Fix the Show

[Evil Queen]

On the Social Media thread there have been discussions on how to fix this show.

 

I would like to add my thoughts

 

The beginning process for picking participants needs complete overhaul.

 

I would like to see the participants involved in activities chosen by both partners.  things they like etc.  I am sure this would cost production more if they have to pay for location etc. but it would be better for the participants and bring much more interest from the viewers

 

I think they should HAVE to live in the same house, not just for filming. 

 

the fishbowl game is good, but they only show the sexual questions, these people are new to each other and the viewers, I think it would better to have the "get to know you" questions first.

 

And of course if they would stop showing a scene, reshowing the scene, having a TH about the scene and reshowing it again. This is just filler, more interesting things could be shown

 

Agree with what you said. I am sure the cost for finding things they like to do wouldn't be a lot when its local to filming. Not like they have to go on a major trip for those things. 

  With the fishbowl questions, I do think the kind given is just because of that stupid expert that hands them over. It should be filled with get to know you questions. Not sexual ones during this. I think that stuff can be figured out IF they want to but its so pointless for this show when the couples are new and for ones that haven't even had any kind of physical contact at all. 

  And yes they should HAVE to live together. Its really obvious when these couples aren't living together. The fake waking up together or waking whoever up is just so badly done. 

   Couldn't agree more about the THs and scenes being shown over and over again. It is a waste of time and could be filled with something else. This is part of why the show feels like it has dragged so much I think too. 

  I said it in the other thread but I honestly don't think these people should be paid. Pay the rent for the rental they live in together (as long as they live together in it) or for their rental properties and make them share the rent on the joint one. Pay for the wedding stuff, honeymoon and the things each person likes to do that they can do together but otherwise no pay for being on the show only. 

[Nancybeth]

First, the "experiment" should last longer than 6 weeks.  6 weeks is nothing...you can put up with almost anything or anyone for that amount of time!   

 

And I agree about having to live together.  I would like to see production just set that up -- don't make them go through the search for new housing on-camera and have long drawn-out discussions about where they're going to live.  They should come back from their honeymoons and walk right into a furnished place to live.  It seems like for a lot of the couples, this season and previously, the awkward time between honeymoon and getting back to real life is where the wheels started to fall off the wagon.  It was even worse in Season 2 because the holidays were jammed in there.  They lose the momentum of being married when they're going back and forth between their own apartments. 

 

And there should be "homework" or challenges each week...they kind of do this now, but it should be a little more focused and structured.  Like, week 1, go grocery shopping, cook meals together, discuss your daily schedules, have a social event for your shared friends.  Week 2, discuss finances, talk about financial goals and career goals, have each person plan one activity for both of them to enjoy together, etc.  The structured experiment shouldn't end when the couple is matched, the experiment should be about forcing them to continue confronting all these marriage issues and having to work through them. 

 

ETA if this show uses stationary cameras in the home, i.e. "Real World" or "Big Brother" style?  I feel like it's just what the crew shoots and what the couples capture on their "Couple Cams."  Because that could bring a whole new dynamic to the show.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Nancybeth

[Sunnyside]

This show is missing real honest communication. It's as if the experts, couples, family members and friends have a script to follow and everything they say comes out canned instead of candid.

I realize it must be hard to express yourself transparently on camera for 6 weeks, knowing your basically in a fish bowl, but the editing is just too redundant and everything sounds rehearsed and irrelevant.

IMO, there was more authentic dialogue in season 1 between Vaughn and Monet, than this season. Though they were not a good match, they kept their comments real and stated just how they felt, not holding back because cameras were in their face. If these couples are "all in" might as well be honest, respectfully.

Sam was beyond honest, she was mean. Ashley should have been counseled more on how to be honest with David and for her to see the irony of her claiming not to hurt his feelings when not being open with him hurt his feelings.

Is this a couples therapy show? No, but maybe it should be. It definitely is missing real talk.

[psychoticstate]

This is the first season I have watched since the beginning (I caught most of season 1 on repeats after this one started) and I am disappointed that the so-called experts seem to vanish throughout most of the "experiment."  I feel they have a responsibility with the couples that should extend after the marriage.  

