Ross' Virginity

Sorry if this was already posted - but I found it pretty funny......I love finding the little inconsistencies in shows and movies. :) It's from [address]:

"Ross Gellar Re-Virginized? Not to be a nitpicky Nellie, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who recognized the character continuity problem in the October 26 episode of Friends. When Ross (David Schwimmer) and Chandler (Matthew Perry) were spilling each other's secrets in front of Monica (Courteney Cox Arquette), Chandler revealed that Ross had slept with their college dorm's cleaning woman. But as we know from what was a fairly big plot point earlier in the series, Ross was said to have slept with only one woman--his lesbian ex-wife Carol (Jane Sibbett)--until after his first divorce. Oops!"

~Teresa~

In article , "TFM" wrote:

love

I'm

the

Chandler

their

big

only one

I was so glad to see someone in the (sort of) media point this out. Nice to see the writers get called on that. ... On the other hand, Ross' love life has always been a little shady. Didn't he tell Rachel she was only his second lover, when an earlier episode had revolved around his sleeping with Julie?

Ida

In article ,

funny......I

from

sure

Monica

first

IMHO, the women of Ross Geller's past (excluding Rachel and Carol) were nothing but sluts, crackwhores, and murders. (The last one counting Emily, who murdered Princess Diana three years ago, and never told anyone, even Ross.)

SailorCallie of Crystal San Antonio

Hi!

Hm, yeah, I guess kinda everyone except for the writers noticed that. - Ross probably subconsiously forgot that it was HIM who slept with the cleaning woman, because later on, he actually BELIEVED, it was Chandler who slept with her. - Carol maybe was his first woman to sleep with. Maybe he cheated on her with the cleaning woman.

In fact, Ross didn't say, that Rachel was his 2nd lover. He said: "C'mon, you know everyone I've been with. All, both of them.". I think he meant Carol and Julie. He just forgot about that cleaning woman, he probably cheated on Carol with, because in his memory, it was Chandler.

Just my 0.02

Didi

Ross said he had been with two women BEFORE Rachel. That is no error.

I highly doubt Ross (or any guy) would forget losing his virginity.

If this were true, Chandler would have quickly corrected Ross in Season 1, when Ross said he had been with only one woman.

Unlike Rachel and Chandler's numerous meetings, there is really no way to justify this continuity error. This is very poor writing --- plain and simple.

--Doc

maybe it was bill clintons idea of what sex is not :)

DocDoc2222 wrote in message news:[email]...

when

simple.

In article , "dot-com" wrote:

If the only sex Bill Clinton had ever had was the sort he had with Monica Lewinksy, then he would be a virgin to this day.

As for the episode in question, Ross said that Chandler slept with a certain woman, but Chandler retorted that it was Ross.

If we follow Bill Clinton's example to use words in accordance with their meaning in English, then Ross first slept with Rachel as early as 108 "TOW Nana Dies Twice"... ;)

Tennant

maybe she was 65 years old and weighed 200lb and he did actually *sleep* with her, but this was sufficiently embarrasing in itself !

Lauren

In article , "Lauren" wrote:

51 year old virgin.

iiiiiiiiiiiill;;.-09

Maybe...

It's the guy version of what IS sex and what ISN'T sex. Note the serious relationships pre-Rachel (Carol and Julie) equal two, exactly what he TOLD Rachel.

So...in guy world...he speaks the truth. A cleaning woman here, a xerox place girl there... they don't count because they're not serious relationships, ergo not real sex, in guy world.

Sue

In article , "Didi" wrote:

Rachel

the

Chandler who

her

said: "C'mon,

meant

You're probably right about this. Because Richard included Monica in his "two" in the parallel conversation, and Rachel included Ross in her list, I had always assumed Ross included Rachel on his list - but the wording leaves room for your interpretation...

Ida

Didi wrote...

Yeah, and maybe that didn't "count" because they were on a break? =)

Adeline wrote:

Sigh. No, it's just careless and sloppy writing by a staff that has no respect for the intelligence or loyalty of their viewers. This was really inexcusable. Next we'll find out that Nora left Mr. Bing because of his womanizing, Joey's twin brother is coming to visit, and Phoebe has been running a business with Ursula ever since she got fired.

"Didi" wrote:

Ross is not the type to cheat on his wife. You can claim he cheated on Rachel, but as far as Ross believed, their relationship was over.

In article , Grace X wrote:

No. People keep bringing this 'error' up. Ross told Rachel that she knew everyone he'd been with, both of them. Of course Ross did not see fit to include Rachel as a person that Rachel knew.

As for the 'error' in 704 "TOW Rachel's Assistant", that wasn't quite the way that Ross remembers the incident...

Tennant

Grace X wrote:

No. Ross was telling the truth. Carol and Julie were his two previous lovers. I'm sorry, but your interpretation does not make sense. Rachel knew about Carol. She was the mother of his son, and Rachel was present at the birth. Rachel knew about Julie. She tried desperately to convince him not to have sex with Julie, then gave in and encouraged him to go ahead by describing what it would be like. It turned them both on, and then he closed the door and went for Julie.

