Has anybody else considered the fact that it might actually mean that Cindy was married to Mac BEFORE she married India's grandfather (can't remember his name)?
No, they've stated that they married last year, during the time that Cindy disappeared for several weeks following seeing Rhys die again due to her Bi-Polar.
They are however supposed to have had a pre existing relationship (but not marriage) resulting in Alfie. Which we saw nothing of in screen and would have needed to have done for Alfie to be Alfie's age.
Has anybody else considered the fact that it might actually mean that Cindy was married to Mac BEFORE she married India's grandfather (can't remember his name)?
Yeah I did wonder but then they have both made out it was recent and Cindy said it was during a bi polar episode
We've also had the Rose/Dee Dee swap despite Fraser having insisted on a DNA test on rose to confirm his paternity. I didn't imagine that did I?
But, as we've been told, Kirkwood believes that all Hollyoaks fans have short attention spans so of course anything more than a month ago is fair game, let alone 14/15 years ago.
I was also wondering about the dates of all this too. I've watched Hollyoaks since it began and Cindy never knew this man in the 90s/early 00s so it had to happen in the period she was away which again is quite odd but possible as we never saw what she got up to.
I'd imagine the answer will be that Mac was married to the older children's Mother at the time of Alfie's conception so he was scared his wife would leave him or his children hate him if the truth was known.
I still hate that they're doing this though.
If they must have his Mother be connected to the Village, wouldn't Jude have made more sense as she had left Hollyoaks by then. She was also hard enough to abandon a baby. Cindy would still be his aunt and might have known about it and even have had a later affair with Mac after she'd moved to Spain.
I agree Jude would have made a lot more sense. What makes it hard to believe about Cindy is the whole reason she fled the village in the first place was because she feared social services taking Holly from her, she even hit and run Anna Green (I think) in her haste to get away. So we are meant to believe that what must have been a short time after she gave up on another child?
Cindy giving a baby up for adoption is perfectly plausible considering how much she'd struggled with Holly but the dates just don't work, it's laughable.
BK's contempt for long term viewers continues to insult.
Yes, it was Anna and so desperate was cindy to keep Holly, she not only did that. But gave up Ben who she was very serious about and was the first decent bloke she'd had since ever really.
What they probably want us to forget (or assume we already have forgotten) was that Cindy was not the selfish, nasty and flaky character we have had for the last few years but a very nice, moral girl who once she'd got over the initial shock of having a baby at 16 (and possible PND) put her child before everything. No reason that wouldn't be true of a second baby.
Cindy giving a baby up for adoption is perfectly plausible considering how much she'd struggled with Holly but the dates just don't work, it's laughable.
BK's contempt for long term viewers continues to insult.
Her doing it if she'd fallen pregnant again straight after Holly was born and she was struggling, i could believe. But she'd adjusted to being a Mother by the time she left with Holly and i find it hard to believe 'that' Cindy would give up a child.
Although, I've never understood the character change betweEn her leaving and returning when Gordon died so maybe, just maybe this could explain it, if she was perhaps forced to give him up and hardened as a result.
I have just had a flick through the Hollyoaks Official Companion, Cindy actually left towards the end of 2000 and was off screen for over a year so can actually have given birth to Alfie off-screen.
The worst thing about that was they never even did anything with it, It went no where, Darren's never even given storylines or interactions with the Rosco brothers, Its just wierd
That was because the whole storyline was unnecessary and boring
I don't agree with the 'Cindy can't have given up a baby because she loved Holly that much' speculation. If Cindy had just come through such a struggle coming to terms with Holly then it would be exactly the wrong time to fall pregnant again. She was putting Holly before anything and that included a 2nd baby.
I don't agree with the 'Cindy can't have given up a baby because she loved Holly that much' speculation. If Cindy had just come through such a struggle coming to terms with Holly then it would be exactly the wrong time to fall pregnant again. She was putting Holly before anything and that included a 2nd baby.
Agree the times are screwed though *sigh*
Guess it is subjective, there is an argument that she wouldn't be able to cope with a second child by the age of 20
But from my pov, I find it hard to believe that that a young girl that had gone through 2/3 years coming to terms with motherhood, with loving her baby and the sacrifices that involved re her life, studying, relationships, work and ultimately, staying in the Country of her birth for fear of that child being taken off her, I can't believe she would give her next baby up.