 

And I agree with the poster a page or two back who said that the experts should be watching the filming so they are aware of any problems or difficulties.  It would have made things a bit more even, in my book, if the experts had been watching film of Ashley and David or Sam and Neil before they had a brief sit down with both couples.

 

Six weeks IS too short of a time.  Three months might be more fair and yes, the couples should be required to live under the same roof during the entire time.  They should also be required to introduce them to family, unless they themselves are estranged from their families. 

 

I do think having the couples interact and mingle would be helpful - - maybe even let people like Ashley and Sam relax to a certain extent.  Having the couples relatively isolated isn't doing the trick.  

 

And a big yes to nixing the apartment/house hunting which is probably mostly for show anyhow.  Just go ahead and put the couples in a prearranged house.

[auntie thesis]

So I started binge-watching this On Demand a few weeks ago. My ideas to fix the show:

 

1. Get rid of all of the "Experts". 
2. Clean house with regards to production staff and whomever picks the participants.
3. Lengthen the experiment to 12-16 weeks instead of limiting it to 6 weeks.
4. Stop relying so much on test results and other such metrics. Numbers don't predict chemistry.
5. Pay more attention to physical attraction. Both Sam and Ashley were not attracted to their husbands. WTF?
6. MONITOR AND SCREEN THE SOCIAL MEDIA OF ALL PARTICIPANTS!!! No more of this sneaking around asking friends about your spouse bullshit.

 

After all of that has been done, do a mixer (someone suggested this upthread). I would do a masquerade mixer or a costume party. Maybe a Halloween party? Everyone has to stay in costume or wear a mask the whole time. Everyone also wears a placard on their person. This placard would have a number or a symbol on one side and some basic information on the other (name, profession, religious beliefs, one interesting fact). They play some games (20 Questions, Pictionary, Charades, Rockband, DDR, pool, whatever), dance, nosh, etc. Then they do a speed date thing where they sit down with each participant for like 5-10 minutes, masks still on, and do a 3 question AMA with each other.  At the end of this, each person rates the other participants with regards to compatibility and then the experts or whoever matches the participants for a shotgun wedding in a secret location.

 

After the wedding, they get back to real life in a house that is already set up and paid for the length of the experiment. Each week should have a theme of sorts and a challenge. Like maybe they compete against other couples or they have to complete tasks or whatever to earn prizes off of a "dream registry". The couples would be allowed to choose their own prizes. I think that would be a good way for the couples to break the ice and decide what is important to them, as well as giving them a way to assess the tastes and convictions of their spouse. The prizes would have to be decent though. Like vehicles, high end kitchen equipment, appliances, furniture, stuff you'd actually need if you were to move into a new home together. No deep discussions and made for TV drama over a Bed Bath and Beyond gift card...unless it's for like 5k lol.

 

The grand prize could be a real wedding, with an awesome honeymoon of their choosing. All of these prizes would likely require sponsors, along with the wedding and honeymoon. More $$$. 

 

Personally, I'd find the show I described above much more interesting than MAFS as it currently is. They need to spice things up and stop trying to force certain things on the audience. I get that the main appeal is supposed to be millennials and late gen x'ers who are currently interested in serious relationships, marriage, kids, etc but probably don't have those things because it's a bitch finding someone who isn't gay, taken, or crazy, period. But if you're to the point where you getting married without ever interacting with the other person...well, that's a little desperate and weird to me. Marriage at first sight is almost a gimmick anyway. It would be funny to watch the couples fail IF some of them didn't seem so invested in the concept of a perfect marriage and happy family shortly after.

 

So let's set these couples up for some sort of long term success. You won't get that by forcing them to tap dance around intimacy and shady pasts while talking about their values and faith, all with a camera shoved in their faces. You don't get genuine love and care on a honeymoon with someone you've known for a few hours. Hell, you may not get it with someone you've known for years, but at least you won't be weirded out if the person you've known for years farts in their sleep and brings a deathcloud of destruction above your hotel room.

[allthelight]

For me as a non native speaker: What is a millenial and what is a genxer?

[JaggedLilPill]

For me as a non native speaker: What is a millenial and what is a genxer?

