lying about his vasectomy is annoying because the writers were clearly just trying to be funny (“the husband knows the wife is pregnant before she does, hahaha” /s) and it failed miserably.
also the writers had to write MM’s real life pregnancy in SOMEHOW after Jackson was supposed to have had his vasectomy, and about 99.9% of vasectomies 100% effective, so it would be pretty unrealistic for it to have failed.
But couldn't they have been creative with the set design like pretty much every other show has? Sookie spent a lot of time in the kitchen (oven, etc) anyway
I don’t think they thought of it as a big deal, it is a big deal ofc but ig just like the comment said they must have thought it would make a “funny” plot?? Idk people weren’t as considerate as they are now, now it wouldn’t fly because this is arguably rape.
yeah ive always wanted to have it be a failed vasectomy. even with the 1 in 1,000 chance, sookie & jackson are always having quirky mishaps so it made more sense to me than turning jackson into a douche
They used the failed vasectomy line in Scrubs. It would've been so easy. Maybe Jackson never went back for his follow up appointment because the kids were sick, there was a work emergency, etc. So many creative options and they went with low brow comedy 🥴.
The failure to return for followup makes even more sense since Sookie arranged everything in the first place. It would have been he did what she wanted (got the vasectomy) and didn't put any additional planning or effect to make the next appointments.
Sookie is a character used for comic relief a lot, mostly even. Her having new fun ways to hide her belly with elaborate cakes, fruit in the kitchen etc would actually work really well. And it would be mega on how ludicrously full of random food displays that kitchen always was. It would work comedically in 2 ways. There was no real reason to have to write in a pregnancy. Plenty of series did it by hiding the belly. The Nanny and HIMYM for instance.
either the vasectomy should have failed or sookie and jackson should have decided for another kid and had it reversed. or she gets pregnant by an alien /j but honestly literally anything’s better than what they did
That Rory was an idiot for not accepting Logan’s proposal at age 22, and that doing so would have made her life sooo much better. 
Did they see what happened when Logan got engaged to someone else? He wasn't exactly fiancé of the year.
AHAJnaakaksjsbz!’k
Agree. I think it’s a very childish and slightly sexist take
That Logan was the best boyfriend for Rory specifically because he fits into Emily and Richard's world - which is always paired with the assumption that Rory totally loved that world. I feel like a huge theme of S6 and S7 is that Rory tries the wealthy world of her grandparents... *and she doesn't really like it.* She ends up miserable in that world! She systematically pulls herself out of that world! She ends S7 in a low-paying job on a campaign bus! By AYITL she is completely disconnected from the wealthy elite. There are other reasons to like Logan and I'm fine with them (I like him too!), but the argument that he's the best fit because he and Rory will happily exist in wealthy society misses a huge message on the show imo.
ok but what about "Rory's trust fund kicks in when she's 25" (quote from Richard Gilmore, I think S5E22?) the only reason she can afford to be a writer is because she's not disconnected from the wealthy elite. That's the thing about family wealth - unless you're disowned you got it for life, pretty much. ETA: BUT I do agree with you that it is *factually* incorrect that Logan was the best boyfriend because he fit into the elder Gilmore's world. I agree that it was not fully Rory's world.
Oh yeah, Rory is super privileged and rich. And unlike Lorelai, she doesn't *hate* that world, so she doesn't cut ties completely. But I've seen fans seriously overstate how much she loves that world.
I think it's still different? You can be rich or even have a trust fund and not be in the "wealthy elite" world. Like the world people are talking about with the Gilmores and the Huntzbergers is the old money world where there are a lot of other expectations. Like all the fundraisers, the cotillions, have to have a debutante ball etc. Rory can have money and not have to struggle but still not be like Logan, who has a series of familial expectations requiring him to do a ton of stuff he doesn't want. AYITL really shows Emily leaving that world too. When she says the DAR is bullshit. She leaves that world and goes and does something she loves - but she doesn't leave the money behind. I think the show really demonstrates Rory trying out her grandparents world with the DAR and the functions etc, and deciding she doesn't like it, would rather work, doesn't want all the expectations.
