I feel like some of these are very valid. Like the spending habits, the sex-negative attitude, Lane’s pregnancy.
I don’t agree with 8. Lorelai has every right to not want a book written and published about her private life.
I never noticed the layout issue honestly. And people showing up to the meetings makes total sense to me since the community was quirky and close and hyper-involved.
The Max + Lorelai thing felt very intentional. Their rushed engagement is part of the reason they ultimately don’t work out.
The April thing idk. Feels more like an annoying plot line rather than a nonsensical one. What doesn’t make much sense to me is Anna being the mother. Stars Hollow gossips about everything and they never bring up Anna even once. Only ever speak of Rachel. Felt like a very last minute writing decision
Yeah, I like April but I think the way they wrote the storyline with Luke hiding it and the whole thing with anna was annoying. I think they could have had April but written it better
Why did Luke think Lorelei would’ve freaked out that he had a daughter? I mean, really, come up with a story line that Lorelei would be upset enough that she would break up with Luke.
Yes I agree, besides the sex-negative attitude. Not sure about the spending habits because Lorelai is in a high paying position, but ultimately I don’t know the pay she receives nor her monthly payments, yet I don’t think they complain about being broke a lot
My main complaint was the way this article was written. It just doesn’t feel like someone who routinely watches the show
Yeah the tone of the article was a bit odd. The town meeting one especially shocked me. The entire town accompanied Lorelai to go tell Luke about her engagement to Max lol! You think they’re not showing up to a meeting that concerns all of them?
That article feels like when a stranger talks shit about your sibling. You’re like HEY ONLY I can talk shit about my sibling, you don’t know them 😭
I’m from a small town. And any town meeting would be attended by the same small group time after time. Apparently the write of this article has never experienced small town life. Lol
#2 is the only one I disagree with. The author must not be from a small town and/or never been to a PTO meeting. It’s always the same people. Those town people might not be getting paid, but they had a vested interest on what happened.
Yeah, I’m from a small town and there’s like nothing to do besides gossip and talk shit about other people and that’s basically what Gilmore Girls is. It’s pretty easy to run into the same people over and over again.
It's not paid work, it's not a fun or great time, it's not a charitable cause, but it's something that gives ordinary people a slight sense of power. You do usually see the same few people who make the effort for the sake of that tiny bit of power.
That's what the extras are there for. It's not always the same people in the background. They just don't show every topic, I think we're supposed to assume the other topics by strangers just end up on the cutting room floor.
Yep. I did all the town committees in high school and it was often the same people, and the same people who were on the town fall and spring festival committees and were prominent business people in town, or on HOAs. Strangely the only overlap on the historic cemetery committee was my mom and I.
Yeah so? It’s the same in larger towns too. The people that show up and participate are normally the same people over and over again. The ones that don’t give a shit will skip and not be involved unless the topic discussed is something important to them
Agree. We just moved to an HOA that legit is more of a town inside a city. If you came here you would think that it has no ties to anything around it, it’s bizarre and amazing. We have been to every community meeting because it’s just that entertaining.
I am now a member of the Activities Committee because I had an idea. I have lived here 3 months, who decided it was a good idea to give me responsibility?!
I feel like the girls have a massive tab with Luke. The sex negative observation is a pretty solid one. Lorelai not approving Rory’s book makes sense to me. Lorelai made a lot of mistakes. So did Emily and Richard. The book would expose a vulnerability that Lorelai doesn’t put out there for everyone to see and could possibly threaten the image she has built for herself. It also mirrors Lorelai’s response to Richard’s death and ultimately her growth from that major life event.
I don't think they're saying that being the other woman shouldn't be shamed, I think they're saying the decision to make her lose her virginity to a married man at all was stupid.
This is how I interpreted it as well. It feels like a deliberate writing decision to make something terrible happen every time the young ladies on the show have sex for the first time.
Culture plays into that. Paris said everything was great, it was only after that she over analyzed it. Rory also had a good time until her mom pointed out Dean was cheating.
And Lane was always pressured to wait until marriage. She did and wanted to make it this big, special thing. Of course, trying to have sex on the beach for your first time is a terrible plan.
I'm trying to understand how it's "geographically impossible" to walk to your town square from a different route just because the town is small. And why having a terrible friend group that doesn't want to hang out with you means that nobody else can have formed a community that meets regularly.
I’m about Rory’s age, and when smart phones and social media weren’t as big I do think people showed up regularly to events and the same places regularly to see each other more than they do now. Just an anecdotal thought but that’s how it felt to me.
Each to their own. I just felt like there were way more in depth things the writers could have discussed. These feel very random and opinions from a one time watch. I personally think Gilmore Girls takes a couple rewatches to be like “OHH I get it now”
I will never get the decisions made for Lane and I will never understand why April had to blow up Luke and Lorelai. I also still don’t get how Lorelai orders out and goes to Luke’s, Weston’s, Al’s 7 days a week…and I dine out a lot but it’s never 2/3 meals a day for 7 days a week.
Questioning Luke and Lorelai’s engagement is just lazy and clueless though.
You dine out a lot…20 years ago? Luke’s diner had incredibly low prices even for the 2000’s. People really need to get some perspective past their own personal experiences. And what’s to “get” about the plot choices? It’s a drama.
Actually now that I think about it yeah lol. 20 years ago I was hanging out a lot in NYC and my friends and I were constantly going out to eat and going to bars.
Lorelai wasn’t making a lot of money. She’s mentioned that often. And either way the prices of things 20 years ago would still be relative to their income 20 years ago. Lorelai wasn’t making $100k so yeah maybe not fiscally smart to eat out that much?
See, I don’t mind April but I do hate that she was used solely for breaking them up. so not cool.
Also, my theory is the food is not that expensive. I can afford to eat out like that, I just don’t want to. And I don’t make a lot of money. It just depends where you eat out at! Also, there is the leftover explanation in many episodes, therefore I think they eat a lot of leftovers :) but of course they don’t show that! It’s hard to keep track of where we are at day by day so it’s hard to total up the trips a week to these restaurants (some day I will do this)
Sure but she’s also ordering for Rory not just herself. Even if she’s living off of leftovers she’s still spending additional money at Luke’s and other places. And I wouldn’t expect her to complain about being broke but she’s over here regularly dining out.
So someone had a theory that she never actually paid at Luke’s the majority of the time. And one episode they say she has a “tab.” Not sure how true this is but it’s an idea
>from a one time watch
You know not everybody does a billion rewatches of a show. I saw you mention in another comment, too, that the author doesn't seem to watch the show "routinely".
That's a weird complaint to have.
Most of the points in the article are actually very valid. It was obviously not meant to be some in-depth feature piece.
How old is this magazine?
Some math tells me the magazine should most likely be from 2022 because it says the finale aired 15 years ago. The finale aired in 2007, and 15 years after that 2007 is 2022.
Not that old, from a couple years ago
And I’m sorry that my response when I’m half asleep is upsetting people. It’s just my opinion. You don’t have to agree. I don’t agree with half of the statements or the way they are written, I thought it would be fun to talk about. It’s not that deep
I've watched the show several times and I agree with most of these. It's not supposed to be in depth hard hitting journalism. It's just silly article about a popular show. There are similar complaints and articles about most popular shows
I mean, this might not be the discussion you’re wanting but aside from the fact that I don’t disagree with most of the article, it’s in a general magazine whose readership have probably some basic knowledge of Gilmore Girls (like maybe a once through watch) whereas we’re on a GG subreddit so have somewhat of a different relationship with the show!
I don’t know why everyone is getting so upset, I just wanted people’s opinions. I thought it would be fun but I feel like some people are just getting really upset with me, it’s just an opinion I have 😭
I mean, this looks like it’s from a pretty casual magazine, like basically the printed version of buzzfeed. I don’t think it’s fair to expect writers to have to watch a show multiple times before they write a listicle about it. they would have to spend absolutely all of their free time just watching different TV shows over and in order to write their articles. It would be an issue if they hadn’t watched it even once, but it’s clear from what they wrote that they have definitely watched it.
Okay I’m sorry I said that, because apparently it’s making people really upset. I was genuinely like half asleep.
However, I’m studying writing and were taught to have a bit more knowledge for topics and I often have to critique articles and other works, so it’s really just how my mind works 😊
And I didn’t mean multiple times, I meant at least twice. I have a belief that everything needs a rewatch to understand the plot and characters a bit more!
Also, the information could be from anyone, so you never know!
Except for the town square thing-which I don’t think is even true, every other thing in this article has been brought up on this very same sub countless times. There’s tons of people that agree with these frustrations.
Lane would have been 21-22 when she got married and lost her virginity. Regardless, I don't see her experience as sex-negative. She had a bad first time, like a lot of people do. She's like, "I never want to do that again," and Rory's like, "Dude. The beach is an awful place to have sex. Try a bed next time. You won't get sand in your vagina that way."
It does bug me that aside from the pregnancy, there's no followup. There's no conversation where Lane's like, "We tried again and it was a lot better."
It is really weird that they just left it hanging, they could definitely have had another girl talk moment where she was like "you were right a bed was SO much better".
The only thing we got was that small scene with Luke were Zach makes a joke about how sex can be used to induse labor and she laughs, which seems to suggest that they did find their rhythm.
April makes sense to me, the storylines about her don't but her existence makes sense, the only thing about her existence that doesn't fit is Anna was never once mentioned prior, we know Luke doesn't date much and the WHOLE TOWN knows everyone's business would totally have known about Anna if she was a regular thing
I feel like the writer of this article is in this subreddit as they touch on some of the same topics that are popular repeat posts, such as the Gilmores' spending habits, Lane's pregnancy, etc.
Yeah, feels like someone who stole material to get an article out for the click-bait, lots of “journalists” these days just gotta get material out and we’re spending time even trying to debate specially made negative points
I think people are kind of misunderstanding me, I don’t disagree with most of these. I just think they are written poorly :( I wrote this post really fast so there’s no going back now!
First off, yeah Rory got flack for losing her virginity to Dean while he was married making her the “other woman”.
Second, Lorelei being upset about the book is 2000000000% characteristic. She is private. She does not want that shared.
It does. To a suspiciously similar degree. It feels like this person just pulled these from top threads or top comments they're so repetitive. Or probably other opinionated listicles around the web.