 

A millennial is usually defined as a person born in the early 80s (probably after '81) to the early 2000s. Some places say 18-33. Technically, I would be a millennial. And I think Gen X is categorized as a person born sometime in the 60s until the early 80s. ('81-ish).

Edited March 3, 2016 by JaggedLilPill

[auntie thesis]

A millennial is usually defined as a person born in the early 80s (probably after '81) to the early 2000s. Some places say 18-33. Technically, I would be a millennial. And I think Gen X is categorized as a person born sometime in the 60s until the early 80s. ('81-ish).

 

Millennial = Person born between the years of 1985-2005, technically.

Gen X'er = Person born between the years of 1964-1984, technically.

Those are the working definitions I was thinking when I wrote my post above, fwiw.

[allthelight]

Thank you!

[JaggedLilPill]

Ah okay. I didn't know specifics but I knew it was 80s to sometime in 2000. Which fits all the people on the show.

[Neurochick]

After the wedding, they get back to real life in a house that is already set up and paid for the length of the experiment. Each week should have a theme of sorts and a challenge. Like maybe they compete against other couples or they have to complete tasks or whatever to earn prizes off of a "dream registry". The couples would be allowed to choose their own prizes. I think that would be a good way for the couples to break the ice and decide what is important to them, as well as giving them a way to assess the tastes and convictions of their spouse. The prizes would have to be decent though. Like vehicles, high end kitchen equipment, appliances, furniture, stuff you'd actually need if you were to move into a new home together. No deep discussions and made for TV drama over a Bed Bath and Beyond gift card...unless it's for like 5k lol.

 

 

I don't know about this part, too much like Survivor/Big Brother/Amazing Race/MTV'S various Challenges.

[allthelight]

I do like the ideas, but the whole premise of the show is letting experts complete strangers. It's what makes watching this show fun for me. But obviously, there's something lacking. I don't know whether the psychological testing is just really bad or whether the people who lie trick the system by lying. Like, two minutes of this show where enough for me to realize how mismatched Ashley and David are and that what she's looking for is a completely different person from David. But could the experts have foreseen their lack of chemistry? Maybe they presented themselves different in the interviews.

[auntie thesis]

I'm not saying that the challenges should be balls to the wall Survivor-style competition for prizes. Personally, I'd enjoy the show more if there were SOMETHING that the couples had to work together for/towards. Competing for prizes off of a "dream registry" would give them something to do besides sit around and mope about how the other person isn't the answer to the prayers/dreams for an ideal spouse whilst going on elaborate pre-planned dates to have awkward canned convos about trivial dramatic moments.

 

I think that the prizes should be rewards for completing tasks as a couple and not the couples competing against the other couples. For example, the husband could have to plan a romantic evening out for his new wife. If he does this and both parties enjoy it, they could get a prize. Something along those lines. Or maybe the whole idea should just be to earn a real wedding and honeymoon at the end.

 

I just think that something is lacking. This show is good, but it could be great if they reworked it and quit matching people based on arbitrary test results and interviews. 

 

------

 

A side thought: I think that this show relies too heavily on churches to recruit people who want to be married without regards to whether or not the individual is ready for marriage. Either this show is about young Christians marrying other young Christians because church/God! Or it's a show about people looking for love after taking a personality test under a rock and veiling their true selves in their interviews. It can't be both without seeming insincere about the premises of marriage and divorce, imho.

Edited March 3, 2016 by auntie thesis

[psychoticstate]

I posted this in the Final Decision Part 2 thread but I guess it bears repeating here since it's my suggestion of how to fix the show:

 

I think this is again where the experts fail.   Maybe the experts should be at the wedding reception to help guide conversations for people like David and Ashley and San and Neil.  Tres and Vanessa were immediately attracted to each other so they were fine initially.   I don't know how long the honeymoons were but maybe they should only be long weekends and again, maybe the "experts" should be present so that the couples are basically in a marriage boot camp.  After all, they are virtual strangers at that point.  They know next to nothing about each other and when you have someone like Ashley who is giving nothing, you have nothing to build from.  This is where the experts guiding conversations and discussions would help.  Tell the couples to discuss their families, histories, whatever.  Heck, instead of sending each of the couples on their separate honeymoons, send them all together to this "boot camp" and have them get to know each other.  It may make things easier for them, knowing the other couples.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that the experts need to be more present than they are.  Maybe if they were, Ashley's initial "dislike" of David could have been addressed and dealt with immediately and Sam's personality could have been toned down or understood so that she wasn't insulting Neil, kicking him out of her house, not giving him a key or closet space, etc.  How COULD those relationships have started off well or even survived otherwise?