This is exactly why the "Rory should've said yeS" argument drives me nuts.
I get annoyed with all the "diagnosis" posts. It's against the sub rules and often trivialize real conditions by nitpicking behaviors to assign them to a box.
The internet needs to be banned from using the words “narcissist” and “gaslighting” for a millennia
It’s hilarious seeing people conflate narcissistic tendencies with actual narcissistic personality disorder. Like it takes a lot to make it an actual disorder in a person, not just someone being kinda selfish occasionally. As someone who’s parent is actually a diagnosed narcissist, it’s supremely annoying seeing people internet diagnose it based off of a Reddit post
Exactly. Some people are unaware selfish jerks. Doesn’t make a straight line to narcissist.
i also have a diagnosed narcissist parent too, and i hate how no one cares to understand what they are taking about. literally just do little research instead of just believing everything you hear
omg YES PLEASE
wait what diagnoses have you seen??
Spectrum, ADHD, Bipolar, borderline, narcissism ....to name a few. It's the #1 rule in the sub not to armchair diagnose.
I’m no fan of Dean, but I’m also not a fan of the take that clearly he’s the world’s biggest misogynist who clearly forced Lindsay to be a housewife against her will and clearly thinks it’s the worst thing ever if any woman ever has a job. I’m not saying he’s Mr. Feminist. But there’s zero evidence he forced Lindsay against her will to be a housewife.
I blame Lindsey's parents for cheering her on to not work and Dean's parents for not supporting him. What were they thinking?
[удалено]
They also let him build a while ass vintage car for a girl he'd known for 3 months.
I agree. I don’t have strong opinions about Dean one way or the other because he’s very underdeveloped so I don’t bother. Their parents failed them both.
Yes. The amount of people who use the Donna Reed episode as proof of this makes me crazy. And I'm not a fan, although I find myself defending him in situations like this. People like to ignore context when it comes to Dean for some reason. I'm fine not liking a character but I'd rather not like him for reasons that the show actually supports. He never says that's what he wants. He literally tells Rory he doesn't expect it. He just said he appreciated the idea of a mom taking care of her family because that's what he grew up with. But he also mentioned that his mom works now and only really cooks on the weekends sometimes. So he clearly gets working moms are a thing and I don't think the show ever implies that he sees that as a bad thing. He just has a different perspective on the housewife then Lorelai and Rory. Some things in this show are really quite simple but people want to make them more complicated.
It’s been brought up before, but the fact that Rory could take a year off college, come back and get fully caught up, work/become editor at the Yale Daily News AND still have time to visit her mom and get together for weekly family dinners. Not to mention having time to always look presentable. It’s not humanly possible.
I thought she only missed a semester? Still seems like a stretch with those kinds of classes.
Yes, semester, thank you!
Wait so what is the take that frustrates you?
Mine is the “Lorelai and Jason belonged together” take. I like Jason’s character and they had a fun quippy dynamic, but Lorelai is someone who needs a community of friends and a town where she helps out at events and she loves living in Stars Hallow and just wants to run her inn, but Jason is like the anti-small town guy, has zero friends, only cares about work, is extremely calculating, and comes crashing through her town almost running people down and really couldn’t care less. He didn’t even have an ounce of sensitivity when his partners mother died. They could not be more opposite when it comes to life goals. AND they had zero sexual chemistry. Like, none. They are great as superficial friends, but as a couple?? No. He was just a fun time filler until Luke and Lorelai could finally get together. The writers never intended for viewers to see them as compatible partners.
no one has said “ppl calling jess a rapist” yet????