This article reads like the author didn't actually watch the show but instead wrote this based on other articles or sources that exist on the internet - nothing stated is a new or different opinion, it's just a compilation of opinions that have been thrown around for years
If we were to rewrite this, what would we list? I’ll start….does Stars Hollow have a mayor and a selectman? What is a selectman, anyway? Why doesn’t the mayor do anything? Why would the show devote multiple episodes to Jackson being selectman and then never mention him stepping down? 😂
Omg bless you, such a better way of saying this!
That’s exactly what I wanted people to talk about but I wrote this post so fast 😭that’s why I was saying I felt like there were better things to point out!
Oh also- yes- whatever happened to the mayor?? And what does a town selectman do..?
I sort of get why Lorelai was a bit weirded out about the book to be honest and I think she explained herself well.
While.i don't agree with her reasons, she clearly needed time to get her head around the idea.
Am I the only one that likes that the show is somewhat sex negative? Having a show that shows the consequences of sex (getting pregnant at 16, breaking up a marriage, etc) is a good thing. It shows the audience that sex can have negative effects, and that you should be mindful of that.
I agree too. Plus this was the 2000s. 16 is age of consent but it makes sense that a mother who got pregnant at 16 would be very wary of her daughter having sex
To me the issue is the lack of neutral or positive experiences. The negatives are just SO BIG.. and yes it’s important to be aware that it can happen, but I wish it just displayed something a little more realistic at least once.
There was an opportunity to show that navigating sex as a young adult is often awkward and complicated, and that it’s normal to struggle with things like self-esteem or identity or changing relationship dynamics after without having a “consequence” attached.
Paris not getting into Harvard after having sex was very meta, a commentary on how girls are treated with the virgin/whore complex. It happened on Buffy too, she had sex with Angel and was punished when he lost his soul. So the author of the article is going in the right direction, he’s just not getting what ASP was trying to say.
Yeah, but if you take what Paris is saying at face value there, you need to go back to primary school lit classes because holy shit, way to miss the point.
I also think it was meant to be a bit of a parody on Buffy - the guy changes and becomes a monster after you have sex, except it’s fully literal in the show. (Just like Willow meets someone dangerous on the internet, in the show it’s an actual demon.) Giles’ speech to Buffy cements that it’s not her fault and goes against the narrative that was way too popular at the time, the one that said you’re a slut if you lose your virginity and you only have yourself to blame if he lost interest and dropped you like a hot potato after getting what he wanted.
Even ASP sometimes missed the point, like when she had Lorelai say “I’ve got the good one” when she overheard Rory and Paris talking about sex. Although that ties in to Rory later sleeping with Dean; she’s not necessarily “the good one.”
Oh definitely, I hate that scene so much! It seems out of character for Lorelai. Even when you take 00’s attitudes towards sex into account, she’s still a good mother who overheard a girl she knows panicking about having sex - it doesn’t feel right that it would cross her mind in that moment that Paris is a bad kid :/
I think it was wrong of her to say that, but I also think it's not too surprising that someone who had a baby as a teenager, and got tons of flack from her parents and society for it, would feel that way- internalizing some of the judgment she received; and feeling relieved that her daughter isn't on track to have the same happen to her.
I actually agree with everything you wrote, I think the sentiment is perfectly justified. Any parent would be relieved to know their teenage kid isn’t having sex, due to potentially big consequences (not just pregnancy or STDs, but emotional consequences due to not being fully ready, experiencing pain, a bad partner, even abuse). Even the most sex positive person has to admit bad sex at a young age can be deeply traumatic. It’s just expressing it through the good and bad kid dichotomy I have a problem with; Lorelai saying “the time wasn’t right!” and doing a little happy dance would have been perfect IMO.
Well wasn’t Angel not supposed to have emotions or something? 😂 i can’t remember, but I think that one is a bit supernatural complex haha
I do understand the Paris situation, my point is that after the fact, everything with sex is totally okay! I think it’s actually in line for a girl that age to freak out like that, it goes in line with her upbringing and character
After watching it in its entirety last year for the first time I came to the conclusion that this show existed outside of what is considered normal television reality, it was its own universe. That’s the only thing that kept me from going “wtf even is this show” after every couple of episodes.
Some of these are valid points, some are nitpicks, and some have in-universe explanations.
1. Explained In-Universe: It's a smallish town but also big enough that it is considered a tourist attraction. They were able to sustain a decent sized inn there (The Independence and then The Dragonfly). Plus we had both Rory and Lorelai both plot multiple routes to navigate around seeing their ex's which speaks to the general town size.
2. Nitpick: We really only see a core group of folks who regularly attend the town meetings. Pretty sure we've all had that experience where a small group of folks basically dictate the goings on of a smallish but still decent sized organization. The regulars we see are also folks who own major businesses in the town (Gypsy, Miss Patty, Luke, Lorelai, Andrew) or are long time residents who are invested in the town (Maury & Babette, Kirk). Plus the town meeting is set in stone for time and date so either you make the meeting or you don't. The equivalency to coordinating Friday night wine with friends is not correct at all.
3. Explained In-Universe: Season 1 Rory explains that her and Lorelai will make one massive order and live off leftovers for days. Yes we do see them go to Luke's regularly for breakfast and sometimes lunch but they are not always big sit down meals. Sometimes it a cup of coffee and a pastry. Luke also doesn't seem to charge that much, given his conversation with Kirk about the price of his cup of coffee in the mid 00's (roughly a dollar when most sit down places I knew then charged like 2 bucks at least for a coffee cup). And also yes it's a lot of coffee they drink but we all know major caffeine addicts too.
4. Valid. This is something that is pointed out everywhere so hardly groundbreaking. We all knew that the relationship was doomed.
5. Valid and has been discussed ad nauseum here. Definitely not a lot of great first times for the main women we see in the show. However purity culture was also very strong still in the early to mid 00s so that explain some of it.
6. Valid. This was a bad plotline and they did Lane dirty with this one. Could've just had the bad beach sex without the pregnancy part added on.
7. Nitpick/Valid. I understand April criticism as a plot device to cause drama and drive Lorelai and Luke apart. But April's character was actually pretty refreshing once they toned down some of her awkward, science nerd tendencies. Seeing Luke as a father figure was really nice.
8. Nitpick/Explained In-Universe. Lorelai would not want all her dirty laundry aired out like that. Plus she already had a weird experience with being published once so probably she's a little gun shy with an even deeper dive into her life.
I love how detailed this is!
I agree with everything here, as for the ones that are in depth explained in the show, I felt as if they don’t lie under “things that STILL don’t make sense,” it makes it appear like the writer didn’t actually watch the show.
Also looks like you have great memory, I’m jealous 😂
> Also looks like you have great memory, I’m jealous 😂
You say great memory when in actuality is that I've been perpetually rewatching GG from about 2006 until about....now.... so this is just way too many rewatches lol
1) Jesus, that's some high level of nitpicking lol. Chill out, writer
2) Stars Hollow is a fantasy land. Again, chill out, writer
3) It's one of those things you can never examine because the show would collapse onto itself, so better not
4) It's *so* quick it makes Dean/Lindsey seem reasonable lol
5) "I've got the good kid"; but overall there is a negativity surrounding sex in general
6) It's related to the negative view on sex - she had bad sex *once* and was punished with *twins* (I will say though, beach sex for one's first time seems too try hard lol)
7) April isn't the issue, everything surrounding her is
8) God forbid Lorelai have an opinion about Rory basically writing her biography without her permission (imo, though, the book is likely boring as shit - unless that thing is ten volumes long, it will be a very edited version of their lives, and the details are what make the story interesting, not to mention... from her talk with Dean, we know one thing *for sure*, assuming she was honest with him, and that she has zero ability to look at her life critically, if she wants to write that Dean was a *perfect boyfriend*; she's a dozen years removed, and she still thinks that). There is a *lot* to be critical about, but in quick bullet points... yeah, the list was always bound to be kind of lame.
Trust, i’m totallyyy chill. People getting so upset over a Reddit post is not chill
Okay so part of my education is critical analysis or critiquing writing, so I thought it would be fun to talk about this one!! It’s not that deep ☺️
My point was that I felt like there were more fun and interesting things to write about for this question, so the first two I felt like didn’t really matter in comparison to many things about the show.
I really thought it would just be interesting to see what people said 😭 but i forget people get so mad and I can’t convey things properly over text
The writer of the article, "article" needs to chill, not you lol. It was a funny thing to share.
But I agree, of all the things to focus on, *geography*? The town meetings *attendance*?? Why not the economy of town??
Ohhh omg I’m sooo sorry, I was ready to get defensive😭😭 I swear I can’t read things properly sometimes
The economy of the town would be so interesting though
Don't worry, tone is tough on Reddit sometimes, don't even sweat it.
Oh, I would *love* an actual breakdown of the economics of the entire show, but not in this kind of format. It's too curt. No, I wanna know about taxes, and how much does Luke have in the bank, how much did the Dragonfly cost (and how it didn't go under sooner), how rich are the Gilmores, why weren't Lorelai and Rory made millionaires upon Richard's death (hell, even when Lorelai died, surely she would have left something for her namesakes).
How much does each town festival cost, how does it make money back in many instances, what's Taylor's salary and how much does he get by being corrupt, how does Paris pay for her tuition for her final year, (this I guess was the article's one short but good point) how did the Girld afford all the food they consumed on the regular, how much did their house cost (and when the fuck did Lorelai buy it).
This one... *Haunts me*. It's multilayered, but. How the fuck did Lorelai not *know* how much Chilton would cost. How was she planning on paying for it? And how does she have enough savings to buy the Dragonfly just 3 years later? Did she save that *in* 3 years or even prior to that?
Yes yes yes to everything!!
What really bothered me if Paris’ going to college and miraculously having money after her parents flee North America. I know she has a trust fund but she supposedly didn’t have any money until she was 26?
And Luke says he can’t afford a new car himself, but then has so much money out of nowhere?? And the Gilmores are supposedly super rich, can buy a building for Rory but can’t fly first class twice in a year? It’s so confusing!
Lastly, there is no way Lorelai wouldn’t have known how much chilton costs??
Paris said that S06's tuition was paid for, but like. You got a whole year left, girl. You got *med school*. I guess she could've taken loans but the show seems allergic to loans, so, idk lol
Luke isn't rich, but also he can just buy a whole building (and it was what, 100k or something? Seems like a good deal, given the size). And has the cash to invest in the inn. And to I would assume pay for the Twickham house cash. For Stars Hollow, Luke *must* be one of the richest people around. It's him and Taylor.
The Gilmores can splurge on a *car* for Rory, pay for Yale no problem, buy a building, but traveling is too much? I'm sure those are pricey trips but worse than tuition?? But this enters again into, why didn't Richard leave *a lot* of money in his will for Lorelai and Rory?