 

 

[auntie thesis]

The experts seem more like narrators than anything else. They sit around and have their group chats and occasionally have a session with one of the couples via Skype. That's about it.

 

Pretty pointless and their presence doesn't seem to add much, if anything, to the experiment. I do think that the marriages would fair better if they had more guidance or at least some consultation from time to time. 

 

However, I'm also in favor of a stronger screening process and scrapping the personality exams in favor of something more comprehensive and personal. A lot of the problems with the couples on this season were due to poor matchmaking, imho. Sam and Neil were never going to work and I think TPTB knew that and went through with it anyway for teh dramatiks!!!

 

Ashley and Dave could have worked if they would have had some serious counseling and A LOT more time to get to know one another. Dave especially needed to work on the issues he had surrounding his father's death, imho. Ashley was far too reserved and honestly seemed cold most of the time. She signed up to marry a stranger and then proceeded to...well, do nothing to get to know the stranger she married. Then it was all his fault when he started talking to her friends to find out more about her. I wasn't surprised when he went on that date or whatever. At that point, I think he knew it wasn't going anywhere with Ashley so he was trying to give both of them a way out without it being so personal. Jmho.

[psychoticstate]

The experts seem more like narrators than anything else. They sit around and have their group chats and occasionally have a session with one of the couples via Skype. That's about it.

 

Pretty pointless and their presence doesn't seem to add much, if anything, to the experiment. I do think that the marriages would fair better if they had more guidance or at least some consultation from time to time. 

 

However, I'm also in favor of a stronger screening process and scrapping the personality exams in favor of something more comprehensive and personal. A lot of the problems with the couples on this season were due to poor matchmaking, imho. Sam and Neil were never going to work and I think TPTB knew that and went through with it anyway for teh dramatiks!!!

 

Ashley and Dave could have worked if they would have had some serious counseling and A LOT more time to get to know one another. Dave especially needed to work on the issues he had surrounding his father's death, imho. Ashley was far too reserved and honestly seemed cold most of the time. She signed up to marry a stranger and then proceeded to...well, do nothing to get to know the stranger she married. Then it was all his fault when he started talking to her friends to find out more about her. I wasn't surprised when he went on that date or whatever. At that point, I think he knew it wasn't going anywhere with Ashley so he was trying to give both of them a way out without it being so personal. Jmho.

 

I agree with you except I think David and Ashley would never have worked, no matter how much intervention they had, because I think Ashley was done immediately.  On the other hand, I think if Sam had not been so mean and critical of Neil from the start, they would have worked.

[auntie thesis]

Eh, I'm not sure about either couple. I thought Dave and Ashley could have worked, if she had been willing to put forth like 1% effort. Neil and Sam, I didn't see working because he was too introverted and there was never really anything besides Sam's drama holding them together.

 

66% failure rate for this season. Time to change some things, get some new experts and stop train before this show turn into The Bachelor for Regular Folks.

[still hoping]

I would really like to see a lot more of the screening process.

 

 I remember a season or two where Bach had some deal with "Chemistry.com" - and used them to match couples

they had a season or two were friends and family of the bach vetted some of the contestants - as in "No way" or "yeah she would be his type"

 

Maybe they could narrow down the couples and then show them vids of the potential pool and see which they say NO, ok, and YAYYYYY too?

Much like speed dating where they "list" people they might be interested in - if the other says  no , no match but nothing personal?

 

Or maybe have a potential of ? 5 who each "approves" of or likes..and then surprise them at altar with one of the 5?

 

JMO something has got to give. The only real successes are Courtney/Jason and the young cute couple in Au.

 

What they have in common - both couple were younger, all good looking, all less baggage it seemed...none of them really show biz types

 

the men in particular had "real" jobs - one an emt/now firefighter ..and one a plumbing contractor/biz owner

 

The salesmen...the "entreprenuers"...and even Sean - an RN but had tried for various reality shows

 

I hope this next season - which is supposed to be a bit older? - does not feature divorced people. Or God forbid any with kids!