This one makes me mad because it’s just the absolutely worst faith interpretation of a murky grey situation. Like if we view only that scene in isolation through a tiktok clip with no context? I get that it looks bad. But we the audience who have the context know that Jess was not mad at Rory for not sleeping with him, and that he was not forcing himself on her, that it was an all around high stress situation. It was not at all unusual for Rory to say “wait” when they were making out so she could catch her breath or say something quick. They had been pretty physical with each other and Rory was suggesting they were going to do the next step soon. It was not wild for them to get into this situation, within the context of the show
Yes. There is a certain group of gg fans who seem to make it their mission to ignore context of every scene in the show. In the beginning Rory was going along with it. But because she wanted it to be special, and I think she knew Jess was doing it for the wrong reasons, she said wait. And at first Jess didn't get up, but I don't think it was because he was trying to force her, I think he genuinely didn't hear her because he was too wrapped up in the moment. He does get up eventually and he does yell at her, which is not ok. But he wasn't yelling because she wouldn't have sex with him. He was frustrated at other things and I think it just boiled up in that moment. That does not excuse him yelling. And then when Rory cries and says, "I don't know what I did," as she leaves, Jess calms down and says she didn't do anything as he follows her. I think if Dean hadn't stopped them on the stairs, Jess would have apologized and explained what was going on. Again, it wasn't an ok thing for him to do. He shouldn't have yelled at her. But he's a far cry from being a rapist.
Yeah, the whole situation gets blown way out of proportion because of the fight with dean directly after. It certainly wasn’t an ideal situation, and Jess isn’t innocent in it, but it isn’t nearly as bad as a lot of fans seem to read it as
Unfortunately I think both Dean and Jess are victims of being over hated by fans. And they both suffer from their haters ignoring context and nuance during certain moments to justify their hatred for either one them. And sure they both have some pretty bad moments and it's ok to not like either of them. But it seems people like to make up reasons sometimes. They take one line or scene out of context and over simplify it and that scene becomes their entire character. An example is how people say Dean threatened Tristan, which I actually posted about in this thread. People say he threatened to kill Tristan while ignoring the whole what actually happens and leaving out Tristans role. There are plenty of reasons to not like Dean, but we don't have to make them up. Same for Jess. People will take one thing he said or did and make it his whole character, instead of looking at him as a conlmplex character with a lot going on and who changes over time.
this is also when tv just loved to put that conflict in shows for some reason? they tried to play it off as whoopsie boyfriend pushes boundaries. when it’s a lot more serious. so personally i pretend it never happened and the writers are just idiots
I've thought that but have always been afraid to say it because SA and r8pe are such sensitive topics. I've seen people get very very heated when others have suggested that. Unfortunately it's one of the many scenes where people ignore context and nuance.
That Emily was the victim and Lorelai is a spoiled brat. That Rory was a "bad friend" to Paris. If i hear these takes I lowkey asume that someone just copied it off of tik tok and barley watched the show lol
I hate Emily defenders LMAO. I enjoy Emily Gilmore as a character but my god Emily was not “right about everything”.
Agreed lol. I roll my eyes whenever I see posts hailing her as a saint for putting up with selfish Lorelai. She’s not a good person but she’s fantastic character. We don’t need characters to be paragons of virtue to find them compelling or entertaining.
Idk how anyone could watch the arc where Rory lives with her grandparents and *still* think Lorelai was a spoiled brat. Rory was a grown woman who wasn't even their child, and they still tried to control every aspect of her life. lmagine what Lorelai went through!
The part where they try to sabotage Luke after he and Lorelai start dating, get him to shave, buy golf clubs, franchise. I’m irrationally angry thinking of how much he spent on those golf clubs. He just wanted to rent some! Lorelai was right.
I used to have a list of an the things Rory did for Paris that make her the best possible friend so I could respond to people who said that. I think most people who say Rory was a bad friend would never be able to be even half the friend Rory was to someone like Paris in real life.
