Alongside the romantic ideals of best friends falling in love and love at first sight, sits one other shipper trope that makes the fans go crazy — the girl with the boy from the wrong side of the tracks. From having your boyfriend trade you for a hotel, to spending some alone time with a guy who thirsts for your blood, shippers have flocked to root for the villain when it comes to love. But as we swoon over our favorite female characters dating bullies and murderers, it makes me wonder, why do we fall for the idea of falling for the bad boy?

Maybe it’s due to some innate instinct some of us hold. After all, the trope dates back to the 1800s, when Emily Bronte first brought tortured Heathcliff into existence in Wuthering Heights. Fast forward a few hundred years, and the trope is solidly embedded in television history — poor James van der Beek got shafted in favor of the rabidly popular Pacey/Joey ship in Dawson’s Creek, and it definitely wasn’t Brian Krakow that found himself plastered on every teen girl’s bedroom wall when My So-Called Life aired. And now, in a post-Twilight world, it seems the trope has dug itself deep into the public’s consciousness. But there has to be some explanation for the pull towards these anti-romantic heroes. For me, it mostly boils down to three main reasons.

I make them bad boys go… good?

Probably the most significant reason that I end up shipping these bad boys is the idea that the girl’s love can make a leopard change his spots. While these guys never become wholly good (unless they suffer a bout of amnesia, which transformed Eric in True Blood from vicious vampire to basically a docile puppy), they do improve in some respects, or at least towards the object of their affections — enough to excuse their more distasteful actions.

In Gossip Girl, sexual fiend Chuck suddenly hesitates when Blair leans in for a kiss. “Are you sure?” stammers Chuck, who just a few episodes ago took the acceptance of a sandwich by Serena as consent. Then, far from being another notch on his heavily-riddled bedpost, he can’t stop thinking about Blair. The power of Blair’s vagina has caused his stomach to be filled with butterflies and his heart to be filled with feelings.

“You know I came into this town wanting to destroy it. Tonight, I found myself wanting to protect it.”

Damon grows more and more sympathetic as The Vampire Diaries goes on, going from the psychopathic older brother to someone worth saving. Elena’s presence triggers a change for the better in Damon, and the time he spends with Elena peels back the layers of bravado and casual cruelty to reveal a nuanced character. This helps overlook any missteps he may have along the way, such as when he force-fed Elena his blood, effectively taking away any free will she had in the matter of her death (though we know now that’s no longer an issue).

While the rest of Stars Hollow never really warmed up to Jess in Gilmore Girls, being around Rory revealed a more sensitive side to him. He’s smart. He reads. He spends way too much money just to have lunch with her. When he does vandalize, it’s to help her win a snowman competition. He steals her book and scribbles all over it, and she ain’t even mad — because he epitomizes the idea of a bad boy who has a softer side, just for her.

RELATED:  Gossip Girl post-hiatus Spoilerpalooza

This doesn’t mean the turnaround from bad boy to good guy can’t be jarring. Logan in Veronica Mars, in the space of an episode, goes from resident bully to sweetly romantic and protective over Veronica. Contrived? Yes. Did I ship it anyway? Yes.

All these shows tell us that all bad boys can change, with the right girl and a heavy dose of love potion number nine. Maybe not the best life lesson, but it makes for great TV and I fall for it almost every time.

Danger is sexy, and the good guys are boring

Even if they don’t really change that much, let’s face it — illegality? Life-threatening situations? The possibility of being murdered by your beau? All of this is irresistibly attractive (okay, maybe not that last point), or at least as the show writers make us believe. And if initially the good guys had some element of excitement to them, the writers do their best to make it seem like life with them would be a dull, meaningless existence, devoid of stimulation or happiness. While in real life, spending a night in watching television with your significant other doesn’t seem too bad an option, in TV drama land, it pales in comparison to a guy with a bit of edge, who can whisk you off on an adventure in the middle of the night, and maybe get you killed.

In Gossip Girl, Chuck was shown as a way for Blair to escape and spend a night of debauchery with instead of hanging out with Nate and his dysfunctional family. Chuck barely lifts his voice over a gruff bedroom whisper, and it is frequently noted in the show that nothing gets Blair’s blood pumping the way Chuck does. (Though admittedly not everything about him is designed to raise his sex appeal. Teletubby onesie, anyone?) As the seasons have worn on, a relationship with Chuck has been shown as often distressing, but never boring. Though I jumped ship a while ago, I have to admit I see the appeal, and sometimes get drawn back in. While arguing about pretentious movies together is sweet in real life, it’s not the same as watching Chuck and Blair spend a day scheming against their enemies, or having some awkwardly slow-motion sex in the hallway, or even watching Chuck casually getting shot in Prague. These are the things teen soaps thrive on.

True Blood ramps up the sex factor of vampires, even to the point where a bite on the neck is akin to climax. Sure, Bill is a vampire, but dude is old and spends most of his time lecturing people and pronouncing Sookie’s name wrong. Eric, on the other hand, embraces his vampiric nature, owns an awesome nightclub and looks like this with his shirt off. Who are you going to root for?

RELATED:  Which shows have the best music scores?

Dean in Gilmore Girls did have good aspects about him, but his character was dumbed down from intriguing outsider to bland stock boy in a matter of episodes. And clingy. While in season one, his devotion and endless calling seemed at least sort of romantic, by season two his incessant need to constantly update Rory on the minutiae of his life was just overly needy and insecure. Get it together, Dean!

Damon swaggers around Mystic Falls, drinking and charming all the ladies in town. As opposed to Stefan, who, before the writers had the strike of inspiration to turn him bad, was sort of a killjoy. And don’t even get me started on Duncan in Veronica Mars. While there was a little bit of gross-out intrigue about whether he was her brother and/or the killer, his character failed to have any other kind of interest. Was there actually anybody thrilled to discover it was him instead of Logan at the door after the season one cliffhanger? I know he had his fans, but for me it just meant more episodes of him being impossibly boring before he exited the series for good.

Sometimes shows present other ships with really nice guys that are perfect for the main female character and are interesting, to boot. Sometimes, they really don’t.

It’s all about chemistry

Often I’ll just follow a ship because the actors just have a little bit more smoulder between them. Combine this with a bit of danger, and maybe a little resistance of their attraction to each other, and it’s fantastic. You know those romantic comedies when two actors force their way through various declarations of love when there clearly is nothing there, and it’s a little painful to watch? The opposite of that is when two actors enter a scene, and the screen almost visibly crackles with romantic tension. It isn’t all acting ability; there are times when the combination of the actors and their characters just click.

This could be because the coupling transcends television and into the real world. Ian Somerhalder and Nina Dobrev’s real-life romance couldn’t have harmed the Damon/Elena ship sailing along. As well, Alexis Bledel and Milo Ventimiglia’s fling definitely gave a bit of steam to the Jess/Rory pairing, especially in contrast to the defiantly G-rated scenes of Dean/Rory lore. A possible exception: I know Stephen Moyer and Anna Paquin from True Blood are married in real life, but this seems only to add a layer of discomfort for me during their highly explicit sex scenes. Like, I can’t help but think, is this what it’s like in the bedroom for them? I don’t want to know. I only want to know what Eric looks like shirtless, again. (But that may just be personal preference.)

In the end, sometimes it just seems that the wrong side of the tracks equals the right couple. Do you like any ships that fall into this category? Are there any other reasons why?

Siao is a law student, and thus is forced to spend the majority of her life studying. Besides this, she enjoys partaking in high-octane activities such as watching television, spending way too much time online, and napping.
  • cacherr1

    However Chair is bit different as Blair is not a “good girl”.

    I don’t like DE (imo instead making Elena excitable as bad boy getting with good girls should do, she makes him very annoying, whiny and dare I say it a killjoy), but I do like Nian (sometimes, as sometimes they do come across as bit publicity stunt-ish as they normally get candidly photographed when it their episode coming up). How I thought the appeal of bad boys was the idea that some girl’s love can “change” him b.s. that women actually believe is real.

    • QMargo


    • Janet Snakehole

      Blair is a VIOLENT, mean spirited bully who has physically assaulted Serena on numerous occasions yet Dair fans treat her like a helpless victim who got manipulated by the Evil Scary Bass. Dair fans, please. Blair probably gets off on her misery because she is a terrible person. Blair Waldorf might be missguided & childish more often than not, but a victim? NEVER.

      • Nicole

        I guess I don’t get what you mean by this? If nothing else, I consider Blair a victim in the scene where Chuck tried to punch her because, well, she is. That’s not speaking to Blair’s character or anything other than someone tried to punch her in the face. She is the victim, the other person is the aggressor.

        • he didn’t try to punch her!jc did you watch the scene?he punched a glass,not her!saying that chuck tried to punch blair is like saying that tayler tried to hit caroline with the bottle of votka.people snap sometimes,it doesn’t mean that they are abusive.and blair has slapped chuck in the face numerous times-i didn’t see you defending chuck for domestic violence.not everything is black and white and not everything in life is pink with unicorns.jeez you people have a way of thinking like you are smurfs or toodlers waiting for the prince.not everything in life is innocent or romantic but in the same time that doesn’t mean that every dark moment that is abusive.

          • Nicole

            I am not sure how anything I said implied my worldview, but you got me on the unicorns. Not smurfs though, never got into them.

            It looks like he is trying to punch her and she ducks. I watched the scene again and I mean, he could be punching the glass over her head but that’s not great either. I think snapping and going to punch a wall to calm down is one thing, but it’s not like it’s okay to get angry and start hitting things directly over the head of a person you are supposed to love. And upon watching it again, saying you’re mine and shoving her down onto a couch is pretty damn creepy.

          • i think that some people try to make big deals out of nowhere.”he punched her,oh no he didn’t do it but he meant to,oh he didn’t mean to but he wanted,mmmm i think that none of the above are true but still it isn’t right to do so..etc etc etc” you get my point.i saw nothing wrong with this scene,like i said before verbal abuse is as bad as any and blair has verbaly abused chuck countless times.let’s not mention the maaany slaps on his face.lastly but not least i didn’t find the ”you’re mine blair” and pushed onto a couch as a creepy thing.heathcliff has done many more creepier things and everybody idolized him.i have seen creepy and trust me that wasn’t.

          • No, He punched glass. You guys need to get some glasses or contacts.