If she'd decided she just couldn't cope as a Mother, why not give up both of them?
Then how does Mac know she was pregnant, gave him up, what care or foster home he went into?
Then how does Mac know she was pregnant, gave him up, what care or foster home he went into?
This is possibly the daftest bit of all. We know she met Mac and got pregnant, and that later she found him had a crazy weekend and got married, but in between times she must have contacted Mac and advised him he had a son god knows where, and Mac went and adopted him, and yet he never mentioned this when marrying her?!
Ok I am confusing myself now. She can't have contacted him to tell him he had a son, as obviously she isn't clicking that Alfie is said son.
Someone else must have been in on it that told Mac all those years later, look thats your son.
If Alfie is in the same year in school as Nico than he must be born between September 2000 and July 2001 as Nico had her 14th birthday in February this year (28/2/01).
Cindy left late in 2000, then she returned briefly in 2002, so she must have had Alfie, yet never mentioned him to to her family which makes no sense considering all the hell she went through with Holly.
Talking of Holly, how does a 4 year old not notice her mum is pregnant and able to give birth without noticing?
Didn't she stay with Jude? She could have helped raise Holly and Alfie.
Fast forward to 2004 for Helen and Gordon's funerals couldn't she of told Max, Mandy, Angela, anyone about Alfie again?
Then 2008 and her permanant comeback, again why not mention her long lost son?
When Hilton was born, why not mention she already had a son?
When Hilton was Ill, why not mention her other son, he could have been a perfect match?
The answers to these questions are simple. Kirkwood and his cronies made this rubbish up in the pub pissed out their brains when trying to come up with a new 'shock twist' a few weeks / months ago with no thought or regard for Cindy's history.
And all this is before the Mac nonsense, and this 'adopting/not adopting' shit.
Basically, it's all bollocks and I hate Kirkwood for shitting on years of heritage for no reason.
Wasn't it their 14th birthdays last year when Sienna jumped to the conclusion that Peri was her daughter because she had the same birthdate? And I'm sure Tom was a Millennium baby, born Xmas week 1999 and he's in the same year.
So, they are actually all 15 now, due to turn 16 within the next few months.
So, if Alfie is in their year too, shouldn't he have been born between Sept 99 and August 2000? When Cindy was still in the show.
Wasn't it their 14th birthdays last year when Sienna jumped to the conclusion that Peri was her daughter because she had the same birthdate? And I'm sure Tom was a Millennium baby, born Xmas week 1999 and he's in the same year.
So, they are actually all 15 now, due to turn 16 within the next few months.
So, if Alfie is in their year too, shouldn't he have been born between Sept 99 and August 2000? When Cindy was still in the show.
Nico, Peri and Tom are 15, but I read on IAmSam that Alfie is a year younger, but in their year at school. Probably just HOs way to get him into that teen group but also match his age to when Cindy left the show.
I hope they do a lot of explaining with this, I was pleased that they revealed that Mac was Alfie's biological father and that Cindy was his biological mother in the same episode, instead of dragging it out. So hopefully after this reveal we wont be waiting months until Alfie and the viewers finds out what actually happened.
Comments
No, they've stated that they married last year, during the time that Cindy disappeared for several weeks following seeing Rhys die again due to her Bi-Polar.
They are however supposed to have had a pre existing relationship (but not marriage) resulting in Alfie. Which we saw nothing of in screen and would have needed to have done for Alfie to be Alfie's age.
Yeah I did wonder but then they have both made out it was recent and Cindy said it was during a bi polar episode
Whatever next? Grace being Jack Osbourne's real daughter, instead of Fraser?
But, as we've been told, Kirkwood believes that all Hollyoaks fans have short attention spans so of course anything more than a month ago is fair game, let alone 14/15 years ago.
I agree Jude would have made a lot more sense. What makes it hard to believe about Cindy is the whole reason she fled the village in the first place was because she feared social services taking Holly from her, she even hit and run Anna Green (I think) in her haste to get away. So we are meant to believe that what must have been a short time after she gave up on another child?
BK's contempt for long term viewers continues to insult.