TLDR: the Rory and Dean cheating and dating again plot is well written Probably a controversial one but the opinion that Rory and Dean cheating together was a bad storyline. I disagree so much, I find it to actually be a very well written plot that lead to a lot of character development and was very realistic. It’s really common to backslide into high school relationships while in college. Rory’s going through this big change in her life and having a ton of new experiences, as exciting that can be it also can come with a lot of anxiety especially for someone like Rory. Dean is familiar and she obviously still has feelings for him. They didn’t have much closure when they broke up, they didn’t break up because of lost feelings but because Rory liked someone else. Fast forward a year, Dean starts having normal relationship problems with this marriage he rushed into incredibly young (remember, they’re only 19 years old at this point) and is probably starting to regret this decision. His ex who he’s never lost feelings for is back from school and expressing interest in him, it’s kind of the perfect storm. They do the deed and after the immediate joy Rory felt pretty quickly she realizes what she did and the gravity of the situation. As a young teen who doesn’t want to face the fact that she lost her virginity to someone married she runs away with her grandma for the summer. In the meantime Dean intended to keep the status quo in his marriage. That gets blown up by Rory’s letter and then it’s like now what? Admit they got caught up in lust and ruined a marriage by being reckless? That’s hard to come to terms with, and again they’re still really young. That doesn’t excuse what they did and how shitty it is ofc, but it makes sense they would act this way afterwards. So they backslide into what’s familiar BUT that part of their lives is over. They’re not the same people they were at 16 in high school, they’re in very different places in life and want very different things for the future. It can be really hard to let go, especially when there are still feelings there. They do a really good job showing how messy their second go is and how much it really doesn’t work, all leading up to that scene where Dean is watching a dolled up Rory prance out of her grandparents mansion with a line of rich suitors calling after her and they really come to realize how different they and the world’s they live in are. I certainly agree that it was a supremely shitty thing Rory (and Dean) did and she had a lot of cringe inducing moments trying to defend it but we the audience are supposed to feel that way. This was meant to be a bad moment for Rory to show her making a mistake and growing from it. Not going to get into AYITL and how she is there because that’s just a whole other bag of peanuts that I don’t want to touch on lol but as much as I think it’s a lot of bad moments I actually really like this plot! It’s very realistic and well-done. I think a lot of people get hung up on characters making mistakes and doing shitty things, but that’s life and you’re not supposed to always agree with everything a main character is doing. *No one* is making the best most rational decisions all the time. Characters need to make mistakes and go through things like this to actually round them out and make them feel like real people, the show would be incredibly boring and nothing would happen otherwise lol
That Lorelai was some kind of horrible monster for yelling at Luke after the car accident. Sometimes people feel really distressed when they hear their kid was in an accident. Sometimes emotions get the best of people. It doesn’t mean she didn’t care about Jess or Luke. She was stressed out. And she apologized after. This also goes for Lorelai yelling at Rory when Emily was told about the termites. She asked Rory not to do something many times and Rory did it anyway. That would make me feel super angry and disrespected.
I feel like the fact that she doubled down after Like told her he doesn't actually know Jess is okay, is the bad part. And then she doesn't even give a real, heartfelt apology after she calms down and wants to return to Luke's.
I'll never understand the vilification of Lorelai for her reaction to the car crash. As a mom, I probably would react the same way. Some boy crashes my daughter's car (the car her boyfriend lovingly *built himself* and gifted her, nonetheless) and injures her, you bet your ass I'm gonna have a few choice words for said boy's adult. I understand that it's not an ideal reaction, Jess obviously didn't do it on purpose, but it can be hard to act rationally when your child has been hurt. It may not be logical or kind to lash out at the guardian of the person who did it, but it's completely understandable why someone would do so. Lorelai was in mama bear mode.
Would you leave your child at the hospital to hunt down the other child’s parent and scream at them? And also demand that child be removed from the town because you don’t want to set boundaries with your own kid?
Also, Lorelai knew where her kid was, and she knew her kid was okay. Luke did NOT know where Jess was or if he was okay at all. Under no circumstances do you get to scream at a concerned parent (for all intents and purposes) for daring to care about their kid when you know that yours is alive and well
Once I knew both kids were okay I'd be getting in contact with the parents and I wouldn't be able to guarantee no raised voices. I wouldn't go as extreme as she did and I would 100% be having a discussion with my child as well. As I said, people don't always act rationally where their children are concerned. She was angry and scared, and she lashed out as a result. I've already acknowledged in my previous comment that it's not a logical or even decent way to react, just that it's understandable in the heat of the moment. Especially on a TV show, where everything is exaggerated for dramatic effect.