          • lexie i really like your attitude girl!go chair fans!(let’s not get started about how abusive dair fan are to chair fans….nowadays and expecially last year i was afraid to say to someone that i was team chuck for chrissake!since they are aaaall upset about ”abuse” around here,it’s good to remind them how it is not to practise what you preach.)

        • Easy A

          Only if Chuck was trying to punch Blair like you said, but wait… oh no, he didn’t. I recommend you to actually go and watch the show instead of mimicking other haters and claiming as if you knew what happened because if you did, you wouldn’t leave comment like this. Seriously, sometimes I wonder how many people watch this show and how many others just copy people’s invalid argument. It kinda makes you guys look bad, tbh.

  • I love seeing a more classic heroic good guy character like say Nate Archibald get the girl too but there’s definitely a certain appeal to seeing a “bad boy” like Chuck Bass redeemed by love.

    I think Chuck and Blair are a little different from the other ships you mentioned in that she’s not a classic good girl heroine like Elena, Sookie or Angela Chase. To me Blair and Serena (in S1 at least) were the good girl with a dark side (Blair) and the bad girl with a sweet side (Serena). Blair isn’t as dark (and tbh troubled at times) as Chuck but she’s approaching anti-heroine status with her love of scheming and her sexually inappropriate side. 😉 So she’s just good enough to lure Chuck from the dark- side (“You were the lightest thing that came into my life”) but dark enough to keep Chuck and Blair from being too cliche for me. 🙂

    • cacherr1

      Yeah Blair has always been more of an anti-heroine than heroine. I think the show trying to make her into a Heroine really weaken the appeal of character to a lot of folks. And anti-hero and anti-heroine romances are possibly the best type romances to tell.

    • Karlie

      You say that them being “dark” keeps them from being too cliche, but it also makes them completely over the top and melodramatic. Their lines have become the show’s cliche. Every time they talk, it’s the different version of basically the same dialogue. It also prevents growth in both characters. Almost all the other relationships in this article have the characters growing. Not in Gossip Girl though.

      • Sally

        This is your opinion, not a fact. Go to Leighton Meester’s Facebook page and see how many Likes and positive comments there are on the CB pics. Look at what GG_quotes’ most retweeted tweets are (hint: they’re not exactly anti-Chuck). Search “Chuck and Blair” on Twitter during an episode and see what the casual fans are saying about them.

        The idea that Chuck and Blair have become boring or cliched is not a universally held opinion but rather one held by about 10 Dair fans who, for reasons I will never understand, are clinging onto a show that they don’t get and which will never give them what they want. Casual fans STILL love Chuck and Blair, and so do I.

    • Completely agree

  • well they make the bad boys seem like they have ”deeper” characters than the good ones.i was a chuck and damon fan from the begining cause i like ed westwick and ian somerhalder more than chace crawford and paul wesley but watching the shows i realised that screenwriters showed the ”i’m a sensitive boy that’s been hurt too much that’s why i behave like this” thing and i like that more than brooding foreheads!they wake up my florence nightingale syndrome!shoot me!:)

    • cacherr1

      Chuck doesn’t really play on I’m a sensitive guy though which imo keeps him from being a cliche like unlike majority of the characters Chuck has never actually used his crappy childhood for the reason he so f-up (however Damon has used multiple lame ass excuses for why acts the way he does). There is difference Chace really relies on his looks, Paul actually is a great actor (whereas I think Ian is more looks than talent…not saying he isn’t talented but he more overrated by the fandom imo when we get down to the acting Paul is actually a better actor).
      Ed Westwick also has very old hollywood look to him and has lot of swag for a Caucasian man hence out of all the men on CW, he to me is the most captivating one. Paul is second as he too has old Hollywood written on him and he genuinely funniest guy.

      • i didn’t say anything about what the characters say or use.i just said what you get from the screenplay.for example when you watch gg you understand that chuck behaves like an sob because of his father and his troubled childhood.also what i like about the bad boys and i forgot to write it on my comment above is that they really get crazy about the people that they love and they are willing to do crazy stuff for them for example,chuck getting shot in prague just because he wouldn’t give up blair’s ring or damon waiting 150 years to release catherine when the good boys actually do nothing and they seem to be satisfied in safety.i don’t say that they don’t do crazy but BAD stuff also,or that,that craziness is good but i like it very much.i like all that crazy passion.i agree with you though about ed’s swag and paul’s talent and of course he is a great actor,better than chace.i wouldn’t say that he is better than ian though cause imo the have different roles.damon is black comedy,facial expressions and stuff,stefan is romantic drama and seriousness.:)

        • cacherr1

          i don’t think I got that from Chuck…it been imply he more of jerk because he wants to be and because he just can but then again Chuck’s backstory has been rewritten so many times I guess one can come to that conclusion (Mind you his mother wasn’t mention as being deceased in season 1). Also kind never saw Chuck’s childhood being that troubled (I’m excluding all that crazy revisionist story with decease mommy).

          I guess I get what you are saying though but I don’t think that formula came to play for Chuck until season 3 finale and onward.
          I think Ian is overrated as I have seen everything he done and he not that good to be winning emmy’s like people be trying to say he should be getting. Damon I would not call him black comedy character but he definitely a dark one but nothing in Damon’s story for warrants his behavior and as a character has far less range than the Stefan character imo (we seen many layers to Stefan from one extreme to the next, Damon kind been stuck the same characterization and he been off lately on the comedy bit of late and base on canon Stefan has more reason to f-uped than Damon.

          • well concidered everything that ian has done i have to agree with you because in his other projects(i have seen everything too,HUUUUUGE IAN’S LOOKS FAN!lol) he was so facial expression-less that he actually hurt my eyes.he seems to be better though in vd.i really feel his character if you know what i mean.i would like to see other projects of paul’s also so i can compere them in a better way.about chuck i could understand his troubled relationshipo with his father from 01×02.maybe there’s only me out there who believes that..!

          • cacherr1

            I mean it was troubled but unlike recently I didn’t really believe Bart didn’t love Chuck it was just he was so busy trying to build an empire to leave for his son but the price of that was Chuck was lonely (but again they revised Basses story to the point Bart apparently is completely heartless and dislikes Chuck for being “in love” even though he approved of Blair in season 1). I guess what I am getting at the problems with his father in early season didn’t seem to be the complete reason for behavior, it really felt like majority of it was because he could whereas tvd writers try to sell Damon’s sad story of not being loved enough as the entire basis for his horribleness (I used the word try to sell because I don’t buy Damon’s sob story because most of it was his own fault).

            I like Ian in TMTYLM, which may had to do with him being naked (so I was distracted). I really think he only really good at being himself (Damon), or sexually confused (Young Americans/Rules of Attraction). He was horrible in Marco Polo (stay away from anything involving an accent, my good sir) and don’t get me started on Pulse. He good in TVD but not as good as people give him credit and if he was smart actor he wouldn’t want to do 50 Shades of Grey like Michael Fassbender said he won’t because he done something similar and quite frankly wants be taken serious. He really has to prove he can be a lead in movie role as oppose to a scene stealer or just that hot guy. I really want him to do something that he physically has transform for like Johnny Depp.

            As for Paul I still think out of the three he has had enough material for emmy consideration tvd. His other work he actually really good even when it was ridiculous. I actually see him going on when TVD does end like David Boreanaz did after Buffy and Angel ended. That man has had 3 consecutive successful tv shows in the last 15 years and that is unheard of.

          • actually any smart actor shouldn’t want to play christian grey.i mean are they serious?i have read the 1st book cause i thought it was a provocative,hard-core sex love/hate relationship and i regretted the 20 dollars that i spend!i’m really curious who’s gonna be dumb enough to accept these roles.really.

          • cacherr1

            well imo Ian the one who constantly talks about it like an idiot. And you right no smart actor would do such a role. Michael Fassbender was in Shame which was legit film and he did nudity and people spent majority of the time talking about his fassdong and making jokes. This book is Twilight Fanfiction and Ian wants a role. Robert admitted he only did the Twilight film for money…I am really trying to figure out why Ian would want to be in this film and why majority of Ian’s fans want him to do this (Cause it not like he doing it because it going to be a good role, in need for cash, or recognition). I adore Michael Fassbender (you may seen because I refer to his appendage in fan slang) but I don’t want my man anywhere near this because he better than that and Ian is better than that too.

      • Karlie

        “Chuck has never actually used his crappy childhood for the reason he so f-up”

        Chuck always spews out nonsense about how his father never really loved him and how his mother abandoned him, etc.

        • ElysiaF

          True! Because otherwise, it would just mean that he just gets off on hurting other people, especially those he supposedly cares about. And that’s not really being a ‘bad boy’, that’s being a sociopath.

          • Hannah

            EVERYONE on this show has got off on hurting someone else at some point! Dan has been doing it all season (as he told Serena) for FUN. Is Dan a sociopath too? Or are you just throwing around emotionally loaded terms that you don’t understand to try to make yourself look “all fancy” on the internet?

        • cacherr1

          this untrue…he has never once bring up his father being the reason he does horrible things or his mother for that matter. In fact majority of the things that people always hold over Chuck he never once brought up Bart as the reason or his mother. Horse comment: Chuck said that because Nate and because Blair had something super mean to him early (none of this he actually brings up), IP: his company and livelihood don’t remember Bart not loving him or even Ellen name being brought up in the excuse scene, and window scene: Blair mind games.
          Like someone posted I do not root for treatment but I do root for the guy wants to overcome them while owning it. Chuck spent most of last season growing while majority of the characters degrade in growth which included Dan and Blair.

        • How is something that is FACTUAL like Chucks abusive, lonely childhood a nonsense? When Chuck appologized to Blair for treating her like property & losing his temper while drunk, NOT once did he mention Bart or his troubled childhood. “Its the boy that blames the girl, not the man”
          Chuck took responsibility on everything he’s done. Unlike Saint Dan. Its never his fault for anything because the universe revolves around a Doughnut apparently (in his head).

  • Chuck is a bad boy? PSSSSSSSHHHHHHH. Chuck is demented, whiny, pathetic, and borderline mentally unstable. He lacks the sex appeal of Eric from True Blood or Damon from The Vampire Diaries. He also looks terrible with his shirt off and without his money, Chuck would be nothing…literally. Eric and Damon are dangerous and brooding, Chuck is just scary (for all the wrong reasons).