What they probably want us to forget (or assume we already have forgotten) was that Cindy was not the selfish, nasty and flaky character we have had for the last few years but a very nice, moral girl who once she'd got over the initial shock of having a baby at 16 (and possible PND) put her child before everything. No reason that wouldn't be true of a second baby.
Her doing it if she'd fallen pregnant again straight after Holly was born and she was struggling, i could believe. But she'd adjusted to being a Mother by the time she left with Holly and i find it hard to believe 'that' Cindy would give up a child.
Although, I've never understood the character change betweEn her leaving and returning when Gordon died so maybe, just maybe this could explain it, if she was perhaps forced to give him up and hardened as a result.
Dates still don't work.
Can't do spoiler tags on here so don't want to say too much but I think you've pretty much guessed it there.
Perhaps they were hoping he'd become a victim of GHK.:D
I have just had a flick through the Hollyoaks Official Companion, Cindy actually left towards the end of 2000 and was off screen for over a year so can actually have given birth to Alfie off-screen.
Awkward!
That was because the whole storyline was unnecessary and boring
I wondered about that too. I think it is just a "sensational" plot twist (for BK at least) that does not work for any of us viewers. >:(
Agree the times are screwed though *sigh*
Guess it is subjective, there is an argument that she wouldn't be able to cope with a second child by the age of 20
But from my pov, I find it hard to believe that that a young girl that had gone through 2/3 years coming to terms with motherhood, with loving her baby and the sacrifices that involved re her life, studying, relationships, work and ultimately, staying in the Country of her birth for fear of that child being taken off her, I can't believe she would give her next baby up.
If she'd decided she just couldn't cope as a Mother, why not give up both of them?
Then how does Mac know she was pregnant, gave him up, what care or foster home he went into?
This is possibly the daftest bit of all. We know she met Mac and got pregnant, and that later she found him had a crazy weekend and got married, but in between times she must have contacted Mac and advised him he had a son god knows where, and Mac went and adopted him, and yet he never mentioned this when marrying her?!
Ok I am confusing myself now. She can't have contacted him to tell him he had a son, as obviously she isn't clicking that Alfie is said son.
Someone else must have been in on it that told Mac all those years later, look thats your son.
I give up.
Cindy left late in 2000, then she returned briefly in 2002, so she must have had Alfie, yet never mentioned him to to her family which makes no sense considering all the hell she went through with Holly.
Talking of Holly, how does a 4 year old not notice her mum is pregnant and able to give birth without noticing?
Didn't she stay with Jude? She could have helped raise Holly and Alfie.
Fast forward to 2004 for Helen and Gordon's funerals couldn't she of told Max, Mandy, Angela, anyone about Alfie again?
Then 2008 and her permanant comeback, again why not mention her long lost son?
When Hilton was born, why not mention she already had a son?
When Hilton was Ill, why not mention her other son, he could have been a perfect match?
The answers to these questions are simple. Kirkwood and his cronies made this rubbish up in the pub pissed out their brains when trying to come up with a new 'shock twist' a few weeks / months ago with no thought or regard for Cindy's history.
And all this is before the Mac nonsense, and this 'adopting/not adopting' shit.
Basically, it's all bollocks and I hate Kirkwood for shitting on years of heritage for no reason.
Cindy has two kids, Holly and Hilton.
End of story.
Thanks
Needless to say, I'm not too happy with this story
Wasn't it their 14th birthdays last year when Sienna jumped to the conclusion that Peri was her daughter because she had the same birthdate? And I'm sure Tom was a Millennium baby, born Xmas week 1999 and he's in the same year.
So, they are actually all 15 now, due to turn 16 within the next few months.
So, if Alfie is in their year too, shouldn't he have been born between Sept 99 and August 2000? When Cindy was still in the show.
And that, is the problem in a nutshell.
Nico, Peri and Tom are 15, but I read on IAmSam that Alfie is a year younger, but in their year at school. Probably just HOs way to get him into that teen group but also match his age to when Cindy left the show.
I hope they do a lot of explaining with this, I was pleased that they revealed that Mac was Alfie's biological father and that Cindy was his biological mother in the same episode, instead of dragging it out. So hopefully after this reveal we wont be waiting months until Alfie and the viewers finds out what actually happened.