felicemastronzo
Message Maven
- May 17, 2020
- 12,050
- 23,019
no ... I honestly do not understand what these reflections of yours would proveIf you look at my previous post, you'll see examples of Jill's behavior throughout the game:
This shows a degree of consistency with her behavior in ep6 and the previous episodes.
I would argue that she has tried to protect the MC against his wishes in both accounts, protecting him from bullies and protecting him from a lawsuit. This is her consistent caring style towards the mc.
Regardless, she does intend to confront the mc about it and in time she does unless the mc and her don't have a close relationship or he ignores her in Ep6, in which case she lets it slide (under those circumstances it's not her business anyway).
She doesn't blindly believe Tybalt. As I quoted in my previous post, during the piano scene her thoughts are:
ji "(Tybalt isn't right about him. I refuse to believe that.)"ji "..."ji "(Just tell him...)"
It's just he leaves before she can breach the subject.
What does Jill's sexual hesitation have to do with her moral integrity?
they are two separate nettings in everyone's life
Jill continues to think she wants to talk to MC about it but in the end she doesn't, and in the meantime she decides to accept Tybalt's advice. to me it remains highly inconsistent
then in the case at the picnic she discovers that Mc is fundamentally guilty, only in that case can it be worth talking about the feelings they have one another.
but it remains that if there is no relationship between them it makes no sense that Jill decides to defend him anyway without feeling the need for clarification with him. even in case Bella hasn't changed her mind about him and Mc has blinded Jill's eye with her dildo helmet. it does not make sense.
I could argue that against Chad, MC was the victim, it was right to defend himI would argue that she has tried to protect the MC against his wishes in both accounts, protecting him from bullies and protecting him from a lawsuit. This is her consistent caring style towards the mc.
in this case Mc is not the victim, he is the culprit, it cannot be the same to defend him in this case, or not?
Jill pushes Tybalt to intervene to stop a Prep from reporting MC, Jill is covering up a crime, a behavior she certainly doesn't share.What do you mean she covers up the crime? The responsibility for reporting the crime is not on her, it's on Tybalt. She's not lying about anything to anyone, are you suggesting that when Tybalt says his friend wants to press charges that she should have responded saying, "Go ahead, if the mc did this then he needs to be punished"? If she had said something like that everyone would have been, "WTF Jill, you are so off my Christmas list!".
Now I have presented a coherent argument, with examples from the game and what I would consider some reasonable assumptions. In no way does this make me a "fanboi" who believes DPC can do no wrong.
but does it really seem legitimate?
a mature person would have heard MC, and then would have favored a clarification, in case she could also undertake to cover any damages.
at most she would have taken time, but she would not decide by herself, without any dialogue, to submit to Tybalt's advice / blackmail. instead she first postpones the clarification and then simply communicates it to MC
Now I have presented a coherent argument, with examples from the game and what I would consider some reasonable assumptions. cit.