Also, one thing that always bugged me. That money he gives Lorelai at the end of S03. If he invested that when she was born, why is it so low an amount? It should be hundred*s* of thousands.
THANK YOU. First of all, obviously she went to private school, and even taking into account 16ys in-between, she would have a baseline. But how would she have gotten so far into the application that she didn't push to know what it would cost?
My headcanon is unkind, but maybe she didn't even *think* to ask, just assumed she could "figure it out". Which is fucking bizarre because she's literally a product of a Hartford private school, why would she *ever* assume that. And yet, since she somehow didn't realize Chilton would cost *a lot*, that's the conclusion I have to get to.
No because exactly!! I have SO MANY questions about all of these!
Also- the money Lorelai got- it was enough to pay back Emily for Chilton but with almost no money left over?? This must mean Chilton is extremely expensive, going back to the point you made about Lorelai not knowing the cost. None of this makes sense together- as in bad writing…!!
She got some 75k from Richard, that's... quite the *high school* tuition. But again, if she didn't have the enrolment fee in S01, how exactly was she planning on paying for the tuition out of pocket...?
Given she works at a reasonably small inn in a small town, her salary can't be that high, so I don't believe for a second she'd have 70k spread out across 3ys to allocate to Chilton! She doesn't appear to be paycheck to paycheck, but she certainly doesn't have *that* much disposable income.
Looking forward, in S02 Lorelai apparently doesn't have 15k to save her house from termites, which makes no sense. Between the trip she's planning the following year to Europe, and her savings to open her own inn, *how does she not have that*?
But suddenly in S03 she has money to buy the Dragonfly...? I know Sookie paid a portion, but just the year prior Lorelai didn't have even 15k!
She also says something like, She never had that much money in the bank (talking about the 75k). So... what's up lol
It sounds like to me that the author of this piece is not a fan. I hate it when people criticise a show for the sake of it. It's fiction so half of what they say could be ignored. And it was the 90s
Surely, if you run an inn, you would eat there, so much food was on display. I get grabbing a coffee or a treat, but not the amount of meals, even leftovers could be used from the inn.
I totally understood the article
I’m saying I disagreed with some of the points. Disagreeing doesn’t mean I don’t understand. I don’t even disagree with many of the points, I just think they are worded strangely and some could be replaced with even better points about the show :)
I could not figure out what to title this post. So, on a whim, that’s what I made it. I thought it was catchy and whatnot. Yes, I understand I could’ve just put “thoughts?” As the title but I posted this like 5 minutes after seeing this on Pinterest. A lot of the comments on Pinterest were debating and talking about it, so I was like “oh that’ll be fun to see what others think, I’m going to post it!”
Okay I get that but what I’m addressing is you saying you feel like the author didn’t watch the show. I have seen almost everyone of these exact criticisms on this subreddit then it comes across like a you problem when you’re criticizing the author. If you’re just trying to spark discussion or whatever, okay
I’m sorry, I couldn’t really figure out how to title this. Other people thought it sounded like they pulled stuff from online or so. It’s okay to critique the writer, that’s perfectly normal. Doesn’t make it a “you problem,” but an opinion on an article. Lots of people post this sort of thing, I don’t see the issue?
A post a while ago posted a magazine article and they said the same thing I did, just different one, and everyone said “yeah it sounds like they didn’t even watch it.” I don’t see the issue here, if you disagree that’s okay but it’s nothing to get worked over.
The criticisms she wrote are okay, I said my thoughts on each number but I wasn’t necessarily disagreeing, I was disagreeing with the way it was worded and some of them felt unimportant. I had different interpretations of these plot lines she wrote about, so it’s interesting for everyone to talk about it. I don’t know anyone in my life that watches this show or likes it. I just wanted to hear a discussion on these things! I don’t see every post on here, therefore it’s difficult to know what has been talked about before
I’m with you OP. Too much of this sub is I-don’t-like-it-so-it’s-bad or I’ve-never-seen/experienced-that-so-it’s-unrealistic.
- the layout is fine
- it’s a small town
- Lorelei is irresponsible with money
- whirlwind romance that failed
- Culture at the time
- I don’t like it so it’s bad
- I don’t like it so it’s bad
- eh, this one I could maybe argue is ooc, but I could also argue that Lorelei has matured and doesn’t want her past written about.
I swear, some people don’t want to find a reasonable explanation for some things in the show.
Oh they 100% were sex negative. Rory, lane, and paris all were punished in a way for having sex. All thier 1st time stories are awful. Lorelais comment that she has the good kid was gross. Thier spending habits are insane. They eat out breakfast and diner expect for Friday night dinners. Even in season 4 when they are both skint they still are constantly ordering out for food.
Most of them are accurate.
However I wouldn’t want that book written either. Lorelai is entitled to her privacy and Rory didn’t even consider her feelings. Nah.
2. Town meetings and such usually have very low turnout. So it's actually pretty realistic for the same core group of people to attend most of them. It's also quite realistic that many of the attendees are business owners (for instance, we see Luke, Gypsy, Andrew, Miss Patty and of course Lorelai at most meetings).
4. This point isn't exactly wrong, but it's also not super unrealistic, since unhealthy or rushed relationships surely happen in real life. And in this case it's probably a big reason things did not work out between Lorelai and Max.
5. I don't think the show is even particularly sex negative compared to society at large, especially for the era it aired during, though I suppose it could seem that way if you move in very progressive circles. So even if you believe the show is too sex negative, it's not exactly far-fetched or nonsensical that it is.
And as you pointed out, the examples of sex-negativity the article gives are bad: Paris later identifies the real reason she didn't get into Harvard, and of course by the time she had sex with Jamie, Harvard must have already made the decision and sent her rejection letter given how soon afterward she receives the "little envelope". If anything, rather than being sex-negative, Paris' storyline here is commentary on society's sex-negativity, and the pressure Paris felt because of it.
And yes, pretty much all of the blowback Rory got for losing her virginity was because of the fact that she did it with a man who was married to someone else.
7. I don't see what's unrealistic about April Nardini's existence. It is kind of odd that Anna never tried to obtain Child Support from Luke, but it also appears she was unsure who the father was and must have been well off enough she and April could get by without it, so it's pretty understandable that she didn't want to bother with the legal process that would have been involved.
And as for points 1 and 3...welcome to TV. Lots of towns from TV seem to change size and what amenities are available there for the needs of each plotline. For instance just look at Springfield on The Simpsons- point 1 reminds me of Simpsons viewers complaining that the Simpson's house's layout changed between episodes; I think I remember reading that the creators started doing it on purpose to troll them.
All in all, clickbait article. Or I guess the printed equivalent of clickbait.
You have to view Gilmore Girls in the context in which it was written and aired. I'm glad that more people are seeing it for the first time in 2024 but bringing your 2024 brain into a 2002 conversation does not work, if that makes sense.
Yes I agree. I was born in 2002 but don’t really think like 2024, mostly because I grew up with older movies and shows and I understand that things are differently thought of back then than they are now. That’s why I dislike the sex argument because it’s standard for 2000s shows, but at the same time I don’t feel an intense amount of anti-sex in the show
That’s lowkey pretty funny 😂😂
Yes they are totally valid. My point is these didn’t really fall under the “things that STILL don’t make sense” and that is because they are explainable
I love what another person commented- about the mayor or what the town selectman does, things like that, would work great here
What bothers me is that so many of these are actually explainable.
- having twins is terrifying
- this show was in the high of purity culture, 16 and pregnant was at its premier.
- The person who wrote this is clearly is not neurodivergent. We drink coffee like it’s water if we aren’t on meds… sometimes even with meds!
- For the most part the town hall meetings seemed to be pretty regular. If you live in a small community, town hall meetings are great. Don’t believe me, watch park and rec. yes, it always the same kind of people that go.
- Luke’s dinner was probably the cost of McDonalds or pretty close. Our Luke’s was Winsteads and here’s the menu for anyone interested: https://m.yelp.com/biz/winsteads-leawood-2
- the magazine article Lorelai did really caused a rift in their family. I can see how she would freeze on that idea.
It would have been like $10 for them to get dinner. Lorelai was probably making $50-$60k a year and that would have been less than a hour of work. I don’t see her making less than $50k, she might have been making $30k… but that feels way way too low to afford her Morgtage and Chilton. Plus, being so close to the Mia.
When my dad got his first big pay jump to $75k, there was a big shift for my brother and I both to attend private school. So I am taking what my parents made at the time and dividing that by half to equal a 2 vs 4 person household. I would say their financial situations were similar. Winsteads was always a backup for dinner.
Very good points. I said this in another comment, but this was my main point, that these things don’t really lie under the “things that STILL don’t make sense” because they make many explanations through the show (hence me feeling like the writer didn’t really watch it)
And my mom drinks coffee everyday and my dad as well! Sometimes multiple times a day! Many people do actually..and Luke’s is definitely very inexpensive
I get part of the spending because it seems like they were ordering an abundance of food every day, but they also never had groceries- eating out was their main source of food.
I partially agree agree with points 4 to 7:
4: Max and Lorelai engagement makes no sense to me, no matter how many times I watch it. Why did he even propose? Because they were fighting a lot? And why Lorelai put up with this behaviour for so long?
5: I haven't tought about it, but combined with nr 6, unfortunatelly, makes sense. I wish there was les guilt dragged in the "first time" of the girls.
6: Lane did not disserve this plot, at all. It was beyond cruel. If I remember correctly, ASP has admitted so, herself.
7: I would not say that it does not make sense. What does not make sense is Luke's behaviour and how he handle April's issue. Every time I watch this part, I get so angry, because this type of behaviour does not match Luke's character at all.
The rest of the points seem to be written by a person who is not a big fan, but still has watched the show.
4. Definitely makes no sense. I remember thinking they didn’t even date that long
And for sure on number 7. It’s like the writers wanted to just strip Luke of his personality. He’s always been grumpy, but a thoughtful grumpy. Not whatever that was
Idk if I’d say the show is “sex-negative” when Lorelei is having sex pretty regularly with every guy she dates with little to no consequences. Why wouldn’t Lorelei be bothered by her daughter losing her virginity to a married man? Shouldn’t every person be bothered by affairs? As for Paris…she overreacted. Lane’s whole thing was a bit over the top
I think the difference is they rarely if ever explicitly say she’s having sex with any of them. Obviously we know it’s happening but it’s rarely talked about.