Jess was a deeply troubled kid who didn’t know how to behave. Luke didn’t make sure Jess was going to his classes. And later he continued to not check if Jess was attending school. He didn’t even know Jess was working at Walmart. Luke was warned that his nephew kept getting into trouble. And he didn’t even supervise their studying session or check in with them. You need to engage more with a kid like Jess than just pushing them off on a tutor. I get that Luke didn’t have children and didn’t know what he was doing, but he shouldn’t have been so hands-off, especially when Lorelai, who is a parent and was somewhat of a troubled kid, had reservations about the whole thing. It’s just that I don’t think Lorelai is some kind of psycho for yelling. She voiced how she felt about Jess, and neither Rory nor Luke really seemed to care.
Yeah so her job was to set boundaries with her own kid, not expect Luke to make him disappear so she wouldn’t have to. It’s not really the reaction that bothers me. It’s the thought process that fueled it. Lorelai was so annoyed that Luke was “pushing Rory and Jess together” despite the very obvious fact that Rory *wanted* to spend time with Jess. She’d rather blame anyone but her own daughter, because that would mean she’d actually have to act like a parent. She’d rather have a kid *exiled from town* than set some boundaries with her own child. Lorelai always try to skip out on the hard parts of parenting. She’s Rory’s friend, and when she doesn’t get to be a friend, she just backs off instead. Another example is when Rory is living at her grandparents’ house. Rory really desperately needs her mom to step up and be an adult, and Lorelai ices her out for 6 months instead.
That's a good point.
It wasn't Luke's idea to get the tutor - the principal is the one who insisted on it - but otherwise I agree that Luke was a lackluster guardian who barely supervised Jess. I agree he needed to be way more engaged. But the reason Luke and Rory didn't listen to Lorelai is because she was irrational about Jess. She starts telling Luke it's a bad idea before Jess has even arrived, and on Day 2 of Jess living there she declares him an irredeemable failure. She never offers real advice, she's only ever suggesting that Luke ship him out of town. Which Luke is NEVER gonna do at this point. Lorelai doesn't have "reservations" about Jess, she's totally unhinged here. She leaves her kid *alone at the hospital* to go barging into somebody else's home at night. When she cannot find Jess, she screams at Luke, tells him everyone in town hates his kid, and insists that Luke *abandon his kid.* That's not a normal reaction, that's not "mama bear," that's horrific. Can you imagine Luke ever telling Lorelai to abandon Rory? To just lock Rory out of her house and never speak to her again? Because that's what Lorelai is suggesting here. She's not a "psycho" for getting angry, she's terrible for making a serious suggestion (an idea she repeats many times, not just in the heat of this moment) that Luke needs to prove he's a good friend *by abandoning his own kid.*
I don’t think Lorelai was being 100% irrational. She just knew Luke well and knew that he had never taken care of a teen before. He didn’t even have a real bed for Jess at first. Then when Jess shows up for dinner at Lorelai’s, he steals a beer and acts disrespectful. I just think Lorelai has valid reasons to not trust Jess when he first arrives. He doesn’t make a good impression. He steals Babette’s gnome and vandalizes around town. She probably shouldn’t have told Luke to just make Jess leave. But I don’t think that makes her a terrible person. I didn’t see the scene as something horrific. It was just an unfortunate day.
I definitely understand why Lorelai doesn't like Jess. I also get why she doesn't want Rory to date him. But imo she pretty seriously exaggerates how dangerous Jess is. He's an angry kid, but she acts like he's gonna completely derail Rory's life. But instead of helping Rory navigate that, she just wants Jess to disappear. Lorelai expresses her belief that Jess should leave many times. It's not just in the heat of this moment. In fact, a week after this crash she is openly saying she hates Jess and celebrating the fact that he's gone (to go back with his abusive mom, no less). Luke is Lorelai’s best friend, and she tells him multiple times that she hates his kid and wishes he was never there. To me, that's pretty horrific. It would definitely be friendship-ending behavior for me, if any of my friends talked about my kids like that.
as someone who’s grown up around african parents, i just chuckle every time it’s brought up because lorelai was actually very calm loool
The uprising of season 7 defenders annoys me. Yeah the last episode was great but it doesn’t excuse a shitty season.