There is no chance Ross was trying to hide his sex life with Julie from Rachel.

In article ,

funny......I

from

sure

in

Monica

with

fairly

first

Rachel

previous

Rachel knew

the

him not

from

Right, I realize that (see my second post on the topic). Actually, I was thinking that the WRITERS had forgotten Julie. When Rachel listed her lovers, she mentioned Ross. When Richard listed his lovers, he said he had been with "two," which included Monica. It sort of stuck in my brain that Ross' "You know who I've been with: all both of them," was Rachel-inclusive. But I realize on reflection and correction that that needn't be the case. Thanks.

Ida

there have been quite a few continuity errors that have ocurred on friends just to name a few. Rachel for one has seemed to have met chandler for the first time on several occassions. Another is in the last episode rachel has suggested that she has never been in anyway attracted to chandler. When we know from previous episodes that she has fantisied about him twice . Once when see dreamed about him and the other in that flash back before she was about to marry barry.

Hi!

just

first

suggested

Well, dreaming about someone or having fantasies of any kind is something completely different to having a major crush on someone. At least I think so.

I have dreamt about women, I really like, but who I don't really find attractive. I'm guessing, the brain does weird things subconsiously...

Didi

Hellooooo!!! After getting drunk in Vegas, Didi doodled cat whiskers on his/her face and miaowed this little lot at a statue...

The theory is that dreams are our unconscious (aka. "true") thoughts - therefore, anything in our dreams is supposed to be an indicator of what's really going on, and hence a pointer to anything that we might be keeping hidden away from ourselves for any reason.

And because I've just realised what I'm saying, here's the disclaimer: I'M NOT IMPLYING ANYTHING. :)

In article , Tina wrote:

Doesn't modern theory go on to say that self-awareness is merely an illusion, such that our conscious thoughts are *not* true thoughts?

Tennant

On Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:44:40 GMT, "TFM" wrote:

This error was inexcusable as everybody who has followed the series from the start knows that Ross slept with Carol for the first time. The writers should have hired some of the fans as consultants. Or maybe they want us to believe that Ross got so hammered that he had no clue that he'd slept with her? (Yeah, right..)

In article , [email] (Marita) wrote:

It's actually very unclear what happened. We only have what the two guys say, and they disagree with each other. We saw nothing for ourselves.

Tennant

I don't know who to agree with here, but as for not seeing anything for ourselves, Thank the Lord for that!

In article , [email] (Toni Perry If only) wrote:

It's important not to rely too heavily on hearsay. Did Joanna die? We only have a colleague's word for it. In the absence of any contradiction we might as well go along with reported information, but when apparent errors start to appear, you should become very wary indeed...

Toni - if you don't mind me saying so, it would be easier to follow a thread if you would please say whom you're quoting. I've just added the line "> Tennant wrote:" to the top of this post myself. TIA. :)

Tennant

Then Toni wrote back: okay, I don't know what TIA means but okay... did I do it right? please remember that I'm reletavely new to this, my first NG and I've only been here a few months... so sorry for any confusion! :) Oh yeah, and you (Tennant) said that we only have one collegues word for it. Sophie knew too though.

In article , [email] (Toni Perry If only) wrote:

You did fine, although marking each paragraph is only necessary when the thread has become difficult to follow, or people are arguing about who said what. Usually just leaving the attribution at the top will do.

There's no need to apologise, you're doing very well, and I only made the comment because you're so interesting to read, and it helps to know who you were replying to.

TIA is Thanks In Advance

But how did she find out? We don't know if she saw the accident, so the safest assumption is that she was told about it just as Rachel was.

Tennant

Toni wrote: (is this right?)

right! how did I do this time then? :)

:)

and it helps to know who

OKay then. I think I got it...:)

ohhhh

that's a good point... but what if she was told by another collegue?

In article , [email] (Toni Perry If only) wrote:

Your own name would only appear at the top if you reply to yourself. Your software should be dong all this for you.

The real point is that we did not see Joanna being run over.

It's all just hearsay.

Tennant

yes but as I have pointed out to so many people (maybe not on this ng but still) my computer is useless. I still use windows 3.0 for Christs sake!!! :)

but if Joanna didn't die, Rachel would've gotten the job

In article , [email] (Toni Perry If only) wrote:

Joanna almost certainly did die, I'm just pointing out that we don't actually know. If a writer came up with an idea requiring her, there would be no difficulty in any resurrection - she was just elsewhere.

The point is (he said again) is that her death is just hearsay, we did not see it happen. Same thing applies to Ross & Chandler at college, with one exception - that account is disputed by the people involved.

Tennant

alright fair point...:)

oh!!!! so basically I seem to have been argueing the wrong thing lol. Okay I gotcha on that then.

In article , [email] (Toni Perry If only) wrote:

Thanks Toni, you're a very reasonable person. :)

Tennant

:)

Well if she comes back then I'm just going to quit watching the show right then and there ;p

God I hated Joanna.

