1992austenlover

That's fair...I mean, I'm sure that she was still a bit wary of Bryan by the end of the conversation. However, I'd like to think that a strong, educated, straight-shooter of a mother would be a little more protective of her daughter if she genuinely believed in her heart-of-hearts that her potential son-in-law was completely insincere. I think that it's easier to imagine that-- though she has her concerns about Bryan--overall, Rachel's mother was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because she saw some form of sincerity about him and she trusted Rachel's judgment. But do I think that Rachel's mother loved Bryan the most? Probably not.

I never said he was dangerous or a threat...I really think that you took my definition of fear a little too literally. What I meant by 'fear' is simply that they were clearly uneasy and critical of him which, I would imagine, came from a place of concern for Rachel (and wanting to make sure that this guy was genuine in order to protect her from future heartbreak). I get where you're coming from but I don't believe that fearing the unknown and questioning someone's sincerity have to be two mutually exclusive ideas, especially when there's a potential proposal in sight. But then again, I can tell that you're coming from the line of thinking that Bryan is definitely insincere which I don't necessarily know to be true or not. What I gathered from the interaction was that the family was confused by Bryan's smooth-talking ways and so, I agree, they questioned him in order to try to break down those platitudes and bring him back down to earth (ie a place that they understand). But it was clear from Rachel's mother's reaction at the end of the visit that she didn't concretely believe that Bryan was insincere: in fact, I think she even said that he appeared to be honest and that she trusted Rachel's judgement.

I think that the feeling of uneasiness you're speaking of is my equivalent definition of fear. Either way, they were scared and concerned about Bryan's character and I argue that the reason why they were concerned was because they had troubles reading/understanding him.

Honestly, I think that the reason why they were harsher on Brian is because I get the sense that Brian's personality is just very different to what they are used to dealing with and is therefore very hard for them to understand. It was interesting seeing the family interact with Peter in comparison; though Peter was very upfront about the fact that he was hesitant about even getting engaged to Rachel at the end of the process, it was almost as if the family respected him for his thought-process given that his cautiousness in the situation clearly made sense to them in a logical way. Brian has always been an enigma to me because I never understood how he was able to just go up to Rachel on that first night, make-out with her and basically claim her for his own without actually having had a genuinely meaningful conversation with her. Honestly, my first impression of Brian pretty much mirrored that of Rachel and Rachel's sister: he made it very easy in the beginning to label him as a "douchebag" and upon first impression, it was hard to believe that he was being sincere because, for better or worse, he does comes across as a little starry-eyed on top of being a bit of a smooth-talker. But I guess I've become so used to Brian over the weeks that I've been able to look past those initial accusations and, at the very least, appreciate the way that he treats Rachel. I think that Rachel is a great catch and so she deserves a guy who is passionate about her and is not afraid to show her how he feels and Bryan definitely fulfills that role. That being said, I totally understand the family's reaction to Bryan because I had the same reaction when he first popped up on screen. People are naturally afraid of things that they don't understand which is probably why Bryan initially scared them.

Nothing wrong with speculation. I just have a problem when people assume that they know exactly what is going on in someone's personal life when, in reality, we have no idea. When I say that it's all speculation and none of our business I'm just speaking from a place of common sense. But speculate away to your heart's content. We'll just agree to disagree.

No one really knows the true nature of their relationship because they try their best to keep it that way. How many couples put on a happy face in public but are actually miserable in private and vice versa? Everything is speculation at this point and when we think about it, it's really none of our business anyways. This whole thing started when you said that Nick was using his relationship for fame--well, I think I've proven my point that he hasn't. Will they last or not? I have no idea--only time will tell. But if they do eventually break up then it won't be because they didn't try to protect their relationship/try to have a normal relationship under abnormal circumstances. Just saying.