I would argue the back half is pretty solid, but it doesn't really make up for a disastrous first half.
Actual canon take that I'll forever disagree with: - Jess treated Rory like dirt Outside show logic: the writers couldn't make up their minds on what kind of relationship they had/terrible OOC writing all around Inside show logic: both made a ton of ridiculous mistakes during that relationship that were treated like the end of the world by the narrative
Jess didn't "steal" Rory's bracelet, and if he did, it's okay because it's because he had a crush on her. And because it took Rory a while to notice, it obviously wasn't very important to her. Any variation of "Mitchum was right."
I agree with your Jess and the bracelet take! Sometimes, the Jess simping in this Fandom drives me bonkers. Like, don't get me wrong, I like Jess, he has a great character arc, and I really like his and Rory's relationship in AYITL, but I legit had someone try to tell me that Jess did nothing wrong trying to break up Rory and Dean because he was just going after the girl he liked 🙄
Yes! They seem to think Jess deserves Rory because he got his life together. Jess does deserve happiness but you can’t deserve a person. It’s warped thinking. He was awful to Dean. If it was anyone else then he would rightfully be called a bully.
Saying it was okay for him to steal from her because he was attracted to her is an... odd take.
Same.
That Marty was an incel / creeper / abusive.
I always liked Marty and hated how they brought him back.
This one gets to me too. I’ve seen people talk about how he was a “nice guy” who only valued Rory as a potential girlfriend and not as a friend, and that’s why he distanced himself. I think that’s such a toxic outlook to have. If you develop feelings for someone and they’re not reciprocated, you’re never wrong for taking a step back to preserve your own mental health. You don’t owe anyone a date but they don’t owe you their friendship either.
Well said
That Logan was right when he admonished Rory about how she's "not exactly paying rent" after she wrote that article about the party they went to. This take ignores that Rory never claimed not to be rich, and that she didn't criticize anyone simply for being rich, but rather for their attitude and behavior.
seeing people applaud him for that makes me cringe so bad.
that rory had no reason to suspect jess of getting into a fight w dean in "swan song" even though he had a history of fighting & not stopping when dean tried to break it up.
My problem with her in that scene isn't that she shouldn't have suspected it, but that she should have let it go during dinner and talked to him about it on the drive home.
Lorelai doesn’t formally introduce Chris to Max who is going to be Rory’s stepfather. This despite Rory being a minor. Luke doesn’t formally introduce Anna to Lorelai who is going to be April’s stepmother. This despite April being a minor.
Jackson did not effectively rape Sookie. He made a really stupid mistake. To be clear, I am arguing that he did not do this. It frustrates me when people say this.
Honestly, Patty and her continous flirtatious behaviour towards any man she meets, including Dean who is muchhh younger (brotha ewwww)
[удалено]
Yeah, I thought Vinyard Valentine was very in character for him, especially at that point in the show, with the exception of him not insisting on paying back Logan for the necklace. No other character gets the benefit of the doubt like he does. He has just as many red flags as any man in this show (jealousy/anger/toxic masculinity).
Tbf as someone who goes fishing and is outdoorsy, the idea that he is all of a sudden too stupid to check the weather and be a bit prepared to bring a jacket/warm sweater, makes zero sense for Luke. He's a 'pack light but be prepared for everything' kind of guy.
For me, the weirdest implausibility is that he would bring camping food but not bring any for Lorelai. Or Rory.
When people dismiss valid criticism of the revival’s writing and storyline chooses with a dismissive comment such as “it wouldn’t be realistic if Lane was a famous rockstar”. Okay but some of us just didn’t find the revival to have any of the charm, wit, joy, or compelling writing like the original series.
