Discuss The Archers  permalink

SHE can't trust HIM?!

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 85
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by Freda Fry (U12836683) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Sheesh! What a hypocrite. Poor old Matt.

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Attack is the best means of defence, FF. Accuse someone else of what you are guilty of, and you will distract them into defensiveness. (Or they will value what you've been saying at its proper worth and wander away and ignore it, of course.)

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by superjan3 (U6523409) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I thought for one moment that they were at the same place as she was at with Paul. I expected a waiter to say "how nice to see you here again so soon madam".

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by JacksParakeetBeingDe-Nested (U2979858) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    This is actually turning into a good SL, and well-acted. IMO the best Friday epi for some time.

    jp

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by Freda Fry (U12836683) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I thought for one moment that they were at the same place as she was at with Paul. I expected a waiter to say "how nice to see you here again so soon madam". 
    Exactly what I thought. It was the same one, wasn't it? Bit of a tease by the SWs, there.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by Purple_Hay (U14319650) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I want Matt to find out about Puss Cat and Paul.

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    You reckon he hasn't, then?

    My view was that either he has and is pretending not to have done, or the SW was trying to pile on the irony.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    My view is that he /suspects/ that Lil is drawn to Paul - but not that she has actually been unfaithful to him.
    Well, good SL, anyway though I remain in folorn hope that Lilian will cut out the cackle.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Purple_Hay (U14319650) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I think they can't resist Matt finding out it's Paul, so while he knows something up I don't think he know his half-brother is involved.

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    He was very much on the alert when he heard from Darrell that his new employer, locally, was Paul who is Matt's half-brother. I think he has been watching Lilian since, and she has been behaving in a way that is not in the slightest bit typical of her. Matt may be a stinker, but I don't think he is generally accused of being *stupid*, and he does value his relationship with Lilian -- if only because the money is all hers, and she is the director of the company and he can't be for at least another couple of years.

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by Schez (U2212013) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Well I'm sorry, I don't approve of unfaithfulness really, but where Matt is concerned, I think he has behaved so badly in so many ways that he deserves whatever Lilian needs to get up to . He's been far more untrustworthy than she ever has until very recently, she will never catch him up. Not to mention using human beings as pawns in his Big Development games.

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by abcdefg (U14604353) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I thought for one moment that they were at the same place as she was at with Paul. I expected a waiter to say "how nice to see you here again so soon madam". 

    heh heh - Even better, "Your usual, madam?"

    Ah yes. That would have been a masterstroke. A storyline with a bit of meat on the bone, so to speak.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by JumboJosephII (U14232752) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Fred my dear fellow, I was about to start a new thread on the very thing. She is a damned hypo-whatsit (big words, oi don't like big words). it's interesting that some people here are claiming that she was practically driven to it by Matt. Well, I don't like him either, but I still find it hard to justify her behaviour.

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by Earldunda (U14196337) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Fred my dear fellow, I was about to start a new thread on the very thing. She is a damned hypo-whatsit (big words, oi don't like big words). it's interesting that some people here are claiming that she was practically driven to it by Matt. Well, I don't like him either, but I still find it hard to justify her behaviour.  I try not to be too judgmental on people having affairs, but in Lillian's case I find it most unseemly on account of her age.

    Quite disgusting.

    All that raddled old flesh, sagging and bagging.

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by Now Locking for a house (U3261819) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    S earl, morality doesn't matter but inevitable ageing does? Ah well, I suppose that is modern morality.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by Denise (U14279398) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I am not sure that meeting someone for coffee/lunch/drinks a few times with no suggested physical aspect to proceedings constitutes an affair. Deceitful yes, but not really that much compared to Matt. IMHO

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 16.

    Posted by Bette (U2222559) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    But Lilian and Paul /did/ have the physical bonding - and they left each other wanting to renew it.