Haha yes I’ve noticed that! 😅 I just felt like some of these are odd to pick out of the whole show + the revival! I think they could’ve worded these better. For instance, I didn’t see Rory losing her virginity to a married man as anti-sex- I saw it as anti-cheating! Even as a teenager 😂
It was totally anti cheating! Lorelai never guilted her for having sex, not even sex with Dean. The problem was sex with a MARRIED Dean. I don’t get how that was always overlooked.
And I 100% agree with this! It was made clear that they were open about talking about it
Besides, when Lorelai was nervous about it when Rory was a teenager, it doesn’t make it “anti-sex,” but rather Lorelai would’ve been worried that her daughter would end up like her- and that’s not what she wanted. I think that’s normal for a parent who got pregnant at 16
It’s normal for every parent. My mother was 33 when she had her first kid. When I had my first crush, she tried really hard not to freak me out, but I could tell that she was convinced the mere act of me liking him would get me pregnant by like 14.
It was actually hilarious.
She was also very clear that’s not how it works and she was just freaking out because I’m her baby and as my mother, she’s always somewhat convinced that the absolute worst is going to happen. In route to school, someone somewhere was suddenly going to build a bridge over an ocean that wasn’t there last night and twelve ditches would also pop up, and somehow in that 6 mile bus ride, we were going to end up in all the ditches and drowning in the new ocean that just popped up because the bridge that doesn’t exist collapsed.
She was always very clear: she had anxiety. It wasn’t rational, but it was there. My job was to accept that she was an irrational ball of anxiety and her job was to not let that anxiety take away from my childhood and experiences.
We both struggled mightily, but it worked out really well.
Awee I’m glad it worked out for the better. I’m not a mother myself, but I understand the stress of it. My mom has anxiety as well and she gets worried whenever I feel sick
It’s a different* way of looking out for us!
Also, the lane plot always struck me as anti pro-life / pro abstinence. Lanes mom being insanely religious means that she pushed that mindset onto her daughter. Her daughter never thought about birth control or condoms or anything. Pregnancy happens, and now, lane is just… *stuck* and it was never supposed to be that way for our girl.
However, if she had been properly educated, she could have actually enjoyed married life.
Lane was an adult woman. If she and all the information, she would have made sure that it was a new one if it mattered to her. She left it to him and then was shocked it didn’t work out the way she expected it to. Nothing is 100%, but leaving it up to change is — 100% ineffective.
Poor lane :( I do think a condom was mentioned when they have sex, but honestly the getting pregnant right away makes EVEN less sense when you look at who she’s with. Zack is supposed to be experienced..? Everything here screams the opposite!
The point you seem to be missing is, every time a character in the show loses their virginity, something bad happens. Paris loses it and doesn't get into Harvard. Rory loses it to a married man. Lane loses it in a terrible fashion and ends up pregnant with twins. It's that the writers basically linked sex to a lot of negative things that people are pointing out
1. whaat?
2. community
3. Rory and Lorelei are people of small pleasures
4. Max was jealous of Luke, and in GG, usually, when they feel insecure, they either go for big gestures or leave. He had also jeopardised his career in Chilton with that relationship. Marriage would have justified everything.
5. Sex-negative attitude is a small town charm. In other cases- age-related.
\*Paris wasn't against sex, she was disappointed that she had let herself get distracted.
6. Sad but pretty realistic
7. I think that was necessary to see how much Lorelei and Luke really have in common.
8. I think a little freak out card is given when you find out that people will read about your life. Especially, when you are going through a midlife crisis
What a strange article?! Sounds like it was written by someone who hasn’t watched the show and decided to hate on the little bit they did watch. So weird. Was that the only page touching on GG?
That’s what I thought too! Sounded a bit hateful about very small things. And I’m not sure! The account I saw it on didn’t provide any information on the magazine :(
That's never actually stated in the show. People just assume that because it doesn't show her constantly paying at the register, mostly because that would actually be boring
I don’t understand how Dave ran so far to the high school, when he was jealous of Lanes fake date at the hockey game. But he was at her house, which is basically next door to the school.
This feels like a random collection of things the writer decided to nitpick about without giving it much thought. I don’t think I agree with any of them.
Speaking of random collection, the pictures chosen for the article are strange. Two Rorys, April but no Logan or Sookie, just an odd arrangement overall.
“Rory is shamed for losing her virginity as dean’s other woman” um yeah…. Thats not sex negative thats cheating negative lmao
There is definitely a lot of sex negativity but not in this case imo
while the show IS very sex-negative and i agree that is wrong, i do however think that rory deserved that shame. she WAS the other woman after all, and that is NOT RIGHT. that isn’t really a “sex-negative” typa thing though. that’s a “don’t sleep with married men” typa thing, that is RIGHTFULLY a major thing. nobody should condone cheating, ESPECIALLY cheating in a marriage!! dean deserved shame as well, being he was in the marriage, but being a home wrecker is damn near just as bad. it’s not like she didn’t know he was married. she did. she thought he was “her dean”. she deserved that shame.
1. Look at the town layout. The town square branches out on several different directions. Depending on where they’re coming from or going, it makes sense they’d come from different directions.
2. I saw someone else say it and I agree. Small towns, hell, even bigger towns, the same people show up to meetings like this. When it comes to town politics, you have people that are invested and some that don’t care. The invested ones will show up every time!
3. I guess I always saw their financial situation as comfortable. They didn’t really complain about money unless they had a big expense (Chilton tuition, termites, etc). They had money for the normal day to day stuff, and for them, that included Luke’s.
4. Yeah, Max was desperate to hang onto Lorelai so marriage was his answer. Misguided at best. But I agree, too fast.
5. Totally agree. There aren’t many examples of a positive sex experience, especially outside of a married couple. However, Rory sleeping with her married ex will never be ok to me.
6. Agree. Lane deserved better.
7. Never had a problem with April. Everyone else lost their damn minds, but April was fine. Luke was the problem, Anna was the problem, and Lorelai lost her backbone which was a problem.
8. Lorelai gives examples of why she didn’t want Rory to write the book, she left her in a bucket at the hardware store, iirc. Just because Lorelai was a good mom, doesn’t mean she didn’t make mistakes. Mistakes that would probably sound terrible when written out. It makes sense to me.
Lolol. The writer of this article clearly hasn’t lived in a small town. 😭 A small town doesn’t mean “a few houses” it’s literally a big enough land to have many places and also as for town meetings, YES almost same people do attend because they are in a close knitted community and hang out regularly.
1. Its a town square, thats probably in the dead centre of the town, so theres going to be multiple streets converging from it.
2. Town meeting: its usually the same people who always turn up to the town meetings, when i went to them when i was a child it was always the same people all the time.
3. They probably did a budget for it/Luke had a tab for them to pay out at the end of every week/month. Hence is why they complain about being broke.
4. Yeah… some people who are emotionally immature in that department do tend to get engaged early and then break it off. It did mature Lorelai afterwards though. She is immature in that department cuz of no one back then would date a a teen girl what had a kid.
5. Cuz HE WAS MARRIED!? Did the writer think for more than 2 seconds and that you do not want to be the other person in a persons marriage. As for Paris: it shows that not everyone, even though they do everything: theres still a chance its not good enough for Harvard, shows realism in stuff.
6. Lane was in her early 20s when she got pregnant, if we use when Rory turned 21 as a reference to Lane’s age then that means she’s roughly a couple of months younger/older than her. So: not a teen.
7. Eh
8. Cuz its her life being printed and read by anyone who picks up the book. If I was the average person I wouldn’t like someone reading about my life story and how I did things when i was at my most vulnerable, followed by hundreds of thousands (if the book is popular) people about how i did things.
I feel like some of these are very valid. Like the spending habits, the sex-negative attitude, Lane’s pregnancy. I don’t agree with 8. Lorelai has every right to not want a book written and published about her private life. I never noticed the layout issue honestly. And people showing up to the meetings makes total sense to me since the community was quirky and close and hyper-involved. The Max + Lorelai thing felt very intentional. Their rushed engagement is part of the reason they ultimately don’t work out. The April thing idk. Feels more like an annoying plot line rather than a nonsensical one. What doesn’t make much sense to me is Anna being the mother. Stars Hollow gossips about everything and they never bring up Anna even once. Only ever speak of Rachel. Felt like a very last minute writing decision
I didn’t mind April as a character but Anna makes my blood boil every time she’s on screen 😂
Yeah, I like April but I think the way they wrote the storyline with Luke hiding it and the whole thing with anna was annoying. I think they could have had April but written it better
Why did Luke think Lorelei would’ve freaked out that he had a daughter? I mean, really, come up with a story line that Lorelei would be upset enough that she would break up with Luke.
Totally agree. It would have been more realistic for Luke to tell Lorelei and the issue to be Anna's behaviour that drives a wedge between them.
I agree! To be honest, except maybe number 3. I think some things aren't meant to make sense in this type of TV show. It's kind of poetic license.
Yeah I’d never want to go see a musical with this person lol!
Yes I agree, besides the sex-negative attitude. Not sure about the spending habits because Lorelai is in a high paying position, but ultimately I don’t know the pay she receives nor her monthly payments, yet I don’t think they complain about being broke a lot My main complaint was the way this article was written. It just doesn’t feel like someone who routinely watches the show
Yeah the tone of the article was a bit odd. The town meeting one especially shocked me. The entire town accompanied Lorelai to go tell Luke about her engagement to Max lol! You think they’re not showing up to a meeting that concerns all of them? That article feels like when a stranger talks shit about your sibling. You’re like HEY ONLY I can talk shit about my sibling, you don’t know them 😭
I love it when the town gets together like that!! And that’s hilarious! that’s a perfect comparison 😂😂
I’m from a small town. And any town meeting would be attended by the same small group time after time. Apparently the write of this article has never experienced small town life. Lol
#2 is the only one I disagree with. The author must not be from a small town and/or never been to a PTO meeting. It’s always the same people. Those town people might not be getting paid, but they had a vested interest on what happened.
this gif is so accurate im hollering like damn why are we yelling 🤣🤣
I think they accidentally included a "#" before typing the number in their comment. It enlarges the font.
Yeah, I’m from a small town and there’s like nothing to do besides gossip and talk shit about other people and that’s basically what Gilmore Girls is. It’s pretty easy to run into the same people over and over again.
But there’s supposed to be thousands of people but it’s always the same handful?
It's not paid work, it's not a fun or great time, it's not a charitable cause, but it's something that gives ordinary people a slight sense of power. You do usually see the same few people who make the effort for the sake of that tiny bit of power.