  • ginny

    I agree with all your points!

    I was a pacey/joey fan since the beginning and was so glad when she picked him in the end! I believe they must be one of the few couples who actually managed to beat the original OTP. They were just that great! lol

    As for the others: logan and veronica were ‘epic’ as he said himself, while duncan was an utter bore. Rory and jess were adorable and I was sorely disappointed when he went away. Dean wasn’t bad in the beginning but as you said he became annoying later on (and I couldn’t stand the college guy). Bill and Sookie were fine in the beginng too but once eric came into the picture he definitely stole the show. I didn’t like how the writers got eric and sookie together though…hope they will have another go now that eric is back to normal and bill has become evil. I can’t wait for delena to happen! I do feel sorry for stefan and I don’t dislike him, he had his moments (my favourite stelena moment is probably the phone call in ep. 3×01) but damon and elena have so much chemistry!

    The only exception is chuck and blair for me. They used to be great. I watched gossip girl only for them for 3 seasons but then season 4 happened and dair happened and I had to change ship. A pity the writers had to destroy it the way they did in season 5 and are continuing even now in season 6. Chuck and blair have lost their spark for me now, and while I won’t mind the fact that they are probabbly going to end up together I can’t help but wish things could have been different…

    Anyway, thanx! I really enjoyed reading your post Siao!

    • Thanks! I moved over to Dair as well in season 4 and agree with what you say about Chuck/Blair, are we the same person haha. To be honest, after all the jerking around the writers did with Blair, reducing her basically to a love interest, now I just want the ending of GG to be Blair being single, confident and happy, with a successful career and maybe running around doing BFF things with Serena. I think this is even less likely then a Dair ending though!

      • ginny

        Yes I agree, that would be better and would definitely make more sense, but as you said that will never happen. The writers are too afraid of the rabid chair fans to do something sensible like that! lol However, since they had to destroy dair I wish they could at least have shown chuck and blair happy together during this last season instead of this stupid pact where they can’t be together…I’m sure the chair fans agree. They pissed off the dair fanbase basically destroying dan and blair’s characters but at the same time they made chuck and blair completely boring and insignificant..luckily there are only 3 episodes left, I don’t think I could take much more of this nonesense! lol

      • Nicole

        Oh my gosh, Dair fans in the comments, yay! Yeah, while I do find Dair adorable, I won’t even be mad if Blair ends up with no one, throws up a peace sign, and gets the hell out of the UES.

        • Omg. That would be a sight to see haha. Even though I really liked Blair when she was with Dan, to me it was like she had finally grown up, but she’s really digressed in this last season since she left him for Chuck. She’s gone back to her old scheming, childish ways and I feel like the only way the writers can redeem her character is to have her standing alone at the end.

          • Nicole

            Yeah but I’m not confident that ending will happen, and even though Dair worked really well together and brought out the best in each other, I’d rather she just grow up and work on actually becoming the Strong Woman she’s always wanted to be by herself without any guy.

  • Star

    The thing is with Chair, Chuck has treated Blair the WORST out of all the girls he has been with, so I don’t agree they are even in the bad boy turned good trope. When he dated Eva she was an angel, when he dated Raina she was sacred, and that prostitute he ran around trying to help in S2. lol Blair has been pimped, manhandled, emotionally abused, demeaned, and is still in the final season twisting herself in knots to be with Chuck. She is obsessed with him. I don’t quite know where you would classify Chair other than on a list with the worst endgame ships in the history of television. I can’t quite believe we are meant to root for a guy that prostituted his girlfriend out to his uncle for a hotel, and think of it as ~romantic~ on top of that. GG writers are twisted and gross!

    • I guess Chuck/Blair fit the trope best during the one-two punch of ‘Victor Victrola’ and ‘Seventeen Candles’, which made me first fall in love with the couple. So I agree, the fact Chuck no longer fits into that bad-boy-turned-good mold is probably why I jumped ship in later seasons. I think I reached my absolute tipping point when he moved onto physical abuse (breaking the window near her face), ugh. But I still watch season 1 and feel sad about what could’ve been, sigh…

      • Star

        Oh I agree, I loved them in S1. I don’t quite know why they writers chose this masochist/narcissist dynamic with them in S2. I think they would have worked much better if Blair gave as good as she got, which she did for the most part through S2. They started turning her into a perpetual victim of him in S3, and then seemed to be deliberately having him not ever apologize or show any true sense of remorse. The glass smashing incident was so poorly handled I don’t even know what they were thinking or how they got away with it, this is a character who was presented to us in the pilot as an attempted rapist and you really want to recall that violence with the girl he is supposed to love the most? really? Very odd way to write a pairing they wanted people to root for, but then again plenty of people still root for them but I am not quite sure they are rooting for the relationship that is being portrayed or the potential they had. Of course they will get a tacked on and they lived happily ever after but it is so deeply unearned, and just really careless of the writers to never appropriately walk Chuck back to redeem him. They are the Kings of tell vs show.

        I personally am sick of the pushing of the bad boy turns good from love scenario anyways, it doesn’t happen in real life and maybe we could snap girls out of this thinking if we stopped spoon feeding it to them. I feel like it has to start with the writers being willing to not cave to ~shippers~ and tell a realistic story of what would happen if you really got a Chuck Bass, I can guarantee you it would end with you in an insane asylum. LOL There will always be an audience for it though so they will keep telling it, love in fiction is passion, angst and drama, love/happiness in the real world is the complete opposite.

        Sorry to ramble on, but jeez the Chair relationship makes me so deeply deeply uncomfortable, on one hand it is so realistic as an abusive relationship even down to Blair constantly going back to him, but then the way they won’t acknowledge it as anything other than ~true love~ is just……lets just say I will not be watching any Josh Schwartz or Stephanie Savage productions again.

    • miss880

      I don’t think you’re supposed to root for the action of prostituting out your girlfriend. Nor are you supposed to think of it as romantic! LOL. I think TPTB want you to root for the guy who owns up to his horrible mistakes and apologizes for them – which Chuck does.

      Sure, it would be better if Chuck never did awful things, but he did, and that’s why he’s classified as a bad boy. But Chuck isn’t all bad, and he’s probably the character on the show given the most internal growth. He’s grown up a lot. Could the show have done a better job with it? Heck yeah, cause not everyone will agree with what I’m saying, like I don’t 100% agree with what your saying.

      • I completely agree. We weren’t supposed to root for Chuck when he did things like that. But I also have to say I’m amazed by people’s capacity to ignore how much Chuck changed over the course of S5.

        • curly

          How much he has changed, sure, for 30 seconds before going back to his old ways. When he used Alexandra to punish Dan for kissing Blair, sent the pic to GG so Blair would have pay the dowry when he knew it would ruin her family and blamed Dan for keeping he and Blair apart, when he actually helped him despite his feelings for Blair… And then of course he blamed Blair for his father screwing him over at the end of s5, saying that he always chose her first. LOL. Many lies detected.

          • Moi

            And Dan was an angel, right? He sent the video, humiliated Blair, ruined her marriage and kept blaming Chuck for it so Blair wouldn’t turn to him for help. Dan helped then in 5.10 but by 5.14 he wanted Blair all to himself. He ended up not doing anything against Dan and in 5.17 he fucked up because he had been betrayed by someone he considered a friend “were you really my friend or was it all an act”? And he didn’t blame Blair, it was his own fault because at times he did put Blair first, he was going to leave his “Empire” behind so Blair would have a Chuck Bass free life after he hurt her and he spent millions of dollars that almost bankrupted him to free her from a marriage everyone knew she didn’t have to go through and having an affair with a guy when she knew her mother’s company was at risk. Yes, Chuck sent the picture, but that didn’t stop Blair from repeatedly cheating on her husband.

          • A) He used Alexandra for thirty seconds before a speech from Blair made him reconsider. So I think that fits the trope.
            B) Georgina was the one who orchestrated 5.17, and Chuck’s role in it was very small. Not to mention that Dan DID purposely keep CB apart after helping – he admitted to it himself. Finally, Chuck paid Blair’s dowry in 5.19 without telling her, fulfilling the supposed trope of a bad boy changing his ways due to the girl he loves.
            C) Chuck blamed Blair in a moment of anger, yes, but he specifically told her in 6.01 that it’s the boy who blames the girl and not the man, and that he now wants to be the man for Blair, so…

            It’s fine if you don’t ship CB, but their story is technically meant to be what this article states it is, even though that is far from the reason I like them.

          • Well stated and I love how Dair shippers fail to see a whole season of growth for Chuck and then fail to see how terrible Dan has been and how manipulative he’s been with everyone for a whole season

      • Are we supposed to root for a character like Dan Humphrey who has back stabbed EVERYONE, never apologizes for being a complete douche and exposing their personal lives, and who is now sleeping with Serena despite the fact that he’s writing BS about her? This is Gossipgirl , not the Care Bears or My Little Pony

        • Melody

          it’s funny how that description you actually just gave to Dan applies to every single member of the NJBC. They are all a bunch of assholes who consistently expose each other, and use each other. I’m pretty sure they sit around a breakfast table with knives in each others backs. I am currently unable to root for any of them, a bunch of selfish obnoxious brats who can’t seem to truly grow up. Six seasons and it seems that Chuck is the only one who really has made any progress. (Still proud of him for getting therapy in S5 admitting he needed help in that capacity is a huge step. So everyone being all: CHUCK HASN’T GROWN. Calm your tits. Yes he has. He regresses every now and then but he is trying. )

    • “We are meant to root for a guy that prostituted his girlfriend out to his uncle for a hotel?” an STD riddled uncle, mind you XD

  • miss880

    Personally, I love Chuck/Blair and Logan/Veronica, but hate Eric/Sookie and Damon/Elena. Maybe I just like my vampires “good,’ lol.

    • cacherr1

      I like Chair too but some reason I dislike bad vampires with good girls (I mean I even dislike Caleb/Livvie a bit and while I respect Spuffy, I wasn’t down with it like I was with Bangel). But then again I don’t really like Bad Guy with Good Girl tropes much to begin with with the exception of Nathan and Haley from OTH and Jonathan and Tammy from Guiding Light. Other than those two majority of couples are of the same same wavelength.

