Gerald Croft is Sheila's fiancé and the son of the wealthy businessman Mr Croft, employed at Crofts Limited, a company in competition with Birling & Co
Gerald is described by Priestley as "an attractive chap about thirty, rather too manly to be a dandy but very much the easy well-bred young man-about-town"
Priestley uses Gerald to represent the individualism of the upper-class and his failure to develop social responsibility conveys the entrenched nature of these attitudes
Gerald is depicted as an ideal husband and son-in-law due to his financial security and higher social status, choosing the engagement ring himself and showing geniality
Gerald is conscious of the cruelty of the upper-classes but shows no desire to change society, maintaining his privilege and conforming to the class system
Gerald is portrayed as caught between the older and younger generations, forming a middle-generation, less flexible and impressionable than Sheila and Eric
Gerald chooses to ignore his sense of morality and tries to forget his actions, reacting only to visible injustices rather than the institutionalized prejudice of the class system
Priestley uses Gerald's dramatic exit to offer alternate interpretations, suggesting a deeper connection between Gerald and Eva beyond a physical level
Gerald's support for Mr Birling's opinions is necessary for him to uphold good relations with his future father-in-law, but it's likely that this is Gerald's legitimate belief as he will inherit the Croft family business and is entrenched in capitalism
Priestley uses the character of Gerald to demonstrate the future generation of capitalists, who are essentially no different to their predecessors; the only difference between Mr Birling and Gerald is that Gerald may show a little care to those below him but only if it benefits him and doesn’t compromise his own privilege
The significance of the class difference between Sheila and Gerald is signified through Mr Birling's concession to Gerald that his mother most likely "feels you (Gerald) might have done better for yourself socially"
Gerald may have settled for Sheila out of genuine love for her, despite her lower class, or he could have pursued her as part of his enjoyment of the chase, as he admits "I’ve been trying long enough"
Gerald's pursuit of Eva and Sheila could be seen as predatory, with an unequal and unbalanced relationship as Sheila is a clear social inferior and the female in their relationship
Sheila's inability to criticize her fiancé and her discomfort with him due to societal and familial pressure is evident in the stage directions "[half serious, half playful]", showing her lack of social clout to challenge him
Gerald's abuse of his position as Eva's provider is caused by his perception of her as an object or possession, leading to a misogynistic portrayal by Priestley
Priestley portrays an imbalance of power between Gerald and Eva, both in social position and influence, demonstrating how women were exploited and abused in 1912 society
Gerald's emotional reaction to Eva's death, revealing a feminine trait at the time, shows his internal conflict between his natural emotional reaction and his attempt to suppress any emotion to remain masculine in a patriarchal society
Gerald's attempt to forget his relationship with Eva and what he did to her reveals the deliberate ignorance of the upper-class to ignore the consequences of their actions and continue living a life of luxury without guilt
Gerald's manipulation of the situation by suggesting that Eva was several different girls, despite knowing the truth, serves to excuse his own behavior and convince himself of his innocence
Characters like Eric, Mrs Birling, Mr Birling, and Sheila display behavior where they know their treatment of the lower classes is wrong but manage to forget their actions and continue living privileged lives
Gerald in the play is portrayed as having complete power over the narrative, reflecting the patriarchal society, conveying the message that the upper-classes are untouchable by law and responsibility
Gerald's guilt is demonstrated through his immediate defensive tone when questioned by the Inspector, showing his attempt to adapt his story to be consistent with the Inspector's knowledge