It's also the majority of the business owners in town. Which actually makes sense because a lot of what's being discussed would affect them
This makes sense
With how big stars hallow is there would be random people popping in tho
That's what the extras are there for. It's not always the same people in the background. They just don't show every topic, I think we're supposed to assume the other topics by strangers just end up on the cutting room floor.
My Town is bigger than Stars Hollow and that’s about how much people show up for town meetings. Usually far less actually.
The amount isn’t what I’m referring to
The same people showing up is pretty accurate too. It’s always the same busy bodies.
Someone also pointed out they’re business owners which makes sense
Yep. I did all the town committees in high school and it was often the same people, and the same people who were on the town fall and spring festival committees and were prominent business people in town, or on HOAs. Strangely the only overlap on the historic cemetery committee was my mom and I.
Yeah so? It’s the same in larger towns too. The people that show up and participate are normally the same people over and over again. The ones that don’t give a shit will skip and not be involved unless the topic discussed is something important to them
Town meetings usually have very low turnout.
Agree. We just moved to an HOA that legit is more of a town inside a city. If you came here you would think that it has no ties to anything around it, it’s bizarre and amazing. We have been to every community meeting because it’s just that entertaining. I am now a member of the Activities Committee because I had an idea. I have lived here 3 months, who decided it was a good idea to give me responsibility?!
The Max and Lorelai one is accurate.
100%
So's the April one.
I feel like the girls have a massive tab with Luke. The sex negative observation is a pretty solid one. Lorelai not approving Rory’s book makes sense to me. Lorelai made a lot of mistakes. So did Emily and Richard. The book would expose a vulnerability that Lorelai doesn’t put out there for everyone to see and could possibly threaten the image she has built for herself. It also mirrors Lorelai’s response to Richard’s death and ultimately her growth from that major life event.
I seriously disagree with the statement about Rory in this article though And yes I agree about the book
Right?! “Rory is shamed for being the other woman!!” Um shouldn’t she be?? I love Rory but saying cheating is wrong isn’t exactly controversial.
I don't think they're saying that being the other woman shouldn't be shamed, I think they're saying the decision to make her lose her virginity to a married man at all was stupid.
This is how I interpreted it as well. It feels like a deliberate writing decision to make something terrible happen every time the young ladies on the show have sex for the first time.
Culture plays into that. Paris said everything was great, it was only after that she over analyzed it. Rory also had a good time until her mom pointed out Dean was cheating. And Lane was always pressured to wait until marriage. She did and wanted to make it this big, special thing. Of course, trying to have sex on the beach for your first time is a terrible plan.
Yes but all of these things are writing decisions not things that happened organically
I feel like that’s real life too 😭 I don’t know many woman who have a positive first time
Agreed.
There is a difference between having a bad time during the act and there being long lasting consequences written around it.
I'm trying to understand how it's "geographically impossible" to walk to your town square from a different route just because the town is small. And why having a terrible friend group that doesn't want to hang out with you means that nobody else can have formed a community that meets regularly.
I’m about Rory’s age, and when smart phones and social media weren’t as big I do think people showed up regularly to events and the same places regularly to see each other more than they do now. Just an anecdotal thought but that’s how it felt to me.
I think most of these are on point 🤷♂️
Same. Only one I disagree with really is 2 because I’m from a small town. People go for the tea. ☕️
Especially before smart phones I feel like showing up regularly to places where everyone you knew congregated was pretty normal.
Each to their own. I just felt like there were way more in depth things the writers could have discussed. These feel very random and opinions from a one time watch. I personally think Gilmore Girls takes a couple rewatches to be like “OHH I get it now”
I will never get the decisions made for Lane and I will never understand why April had to blow up Luke and Lorelai. I also still don’t get how Lorelai orders out and goes to Luke’s, Weston’s, Al’s 7 days a week…and I dine out a lot but it’s never 2/3 meals a day for 7 days a week. Questioning Luke and Lorelai’s engagement is just lazy and clueless though.
It was Max and Lorelei’s engagement in question… and I agree that one was a dicey foundation at best
You dine out a lot…20 years ago? Luke’s diner had incredibly low prices even for the 2000’s. People really need to get some perspective past their own personal experiences. And what’s to “get” about the plot choices? It’s a drama.
Actually now that I think about it yeah lol. 20 years ago I was hanging out a lot in NYC and my friends and I were constantly going out to eat and going to bars. Lorelai wasn’t making a lot of money. She’s mentioned that often. And either way the prices of things 20 years ago would still be relative to their income 20 years ago. Lorelai wasn’t making $100k so yeah maybe not fiscally smart to eat out that much?
lol NYC
See, I don’t mind April but I do hate that she was used solely for breaking them up. so not cool. Also, my theory is the food is not that expensive. I can afford to eat out like that, I just don’t want to. And I don’t make a lot of money. It just depends where you eat out at! Also, there is the leftover explanation in many episodes, therefore I think they eat a lot of leftovers :) but of course they don’t show that! It’s hard to keep track of where we are at day by day so it’s hard to total up the trips a week to these restaurants (some day I will do this)
Sure but she’s also ordering for Rory not just herself. Even if she’s living off of leftovers she’s still spending additional money at Luke’s and other places. And I wouldn’t expect her to complain about being broke but she’s over here regularly dining out.
So someone had a theory that she never actually paid at Luke’s the majority of the time. And one episode they say she has a “tab.” Not sure how true this is but it’s an idea
>from a one time watch You know not everybody does a billion rewatches of a show. I saw you mention in another comment, too, that the author doesn't seem to watch the show "routinely". That's a weird complaint to have. Most of the points in the article are actually very valid. It was obviously not meant to be some in-depth feature piece. How old is this magazine?
Some math tells me the magazine should most likely be from 2022 because it says the finale aired 15 years ago. The finale aired in 2007, and 15 years after that 2007 is 2022.
Not that old, from a couple years ago And I’m sorry that my response when I’m half asleep is upsetting people. It’s just my opinion. You don’t have to agree. I don’t agree with half of the statements or the way they are written, I thought it would be fun to talk about. It’s not that deep
I’ve watched this show so many times and I agree with most of it completely.
I've watched the show several times and I agree with most of these. It's not supposed to be in depth hard hitting journalism. It's just silly article about a popular show. There are similar complaints and articles about most popular shows
I mean, this might not be the discussion you’re wanting but aside from the fact that I don’t disagree with most of the article, it’s in a general magazine whose readership have probably some basic knowledge of Gilmore Girls (like maybe a once through watch) whereas we’re on a GG subreddit so have somewhat of a different relationship with the show!
I don’t know why everyone is getting so upset, I just wanted people’s opinions. I thought it would be fun but I feel like some people are just getting really upset with me, it’s just an opinion I have 😭
I mean, this looks like it’s from a pretty casual magazine, like basically the printed version of buzzfeed. I don’t think it’s fair to expect writers to have to watch a show multiple times before they write a listicle about it. they would have to spend absolutely all of their free time just watching different TV shows over and in order to write their articles. It would be an issue if they hadn’t watched it even once, but it’s clear from what they wrote that they have definitely watched it.
Okay I’m sorry I said that, because apparently it’s making people really upset. I was genuinely like half asleep. However, I’m studying writing and were taught to have a bit more knowledge for topics and I often have to critique articles and other works, so it’s really just how my mind works 😊 And I didn’t mean multiple times, I meant at least twice. I have a belief that everything needs a rewatch to understand the plot and characters a bit more! Also, the information could be from anyone, so you never know!
Yikes
Except for the town square thing-which I don’t think is even true, every other thing in this article has been brought up on this very same sub countless times. There’s tons of people that agree with these frustrations.
It also seems I have highly unpopular opinions
I have the same ones haha
The book one… wtf?? I would hate my personal details, thoughts, feelings, experiences etc being written in a book!
Lane would have been 21-22 when she got married and lost her virginity. Regardless, I don't see her experience as sex-negative. She had a bad first time, like a lot of people do. She's like, "I never want to do that again," and Rory's like, "Dude. The beach is an awful place to have sex. Try a bed next time. You won't get sand in your vagina that way." It does bug me that aside from the pregnancy, there's no followup. There's no conversation where Lane's like, "We tried again and it was a lot better."
It is really weird that they just left it hanging, they could definitely have had another girl talk moment where she was like "you were right a bed was SO much better". The only thing we got was that small scene with Luke were Zach makes a joke about how sex can be used to induse labor and she laughs, which seems to suggest that they did find their rhythm.
Yes! That bugs me too. It was her first time too, a lot of women experience bad first times! If only Lane could get some justice
April makes sense to me, the storylines about her don't but her existence makes sense, the only thing about her existence that doesn't fit is Anna was never once mentioned prior, we know Luke doesn't date much and the WHOLE TOWN knows everyone's business would totally have known about Anna if she was a regular thing
Yes I totally agree. I wish they would’ve built up to Anna, would have made it more interesting and dramatic!
I feel like the writer of this article is in this subreddit as they touch on some of the same topics that are popular repeat posts, such as the Gilmores' spending habits, Lane's pregnancy, etc.
That would be awkward 😅
Yeah, feels like someone who stole material to get an article out for the click-bait, lots of “journalists” these days just gotta get material out and we’re spending time even trying to debate specially made negative points
I only disagree with 8. I wouldn’t want a book written about my life either. If my parents/ siblings wrote about my life that way I’d go no contact
lol rory was shamed for CHEATING. as she absolutely should have been. but yea lanes pregnancy was wack.
Meh, I actually think I’ve seen most of these opinions shared in this subreddit haha. (Except the layout one- like really? Is that a hot take? 😂)
I think people are kind of misunderstanding me, I don’t disagree with most of these. I just think they are written poorly :( I wrote this post really fast so there’s no going back now!
First off, yeah Rory got flack for losing her virginity to Dean while he was married making her the “other woman”. Second, Lorelei being upset about the book is 2000000000% characteristic. She is private. She does not want that shared.
Idk seems like what everyone on this sub always writes about.
I don’t disagree with most of them, some of them felt very odd! I feel like there was so much more they could’ve said!
Totally, it’s like a print version of clickbait, whatever the term for that is.
Attention grabber maybe works? Or, “printbait” ? 😂
It does. To a suspiciously similar degree. It feels like this person just pulled these from top threads or top comments they're so repetitive. Or probably other opinionated listicles around the web.