Okay, so I realize that I went off topic in my defence of Nick and Vanessa so I might as well give my opinions on The Bachelorette before I get in trouble lol. Honestly, I agree with everyone who believes that Peter is simply just not that into Rachel. I think he might be trying to convince himself that it's just the process that's hard to handle and that he might be in his head as a result...but I think there's a difference between questioning the process and questioning your feelings and I just feel like the reason why Peter has a wall up is because, deep down, he probably realizes that his feelings for Rachel just aren't strong enough for him to even consider proposing at the end of it. That's fine; it doesn't make him a bad guy--and I'm sure that he probably senses that Rachel is more into Bryan anyways which wouldn't help Peter in the feelings department. Honestly, I've already written Peter off to the point where right now I'm just looking ahead and wondering if I think he will make a decent Bachelor. I think he would probably be better than Luke Pell would've been (although I believe that a brick wall would have been a more compelling Bachelor, imo) but I'm not really sure if Peter has what it takes to actually fall in love in this environment. I guess we'll just have to wait and see if he's even chosen to be the lead. As for Bryan, though I still have my concerns about him, at this point I've just decided that I'm going to be like Rachel and just believe in what he's selling and hope for the best. He seems to genuinely have feelings for her and it's not even fair to compare her chemistry with Bryan in relation to the other guys because theirs is on a whole other level entirely. I think that Eric is a really genuine guy with real feelings for Rachel but Rachel isn't that into him in the same way that Peter isn't that into Rachel; but when I see Bryan and Rachel together, I see a level of mutual interest that is equally reciprocated on both sides--that is enough for me to root for them as far as I'm concerned.

A link to what? The article or the podcast? Actually, I wouldn't even call it an article. 'Gossip rag' is more appropriate.

I'm comparing them to my interpretation of other couples in the past-- and Nick and Vanessa definitely do not do events 3 or 8 times a month, just saying. They did No Better You last weekend, and then the last function that they did before that was a charity event at the beginning of June and one at the beginning of May. They went to the Guardian of the Galaxy premiere and the MTV Movie awards...and they did a meet and greet in Nick's hometown in March. Look, I didn't say that they don't got out together at all (which I'm glad about--I mean, I definitely don't want them to be a reclusive couple that don't go out and do fun things from time to time) but compared to past couples, they have been extremely low-key. Just my opinion. And also, I didn't mean to suggest that "barely going to public events together" and "mostly going to charity events" are mutually inclusive. I was merely giving an example of what they normally do on the odd occasion that they do attend public events together (ie. they seem to like doing charity events with some other red carpet events thrown into the mix), that's all. ps. My definition of 'barely' is different to yours so I'm sorry if you took offence to my usage of the term (even though it is clearly a subjective/relative word). Anyways, I get the sense that you don't really care too much about Nick and Vanessa which, again, that's fine. I'm not really trying to change anyone's minds (because, let's face it, that would be a fruitless cause to say the least)--I'm just here to shed some light on the subject.

Ah yes, the eyewitness report saying that Nick and Vanessa's body language suggested that they hate each other because they didn't talk on the plane; the same report that Nick addressed in a recent podcast where he explained that he and Vanessa don't talk to each other on planes out of fear that people like that would be listening. Look, you don't have to like them--that's fine, that's your prerogative. But ignorant hate is a big pet peeve of mine which is why I enjoy combatting it with facts. Just saying. ;)

If you honestly believe that Nick is only with Vanessa because of "the fame" then you clearly have no idea how he has been dealing with his relationship as far as the media is concerned. Since the show has wrapped, Nick has done countless interviews (mostly due to DWTS) and yet the only thing that I know about his personal relationship with Vanessa is that they like to cook for each other and that he is a morning person while Vanessa is not. The reason why I know so little is because Nick barely talks about Vanessa in interviews in order to maintain a sense of privacy in the relationship. If he was in it for the fame then why would he constantly go out of his way to privatize the one thing that is keeping him relevant in the eyes of the public? That logic just doesn't make any sense. In fact, as far as Bachelor/Bachelorette couples go, Nick and Vanessa have probably been the most low-key and least exploitive couple that I have seen out of this franchise in a long time. Unlike many former couples, Nick and Vanessa barely go out to public events together (they mainly seem to go to charity events with a red carpet here and there); and they don't do joint interviews together if they can help it. Even at the No Better You foundation when they were forced to do joint interviews and were asked about their relationship, they made sure to simply say that they've been "busy" with Nick deflecting by adding "just working on the foundation". Nick has also said on multiple occasions that he has zero desire to do any show relating to his dating/personal life in the future, clearly stating that there will be no Marriage Bootcamp or "Nick and Vanessa: Happily Ever After?" down the line. People can interpret things how ever they want but what I see is a couple who is very protective of their relationship which is evident by their unwillingness exploit it to the world, and who are in the process of forging new career paths for themselves independent from The Bachelor world/their relationship. If great opportunities come their way thanks to being on a hit television show then all power to them...but I think they've already proven that they have zero interest in exploiting their relationship in order to stay in the limelight. I give even more power to them for that.