      • I just don’t like Vampire romances period, haha. But if I’m watching a vampire show, I will choose a side (I prefer Stefan/Elena and Eric/Sookie, so as you can see, it has nothing to do with whether it’s a “good” or “bad” boy for me). Even if I would prefer for the girl to realize her human life is better and more fulfilling and go back to real life, haha.

  • Eden

    Blair is such a pathetic character obsessing with a guy who is capable of offer all that he has to a high class prostitute (Elle) and to give up everything for a cheap one (Eva) but values Blair less worthy than an old hotel.Not mentioning how he always is eager to sex up any other women but her.

    • I guess Dair fans are super bitter these days if they only see Chuck and Blair like this. I think Chuck has proven his love for Blair and Blair has done the same over the years. Why you’re even making guest stars who were around for maybe 1-4 episodes anywhere relevant is beyond me at this point. He dropped both for Blair and I think Chuck willing to let Blair go and her be happy because he couldn’t believe he could make her happy makes him pretty damn self-less.

      • Eden

        FYI I’m not a Dair shipper.Those two being into each other made no sense at all. That doesn’t change the facts I stated.The guy sold her for a Hotel and if she had any sense of respect she should’ve stay away from him ever since.No matter how much he changes or apologizes.A women with self respect goes and find herself some one better.

    • The writers turned her into a pathetic character when they reduced her into nothing but a pathetic vehicle for that terrible Chuck/Blair ship.

      It’s strange how docile, weak-willed and submissive Blair is around Chuck but how interested, multi-faceted and funny Blair is around Dan. Now I wonder what that says about the two different relationships… hmmm…

      • I could not disagree with you more. Blair has a career now and she’s successful. She’s not dependent on a man and she doesn’t need someone to put a fake tiara on her head to make her feel better about herself. She was absolutely the neediest and most pathetic when she was dating Dan. I think she was doing well as a character when she and Dan were friends in Season 4 but it’s completely untrue that she’s weak and pathetic now that’s dating Chuck while she was epitome of strength when she was dating Dan. As much as Dair fans accuse Chair fans of not seeing the flaws in their ship the same is true of Dair fans. The fact they cannot see how much that S5 romance brought out the worst in both Dan and Blair and was just a cowardly act of escapism from dealing with their real feelings amazes me.

        • O rly? Going back to a man who sold you for a hotel and cut your cheek bleeding with a piece of glass sounds pretty weak and pathetic to me.

          And no, Chuck hasn’t changed, he’s still drinking and crying about his father, again.

          Blair’s career came out of nowhere, she realised that she never wanted the same job as her mother in Season 4 yet the writers regressed her character by giving her that just so she could be with Chuck.

          Dan/Blair may have their problems but at least I can rest assured that they never tried to sell each other for property, and Dan has never tried to rape anyone, so I guess he wins 🙂

          • If you don’t think Chuck matured in Season 5 then you are rejecting the writing on the show and projecting your own fantasies on to the story. The writers have said he’s changed and grown and they have shown it by action as well. Chuck apologized, went into therapy, and was tested over and over again by Blair’s rejection and crazy family drama and reacted completely differently from how he’s reacted in the past. Chuck’s not perfect and he still needs to let go of this obsession with his father but it’s untrue to claim he’s the exact same person that did the Indecent proposal.
            As for Blair, how did giving her successful career regress her? I actually think it’s taking away Blair’s agency to say she cannot forgive Chuck and go back to him. He’s apologized and he’s changed. Even one of the biggest Dair fans out there, Carina from zap2it, said Chuck has not done anything abusive to Blair since Season 4. I’m sorry the story did not turn out the way you wanted it to. I’ve shipped non-endgame before and it was painful. But you are making claims about Chuck as a character that are simply untrue.

          • Your words speak to me. It’s one thing to simply say that despite the story clearly being that Chuck has changed and CB are best together, you simply disagree and wish it had gone a different way. That’s fine – I feel that way about Little Women (I loved Jo/Laurie and was heartbroken he ended up with Amy and she ended up with Bhaer) and Hunger Games (I loved Gale/Katniss, waaah).

            But when you simply discount what the story is saying, then you lose your point. As bad as someone thinks GG and its writing is, they are still the authors of the story. We are not.

          • Sarah

            Forever crying over the tragedy of Gale/Katniss 🙁

        • I totally agree with you. I’d say Blair treated Dan pretty badly. She was very selfish. She knew he loved her and used him anyway. Dan meant well but he got shady and stalkerish and he did weird things to isolate her from people like not tell her about Serena. I think he wanted to be the only person in her life which isn’t the healthiest. Chuck and Blair have hurt each other but they’ve also forgiven one another and are mutually supportive. Poor Dan did all the supporting.

  • I feel like I’m the only Gilmore Girls fan in the world who didn’t like Jess and adored Logan. I generally like the bad boys so I have no idea why I’m such an oddball in this case.

    • Karlie

      You’re not. Jess sucked. I preferred Logan as well.

  • Renee

    I honestly don’t know what woman can take into consideration all of things Chuck has done (specifically to Blair), and still manage to actively ship them with a smile on their face. The bad boy trope has to be done very carefully otherwise it runs the risk of being downright offensive and gross. That is precisely what happened to Chuck and Blair. I never liked them, but overtime, I literally grew to hate them. Worst. Couple. Ever.

    • I agree the trope needs to be deployed carefully. I think Chuck and Blair in early seasons do fit in pretty well within it, but in the newer seasons the writers have distorted it with Chuck never really ‘breaking good’ the way the trope calls for, which is why I think a lot of people, including me, moved away from the ship. I can’t speak for current shippers, but maybe Chuck/Blair still falls well enough within the trope to keep people aboard.

      • Sorry, that comment was by me, I accidentally deleted it and it changed to Guest lol.

      • As a current shipper, I can state that for me personally the ‘bad-boy-turned-good’ has very little to do with why I ship CB. I am simply not particularly moved by that cliche – or by any cliche of a story line. For me it has to come down to the individual case of each couple: chemistry, acting ability, foundation, etc.

        But I really do think you are underestimating the existence of the trope in later seasons due to your feelings regarding specific actions committed by Chuck. Chuck has apologized for the vast majority of things he has done and tried to reform since each incident, and made actual amends for most of them or performed heroic actions soon after.

    • miss880


  • Karlie

    “As the seasons have worn on, a relationship with Chuck has been shown as often distressing, but never boring.”

    One lie detected. They began getting repetitive in S2, by now it’s just the writers beating on a horse carcass that’s been rotting for six years.

  • QMargo

    Ok, I do not watch True Blood so I can only speak about GG and TVD and all I can say is, there bad scenarios are very different there.

    With GG, the thing about Blair and Chuck and why they intially worked was because they were actually very much alike from the beginning. Blair was never a good girl, she was a good person overall but not a good girl…..she was always plotting and scheeming…and Chuck was sort of Blair’s male version from the start of GG. Also, Chuck always had a thing for Blair and he was a bad boy also from the start. With Chair it really isn’t about loving the bad boy here, because most of the characters at the beginning did not view him primari;y as a bad boy but as someone who is just gross…Chair’s relationship was really special and it grew out of both of them realizing that they both can manipulate and control other people but can not do the same with their emotions and admitting that was the hardest part.

    With TVD, yes Damon was the 100% original bad boy and Elena was the 100% good girl. So naturally, according to teenage soap rules the girl was destined to fall for the bad boy….but the thing is TVD is contradicting itself here because if you take a look both Salvatores are bad in any case, its just that Stefan was not affraid to show being good at times and Damon was uncomfortable showing his good side….with regards to the chemistry part, also very questionable because if you take a look at the pilot Paul and Nina showed great chemistry from the start, you could see it in their eyes….I am not saying it is not the same with Ian because obvs it is, but I just have to say Nina works well with both guys and aside from the ridiculous script that chemistry with Paul and Ian is the only thing that is convincing me of this pseudo-triangle…

  • curly

    Most of these guys never went good though. The moment they seem to learn from their mistakes, they make two or three steps back.

  • Janet Snakehole

    This is a great artcle and all of it is true. In almost every instance of my TV, film & book experience, I’ve always been the “good” guy supporter. Im the Jacob girl, Peeta Girl, Stefan girl (but only bcz Elena makes Damon super whiny and I LOVE Damon) except for Chuck & Blair. I am constantly drawn to their disturbing & sexual relationship. Blair is different than every other show lead. Both Chuck & Blair are BAD people who love doing BAD things. In my mind, they were born bad and they can never find fullfilment in life with anyone else but each other. Why do good girls go for bad guys?
    1. They think love can change them (Beauty & the Beast fantasy)
    2. Sex is GOOD. (It ALL comes down to sex)
    3. Danger is exciting & unpredictable.
    4. Sex is GOOD.
    5. Forbidden fruit is the sweetest kind.
    6. Did I mention that sex is GOOD? 😉

  • cacherr1

    Dair fans need to get a grip, the guy you rooted for was a dick too and really didn’t give a shit about Blair other than having her to himself because he needs to be the center of the universe. Chuck actually gave a damn about Blair’s outside relationships (for example if Dan was good boyfriend he wouldn’t allow that Serena and Blair friendship end up in such a way but Chuck actually spent an episode getting those two talk to one another… Dan in fact made it his business to create a bigger divide between Blerena, you know the true OTP of this series). I wouldn’t date anyone who treat my friend like shit which Dan did and continue on doing.

    Chuck actually the only character who did mature in season 5, both Dan and Blair behaved like kids the entire time. Dan still a douche to women…ask Vanessa, Georgina, and Serena. The only effing loyalty that “good” guy has is to his evil ass sister.

    You know why I pick Dan over Chuck, Chuck is up front and owns his mistakes…what the hell Dan do? whines, screw people over but then goes to do “devil made me do it” like some 5 year old.

    Also Blair is possibly the most verbally abusive person on here so yeah she still gave it come in the last few series. Her crazy bi-polarness last year was just as damaging to everyone around her especially Chuck. So stop making this chick into the victim, she’s not.

    I am not going to bother discussing the IP as many people seem to have selective memory over that and the window incident was in no way abusive. Chicks throws harmful shit like glass at men or slap them when their angry yet I don’t hear abuse as often I hear it when those are deliberate actions to harm someone while his was not.