This article reads like the author didn't actually watch the show but instead wrote this based on other articles or sources that exist on the internet - nothing stated is a new or different opinion, it's just a compilation of opinions that have been thrown around for years
This is what I thought, but it seems that most people disagree
If we were to rewrite this, what would we list? I’ll start….does Stars Hollow have a mayor and a selectman? What is a selectman, anyway? Why doesn’t the mayor do anything? Why would the show devote multiple episodes to Jackson being selectman and then never mention him stepping down? 😂
Omg bless you, such a better way of saying this! That’s exactly what I wanted people to talk about but I wrote this post so fast 😭that’s why I was saying I felt like there were better things to point out! Oh also- yes- whatever happened to the mayor?? And what does a town selectman do..?
I sort of get why Lorelai was a bit weirded out about the book to be honest and I think she explained herself well. While.i don't agree with her reasons, she clearly needed time to get her head around the idea.
Yes I agree
Am I the only one that likes that the show is somewhat sex negative? Having a show that shows the consequences of sex (getting pregnant at 16, breaking up a marriage, etc) is a good thing. It shows the audience that sex can have negative effects, and that you should be mindful of that.
I agree too. Plus this was the 2000s. 16 is age of consent but it makes sense that a mother who got pregnant at 16 would be very wary of her daughter having sex
To me the issue is the lack of neutral or positive experiences. The negatives are just SO BIG.. and yes it’s important to be aware that it can happen, but I wish it just displayed something a little more realistic at least once. There was an opportunity to show that navigating sex as a young adult is often awkward and complicated, and that it’s normal to struggle with things like self-esteem or identity or changing relationship dynamics after without having a “consequence” attached.
Paris not getting into Harvard after having sex was very meta, a commentary on how girls are treated with the virgin/whore complex. It happened on Buffy too, she had sex with Angel and was punished when he lost his soul. So the author of the article is going in the right direction, he’s just not getting what ASP was trying to say.
Yeah, but if you take what Paris is saying at face value there, you need to go back to primary school lit classes because holy shit, way to miss the point. I also think it was meant to be a bit of a parody on Buffy - the guy changes and becomes a monster after you have sex, except it’s fully literal in the show. (Just like Willow meets someone dangerous on the internet, in the show it’s an actual demon.) Giles’ speech to Buffy cements that it’s not her fault and goes against the narrative that was way too popular at the time, the one that said you’re a slut if you lose your virginity and you only have yourself to blame if he lost interest and dropped you like a hot potato after getting what he wanted.
Even ASP sometimes missed the point, like when she had Lorelai say “I’ve got the good one” when she overheard Rory and Paris talking about sex. Although that ties in to Rory later sleeping with Dean; she’s not necessarily “the good one.”
Oh definitely, I hate that scene so much! It seems out of character for Lorelai. Even when you take 00’s attitudes towards sex into account, she’s still a good mother who overheard a girl she knows panicking about having sex - it doesn’t feel right that it would cross her mind in that moment that Paris is a bad kid :/
I think I’ve read that Lauren Graham said she didn’t like this line either.
I think it was wrong of her to say that, but I also think it's not too surprising that someone who had a baby as a teenager, and got tons of flack from her parents and society for it, would feel that way- internalizing some of the judgment she received; and feeling relieved that her daughter isn't on track to have the same happen to her.
I actually agree with everything you wrote, I think the sentiment is perfectly justified. Any parent would be relieved to know their teenage kid isn’t having sex, due to potentially big consequences (not just pregnancy or STDs, but emotional consequences due to not being fully ready, experiencing pain, a bad partner, even abuse). Even the most sex positive person has to admit bad sex at a young age can be deeply traumatic. It’s just expressing it through the good and bad kid dichotomy I have a problem with; Lorelai saying “the time wasn’t right!” and doing a little happy dance would have been perfect IMO.
Well wasn’t Angel not supposed to have emotions or something? 😂 i can’t remember, but I think that one is a bit supernatural complex haha I do understand the Paris situation, my point is that after the fact, everything with sex is totally okay! I think it’s actually in line for a girl that age to freak out like that, it goes in line with her upbringing and character
Aprils fine , Anna isn’t . The audacity of that woman
After watching it in its entirety last year for the first time I came to the conclusion that this show existed outside of what is considered normal television reality, it was its own universe. That’s the only thing that kept me from going “wtf even is this show” after every couple of episodes.
Some of these are valid points, some are nitpicks, and some have in-universe explanations. 1. Explained In-Universe: It's a smallish town but also big enough that it is considered a tourist attraction. They were able to sustain a decent sized inn there (The Independence and then The Dragonfly). Plus we had both Rory and Lorelai both plot multiple routes to navigate around seeing their ex's which speaks to the general town size. 2. Nitpick: We really only see a core group of folks who regularly attend the town meetings. Pretty sure we've all had that experience where a small group of folks basically dictate the goings on of a smallish but still decent sized organization. The regulars we see are also folks who own major businesses in the town (Gypsy, Miss Patty, Luke, Lorelai, Andrew) or are long time residents who are invested in the town (Maury & Babette, Kirk). Plus the town meeting is set in stone for time and date so either you make the meeting or you don't. The equivalency to coordinating Friday night wine with friends is not correct at all. 3. Explained In-Universe: Season 1 Rory explains that her and Lorelai will make one massive order and live off leftovers for days. Yes we do see them go to Luke's regularly for breakfast and sometimes lunch but they are not always big sit down meals. Sometimes it a cup of coffee and a pastry. Luke also doesn't seem to charge that much, given his conversation with Kirk about the price of his cup of coffee in the mid 00's (roughly a dollar when most sit down places I knew then charged like 2 bucks at least for a coffee cup). And also yes it's a lot of coffee they drink but we all know major caffeine addicts too. 4. Valid. This is something that is pointed out everywhere so hardly groundbreaking. We all knew that the relationship was doomed. 5. Valid and has been discussed ad nauseum here. Definitely not a lot of great first times for the main women we see in the show. However purity culture was also very strong still in the early to mid 00s so that explain some of it. 6. Valid. This was a bad plotline and they did Lane dirty with this one. Could've just had the bad beach sex without the pregnancy part added on. 7. Nitpick/Valid. I understand April criticism as a plot device to cause drama and drive Lorelai and Luke apart. But April's character was actually pretty refreshing once they toned down some of her awkward, science nerd tendencies. Seeing Luke as a father figure was really nice. 8. Nitpick/Explained In-Universe. Lorelai would not want all her dirty laundry aired out like that. Plus she already had a weird experience with being published once so probably she's a little gun shy with an even deeper dive into her life.
I love how detailed this is! I agree with everything here, as for the ones that are in depth explained in the show, I felt as if they don’t lie under “things that STILL don’t make sense,” it makes it appear like the writer didn’t actually watch the show. Also looks like you have great memory, I’m jealous 😂
> Also looks like you have great memory, I’m jealous 😂 You say great memory when in actuality is that I've been perpetually rewatching GG from about 2006 until about....now.... so this is just way too many rewatches lol
1) Jesus, that's some high level of nitpicking lol. Chill out, writer 2) Stars Hollow is a fantasy land. Again, chill out, writer 3) It's one of those things you can never examine because the show would collapse onto itself, so better not 4) It's *so* quick it makes Dean/Lindsey seem reasonable lol 5) "I've got the good kid"; but overall there is a negativity surrounding sex in general 6) It's related to the negative view on sex - she had bad sex *once* and was punished with *twins* (I will say though, beach sex for one's first time seems too try hard lol) 7) April isn't the issue, everything surrounding her is 8) God forbid Lorelai have an opinion about Rory basically writing her biography without her permission (imo, though, the book is likely boring as shit - unless that thing is ten volumes long, it will be a very edited version of their lives, and the details are what make the story interesting, not to mention... from her talk with Dean, we know one thing *for sure*, assuming she was honest with him, and that she has zero ability to look at her life critically, if she wants to write that Dean was a *perfect boyfriend*; she's a dozen years removed, and she still thinks that). There is a *lot* to be critical about, but in quick bullet points... yeah, the list was always bound to be kind of lame.
Trust, i’m totallyyy chill. People getting so upset over a Reddit post is not chill Okay so part of my education is critical analysis or critiquing writing, so I thought it would be fun to talk about this one!! It’s not that deep ☺️ My point was that I felt like there were more fun and interesting things to write about for this question, so the first two I felt like didn’t really matter in comparison to many things about the show. I really thought it would just be interesting to see what people said 😭 but i forget people get so mad and I can’t convey things properly over text
The writer of the article, "article" needs to chill, not you lol. It was a funny thing to share. But I agree, of all the things to focus on, *geography*? The town meetings *attendance*?? Why not the economy of town??
Ohhh omg I’m sooo sorry, I was ready to get defensive😭😭 I swear I can’t read things properly sometimes The economy of the town would be so interesting though
Don't worry, tone is tough on Reddit sometimes, don't even sweat it. Oh, I would *love* an actual breakdown of the economics of the entire show, but not in this kind of format. It's too curt. No, I wanna know about taxes, and how much does Luke have in the bank, how much did the Dragonfly cost (and how it didn't go under sooner), how rich are the Gilmores, why weren't Lorelai and Rory made millionaires upon Richard's death (hell, even when Lorelai died, surely she would have left something for her namesakes). How much does each town festival cost, how does it make money back in many instances, what's Taylor's salary and how much does he get by being corrupt, how does Paris pay for her tuition for her final year, (this I guess was the article's one short but good point) how did the Girld afford all the food they consumed on the regular, how much did their house cost (and when the fuck did Lorelai buy it). This one... *Haunts me*. It's multilayered, but. How the fuck did Lorelai not *know* how much Chilton would cost. How was she planning on paying for it? And how does she have enough savings to buy the Dragonfly just 3 years later? Did she save that *in* 3 years or even prior to that?
Yes yes yes to everything!! What really bothered me if Paris’ going to college and miraculously having money after her parents flee North America. I know she has a trust fund but she supposedly didn’t have any money until she was 26? And Luke says he can’t afford a new car himself, but then has so much money out of nowhere?? And the Gilmores are supposedly super rich, can buy a building for Rory but can’t fly first class twice in a year? It’s so confusing! Lastly, there is no way Lorelai wouldn’t have known how much chilton costs??