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by footintwocamps (U9458464) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Well I'm sorry, I don't approve of unfaithfulness really, but where Matt is concerned, I think he has behaved so badly in so many ways that he deserves whatever Lilian needs to get up to . He's been far more untrustworthy than she ever has until very recently, she will never catch him up. Not to mention using human beings as pawns in his Big Development games.  Agreed entirely. I wonder if Kim Durham has ever played Richard III ?

    His Matt is the same sort of charming, engaging monster, who in the end finds out too late that all that scheming leaves you without anyone who really cares about you.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by JoinedPeetsBoard_Smeesues_too (U14519481) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    I don't think Lil is in the same league as Matt regarding trustworthiness ..

    Hounding an old couple so much that one ends up hospitalised and the other died is beyond everything ..

    I would *LIKE* to think that Matt didn't tell Lil of the old chap's death because he felt guilty .. but I doubt it ..
    JPBS

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by Curmy (U10228939) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Well I'm sorry, I don't approve of unfaithfulness really, but where Matt is concerned, I think he has behaved so badly in so many ways that he deserves whatever Lilian needs to get up to . He's been far more untrustworthy than she ever has until very recently, she will never catch him up. Not to mention using human beings as pawns in his Big Development games.  I quite agree with you !!

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by SpaceTod (U15307849) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Fred my dear fellow, I was about to start a new thread on the very thing. She is a damned hypo-whatsit (big words, oi don't like big words). it's interesting that some people here are claiming that she was practically driven to it by Matt. Well, I don't like him either, but I still find it hard to justify her behaviour.  I try not to be too judgmental on people having affairs, but in Lillian's case I find it most unseemly on account of her age.

    Quite disgusting.

    All that raddled old flesh, sagging and bagging. 
    What on earth difference does their age make? That's the most bizarre reason.

    Lillian had probably decided that since she couldn't trust Matt (over his business dealings and deception) there was no need to worry about being trustworthy to him. But two wrongs don't make a right. She should've told him once she knew she was planning to shag his brother.

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by Miss Matty (U11719655) on Friday, 30th November 2012

    Well I'm sorry, I don't approve of unfaithfulness really, but where Matt is concerned, I think he has behaved so badly in so many ways that he deserves whatever Lilian needs to get up to . He's been far more untrustworthy than she ever has until very recently, she will never catch him up. Not to mention using human beings as pawns in his Big Development games.  Yes I agree. Forever trying to make marriage to Matt into a fulfilling equal relationaship to grow old in is just flogging a dead horse.

    At Lillians age if she has met someone she wants to be with more than Matt she needs to make the break now - pronto - or it will soon be too late.

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by Miss Matty (U11719655) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Fred my dear fellow, I was about to start a new thread on the very thing. She is a damned hypo-whatsit (big words, oi don't like big words). it's interesting that some people here are claiming that she was practically driven to it by Matt. Well, I don't like him either, but I still find it hard to justify her behaviour.  I try not to be too judgmental on people having affairs, but in Lillian's case I find it most unseemly on account of her age.

    Quite disgusting.

    All that raddled old flesh, sagging and bagging. 
    What a silly immature attitude to aging.

    But then of course that is exactly the kind of response you are trying to provoke. Very odd.

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by GreenBrownBear (U14258765) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Afraid I laughed like a drain when Matt was waffling on about 'making a difference' and other great cliches of our time. Sweetie, you want to make money. No probs with that (so long as you avoid the big bully tactics) but please stop trying to fool us that you've set this company up for the good of mankind.

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Lilian is not trying to make anything out of marriage to Matt, because they are not married. They've been living together since July 2005, once Matt was divorced from Yvette.

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    She has always been a hypocrit so no change there. And the idea that Amside was set up for anything other than making money out of people is risible. She has never cared when Matt has ripped people off in the past so what has changed now? I think it more to do with Matt not running around after James.

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by Purple_Hay (U14319650) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Lillian's change of character has been the most extreme, although touchy feely Eddie is pushing it.