[allthelight]

I do like Jamie and Doug together. I should probably hide.

[okerry]

I'd watch a show where Real Experts find singles who say they really really want to be married (like David and like, say, Vanessa) and match them up - but the show follows them for 6-8 weeks of intense dating and counseling, and at the end of that the couple decides whether they want to marry or not.

 

If they do, the show pays for a splashy wedding and honeymoon. But nothing more than that, or else too many will get married just to get the follow-up TV show and the cash. There could be a yearly special to check in and see how they're doing (whether still married or back to single) but that's all.

 

The suspense would come from whether or not there's going to be a proposal, not from whether there's going to be a divorce. It could be just as much fun but without the ominous downer of dread hanging over it that MAFS now has. I still say that the audience for a show like MAFS  sincerely wants to see a happy ending to the story, not just trainwrecks.

 

If we want trainwrecks, we watch 90-Day Fiancee! 

[AuthCElisabeth]

1.  Dr. Pepper needs to go as well.  She was the primary advocate for the Extreme Opposites strategy of pairing, which I feel was a failure.  Being the genuine caring person she is does not equal competence.  Experts need to be neutral in their SM ect for duration of the show.  Experts must also demonstrate competency in the field of martial therapy/matchmaking.  Get Patty in there!

 

2.  Let the couples interact with the other couples.  It seems that these pairings have nobody else to support them through the process, people who understand intimately the pressures of being the couple under the microscope.  Would also make for good TV.

 

3.  BACKGROUND CHECKS, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD.  And follow through by actually not allowing people with certain backgrounds/histories to participate.  Social Media monitoring, of course.

 

4.  The audience needs to be informed of producer created situations, which will whittle it down more to what's absolutely necessary.  

 

5.  At no point should there be any requirement for the participants to share a bedroom or a bed.  Put yourself in the shoes of someone paired with a complete stranger.  There needs to be an option to remove yourself from even the most minor of situations, if only to collect your thoughts and think things over.  I wouldn't want my daughter to be required to be intimate at any level with someone she needs time to get to know.  

 

6.  Love the fishbowl idea posited by other posters.  A Get To Know You fishbowl each week, bonus for full participation, the questions getting more deep/intimate as time passes.

 

7.  Alter the contract to allow participants to sue for damages if they are paired with someone who has an issue that compromises their safety, if the show knew and allowed them to move forward.  That alone would make the show a helluva lot more genuine, and attract a better quality of participant.  It would also require the experts to actually do a good job.

 

To the poster who suggested Dr. Logan be paired with Sean?  I Love You!  THAT would be a show.

[hoosiermom]

No more beards on the men.( or mustaches on women)

[Nffftshewasgone]

Screen tests. Ask a question, like what their favorite color is, and if the response is, "Uuuummmmmmmmmmmmm," followed by crickets --- NEXT! !!

Edited March 10, 2016 by Nffftshewasgone

[Palomar]

Maybe they could narrow down the couples and then show them vids of the potential pool and see which they say NO, ok, and YAYYYYY too?

Much like speed dating where they "list" people they might be interested in - if the other says  no , no match but nothing personal?

Or maybe have a potential of ? 5 who each "approves" of or likes..and then surprise them at altar with one of the 5?

 

 

Yes, something like this or even showing each finalist pictures of 50 suitors and ask which ones are deal breakers.  That would still not change the premise of marrying a complete stranger. 

[call me ishmael]

Maybe they could marry without actually meeting. If the couples never interacted the show would probably have a higher success rate.

[xman4802]

I agree with a lot of the suggestions that folks are making for this show, but I feel like the premise of the show, that compatibility can be determined by interviews and personality tests (and not by physical attraction/chemistry) is an interesting one and I imagine that the show becomes something completely different if the participants aren't "married at first sight." That being said, I do agree with the idea that people should actually have to live together.  