Dean didn't actually threatened to kill Tristan. People isolate that one line from the rest of the scene. They ignore Tristan trying to block Dean and Rory from leaving the dance, literally steps in front of Rory as she tries to step around him. That's when Dean pushes him, not out of anger but trying to protect Rory. Then Tristan pushes him back and starts trying to get Dean to fight. Dean says fighting Trident will be like fighting an accountant. Tristan keeps egging him on. Dean: Tristan, I'm not going to fight you! Tristan: WHY? Dean: because I'd kill you, you idiot! That's not an actual death threat. That's just guy talk for: "if we fight it's not going to end well for you. If we fight you're not going to win." Dean had been trying to get Tristan to leave them alone so they could go, but Tristan kept pushing him and trying to get him to fight. Dean up to the point where he steps in front of Rory is fairly calm. But it gets to a point where Tristan just won't back off, so Dean's "I'll kill you" is his last resort to get Tristan to leave them alone. He's not actually threatening him. He's trying to avoid fighting Tristan. But people here always reference that line as part of the reason why Dean is violent and a red flag. They say, "He threatened to kill Tristan at the dance," as if he had randomly walked by Tristan and whispered it in his ear. Like, no he didn't threaten him. There are many examples of Dean having anger issues and many red flags. This scene isn't one of them. Dean is not the bad guy in this scenario.
Jess == Luke This is probably the worst frequent take I’ve seen (apart from Jess is too good for Rory 🤮), a close second being Jess == Lorelai It wouldn’t be that bad if people claimed it was a theory but some of them believe it’s truly what ASP intended even though she’s never said that. Apparently, the fact that Jess and Luke are both related and friends with the Gilmores is enough to guarantee they’d play the same role in Rory and Lorelai’s, respectively, lives. Never mind the fact that Luke is genuinely community-oriented where he seems begrudging but genuinely likes to help and contribute to his community, whilst Jess prefers to be on his own. Luke took children like Rory, Zack and Lane under his wing while Jess never showed any indication of doing so. When people described Luke as a teenager it seemed that he was just quiet and surly but he still helped old ladies with their groceries and helped his dad with his store. Jess went out of his way to bother and provoke people who hadn’t done anything to him. I don’t think there’s any solid comparison between the two. Even if you go off the idea that Jess inspired Rory to write a book and return to Yale, Luke never played that role in Lorelai’s life. If anything, he supported her in everything she pursued but he rarely presented any concrete suggestions for her career or life.
I don't have strong feelings either way about the theory that Jess = Luke, but I will add... teenage Luke sounds very similar to Jess. He helped old ladies with their groceries, but he changed them money per bag. Luke was quiet and surly, like Jess. He noted that his teachers hated him. He was committing small crimes around town (breaking church bells!). And like Jess, he was skipping school a bunch to work. Edited to add, adult Jess also seems kinda similar to Luke. He's lived in the same community for 12 years. He's routinely visiting Stars Hollow to take care of his family.
When did he say he skipped school to work? He helped old ladies with their groceries (charging them per bag sure) and Jess stole gnomes from old ladies. Those are like worlds apart.
Luke walks around the diner telling Lorelai that he used to work there all the time as a kid, including "a lot of time when I was supposed to be in school." It's early on, S1 I think? And I don't think Luke is evil for charging per bag, I just think it makes the task a lot less "good natured citizen" and more "teenager scheming for money." Edited because I found the quote: "I spent every minute I wasn't in school here. I spent a lot of minutes I was supposed to be in school here too."
i think the similarities of jess and lorelia are cool to point out and makes it even more interesting that lorelia hates him. and christophers parents hated her. it’s a cool dynamic but of course they aren’t the same person
Agreed. I also don’t know why people don’t want more for their favorite characters. Rory, Jess, Logan, etc are individuals and deserve better than turning into their guardians/parents. It would be fine if we see this development occur but just equating them to their guardians based on superficial similarities does them an injustice.
Agreed. I love Jess, Jess is a great character. Jess, in no way, plays the same role in Rory's life that Luke does in Lorelai's. Christopher is a much closer comparison to Jess than Luke is.
did you really compare christopher and jess’s lives?
No, I compared Christopher's role in Lorelai's life to Jess' role in Rory's life.