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by joe (U13868420) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    I think they can't resist Matt finding out it's Paul  Annette, Leon, Helen…

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by maggiesaes (U2771771) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    She has always been a hypocrit so no change there. And the idea that Amside was set up for anything other than making money out of people is risible. She has never cared when Matt has ripped people off in the past so what has changed now? I think it more to do with Matt not running around after James.  I think so too.
    She moved James in knowing how he and Matt felt about each other and allowed him and his trollop to take over her and the house which is after all Matt's home.

    She's never shown any scruples in business till we got Joyce and Arthur blown in for the sole purpose of the current uncaring Matt/ extra soft Paul scenario and she did a complete about turn.

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by Dinah Shore (U14984316) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Afraid I laughed like a drain when Matt was waffling on about 'making a difference' and other great cliches of our time. Sweetie, you want to make money.  Exactly like Hippo Crit Brian, who pretended he wanted to build the new market "to put something back in to the community."

    A pox upon both houses.

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 14.

    Posted by carolyn (U15450251) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    How ageist.
    One way & another, Matt has forfeited his right to fidelity.
    Lilian didn't succumb to Paul the first time around - it's betrayal after betrayal that has pushed her now.
    What is more, she doesn't know the half of it where Joyce & Arthur are concerned. Wait until she has an in depth conversation with Darrell.

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by maggiesaes (U2771771) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    How ageist.
    One way & another, Matt has forfeited his right to fidelity.
    Lilian didn't succumb to Paul the first time around - it's betrayal after betrayal that has pushed her now.
    What is more, she doesn't know the half of it where Joyce & Arthur are concerned. Wait until she has an in depth conversation with Darrell. 
    I don't actually see any of that as an excuse for sexual betrayal of a partner.

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by snarklehound (U15065053) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Totally agree, maggie. Lilian was having a physical relationship with Matt while he was still ostensibly married to his first wife. Now she is moving on apparently without telling Matt yet. Finish the first course before the pudding, I say, and so, while having posted vehemently against Matt for his treatment of Arthur and Joyce (while many other posters wanted them dedded or showed little sympathy for their plight), I now find myself entirely in support of him.

    His problem is not that he has taken her for granted, more that she has shown no real interest in the business, letting him run it for her, with sporadic pseudo-concern on her part. Now she plays the injured party when her betrayal is total. She started persuading herself into this course of action by assuming that every time Matt went out to get some respite from the awful James and Leonie he was visiting a woman.

    Paul is beyond despicable and the scenes between Lilian and Paul were imo plain false and horrible. Paul has not done anything but agree sycophantically with Lilian in every whim and fancy that has occurred to her, in an attempt to make her emotionally dependent on her. That is not a relationship imo and is much more akin to the kind of emotional control sought by stalkers and blackmailers.

    I still hope Paul forces some appalling demand on Lilian and Tiger bursts in and horsewhips him - then leaves her alone, as she so richly deserves. Annabelle Schrivener, you should be here at this hour!

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by Purple_Hay (U14319650) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    That's right, not enough horsewhipping going on, I suppose Peggy hasn't got her whip hand going.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by JumboJosephII (U14232752) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    "How ageist."
    Would you care to substantiate that madam?
    How does message 14 in any way allude to Fagash's age?

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by carolyn (U15450251) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    message 14 : '....unseemly on account of her age' , 'sagging flesh etc..'
    So, apparently not 'quite disgusting' on moral grounds, just age.

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by carolyn (U15450251) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    That's a point of view, which I respect, though most grudgingly here. I think there's worse betrayals than the sexual kind.

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by JumboJosephII (U14232752) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    message 14 : '....unseemly on account of her age' , 'sagging flesh etc..'
    So, apparently not 'quite disgusting' on moral grounds, just age. 
    oops, sorry, I thought you were responding to my first post in this thread. I blame the technology smiley - smiley
    apologies

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by Digitalis lividus et niger (U8605497) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    morality doesn't matter but inevitable ageing does 

    So what is more immoral about a 'relationship' with one brother than with the other? She's not legally tied to either. It could be argued that there's no fidelity issue in either 'relationship.