Yeah, I don't see Nick as a huge smooth-talker either...which is why I said that Bryan is a more smooth-talking, sexually assertive version of Nick. I think what I meant by that comparison is that I feel like Nick is generally misunderstood and I hope that Brian is in a similar situation as Nick in the sense that, like Nick, he actually is a genuine person but is being labeled as smarmy because of the way that he comes across sometimes in his interactions with Rachel. As for the Josh Murray comparison, I referred to Bryan as a potentially "more convincing" Josh Murray because sometimes I get the sense that Bryan is a little too polished/cliched when he professes his feelings for Rachel...and it doesn't help that their narrative kind of reminds me of Andi and Josh when Andi also sort of questioned at times if Josh was too good to be true. The difference is that I never believed that Josh was sincere....so I think that if Bryan is like Josh then he's way more convincing because I do think that Bryan comes across as fairly genuine and sincere even though I also get some serious smooth-talking vibes from him. But to be clear, I actually don't have a problem with Bryan in the sense that I at least believe that he does really like Rachel and that his intentions are good. I guess I'm trying to figure out if I see can them working out in the long run based on my understanding of his character...which is clearly a little murky given that I don't feel like I know enough about Bryan to be able make a strong case for him either way. Overall, I like Bryan...but he also confuses the hell out of me which naturally makes me a little wary of him in the long-run post-show. But I'm hoping for the best. :)

Bryan confuses me so I don't blame Rachel one bit for being skeptical of him or his intentions. It's weird; I honestly can't tell sometimes if he's a more smooth-talking, sexually assertive Nick (a guy who I think is very genuine and has a good heart but who is easily misunderstood because of the way that he goes about things sometimes) or a more convincing Josh Murray (a guy who tries to project this perception of being this amazing catch when in reality he's just an egomaniac with an obvious chip on his shoulder). It's hard to say at this point...I mean, for Rachel's sake I certainly hope that it's the former but I will say that I can't help but cringe every time that Bryan maintains that their situation/relationship is a "fairytale". Personally, I see that as a red flag....but again, I hope I'm wrong.

Amen. I'm still a little bitter about the hatchet editing job that they did on Nick and Vanessa's relationship last season. I mean, yeah, they had some great moments together but I still hate the fact that the editors clearly sacrificed some time showing more romantic moments between them in order highlight the hardships/challenges in their relationship so that they could try and keep the viewers guessing until the end (even though it was obvious from their first one-on-one date that Nick was going to pick Vanessa all along). I guess at this point I'm worried about the editing job that is currently happening with Rachel and Bryan's relationship; if she does indeed pick Bryan then the only thing that I'm seeing right now is a deep physical attraction between them which is not going to convince me that they are in it for the long haul. Seriously, every time I watch them together I have flashbacks of Josh and Amanda aggressively making-out on Bachelor in Paradise and we all know how that ended up. I guess I just hope to see some deeper conversations between them and see them build a genuine connection in the future but I also fully expect their relationship to be downplayed and I'm concerned that their storyline will turn into Rachel constantly questioning if their relationship is purely physical or not (she hasn't started saying this yet but I can definitely see this being a manufactured storyline that will create some doubt in the viewers' minds that she picks him in the end). I mean, I like Rachel and so I'm hoping for the best and I'm really hoping that I grow to like this Bryan guy over time...but right now I'm just not that impressed. I hope that it is editing and not the guy, himself, that makes me a little wary of this relationship. But it is still early days so I'm just going to give it some time...