    • Star

      I really hope your use of the word “chick” means you are a male, bc I cannot if a woman wrote all this. Smh

      • cacherr1

        I am a woman…and since when is chick only used by males? Get the hell over yourself.
        I explain myself in rational way. But if you are not up for real conversation don’t insult my intelligence. Blair is not victim as people make her out to be. She has done more messed up things.
        Dan is a not a good guy cause no guy will push people out your life like he did.
        At the end of the day I wouldn’t date neither Dan or Chuck but I take Chuck over condescending, serial monogamist Dan. Manbangs all day for this lady.

    • i agree about the abusive side of blair.i mean come on if anyone of us were such a bitch we’ll be all alone now and friendless.and was does she have?loyal friends and loyal was very annoying to me that eeeeeeverybody was ”omg he’;s abusive!he broke a glass and it fell of her face!”.well people he didn’t mean to hurt her obviously.if he wanted to hurt her he would punch her in the face,end of story.and blair actually has slapped chuch in the face more times that i can count,i didn’t see anyone rooting for that.and it’s not just the phycical abuse that has to be jugded,there’s also verbal abuse and ”actions abuse”.chuck was nothing but sweet to blair until she opened her mouth and all hell broke loose.the only thing that made no sence to me was the hotel story.he made the deal with jack and then he was upset that she went there by herself.didn’t really get that part and ever i,a chuck fan have to agree that,that wasn’t right.anyways i really like chuck,he;s dealing with the cards that he was given and the character that he has and he’s a loyal friend,everybody runs to chuck when they have a problem,nate,serena,blair,dan everyone.and what he gets in return?dan stabbing him in the back and a whole season of bipolar blair..well done.

    • “Crazy bi-polarness”? Nice ableism there.

      • Sally

        Picking up on the one non-PC thing you can find and somehow thinking that will won you the argument even if it has nothing at all to do with the actual characters and plot? Nice Dair fan move there.

      • You are obviously an idiot.

        • People, especially fans who cannot understand something as simple as Gossip Girl, are really not worth the time. Anyone who didn’t see Chuck and Blair as endgame since season 2 has questionable intelligence at best.

  • For me Chuck and Damon are rootable and have the most rootable ships (and yes, Dair fans, they do) because they aren’t black and white villians. While both Damon and Chuck have the ability to hurt those they love deeply and make questionable choices, they do have souls and are generally the most vulnerable characters despite their past or how they were raised. Both had very little love as children and teenagers and were rejected by fathers and mothers who seem to not care if they ever existed (with Damon after he became a vampire). Both yearn to love and be loved. Will they mess up along the way-yes, but they always have something redeemable that draws us as an audience back to them. The main thing is they are not black and white, just as we in real life are not black and white, nor are they one note like a Dawson Leary or Dan Humphrey. Do they still hurt and feel as we do in real life- of course, but that’s what makes us connect to them. With Damon and Chuck you see so many sides that intrigue and make you feel more than any Dan or Dawson type character ever could and that’s why you root for them and their ships so fiercely.

  • I want to say a few things in defense of Chuck and Chuck and Blair’s relationship:

    First, we were NEVER supposed to root for Chuck when he did hurtful things to Blair or find them romantic. We were supposed to root for a very troubled guy to change and grow – which he did in S5.
    Moreover, Chuck and Blair’s relationship is not all dark as several people have portrayed it as here. They were portrayed as L’Amour Fou – a crazy love that brings out the best and the worst in people. Blair also brought out the very BEST in him too: She is the only woman he’s ever loved and she has more emotional power over him than anyone in his life. She’s gotten him to do things he would be afraid to do like open his heart to people, visit Lily when she was ill, come back and face his problems after he screwed up and wanted to move away. As for him treating her poorly? I’d say he’s done very hurtful things but was rarely if ever malicious. (He was usually reacting due to his own issues.) Moreover, Chuck’s done a number of things ANONYMOUSLY (and thus getting zero credit) simply to make Blair happy from giving her the perfect prom with Nate, sending in her application to Columbia so she’d have the choice to go to another school (since she was so unhappy with NYU and wouldn’t admit it), stopping the priest from ruining her wedding to Louis, hiring photographers to boost her spirits, paying her dowry so she could be free to date Dan, etc. He’s also shown her support for her ambitions at W and at Eleanor Waldorf Designs, etc. He’s told her numerous times she’s smart, beautiful and capable and doesn’t need other people’s approval. Just 3 episodes ago he spent the day helping her fix her runway fashion show – expecting nothing in return.
    I would also point out Blair has done a number of hurtful things to Chuck too so it’s hardly a one way street but he also brought out her most compassionate, loyal and kind side as well.
    Lastly, I think it’s important to note Chuck and Blair have definitely moved past a L’Amour fou type love story into something more stable and less dramatic after S5. I think one of the things the writers are showing in this final season of Gossip Girl is both of them backsliding a tiny bit (last week when Chuck gave up after his only loving parental figure betrayed him and Blair regressing to using high school bullying tactics in business)
    but ultimately responding differently to the same pressures to show how much they’ve changed and evolved as characters and as a couple. So personally I think it’s a pretty beautiful endgame ship because of how far both characters have come along and how far their relationship has evolved. 🙂

    • well said ma’m,well said.i would change nothing from the comment above.

  • I think chemistry really is the most important element. Good acting and sparks between the actors can pull a couple through some of the worst writing pitfalls. I also think a good foundation in the first season or so of story allows the audience to be more forgiving of the slumps in the middle of the tale.

    Chuck and Blair, for me, are comprised of the best actors on the show and boast the most consistent buildup and story line on Gossip Girl bar none. For me, the “bad boy” element isn’t important – I’m just drawn to the story that shows the most love and longing between two people. And on GG? That’s definitely Chair.

  • I usually enjoy bad boys but there’s a limit to how far you can push their behaviour before they cross the line into ‘villain’, and when Chuck tried to rape both Jenny and Serena in the Pilot that’s when I knew I could never root for him romantically. If a man is capable of that kind of abusive behaviour, it doesn’t matter what happened to him in the past – he doesn’t need a woman’s love, he needs a therapist’s help.

    Another thing about Chuck and Blair is that there was no balance in that relationship. Usually the bad boy is paired with the plucky hearted good girl who would help bring out the best in him and thus making him a better person to EVERYONE, not just her. Chuck and Blair were both horrendous bullies from the start, and the only thing their romance ever did was to set off a mutual self destruction that has been horrifying and grotesque to witness from beginning to end. Their relationship is a horror story and an ode to all the Chris Browns and Rihannas out there, it is not epic or magnetic, as much as their fans would spin it.

  • Also all these ‘bad boys’ are NOTHING compared to Sawyer from LOST. Who was the absolute best <3 Chuck could never. Including taking his shirt off as liberally and often as Josh Holloway did. Hey, just thought of my Christmas present: LOST boxset!!

    • Nicole

      I agreed with what you said about Dair elsewhere in these comments, but now I’m certain you have good taste. SAWYER. With the insults and the hair and the general shirtlessness. Even pantlessness one time!

    • Melody

      And Logan Echols from Veronica Mars is another great bad boy. I miss Sawyer.

      • Logan and Veronica. Now that was an epic romance.

  • Liz

    The whole idea that the Chuck/Blair relationship on Gossip Girl is a “good girl/good boy” relationship stems from a fundamental understanding of two things: 1) Blair Waldorf as a character, and 2) Gossip Girl as a (flawed, badly told) narrative. The first is this whole idea that Blair’s a “good girl with a dark side.” As someone who is a chronic good girl/good boy shipper, as someone who doesn’t believe that opposites stick together (they may attract, but what bonds relationships are commonalities), I HATED both Blair and Chuck during the first 13 episodes of the series, interspersed with moments of feeling sympathy for them. From my POV, they reminded me of the bullies who terrorized my school, and although I knew Serena had been a “bad girl” before leaving NYC, I felt sorry for the things they did to bait, backstab, and (in B’s case) bully and terrorize those who they saw as weaker and vulnerable. So while during the first season I thought they were PERFECT for one another (and how often often of reality TV do you get a ship that’s so bad, it’s good), I wouldn’t say that I “shipped” Chair.

    I became a Chair shipper during the second season premiere. I still think that Chuck and Blair were Chuck and Blair, but I saw enough layers peeled back in that episode to believe that they were it for each other. Since then, the road hadn’t been easy, but I’ve never wavered. I think it’s because I don’t see Blair as this she-ro, or fundamentally good (I think that the “Grace Kelly” and “Audrey Hepburn” moments are an act — they always have been!), but as a human, vulnerable girl who covers up her vulnerability with her antics, that I support Chair. What I like about Chair is that Chuck, for all his flaws (and as I’ve said repeatedly around fandom, being the scion of the Basses was clearly like being raised by wolves; how the hell was Chuck supposed to know how to behave any better? Hate when Chuck haters judge him by a standard that he’s trying to learn as he goes along)…. Chuck loves Blair exactly as she is. Dan, on the other hand, wants to CHANGE all of his girlfriends… and I say that as someone whose first GG ship was Derena. Dan didn’t love Blair for Blair (as she claimed he did); those who claim the season 5 finale was OOC for Dan and Blair are wearing shipper goggles. Dan judges without mercy, he did it to Serena, Georgina, and even his best friend whom I thought for a while would be his endgame, VANESSA. It was only a matter of time before he was going to find fault with Blair.

    The other flaw is that so many people display a total misunderstanding of Gossip Girl as a milieu and show. I don’t understand why people were expecting middle class or even upper middle class values on this show. Perhaps it’s because I’m not white, but I look at TV and don’t assume that my culture, my values, or the way I see the world to be represented all the time. I’d be waiting a long time if I wanted to see my beliefs depicted. The world of Gossip Girl is the world of the 1%, and the Darwinian, starker tones of the first season suited that world. I don’t think our corporate overlords are good people, and I don’t think that their progeny are supposed to be depicted as angels. It annoys me to no end when people think that GG is supposed to be like Dawson’s Creek, but with better clothing. NO. Chuck Bass in season 1 was exactly what I thought someone like him would be like, and his character growth has been interesting. Those who claim he takes two steps back for every step forward have suspect shipping and character agendas, and usually when you chat with them, you learn they haven’t watched every single episode of the show, yet make all these broad, declarative statements that are frustratingly false. The hotel incident was three seasons ago, and the glass punch was almost two seasons ago. In contrast, Dan cheated on Blair less than 10 episodes ago. You can’t claim the latter is OOC (when Dan has cheated on girlfriends before), but claim all Chuck’s foibles are totally in keeping with who he is.