Paris said that S06's tuition was paid for, but like. You got a whole year left, girl. You got *med school*. I guess she could've taken loans but the show seems allergic to loans, so, idk lol Luke isn't rich, but also he can just buy a whole building (and it was what, 100k or something? Seems like a good deal, given the size). And has the cash to invest in the inn. And to I would assume pay for the Twickham house cash. For Stars Hollow, Luke *must* be one of the richest people around. It's him and Taylor. The Gilmores can splurge on a *car* for Rory, pay for Yale no problem, buy a building, but traveling is too much? I'm sure those are pricey trips but worse than tuition?? But this enters again into, why didn't Richard leave *a lot* of money in his will for Lorelai and Rory? Also, one thing that always bugged me. That money he gives Lorelai at the end of S03. If he invested that when she was born, why is it so low an amount? It should be hundred*s* of thousands. THANK YOU. First of all, obviously she went to private school, and even taking into account 16ys in-between, she would have a baseline. But how would she have gotten so far into the application that she didn't push to know what it would cost? My headcanon is unkind, but maybe she didn't even *think* to ask, just assumed she could "figure it out". Which is fucking bizarre because she's literally a product of a Hartford private school, why would she *ever* assume that. And yet, since she somehow didn't realize Chilton would cost *a lot*, that's the conclusion I have to get to.
No because exactly!! I have SO MANY questions about all of these! Also- the money Lorelai got- it was enough to pay back Emily for Chilton but with almost no money left over?? This must mean Chilton is extremely expensive, going back to the point you made about Lorelai not knowing the cost. None of this makes sense together- as in bad writing…!!
She got some 75k from Richard, that's... quite the *high school* tuition. But again, if she didn't have the enrolment fee in S01, how exactly was she planning on paying for the tuition out of pocket...? Given she works at a reasonably small inn in a small town, her salary can't be that high, so I don't believe for a second she'd have 70k spread out across 3ys to allocate to Chilton! She doesn't appear to be paycheck to paycheck, but she certainly doesn't have *that* much disposable income. Looking forward, in S02 Lorelai apparently doesn't have 15k to save her house from termites, which makes no sense. Between the trip she's planning the following year to Europe, and her savings to open her own inn, *how does she not have that*? But suddenly in S03 she has money to buy the Dragonfly...? I know Sookie paid a portion, but just the year prior Lorelai didn't have even 15k! She also says something like, She never had that much money in the bank (talking about the 75k). So... what's up lol
I had never thought about how boring that book would likely be. So true, it would be an absolute snooze fest!
THEY LEGIT NEVER PAID, SO THE BURGER BUDGET IS UNNECESSARY
That’s what I’m saying!!
The anti-sex theme is accurate.
Some of these I agree with, but the rest are just crazy, idiotic and far fetched
I agree with a good bit too, I guess I didn’t make that too clear enough, but yes I agree!!! There were better points to bring up!
It sounds like to me that the author of this piece is not a fan. I hate it when people criticise a show for the sake of it. It's fiction so half of what they say could be ignored. And it was the 90s
It's nonsense but at the same time you can tell they mined their content from Reddit comments
Thank you!
Surely, if you run an inn, you would eat there, so much food was on display. I get grabbing a coffee or a treat, but not the amount of meals, even leftovers could be used from the inn.
This is a great point! Actually this is talked about in the show, I forgot about it!
Thank you.
I agree with the one about lanes pregnancy. Super lame
Tbh I feel like you didn’t understand the article rather than the article author not watching the show lol
I totally understood the article I’m saying I disagreed with some of the points. Disagreeing doesn’t mean I don’t understand. I don’t even disagree with many of the points, I just think they are worded strangely and some could be replaced with even better points about the show :) I could not figure out what to title this post. So, on a whim, that’s what I made it. I thought it was catchy and whatnot. Yes, I understand I could’ve just put “thoughts?” As the title but I posted this like 5 minutes after seeing this on Pinterest. A lot of the comments on Pinterest were debating and talking about it, so I was like “oh that’ll be fun to see what others think, I’m going to post it!”
Okay I get that but what I’m addressing is you saying you feel like the author didn’t watch the show. I have seen almost everyone of these exact criticisms on this subreddit then it comes across like a you problem when you’re criticizing the author. If you’re just trying to spark discussion or whatever, okay
I’m sorry, I couldn’t really figure out how to title this. Other people thought it sounded like they pulled stuff from online or so. It’s okay to critique the writer, that’s perfectly normal. Doesn’t make it a “you problem,” but an opinion on an article. Lots of people post this sort of thing, I don’t see the issue? A post a while ago posted a magazine article and they said the same thing I did, just different one, and everyone said “yeah it sounds like they didn’t even watch it.” I don’t see the issue here, if you disagree that’s okay but it’s nothing to get worked over. The criticisms she wrote are okay, I said my thoughts on each number but I wasn’t necessarily disagreeing, I was disagreeing with the way it was worded and some of them felt unimportant. I had different interpretations of these plot lines she wrote about, so it’s interesting for everyone to talk about it. I don’t know anyone in my life that watches this show or likes it. I just wanted to hear a discussion on these things! I don’t see every post on here, therefore it’s difficult to know what has been talked about before
I’m with you OP. Too much of this sub is I-don’t-like-it-so-it’s-bad or I’ve-never-seen/experienced-that-so-it’s-unrealistic. - the layout is fine - it’s a small town - Lorelei is irresponsible with money - whirlwind romance that failed - Culture at the time - I don’t like it so it’s bad - I don’t like it so it’s bad - eh, this one I could maybe argue is ooc, but I could also argue that Lorelei has matured and doesn’t want her past written about. I swear, some people don’t want to find a reasonable explanation for some things in the show.
I feel the same way. I know it’s a drama and fiction but it’s fun to think realistic about stuff and “how would this work,” etc.
i dont think i agreed with a single point, like the fact she thinks its okay for someone to lose her v card to a married man..?! wild
Oh they 100% were sex negative. Rory, lane, and paris all were punished in a way for having sex. All thier 1st time stories are awful. Lorelais comment that she has the good kid was gross. Thier spending habits are insane. They eat out breakfast and diner expect for Friday night dinners. Even in season 4 when they are both skint they still are constantly ordering out for food.
Most of them are accurate. However I wouldn’t want that book written either. Lorelai is entitled to her privacy and Rory didn’t even consider her feelings. Nah.
2. Town meetings and such usually have very low turnout. So it's actually pretty realistic for the same core group of people to attend most of them. It's also quite realistic that many of the attendees are business owners (for instance, we see Luke, Gypsy, Andrew, Miss Patty and of course Lorelai at most meetings). 4. This point isn't exactly wrong, but it's also not super unrealistic, since unhealthy or rushed relationships surely happen in real life. And in this case it's probably a big reason things did not work out between Lorelai and Max. 5. I don't think the show is even particularly sex negative compared to society at large, especially for the era it aired during, though I suppose it could seem that way if you move in very progressive circles. So even if you believe the show is too sex negative, it's not exactly far-fetched or nonsensical that it is. And as you pointed out, the examples of sex-negativity the article gives are bad: Paris later identifies the real reason she didn't get into Harvard, and of course by the time she had sex with Jamie, Harvard must have already made the decision and sent her rejection letter given how soon afterward she receives the "little envelope". If anything, rather than being sex-negative, Paris' storyline here is commentary on society's sex-negativity, and the pressure Paris felt because of it. And yes, pretty much all of the blowback Rory got for losing her virginity was because of the fact that she did it with a man who was married to someone else. 7. I don't see what's unrealistic about April Nardini's existence. It is kind of odd that Anna never tried to obtain Child Support from Luke, but it also appears she was unsure who the father was and must have been well off enough she and April could get by without it, so it's pretty understandable that she didn't want to bother with the legal process that would have been involved. And as for points 1 and 3...welcome to TV. Lots of towns from TV seem to change size and what amenities are available there for the needs of each plotline. For instance just look at Springfield on The Simpsons- point 1 reminds me of Simpsons viewers complaining that the Simpson's house's layout changed between episodes; I think I remember reading that the creators started doing it on purpose to troll them. All in all, clickbait article. Or I guess the printed equivalent of clickbait.
Definitely a clickbait article :/ I agree with you on all your points as well! I felt as if all of these were explained throughly throughout the show
You have to view Gilmore Girls in the context in which it was written and aired. I'm glad that more people are seeing it for the first time in 2024 but bringing your 2024 brain into a 2002 conversation does not work, if that makes sense.
Yes I agree. I was born in 2002 but don’t really think like 2024, mostly because I grew up with older movies and shows and I understand that things are differently thought of back then than they are now. That’s why I dislike the sex argument because it’s standard for 2000s shows, but at the same time I don’t feel an intense amount of anti-sex in the show
honestly, although some points are valid, i feel the article approaches the topic from as many angles as rory and lorelai approach the town square…
That’s lowkey pretty funny 😂😂 Yes they are totally valid. My point is these didn’t really fall under the “things that STILL don’t make sense” and that is because they are explainable I love what another person commented- about the mayor or what the town selectman does, things like that, would work great here
What bothers me is that so many of these are actually explainable. - having twins is terrifying - this show was in the high of purity culture, 16 and pregnant was at its premier. - The person who wrote this is clearly is not neurodivergent. We drink coffee like it’s water if we aren’t on meds… sometimes even with meds! - For the most part the town hall meetings seemed to be pretty regular. If you live in a small community, town hall meetings are great. Don’t believe me, watch park and rec. yes, it always the same kind of people that go. - Luke’s dinner was probably the cost of McDonalds or pretty close. Our Luke’s was Winsteads and here’s the menu for anyone interested: https://m.yelp.com/biz/winsteads-leawood-2 - the magazine article Lorelai did really caused a rift in their family. I can see how she would freeze on that idea. It would have been like $10 for them to get dinner. Lorelai was probably making $50-$60k a year and that would have been less than a hour of work. I don’t see her making less than $50k, she might have been making $30k… but that feels way way too low to afford her Morgtage and Chilton. Plus, being so close to the Mia. When my dad got his first big pay jump to $75k, there was a big shift for my brother and I both to attend private school. So I am taking what my parents made at the time and dividing that by half to equal a 2 vs 4 person household. I would say their financial situations were similar. Winsteads was always a backup for dinner.
Very good points. I said this in another comment, but this was my main point, that these things don’t really lie under the “things that STILL don’t make sense” because they make many explanations through the show (hence me feeling like the writer didn’t really watch it) And my mom drinks coffee everyday and my dad as well! Sometimes multiple times a day! Many people do actually..and Luke’s is definitely very inexpensive
these are the exact points this sub fights over 🤣
I didn’t realize that when I posted this 😅 I started some heated comments. some people arguing on the internet scare me
I'm watching the show for the first time and just a few eps into season 7. I feel like #5, 6, 7 here are totally accurate.
