Chloe's betrayal could be proof of her relationship with Scott being purely sexual

[asdf1239]

im wondering when theyll reveal that shes a deep cover nid agent and the whole scared out-of-depth thing was an elaborate front, it would make sgu kind of worth watching to me

[Replicator Todd]

im wondering when theyll reveal that shes a deep cover nid agent and the whole scared out-of-depth thing was an elaborate front, it would make sgu kind of worth watching to me

I miss the NID....

[Phenom]

I would let Chloe have a purely sexual relationship with me and I wouldn't be offended at all!! She could betray me every day of the week and I am sure I would get over it

[carnivore]

Chloe's betrayal is proof of nothing other than she is exceptionally naive and impressionable for someone who was presumably exposed to politics at an early age by her powerful father the senator.

I don't know how the actress sees her character (didn't bother to check the linked interview) but I know how i see her: a pouty, immature brat that has trouble foreseeing the consequences of her own actions. The shame of it all is that there was potential for more in the first episode, but it seems like she's been getting less and less substantive as the series goes on.

Regarding the coup: She bought into it as a matter of right and wrong, but didn't for a minute consider that it wouldn't go exactly as planned with nobody hurt. She didn't (in her mind) betray Scott because she naively thought that the scientists would make their demands and the military would have no recourse but to meekly submit. No one would get hurt, and afterwards the military types would simply forgive, forget, and integrate. Scott would soon enough realize that it was for the better and no problems ...

I'd call her the dumbest woman on Earth ... but she ain't here.

[prion]

Hmm, don't think so. First, she went through a traumatic experience of being abducted by aliens and had lord know what done to her (yes, later on down the road she'll be pregnant by alien means - just guessing). PTSD would not be out of the question, and might influence her decisions. She does have a 'survivor' relationship now with Rush (oddly enough, a man she wanted to kill), hence, that, and the trauma, might have made her go 'okay, I'm with it.' After all, there's Young, the leader, LYING to everyone about Rush's oh-so-unfortunate demise.

Otherwise, she isn't the most mature. As pointed out, she doens't always think about the consequences of her actions. If she thinks Scott is going to greet her back with welcoming arms after this little coup, she's got another thing coming.

[chrono trigger]

well for me scott/chloe have always just been a sexual relationship i mean i see no real bond or connection and after recent events chloe has confirmed it for me because she helped cause a situation that put peoples lives at risk including her boyfriend for a man who she had blamed for the death of her father.

[xxxevilgrinxxx]

Im just throwing this out there, but i found it strange that she didnt confine with Scott about the coup beforehand, and she didnt stick with the military side which wouldve seemed reasonable in her case considering that she had a supposedly strong relationship with a soldier. i know she seemed a little naive about it but really, she might as well be made out of stone to be able to fully betray Scott in that manner. the only explanation i can think of at the moment is that their relationship mightve been purely sexual, nothing concrete. dont get me wrong, one of the best scenes in Divided was how Scott reacted to what Chloe did. and i think Scott deserved it a little maybe for doing the same to other women maybe. so Chloe taking the opposite side of Scott isi big Ouch!

"Chloe's betrayal could be proof of her relationship with Scott being purely sexual "
is it a betrayal?
did she swear an oath to agree with him on all points?
I do think that people in a sexual relationship are better served by communication but it doesn't mean they have to talk about everything, and it definitely doesn't mean they have to agree on everything.

Further, if it is solely a sexual relationship, what's wrong with that? They're both adults.

[Lahela]

"Chloe's betrayal could be proof of her relationship with Scott being purely sexual "
is it a betrayal?
did she swear an oath to agree with him on all points?
I do think that people in a sexual relationship are better served by communication but it doesn't mean they have to talk about everything, and it definitely doesn't mean they have to agree on everything.

Further, if it is solely a sexual relationship, what's wrong with that? They're both adults.

Hear, hear!