    But the fundamental issue with Gossip Girl is abysmally bad showrunning and storytelling, particularly during the Safran era. Josh Safran was the architect of Dair, and the very worst thing that happened to GG. He split the fandom and started one of the most bitter ship wars I’ve ever seen. It was a different show before he took over. I’m just thankful he isn’t writing the final season. Good riddance and good luck to Smash fans.

    • Yeah, but Gossip Girl is a teen soap directed primarily towards young women, not adults, and thus it carries a greater moral and didactic responsibility towards its audience, than, say, Mad Men or Breaking Bad. This was a show for young people to watch other young people go through issues such as love, friendship, heartbreak and family: the UES was a backdrop that occasionally gave the writers to explore the issues of class in New York (something they did quite well in the beginning, but completely lost their way at the end). It was never supposed to be about the ‘Darwinian, starker tones’ of the world of the 1%.

      So no, you can’t sugarcoat a dark and clearly abusive relationship like Chuck and Blair and present it as true love. If a man tries to hit his love interest during a drunken rage, it doesn’t MATTER how long ago it happened, it would happen again. There’s a trope in fiction called the Moral Event Horizon and Chuck crossed that back in Season 3 when he tried to sell his girlfriend for a hotel. To gloss over his actions and not give him proper repercussions is not only offensive, it’s insulting and tiring to my intelligence as a viewer.

      And personally, I am disgusted with how classism is treated like a joke and how the elitists on the show are now being shown as the heroes as opposed to the villains that they should be. No other story about class warfare that I know of ends with the rich and privileged winning over the less fortunate; that’s a tragedy, not a happy ending.

      • Star

        Also, I read somewhere that in the writers stuff that leaked they actually referred to Blair as a battered wife, so the writers do kind of see it that way but they caved to this rabid faction of Chair shippers (as seen in this comment section) that would die if Chair weren’t together. They can’t stand that not everyone likes Chair so they made campaigning for a fictional ship a job and thus why we get stuck with a unrealistic Chair ending, it has nothing to do with a logical narrative and is strictly fan pandering, even Leighton confirmed that. Blair should end the show single and alone finally standing on her own not waiting around for a guy to be happy.

        • Sure, they did. Seriously the crap you guys make up is pretty hilarious right now.

        • Leighton never said she wanted Blair to end the show alone and single. She said everyone wants Chuck and Blair to get married but she wasn’t sure if that was the best ending for Blair because everytime Blair gets a happy ending. something happens to ruin it. She advocated that Blair’s story be a cliffhanger of some sort. Would love to see this evidence that writers saw Blair as a battered woman because I haven’t yet. Lastly I don’t think the Chuck and Blair fans are the ones that are looking rabid here in the comment section. Most of them are making very reasonable arguments in defense of why they like their couple while a few Dair fans are making snarky comments and sometimes histrionic and inaccurate ones.

          • Janet Snakehole

            They sound just like…oh wait, Dan himself.

          • I think they’ll take that as a compliment.

          • They tend to like to put words and story lines in people’s mouths that never happened. I truly feel sorry for Dair fans because they go beyond the realm of delusion at this point and ,yes, Leighton said she liked where Blair’s story ended up. What character is Blair ending up with, oh, that’s Chuck.

          • Easy A

            Yes, she did say that she liked Blair’s ending story and everyone knows she ends with Chuck. I feel it sad for whoever still clings on the idea of Leighton disliking Blair with Chuck just because they want to believe it themselves, not to mention that Leighton’s opinion doesn’t have anything to do with how the world sees Chuck and Blair story in the first place. It’s embarrassing sometimes to even think about how pathetic some people are.

        • I agree. The writers caving in to the crazy Chair shippers ruined the show.

          • Hannah

            Even the huge Dan and Dair fan CadlyMack has admitted that Chuck and Blair were clearly endgame since S1. Maybe it’s time you joined her in the real world?

          • Chuck and Blair were always intended for endgame. If they catered to fans at all there would have been no Dair and Serenate would be endgame because Dan doesn’t have near the fans for people to care who he ends up with. I hate Derena but I’ve seen them build that story over Serenate (who I prefer) and Chuck and Blair were the story the whole time. Sadly it’s fans like you who clearly don’t watch the entire show’s story arcs. Blair never loved Dan, only Chuck. Even Safran said it was unrequited from the beginning. That tends to be a clue as to where things are going. Sorry you can’t understand a teen show, but it’s really not that hard.

        • Holland

          Lol “I read somewhere.” Okay. We totally believe you because of the verified source. And of course not everyone likes Chair. What ship is loved by everyone? Look, the people you see in the online fandom are different from fans who just watch it on tv. And most casual viewers just want it to go back to seasons 1 and 2 quality, when the characters made sense. (And there was no Dair btw.)

        • Katie MacAllister

          Wow. Is it really that hard for you to accept that Chuck and Blair were always going to end up together? You hate them so much that you literally cannot wrap your mind around the fact that other people love them- not just other fans, but the creators of the show itself- and you cling to this notion that them ending up together must be some changed-at-the-last-minute pandering to a rabid splinter faction of fans, because otherwise it means that your interpretation of the show was wildly incorrect, right? I mean, I get that it sucks to be wrong, but at least accept it with some dignity. Even Cadly pointed out that a Chair endgame has been obvious since Season 1 to anyone who’s watched TV before.

          • miss880

            I agree. Picture Friends ending without Ross and Rachel being together… The writer’s thought about it and realized that would be stupid. The same thing is happening here. TPTB can’t end the show without Chuck and Blair. It would be a waste of everyone’s time.

        • cassia

          Dan took advantage of Blair when she was perhaps at her emotionally weakest point (after she’d lost the baby/ made the pact about Chuck) and manipulated her into thinking no one else cared about her but him, just as abusive as anything Chuck ever did.

      • miss880

        Gossip Girl has always been a show about the rich UES elitists being the heroes. I don’t know why you would expect otherwise. That’s like tuning into Dexter and getting disgusted that the protagonist is a serial killer. You go into these shows knowing the premise, as unrealistic as it might be, and enjoy the ride. Or stop watching.

        • Naw, I love Dexter. He’s an interesting character and the writers don’t romanticise him as much as the GG writers do with Chuck. Also, guess what, not even Dexter ever tried to rape his girlfriends.

          And it’s nice that Michael C. Hall can actually take his shirt off. Showtime has this thing for casting morally dubious yet extremely sexy ginger men as ‘bad boys’. No time for flops with beer bellies with a Batman voice and squint eyes/flaring nostrils.

          • miss880

            You completely missed the point of my comment. I was just saying that shows have premises that you either like or dislike – and you choose to watch that show accordingly. Watching Gossip Girl and then complaining that the spoiled rich kids are the heroes, as if you should be expecting something else, is a waste of time.

          • I wouldn’t say it’s a waste of time at all. It promotes discussion, alas not very good ones when it comes to Gossip Girl because all these pre-pubescent teens seem to talk about are Chuck and Blair and their ‘epic love’. Just look at this thread.

          • Hannah

            Accusation of a rape attempt that never happened – check!

            Criticism of Ed’s looks as if that will prove anything whatsoever about Chuck and Blair – check!

            Wow, I really thought you guys might have got some new arguments by now. Your old ones still suck BTW.

          • Holland

            That “flop with a beer belly and a Batman voice and squint eyes/flaring nostrils” was in GQ’s men of the year issue, won TCA’s, Young Hollywood Awards for breakthrough performance, has been on numerous magazine covers, and been the face for fashion campaign. Clearly, the world sees it differently.

          • cacherr1

            Also considering alot of people assume Ed Westwick is American proves this mofo is damn good actor.
            And I put it this way Ed Westwick pulls off alot of clothing that men normally can’t do including her boy Michael C. Hall (who I adore).

          • beer bellies?really?you’re attacking the actor now?we’re talking about shows you moron not real life!get a grip!

      • TV should only feature rainbows, butterflies & unicorns! Clutch your pearls elsewhere because some of us (well majority actually) enjoy some good ol’ drama.

      • Easy A

        Yes, only the ‘less fortunate’ in the question, is also a douche who wants to buy his way in the world of people he claims to despise. Apparently, the ‘less fortunate’, no matter how ‘douchy’ he is, should still be a hero and deserves a happy ending more than the elitists under any circumstance. LMAO, ok.

      • Finally, someone with a brain in this thread!

    • Katie MacAllister

      This is so true, btw. I don’t get how anyone could watch S1 of Gossip Girl- or any season, really- and characterize Blair Waldorf as a “good girl.” Blair and Chuck began as a relationship between two relatively dark, emotionally-damaged people, who unexpectedly fell in love- and thus made themselves vulnerable to each other in a way they never were with anyone else. They’re both such complex, layered characters, who present this sort of heartless facade to the outside world… but then with each other, they let their guard down. And that’s ultimately what makes their relationship so compelling, the feeling that there’s no one for either of them but each other. It’s very much a crazy, melodramatic, all-consuming-love type of relationship. Some people love that, some people prefer morality plays or cheesy rom-coms. To each their own, I guess.

  • I think the good girl/bad guy idea probably over simplifies things in a way that makes it a very either or debate. I will say this there are many types of “bad” guys. In regards to the “I ship Dair because Chuck is a bad guy argument” I would argue that sometimes the bad guy who does it while talking about how he is good and noble is as bad as the guy who makes mistakes and pays for them. If you want the “good guy” on Gossip Girl to win Blair on gossip girl, in terms of the guy who won’t make a mistake and would never on purpose or accidently hurt the heroine, then you should have been hoping for someone to be cast because Dan Humphrey does not fit the bill. Not in relation to how he treated Blair, Serena or Vanessa.

  • Holland

    I think people fail to realize that Gossip Girl is a tv show. It’s not supposed o reflect real life. Blair Waldorf is in no way a role model for girls to look up to, and the writers have never pretended otherwise. So it’s really stupid to make people feel guilty for shipping something that they like because of the characters and the chemistry. This show is a guilty pleasure, mindless entertainment. Stop trying to turn it into something like Glee, which actively helps teens with issues.