    Dig

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 39.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 1st December 2012

    Oh, I think that living with someone and sharing his bed for seven years is probably a relationship, Dig.

    Report message40

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by maggiesaes (U2771771) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    Oh, I think that living with someone and sharing his bed for seven years is probably a relationship, Dig.  Well I'd think so too Chris,not exactly a fling is it.

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by anna kist (U2314477) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    Top post, Snarkles. If fagash wants to leave Matt fair enough but lining up someone else before the deed is done is the action of a spineless cur. But then fagash has always been lacking any moral fibre.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 42.

    Posted by Buntysdaughter (U7084475) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    Excellently well out, snarklehound.

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by Freda Fry (U12836683) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    it's interesting that some people here are claiming that she was practically driven to it by Matt. Well, I don't like him either, but I still find it hard to justify her behaviour. 
    Quite, Joe. The dodgy, moral relativism displayed on the board with regard to this rather alarming.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by borchesterbouncer (U14738918) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    I don't like either character but I do think her behaviour is unacceptable. She has never stood up to Matt about the old duffers but just runs off to Paul who she is using as much as has Matt. (Don't like him either though)

    Report message45

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by maggiesaes (U2771771) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    I don't like either character but I do think her behaviour is unacceptable. She has never stood up to Matt about the old duffers but just runs off to Paul who she is using as much as has Matt. (Don't like him either though)  I think it's appalling behaviour especially form one such as herself who has never really put anyone but herself first and blaming Matt's behaviour for her sexual adventure is typically self dellusional of her.

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by BlackSheepBoy (U11150138) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    She was never bothered about Matt's business before, and knew very well that some of his dealing was ruthless. Since she has become the nominal head she has not exactly been consistent or dedicated in her interest; it's been more case of drop in a dabble a bit when the mood takes her.

    If she is upset with Matt, and it is supposed to be do with his lack of franknesss about business, and his harsh treatment of tenants, well that does not seem like the Lilian we used to know. In fact it seems more like finding a justification for going off your man, when the true reason is the arrival of Paul on the scene.

    She declares she cannot trust him. We know he should not trust her, and I siuspect he will find out.

    I think they deserve one another. Better to keep it between themselves and fight one another over badness and lack of trust; leave Paul and the public at large alone.

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 45.

    Posted by Burberry (U14785386) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    Years ago I heard the phrase " keeping a clone in the cupboard" --
    referring of course to people like Lilian who are unable to move from
    one relationship without the certainty of an immediate substitute.

    For most of her life, Lils has gravitated from man to man, and youth and money have aided her in this.
    Money might stay, but come what may, *youth* will not.

    If this SL is to be well and truthfully written, I would like to see it all come
    finally and inevitably crashing down about her rouged ears.

    Who knows, it might be the making of her ...

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 48.

    Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    She seems to have been devoted to the gin bottle rather than to a man for a long time after Ralph Bellamy died in 1980; she'd been drinking a lot even before he died according to her sister and to her own "It was all my fault, if only I had done as he said and not got srunk" maunderings. Her having a toy-boy came as a bit of a surprise when she turned up with Scott in tow, as far as I remember. Everyone was more or less expecting drink; sex drugs and rock'n'roll weren't being allowed for at that point.

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 49.

    Posted by Burberry (U14785386) on Sunday, 2nd December 2012

    sex drugs and rock'n'roll weren't being allowed for at that point. 

    They have certainly all been 'dealt with' by the Sws since then, haven't
    they? In varying degrees ....

    Drugs - Ed and Jazza (anyone else?)

    Sex - well, recently, almost everyone under the age of 80, of varying
    inclinations.

    Rock'nroll - Perhaps they'll get The Stones along as their next celeb. guests??

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

This messageboard is now closed.

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.