Absolutely. A one-night stand is very useful to the other person as a pretext to gain or re-gain the moral high ground. If Shula thinks about it, she ought to be glad. She’s already saying or perhaps implying that it means it’s Alistair’s fault they are splitting up.
Holly. I think.
Though she ought to have been called ‘Willow’. I understand she was very flexible.
And quite possibly a bit of a dog.
Whither Shula, now? Back to pursuing the vanished (again) Dr Dick? Or RoboTaff Mk II? (It’s been four years since Kirsty’s last dumping, so she’s due for another.)
Judging by what’s happened, the most plausible explanation for Shula’s behaviour is that she wanted Alistair to fight to keep her, but did such a terrible job of acting out her desire for separation that he took it seriously.
Nah. She’s just a spoilt, self-centred female-bovine and wanted out without the negative consequences & entirely under her terms.
She wanted to keep her reputation and was willing to lie for it
In fact some of her behaviours over the past couple of years are classic “if I behave badly enough he’ll do the finishing, which is much easier, and I’ll look like the victim & get all the sympathy”.
She’s finding out it’s not as simple as that. Which is a good thing, btw.
Not the first time, either.
Not the first lie, but in what way did telling a lie for Rob about the hunt observer help Shula’s reputation with anyone except Rob?
Her justification was the reputation of the hunt, wasn’t it?
Yes, but at that time she was not a joint master, and the hunt’s reputation was not hers.
Oh, poor Kirstie. That said, I would love to hear Shula as temptress! In the Bull, after four dry white wines.
For you or her?
Though she still considered protecting that reputation justified perverting the course of justice. That does rather suggest a somewhat skewed sense of morality, with which her present behaviour is entirely consistent.