  • Mee

    You don’t have six years of two people loving each other no matter what happened (because despite everything, you can’t accuse CB of ever not loving each other) and then end with another couple. Like even the King of Dairdom, Safran, said: “Chuck and Blair never stopped being the story.”

  • Sally

    Re: Chuck and Blair.

    I agree with a lot of posters here in that the darkest, most unhealthy parts of Chuck and Blair’s relationship were NEVER shown to be a good things. We saw Blair reject Chuck because of them, we saw other characters yell at Chuck about them, we saw Chuck miserable and self-hating because he knew he crossed the line and hurt the person he loved most. The show has never suggested that the IP or 4×20 were “normal” or “healthy”.

    What they HAVE done, however, is consistently write Chuck with enough light (his habit of doing lovely things for Blair, the way he has REPEATEDLY let Blair go to “better” men when he thought it was for her own good, his love for Nate and his family) that it was clear that his character could and would be redeemed some day. That was the whole point of his Season 5 arc (the one decent part of a generally horrendous season).

    Having said that, although Chuck’s “sins” are worse and he has been given a substantial redemption arc, Chuck and Blair are by no means the cliched good girl/bad boy teen romance. Blair has a dark side too, and whatever the DVDs-and-books!!! crowd might like to say, Blair’s arc was never about killing her dark side to become a good little hipster girl, but about coming to terms with it and making it work in her adult life.

    THIS is why Chuck and Blair fit. Neither are perfect. Both are very damaged and complicated in their own ways. They were never going to be the perfect on paper romance but they have made some damn good television – which, after all, is what Gossip Girl is. Remember?

  • Katie MacAllister

    I think the whole “good guy” versus “bad guy” dynamic is woefully simplified and misunderstood (generally by self-described “good guys” who don’t realize that the problem isn’t that they’re good- the problem is that they’re boring).

    For me, it’s not about rooting for a bad guy, it’s about being more interested in the more layered characters, the ones who have more to them than what meets the eye. The same is true for relationships- the light, easy, “healthy” ones simply don’t capture my attention. I watch drama to see… drama. Not to see a realistic depiction of a relationship I should aspire to, or to get advice on how to live my life. I want to see drama, and angst, and sparks flying, and crazy hot chemistry. And Chuck and Blair definitely have all of that.

  • Joanna

    You posted an It Crowd clip. How awesome is that?! I want to randomly start quoting the show now. “This is the Internet? The whole Internet?”

    But alas, I will refrain and try to explain why I love Chuck and Blair. For so many reasons and no reasons at all. I had had no idea who Chuck or Blair was when I accidentally stumbled upon the infamous limo scene and was instantly hooked. So Chuck and Blair are what got me into GG – that’s how intense and powerful their chemistry was/is. But you can ship based on chemistry for so long, and here is where the real story begins. Everyone loves a bad boy and everyone loves stories about how love opened them up enough to redeem themselves. But I don’t think this is so simple in Chuck and Blair’s case. This is the story of the bad boy and the bad girl. Here you have two complex characters, both damaged and issue-riddled. They’re snobs and love their status, they’re ambitious and cunning. They’re selfish and revel in the havoc they wreck. Yet they are fiercely loyal and will do anything for their best friends. They’re the same even if their methods and reactions differ. And then they fall in love and somehow two twisted wrongs make a right. They bring out a side in each orher that was always there unbeknownst to everyone but them. Now, they both screwed up, Chuck more than Blair but I never doubted that those two love each other. And this is more than I can say about the other GG characters or other TV shows in generall. Chuck and Blair have that element of destiny, eternity, forever that I appreciate and find very interesting in this fickle, cynical world.

    What else can be said about them? Hm, they way they believe in each other even if themselves don’t and how that will inspire them to achieve their goals, how Blair takes care of Chuck even if he pushes her away, how Chuck wants to be there for Blaie even if they’re not together. All this and more is beautiful to watch but what I love mostly about them is that they’ve earned their endgame status. Since the beginning they both fought against their feelings and kept fighting as long as they could. Until they could no longer deny it, run from it or lie about it. Yes, we had to wait for quite some time for them to get together the first time, but I basked in the knowledge that what they felt for each other wasn’t a fleeting emotion because of how hard they fought against it. And after they broke up and did their best to move on, they always came back to each other and that’s we know their bond is strong and everlasting. I guess their stubbornness, reluctance to give in and the myriad of obstacles shouldn’t be a reason to love them but it’s their way of showing us that their love is real and will withstand time and that I do love a lot. Their love for each other should never be dismissed as a teenage fancy but it has in fact intimidated anyone who came between them and it is perhaps the only thing i can take seriously on this show. After all this is a show where characters get an average of 3 love interests a season and go on and on about how different this time is from all the others, where guest stars whip out engagement rings after being on the show for no more than 4 episodes, where one character is all “You’re the worst. I hate you.” one minute and “I love and I don’t think you’re the worst anymore even though nothing changed in the last 42 seconds. Let’s be together for ever and ever.” Needless to say, they are the only reason I still watch this stupid show. They had to be no less than epic for me to stick around for this long.

  • Holland

    I think using Chuck’s behavior in the pilot as evidence of how terrible he is doesn’t make sense. There were things that happened in the pilot that the writers have ignored for the rest of the series: Nate and Chuck riding the bus, Chuck’s line about stealing his mom’s Paxil when it’s made clear later that everyone thinks she’s dead, and Blair’s mother played by an entirely different actress. The writers chose to go in a different direction than the pilot. I believe that Chuck was supposed to be the bad guy at first, but then they realized Ed’s potential – numerous Schwartz and Savage interviews about how much they love him support this – and decided to make him into the “bad boy turned good,” as you call him. This is extremely clear because even in the second episode, Chuck is reprimanded by Bart and instantly becomes miles more sympathetic than he was in the pilot. So I really don’t think we’re supposed to take the pilot into consideration.

    As for the hotel incident, well, there’s another Schwartz and Savage interview – Google it! I’m too lazy to find the link – in which they make it clear that that was an obstacle put in their way to delay their endgame. Schwartz said something about how it wouldn’t make sense for the show’s lead couple to get together years before the show ends. They needed conflict. So it’s dumb to start comparing Chuck and Blair to real life people when it’s clear that the writers used the hotel incident to just create drama. And tbh, I never expected any better. I can think of loads of better ways to create drama, but these are the gg writers, and they’re who we’re stuck with.

    Dair was Safran’s wet dream, which he immediately plunged into once Schwartz and Savage were looking the other way. I think they realized too late that he was ruining their show and hastily fired him, and are now trying their best to get it back on track – hence why they wrote the season six premiere, and why Stephanie Savage wrote the finale.

    I think my point is that I think a certain section of the fandom misinterpreted the story, when in truth, the story was never anything other than Chuck and Blair.

    • Nicole

      I agree with you about the pilot. I really can’t remember what I thought of Chuck’s actions on first viewing, and I definitely fell in love with Chuck and Blair. Now I tell myself that was okay because characters often go in different directions after the pilot. So, I tend to not put as much stock in that instance, but there are still plenty of examples of womanizing, violent, manipulative Chuck Bass that define his character and have happened throughout the seasons.

      GG in particular is one of the worst shows in terms of having characters do out of character things to create drama. So fine, if its not Chuck’s fault, it’s still the writers that he sold her for a hotel, and I don’t Blair to be with someone who literally sold her as if that’s a thing a boyfriend can do.

      Also, things change in TV. Characters that are supposed to be around a couple episodes turn into regulars and surprise pairings work better than anyone imagined. Fans who don’t like Chuck and Blair didn’t “misinterpret” the story. That implies that they got something wrong. Smart writers don’t completely do what the fans say but they should play with what works, and Blair and Dan worked for some people. There’s no one way to view a show, especially one as uneven as GG.

      • cacherr1

        I am sorry but am i the only one who find that people want to bring up IP but forget the kiss Blair sold Chuck for.
        Same thing in my book but hey each his own. Also the fact Blair has laid hands on both Chuck and Dan.

        • what’s the meaning of IP exept the standard?i don;t think that you use it as internet protocol!lol.

          • cacherr1

            IP: Indecent Proposal which is what that entire story are was based on. Slight alterations.

          • ahhhhhhh ok then!i couldn’t follow the conversations cause i didn’t know that!thanks!

        • Nicole

          I’m not sure how Chuck or Blair’s actions makes the others okay? Giving people away without their consent is bad. Though I would say maybe people don’t bring up the thing with Blair because a kiss and a person are in the same family of wrong but on much different levels.

          • cacherr1

            No it isn’t you are still trading someone. For me the kiss was worst as Chuck knew nothing about it.

      • Holland

        The hotel incident is forgivable, to me, because Chuck has had such a good retribution arc. It’s basically the only story line I’ve enjoyed on gg for a long time. There was never a moment when any of the characters supported Chuck for what he did. He was pretty much miserable and isolated for seasons. I feel like people who are against Chuck and Blair and call them abusive too often treat them as if they are real life people. And they did misinterpret the story because Schwartz and Savage have made it clear time and time again that Chair is the story, and that they were always meant to come back to each other.

        You can ship what you want on a show, but in the end, it is up to the writers because it’s their story. Josh Schwartz has always loved Chair – he has referred to their limo scene as gg’s defining moment. It’s his story.

        • Mee

          Also, Chuck has apologized for every one of his actions. He has suffered, he has paid the price. He went to therapy. He’s tried to become a better man, and he’s succeeded. Chuck – unlike other people who shall remain unnamed – accepts that he makes mistakes, and tries to better himself. Again, his arc has been that he is now a man who deserves love.