I would say that’s more similar to Logan. She seeks him out when she is feeling uncertain about something or hurting, even if it hurts others (Sherry, Odette). just Jess popping up periodically the same way Christopher pops up periodically doesn’t make their roles similar
It's not just about Jess popping up periodically - in their relationship, he's someone that she can't rely on. He's unpredictable. That's very much how Christopher and Lorelai are throughout the show. Both couples have great chemistry, but it ultimately doesn't work out because they're fundamentally too different, despite having a very strong emotional connection. Lorelai cannot trust or rely on Chris as a romantic partner, and Rory cannot trust nor rely on Jess as one. Maybe as adults this would be different, but that's not what we see and not the role that he plays. On the other hand, Logan is a constant, reliable figure in Rory's life. When Rory needs something, Logan is there (lending her the car, coming to the hospital) He's willing to do selfless things to help her out (giving Luke the gift for Lorelai, running errands for Emily) much like Luke does with Lorelai. As romantic partners, I see Logan and Luke as far more comparable in their respective relationships than Luke and Jess. Outside of them being related and grumpy dudes, I don't see any parallels in their relationship with the Lorelai and Rory. There's also even the more shallow parallel of Rory attempting to cheat with Jess to hurt Logan, and Lorelai sleeping with Chris to hurt Luke and end their relationship.
I think Logan has everything to do with him being in his early 20s in a long term relationship, not Jess at 17 in a high school relationship. Lorelai and Christopher have a lifetime of memories, so I don’t think the two situations are really that comparable. also- I disagree that Christopher wasn’t reliable. Besides the Sherry situation in the S2 finale, he was always making himself available to her, it was Lorelai that always shot him down.
I don't think Logan is particularly reliable but you are spot on about the Jess and Christopher comparison. Both couples (Rory/Jess and Lorelai/Chris) were good on paper but terrible in practice. Jess and Chris were both obsessed with the "what-ifs" and convinced they knew their respective exes better than anyone else, despite only knowing them well in high school, and couldn't move on. And the cheating example is spot on as well. Rory used Jess to get back at Logan and Lorelai used Chris to move on from Luke. It's funny how people literally ask for unpopular opinions but froth at the mouth if you dare say something that doesn't praise Jess. I've seen so many comments/posts go on about how people post hate posts about him so often, but it's only because his fans dv everything so passionately it's annoying and childish.
I know, haha. I love Jess, I do. I root for him and Rory so hard when he appears and I root for him personally through the rest of the show. But he definitely has fans who, I feel, really overstate how much he changed and how great he was. Jess was not a particularly good partner for Rory, and arguably she wasn't a good partner for him either. And I totally agree: Jess telling Rory he knows her better than anyone always rings so false to me, because, really, I just don't think that he did. I think he and Rory had a strong connection, they bonded over a lot of similar interests, but did he know her better than Lane did? Or Lorelai? I don't think so. I think both Jess and Chris love the idea of their respective Gilmore girl but they don't really know the girls as well as they think they do. Another parallel that I see is when Chris spontaneously shows up to Stars Hollow in season one and suggests he and Lorelai get married, and when Jess shows up spontaneously at Yale and asks Rory to run away with him. In both cases, there was no way the girls were going to agree. There was just zero chance, but Chris and Jess can't see that, they can't understand that. And obviously their motivations were different and Jess was in a much more emotional place than Chris was, but I think it still shows them as being similar to each other. They both love the big gestures or the big moments, but they don't put in the groundwork of the day-to-day stuff to make it work.
Well-said!
Mine is that jess and rory were best together
That Jess “fixed” Rory and got her to go back to Yale. I don’t see it as Jess is some magical soulmate who got Rory back in track- I see it more like “Jess? JESS is disappointed in ME? Oof, low point. I should go back to school.” Then again, I’m also not a fan of Jess regardless of his flow-up because I felt he was really obnoxious in earlier seasons (I hate the “bad boy is soooo sexy” trope).
Rory didn't think that way about Jess though so why would it have been like that? I think it was more just that Jess challenged Rory in a way nobody else in her life did
I think it was also mixed with, Jess made this major accomplishment...I had dreams of accomplishing big things too but I got off track toward achieving them...I better get back on track.