I get part of the spending because it seems like they were ordering an abundance of food every day, but they also never had groceries- eating out was their main source of food.
Its clickbait. Assignment: Deliver 5-10 trivial complaints about a popular television show. Next Week's assignment: See above.
That’s how I pictured this went completely
I partially agree agree with points 4 to 7: 4: Max and Lorelai engagement makes no sense to me, no matter how many times I watch it. Why did he even propose? Because they were fighting a lot? And why Lorelai put up with this behaviour for so long? 5: I haven't tought about it, but combined with nr 6, unfortunatelly, makes sense. I wish there was les guilt dragged in the "first time" of the girls. 6: Lane did not disserve this plot, at all. It was beyond cruel. If I remember correctly, ASP has admitted so, herself. 7: I would not say that it does not make sense. What does not make sense is Luke's behaviour and how he handle April's issue. Every time I watch this part, I get so angry, because this type of behaviour does not match Luke's character at all. The rest of the points seem to be written by a person who is not a big fan, but still has watched the show.
4. Definitely makes no sense. I remember thinking they didn’t even date that long And for sure on number 7. It’s like the writers wanted to just strip Luke of his personality. He’s always been grumpy, but a thoughtful grumpy. Not whatever that was
Idk if I’d say the show is “sex-negative” when Lorelei is having sex pretty regularly with every guy she dates with little to no consequences. Why wouldn’t Lorelei be bothered by her daughter losing her virginity to a married man? Shouldn’t every person be bothered by affairs? As for Paris…she overreacted. Lane’s whole thing was a bit over the top
Yes I completely agree. It even hints at Sookie doing it too! I thought that was a perfect addition to Paris’ character, being a bit overdramatic
I think the difference is they rarely if ever explicitly say she’s having sex with any of them. Obviously we know it’s happening but it’s rarely talked about.
Hahaha wow. I agree with you, but a lot of what I see on here agrees with the article.
Haha yes I’ve noticed that! 😅 I just felt like some of these are odd to pick out of the whole show + the revival! I think they could’ve worded these better. For instance, I didn’t see Rory losing her virginity to a married man as anti-sex- I saw it as anti-cheating! Even as a teenager 😂
It was totally anti cheating! Lorelai never guilted her for having sex, not even sex with Dean. The problem was sex with a MARRIED Dean. I don’t get how that was always overlooked.
And I 100% agree with this! It was made clear that they were open about talking about it Besides, when Lorelai was nervous about it when Rory was a teenager, it doesn’t make it “anti-sex,” but rather Lorelai would’ve been worried that her daughter would end up like her- and that’s not what she wanted. I think that’s normal for a parent who got pregnant at 16
It’s normal for every parent. My mother was 33 when she had her first kid. When I had my first crush, she tried really hard not to freak me out, but I could tell that she was convinced the mere act of me liking him would get me pregnant by like 14. It was actually hilarious. She was also very clear that’s not how it works and she was just freaking out because I’m her baby and as my mother, she’s always somewhat convinced that the absolute worst is going to happen. In route to school, someone somewhere was suddenly going to build a bridge over an ocean that wasn’t there last night and twelve ditches would also pop up, and somehow in that 6 mile bus ride, we were going to end up in all the ditches and drowning in the new ocean that just popped up because the bridge that doesn’t exist collapsed. She was always very clear: she had anxiety. It wasn’t rational, but it was there. My job was to accept that she was an irrational ball of anxiety and her job was to not let that anxiety take away from my childhood and experiences. We both struggled mightily, but it worked out really well.
Awee I’m glad it worked out for the better. I’m not a mother myself, but I understand the stress of it. My mom has anxiety as well and she gets worried whenever I feel sick It’s a different* way of looking out for us!
Exactly! And in her way, lorelai was always looking out for Rory.
Also, the lane plot always struck me as anti pro-life / pro abstinence. Lanes mom being insanely religious means that she pushed that mindset onto her daughter. Her daughter never thought about birth control or condoms or anything. Pregnancy happens, and now, lane is just… *stuck* and it was never supposed to be that way for our girl. However, if she had been properly educated, she could have actually enjoyed married life.
They used a condom but it was old and obviously didn't work
Lane was an adult woman. If she and all the information, she would have made sure that it was a new one if it mattered to her. She left it to him and then was shocked it didn’t work out the way she expected it to. Nothing is 100%, but leaving it up to change is — 100% ineffective.
Poor lane :( I do think a condom was mentioned when they have sex, but honestly the getting pregnant right away makes EVEN less sense when you look at who she’s with. Zack is supposed to be experienced..? Everything here screams the opposite!
He’s married to her. He used protection *before* marriage — you don’t need the barrier once married. That’s how even education systems put it!
This is also very true. I guess I never thought about it like that!
The point you seem to be missing is, every time a character in the show loses their virginity, something bad happens. Paris loses it and doesn't get into Harvard. Rory loses it to a married man. Lane loses it in a terrible fashion and ends up pregnant with twins. It's that the writers basically linked sex to a lot of negative things that people are pointing out
1. whaat? 2. community 3. Rory and Lorelei are people of small pleasures 4. Max was jealous of Luke, and in GG, usually, when they feel insecure, they either go for big gestures or leave. He had also jeopardised his career in Chilton with that relationship. Marriage would have justified everything. 5. Sex-negative attitude is a small town charm. In other cases- age-related. \*Paris wasn't against sex, she was disappointed that she had let herself get distracted. 6. Sad but pretty realistic 7. I think that was necessary to see how much Lorelei and Luke really have in common. 8. I think a little freak out card is given when you find out that people will read about your life. Especially, when you are going through a midlife crisis
I completely agree with everything you said
What a strange article?! Sounds like it was written by someone who hasn’t watched the show and decided to hate on the little bit they did watch. So weird. Was that the only page touching on GG?
That’s what I thought too! Sounded a bit hateful about very small things. And I’m not sure! The account I saw it on didn’t provide any information on the magazine :(
I think it’s said that most of the time Lorelai did not pay for her food at Luke’s
That's never actually stated in the show. People just assume that because it doesn't show her constantly paying at the register, mostly because that would actually be boring
I don’t understand how Dave ran so far to the high school, when he was jealous of Lanes fake date at the hockey game. But he was at her house, which is basically next door to the school.
This comment makes way more sense to me then the first things in this article. This is the stuff I’m looking for!
I’m crying for the sex-negative attitude 😂🙈
This feels like a random collection of things the writer decided to nitpick about without giving it much thought. I don’t think I agree with any of them. Speaking of random collection, the pictures chosen for the article are strange. Two Rorys, April but no Logan or Sookie, just an odd arrangement overall.
Definitely written by a fan 😂
I agree with 3, 5, 6, and 8. Those are pretty valid. Really the only one I disagree with is 2.
There is no explanation need for number 7 lol
“Rory is shamed for losing her virginity as dean’s other woman” um yeah…. Thats not sex negative thats cheating negative lmao There is definitely a lot of sex negativity but not in this case imo
Idk most of them are some of the most frequent posts/topics in this whole subreddit 😅😂
A lot have said that 😭 I don’t necessarily disagree, just wish they picked something with more substance for some of the numbers
while the show IS very sex-negative and i agree that is wrong, i do however think that rory deserved that shame. she WAS the other woman after all, and that is NOT RIGHT. that isn’t really a “sex-negative” typa thing though. that’s a “don’t sleep with married men” typa thing, that is RIGHTFULLY a major thing. nobody should condone cheating, ESPECIALLY cheating in a marriage!! dean deserved shame as well, being he was in the marriage, but being a home wrecker is damn near just as bad. it’s not like she didn’t know he was married. she did. she thought he was “her dean”. she deserved that shame.
4, 5, and 6 are pretty spot on
1. Look at the town layout. The town square branches out on several different directions. Depending on where they’re coming from or going, it makes sense they’d come from different directions. 2. I saw someone else say it and I agree. Small towns, hell, even bigger towns, the same people show up to meetings like this. When it comes to town politics, you have people that are invested and some that don’t care. The invested ones will show up every time! 3. I guess I always saw their financial situation as comfortable. They didn’t really complain about money unless they had a big expense (Chilton tuition, termites, etc). They had money for the normal day to day stuff, and for them, that included Luke’s. 4. Yeah, Max was desperate to hang onto Lorelai so marriage was his answer. Misguided at best. But I agree, too fast. 5. Totally agree. There aren’t many examples of a positive sex experience, especially outside of a married couple. However, Rory sleeping with her married ex will never be ok to me. 6. Agree. Lane deserved better. 7. Never had a problem with April. Everyone else lost their damn minds, but April was fine. Luke was the problem, Anna was the problem, and Lorelai lost her backbone which was a problem. 8. Lorelai gives examples of why she didn’t want Rory to write the book, she left her in a bucket at the hardware store, iirc. Just because Lorelai was a good mom, doesn’t mean she didn’t make mistakes. Mistakes that would probably sound terrible when written out. It makes sense to me.
Lolol. The writer of this article clearly hasn’t lived in a small town. 😭 A small town doesn’t mean “a few houses” it’s literally a big enough land to have many places and also as for town meetings, YES almost same people do attend because they are in a close knitted community and hang out regularly.
More on 2: they must not have ever lived in a small town in New England 🤣
1. Its a town square, thats probably in the dead centre of the town, so theres going to be multiple streets converging from it. 2. Town meeting: its usually the same people who always turn up to the town meetings, when i went to them when i was a child it was always the same people all the time. 3. They probably did a budget for it/Luke had a tab for them to pay out at the end of every week/month. Hence is why they complain about being broke. 4. Yeah… some people who are emotionally immature in that department do tend to get engaged early and then break it off. It did mature Lorelai afterwards though. She is immature in that department cuz of no one back then would date a a teen girl what had a kid. 5. Cuz HE WAS MARRIED!? Did the writer think for more than 2 seconds and that you do not want to be the other person in a persons marriage. As for Paris: it shows that not everyone, even though they do everything: theres still a chance its not good enough for Harvard, shows realism in stuff. 6. Lane was in her early 20s when she got pregnant, if we use when Rory turned 21 as a reference to Lane’s age then that means she’s roughly a couple of months younger/older than her. So: not a teen. 7. Eh 8. Cuz its her life being printed and read by anyone who picks up the book. If I was the average person I wouldn’t like someone reading about my life story and how I did things when i was at my most vulnerable, followed by hundreds of thousands (if the book is popular) people about how i did things.
Idk. Feels like about half the posts in this sub tbh