====== es*o*ter*ic b : of or relating to knowledge that is restricted to a small group

2 a : limited to a small circle

In article , [email] (EsotericGrrrl) wrote:

Did you? Gosh, I rather liked her...

Still, I shouldn't worry about it Phyllis, it's unlikely to happen.

Tennant

On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 05:59:41 GMT, Tennant Stuart wrote:

I have to say I don't agree with you here. Claire makes a good point in her post in this thread. The writers just don't show respect for the previous seasons and the great shows we had back then. When we first met Ross he was a lovable funny character who had been deeply hurt by his ex-wife. He even spent an entire episode reminiscing about the first time they had sex. (104 TOW George Stephanopolous)

He remembered everything about that night, an experience which obviously was very special to him. The others made fun of him and thought he was nuts because he had just been with Carol, but the vulnerablity he showed in that episode was what made us love Ross in the Good Ol' Days.

And now all of a sudden we hear that he has slept with the lady who cleaned his and Chandler's dorm? Please... Another way of ruining the old Ross. (BTW, he's already gone, I know that.)

Like I said in my post, how on earth could he forget about the incident with the cleaning lady? Did he get drunk and forget all about it? Neither Ross '94, nor the guy whose girlfriends all cheated on him in high-school would have forgotten this.

I know that we've never seen what actually happened and that we only have Chandler's and Ross's words for it, but to me it sounded like a very cheap joke and nothing else.

In article , [email] (Marita) wrote:

I actually agree with everything you said from "Claire makes a good point" onwards.

There has been a lot of rewriting of Ross's past as the series has progressed, always in the direction of demeaning his character. But as you admit in your final paragraph, the incident referred to as a huge continuity error is nothing of the sort, since it's so vague.

Tennant

On Mon, 06 Nov 2000 23:52:56 GMT, Tennant Stuart wrote:

Ok.  :)

I guess the average viewer wouldn't think of it when they saw the eppy, but we know about these things, and it sounds plain stupid to us. It's a shame that it has gone so far in Ross's case that we have to correct them. Usually, when an error pops up on the show, we discuss it, and that's it, but this time even the guys at [address] noticed it and wrote about it in the TV column there. It would have been fun to ask the producers about it in the official WB (Friends) newsletter.

In article , [email] (Marita) wrote:

I still say everyone is making too much of a fuss about a remark which wasn't even said about Ross in the first place. Would you say it was a continuity error that both Ross & Chandler said they wrote the joke that appeared in Playboy?

Tennant

There is no comparison. That was a dispute, this is not. Ross had a temporary memory lapse while searching through his memories for something to mock Chandler about. Monica did something very similar only moments before, but she hit the wrong target instead of misquoting the past. Ross admitted later on that it had happened to HIM by saying that the cleaning lady had come on to him, rather than the other way around.

It shows a total disregard for the characters past, and it is no surprise it happened to Ross. If they are so determined to re-write his past, they should really just take the first 2 seasons out of the re-run loop.

Tennant Stuart wrote:

The comment establishes that Ross slept with somebody else before Carol, when the fact that he did no such thing, and that CHANDLER KNEW THIS was a cornerstone of his early characterization. This was indeed a continuity error, and a very big one.

Ross and Chandler both claiming authorship of a joke does not fundamentally alter the audience's perception of their relative sexual innocence at a particular time. This almost defined Ross in the first two years.

In article , Claire Abraham wrote:

No. The comment establishes no such thing. Just because somebody makes a claim does not necessarily mean that it happened.

I'm not disagreeing with you about Ross's character or background, but you have missed the point about the joke. Because two people both claim authorship, then for one of them that which they claimed did not happen.

Once you accept this, you must agree that just because somebody makes a claim does not necessarily mean that it happened.

Tennant

guys

But in episode 104 when Ross admits his first and only time was with Carol, Chandler (*genuinely*) says "So in your whole life, you've only been with one... �pauses� oh." Also, what I think doesn't make sense is the secret thing. How can it be a "secret" if Ross always believed Chandler slept with the dorm lady and Chandler always believed Ross slept with the dorm lady. In this case, it means that the guys have decided **for themselves** that their friend sleeping with the dorm lady is something to be ashamed about and should be kept secret. And then you could argue that in 104 Chandler was looking out for Ross and didn't expose him in front of Joey. But even then Chandler's line in 104 would actually be "laying it on too thick". The normal thing for Chandler to do in 104 would be to say nothing and hope Joey wouldn't figure it out and ask Ross about it. Tennant, can you follow my theory? And obviously I think it's a continuity error.

Cihan.

In article , [email] wrote:

We can accept 104 since it fits in with the rest of the show. You are the one who is insisting that 704 does not fit, and since it is all hearsay and the people involved disagree about what happened, you should dismiss the account as unreliable, not accept it as truth and then shout error.

Tennant

Marita wrote...

Maybe he was high? =)

Adeline wrote:

Have you ever been high?

It would not make you forget losing your virginity.

On Mon, 6 Nov 2000 18:23:42 +0100, "Adeline" wrote:

Lol! Yeah, and Chandler had just jumped out the window.. (I'd really like to see that scene in a flashback-episode.)