          • Yes, and a character like Dan never apologizes and rarely has consequences for any actions

        • I agree with this. I’ll just add two points about the Indecent Proposal story that alot of people seem to miss as they simplify it into a story of a girl being abused.
          First, it was done to illustrate Chuck and Blair’s lack of trust in one another. Chuck did not trust her to help him out of his situation and she did not trust Chuck enough to say something when Jack propositioned her. She was going to go ahead and sleep with Jack behind his back. If they had only talked with one another the whole tragedy could’ve been avoided.
          Second, Blair was ashamed because she loved Chuck so much that she was basically willing to “whore herself out” for him. It made her question whether it was possible to love someone too much and thus began 2 seasons of her trying to find a safe relationship. Safe in two ways: A guy that wasn’t as untrustworthy as Chuck and a guy that loved her more than she loved him (if she loved the guy at all.) Season 5 she thought she’d found that kind of relationship with Louis and later Dan. But the writers were giving Chuck growth and redemption all through Season 5 and ended the season by showing that both Louis and Dan were capable of being just as untrustworthy as Chuck was and in the case of Dan about a billion times more hypocritical. The story was that Blair was never going to be completely safe. Even someone as nice as Dan was capable of cheating on her with her best friend and given the right circumstances her Prince Louis was capable of darkness too. But that didn’t mean she had to settle for the kind of person Chuck was when the Indecent Proposal happened. He had to mature and change before they were going to be back together for good.

          FWIW I would never advocate this type of relationship in real life but I have a soft spot for fiction written about flawed “bad” characters struggling to change and be redeemed. That’s why I tend to be drawn to Chuck Bass, Serena van der woodsen and Blair Waldorf type characters over the morally righteous and sometimes hypocritical Dan Humphreys and Vanessa Abrams types. However I also love good guys that are always trying to do the right thing are weighted down by things like their family, crazy friends, rarely get the recognition they deserve and are humble and not hypocritical, etc aka Nate Archibald types.

          • cacherr1

            While I agree with you, I do remember a reviewer bringing to light how technically the Indecent Proposal was bit OOC for Chuck at that point and contradicted what he said earlier in the season about Blair’s flair for scheming and how Chuck went about the Indecent Proposal contradicted that.
            I also want to defend Vanessa, she actually owned her mistakes but of course Dan has make every girl he get with go insane (I am sorry I really was upset with Dan over his treatment of Vanessa, that when I really realize Dan was a crummy guy and cheats on girlfriends). Humphrey family just blame others and get away with everything.

        • Nicole

          Yes, they can tell whatever story they want. They cannot control how viewers react to it. There’s nothing wrong with not liking what the creator does or reacting to it in a different way.

          And creators can be wrong. I remember coming back to GG after hearing about what was happening to Chuck and Blair’s relationship. I was not impressed with how the writers viewed Chuck trying to hit Blair. They said some bullshit like Blair knew Chuck would never hurt her and she was never really afraid. Which was just not what was on TV.

          And I don’t get the real life comment. The show takes place in the same world as our own, albeit with better clothes, alcohol and sounds tracks. Abuse doesn’t have a different definition there, and it can be show intentionally or unintentionally by the way the characters act.

  • Such STRONG reactions to Chuck and Blair! No wonder they are endgame. How can they NOT be? Just look at the passion in the comment section. Wow. 🙂

    • Queenoftherant

      Sorry, I really don’t want to start anything, but the highest number of likes is still in the 20s. It is a small group of passionate people and I don’t see why people who aren’t into chuck/blair would bother joining in only to get attacked (and from what I hear, season 6 has been written specifically to please this fan base anyway so it makes sense that they would be more engaged with the show at the moment). Passion on the internet is great but exists in many relationships, that isn’t a reason for so called endgame. Some websites form a community around a particular ship and scare off the others. Anyway, Chuck and Blair are cool by me if done right, believe me, it just annoys me when viewers dictate stories; writers own the characters and should be doing their job with continuous, decent storytelling. They didn’t do this for ANY ship, including Chair, it’s just pathetic.

  • Nicole

    What I find funny is that a fundamental part of any relationship with a bad guy is that there has to be change. I don’t want the leopard to change his spots because I like the leopard how it is! That’s a big reason why I loooooved Sawyer from Lost and ranted endlessly to my mother about why he belonged with Kate instead of Jack. I thought they fit better whereas Kate seemed to need to change to make herself good enough for Jack. Anyone remember “You run, I con a leopard don’t change it’s spots, Freckles?” dghagfka I was so obsessed with them. Except, of course, then there was this idea that Sawyer wasn’t good enough for Kate and she really wanted someone like Jack. And what worked is when Sawyer became a good person kind of independent of romance. He didn’t need someone to change him. He just needed someone to have his back (fdgfjffdkj Juliet and Sawyer forever).

    I also don’t like relationships where the morality is put on the woman. She has to “save” the guy and her good qualities help dictate what their relationship should be. Or in Elena and Damon’s case, a lot of the time she’s the only thing that makes him have some compassion. I don’t think it’s hot how he’ll kill anyone or let anyone else die to save her. That she’s the only thing he cares about seems more like obsession than romance.

    A big part of why Barney and Robin became really awkward is because they didn’t know what to do with a Barney who could have Robin. They didn’t know what to do with a womanizer who is tied down to one person, so they had to change him without damaging the most popular character and all kinds of awkward characterization followed with those two. However, Barney is not normal, Robin is not normal and I got so annoyed when Lily and the others would try to put them in this typical relationship mold. I didn’t see why Barney couldn’t be his crass self while only sleeping with Robin. He can still throw out Lemon Laws and Hot/Crazy Scales while in a relationship. They had an awesome bro dynamic that made me love them but that disappeared once they got together.

    It’s easier to gravitate to the rebellious characters because they are almost always more interesting. The white hat characters usually start out very straightforward where there’s more freedom with a bad boy. I also think it gives the relationship more potential because the bad guy has room to be more open minded. That gives more places for the other character and the relationship as a whole to go. That’s more how I see Eric and Sookie. He has an element of danger in the TV show, but he’s much less bloodthirsty in the books and that’s the Eric I fell in love with. He’s funny and charismatic and more inventive than straitlaced, uptight Bill Compton.

    With Rory and Jess, I liked Jess instantly because he was interesting. However, I don’t think I would have liked him with Rory if they didn’t fit. It didn’t really matter whether he was a bad guy, they both loved books and had adorable banter. The best part about him being a “bad boy” was the relationships he formed with Rory and Luke despite his gruffness. I guess they felt more meaningful because they had to be earned, and that made them more real.

    Judging by these comments in support of Chuck and the Dair tag on tumblr each boy’s actions are judged completely differently depending on who you favor. So, I’m not going to argue who’s better for her. I’ll admit that I don’t support Chuck because I do think he was abusive to Blair even though I liked them in the beginning. I know that Chuck’s been in therapy and has supposedly become a better man, but I don’t think that’s completely possible. Some real issues were never addressed because the show can’t come out and say his behavior was domestic abuse. He can be a better person in a lot of ways and even try to do what he thinks is best for Blair, but if his actions are never classified as what they are then his views are still skewed. He can still attempt to hit her again or treat her like property.

    Ugh, I wrote way too much. And while I do like bad guys sometimes I like normal, boring relationships too. I was happy Duncan was at the door! I always thought he was sweet. I love Stefan/Elena, and I don’t need drama in GG if Dan and Blair are going to argue about something I’ve never heard of and watch movies in his apartment. I just like the payoff that so rarely arrives after will they/won’t they relationships where the couple gets to be happy and settle into a healthy relationship.

  • Chuck and Blair forever! I love them! Best part of GG, and Can’t wait til they get married! Thanks for Highlighting them!

  • Queenoftherant

    Well it’s a shame all these comments have been largely driven by shipper arguments between a small group of passionate people because this is a thoughtful, fun read. Personally, I have always found it funny that teen soaps take this approach to writing their romances because in teen movies, it is almost always the opposite – the main character (male or female) is distracted by the bad boy/shallow popular girl while their nice, perfect match hangs about in the friend zone till the last few minutes. I guess in shows they need to keep everything moving along for a lot longer.

    Obviously it is extremely subjective what captures/repels people about certain pairings, based on age, personality type, and relationship experience etc. Because of that I think it’s extra important that writers have a plan and stick to it in their storytelling, not wildly swing about trying to please viewers (or create random drama). Messing around viewers with in continuity, blatant character assassination etc is just disrespectful.

    Thanks for the article:)

  • Queenoftherant

    Random thought about the IP incident – WHY didn’t the writers have Chuck say no way to jack, then have everything else unfold as it did. Still would have been brilliant angst as Blair struggled to believe that Chuck was NOT in on it and would have added the very interesting element of Chuck’s feelings of betrayal. Chuck’s complicity means that a lot of women were going to be really disgusted by him but seriously, how revolting was Blair’s behaviour, going off to sleep with her boyfriend’s uncle behind his back, just assuming what Chuck didn’t know wouldn’t hurt him? Worst storyline ever.

  • cassia

    Dan in Gossip Girl is a vile judgemental stalker(yet still one of the dullest things on tv ever) he’s hardly a good guy. Chuck’s horrid, no one would want to date him in real life but he’s fun to watch at least.

  • Jamie

    Love this article. I can never decide if the writers are making the good guy characters less intriguing or if they just seem that way next to the more complex bad boy characters.

    When Eric & Sookie were ridiculous and sweet together on True Blood during the amnesia spell, I was no longer interested (it was actually painful to watch, which is saying something in scenes where we get to see that much of Eric), which could say something about me I guess, but I think it just demonstrates that conflict is more interesting. The bad boy relationship guarantees conflict. Same with the “will they or won’t they.” I’ve been impressed with Castle’s ability to keep the conflict and drama despite having moved beyond their four seasons of will they or won’t they.

    (Small note, I think it was Logan at the door at the end of Veronica Mars season 1, we were all a little disappointed when her boyfriend showed up at the coffee shop in the season 2 premiere and it was Duncan)

  • Chuck is no bad boy. He’s a big wuss who whines about his daddy issues all the time. And he got KO’d by the “good guy” Dan so many times.

  • Maddy

    Chuck and Blair stand out in this article, since Blair is a bad girl too. Yeah yeah, she’s loyal and vulnerable and I’m sure Dair fans will tell me that big bad Chuckles made her scheme, but there is no way that Blair is a typical (read: dull) heroine like Elena or Joey. So they’re kind of like… bad girl falls for worse bad boy. haha

  • Ley

    well, let’s not judge, enjoy the journey, it’s all fiction XD this is the only thought i’ve got after reading this multi-word article with some nice pics, 3 famous gifs and 2 clips

  • Sarah

    I don’t care about any of the ships on Gossip Girl. I JUST WANT IT TO END SO I NEVER HAVE TO HEAR ABOUT IT EVER AGAIN.

    (Glad ya’ll found something to be passionate about though.)