 

While I know the dating scene is enormously challenging, I have to imagine that better vetting wouldn't necessarily have produced better results.  I figure if someone is actually emotionally healthy, mature, and "ready for marriage" reasonably attractive, and reasonably financially situated in life, they are most likely already married or at least in a serious long term relationship.  While I imagine there might be exceptions to this rule, I have found that in all of the couples of Season 2 and 3 there appeared to be serious unresolved emotional/mental health issues that really did not make any of these folks particularly suitable for marriage.   It seems like at the very least all of these folks could have benefited from individual and couples counseling.  I say that even as I recognize that for many people, they begin long term relationships (that in some cases lead to marriage) when they are not in the most stable of situations financially, emotionally, etc.  I think this is part of what makes the "experiment" interesting to me.  Most people don't have it all the way together and in some cases are complete messes, yet despite flaws, insecurities, trauma etc. is it possible to find companionship?  Perhaps the show could rename itself "Engaged at First Sight" or something of that nature but I suspect that those who would resort to a show of this nature are probably in many ways not the most ideal candidates for marriage in the first place. 

 

Lastly, the show has got to stop with their agendas.  It was clear to me in Season 2 that the agenda was interracial/intercultural/ marriages, to see if the experts rubrics could work across cultural/racial difference.  In Season 3, the agenda was to have a black man paired with a black woman regardless of the fact that most of the black men who applied for the show were not interested in marrying a black woman.  I just wonder if they had gone into the pairings without these agendas if they would have found more success.  

[Neurochick]

I figure if someone is actually emotionally healthy, mature, and "ready for marriage" reasonably attractive, and reasonably financially situated in life, they are most likely already married or at least in a serious long term relationship.

 

 Maybe, but there are more women than men in the US, so that theory isn't really correct.

 

In Season 3, the agenda was to have a black man paired with a black woman regardless of the fact that most of the black men who applied for the show were not interested in marrying a black woman.  I just wonder if they had gone into the pairings without these agendas if they would have found more success.

 

If that's what most of the black men said, then those guys are too fucked up to marry anyone IMO.  I mean why would a black man say, "I don't want ANY black women" as if all black women are the same.  Something else is wrong there.  Either they see white or non black women as "prizes" meaning they are objectifying them, or they hate their own skin color, which is another issue.

[Gigi43]

Yeah I have a hard time accepting the idea that the men specifically said "I don't want a black woman." I think Tres was heavily influenced by his family to marry a black woman even though I don't at all think race should be a limitation, I "get" the idea of wanting someone of the same race rather than specifically not wanting someone of your own race. I don't think preferring to date within your race makes you racist, but, I do think not wanting your own race is a sign of issues. Maybe that's wrong of me, but it's just how I feel. Davina seemed against dating her own race, and that seemed to be rooted in her issues with her father (then again, I know Tres' fathers family may have wanted a black woman because of Tres' mom, but I don't get the vibe Tres' himself see's white woman in terms of his mom, I'd believe more his family is maybe a factor in why he and that Jenna girl have yet to make an attempt to be an item.) The notion that every black man that applied didn't want a black woman except for Tres is just hard to believe, unless this show attracts even more damaged people than we think and even still, the odds are against it. I do, however, agree that Tres and Vanessa may have been matched because of race... as were possibly Voughn and Monet, but I also do buy to an extent the idea they and the show put forward that they both thought they wanted things it turns out they didn't once they had it.

 

In the event this show ever gets another couple to stay together past the 6 week mark, it should be mandatory that they have to continue regular counseling until at least the 6 month mark, unless the couple really wants out and the counselor agrees they are beyond help and in the event of that, they have separate counseling in dealing with the breakup. Vanessa looked so defeated at the 6 Months Later. I respect Neil for taking and admitting he took the optional therapy once the show was over with.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Gigi43

[sleekandchic]

I rewatched the Matchmaking episode last week. My memory might be wrong (and please correct me!) but I believe the show highlighted several seemingly-intelligent and attractive Black guys, three of whom interviewed on-camera that they did NOT date, nor wish to marry, Black women. No reasons given.

Again, my memory might be wrong, but I seem to remember a guy named Sean, an attorney, who seemed perfect for Vanessa, imo-- on paper anyway. I liked his personality and manner. Then he said no Black women, and my admiration of him went POOF!

I think the guy with a shaven head, former training-for-the-Olympics swimmer, stopped by leukemia, in remission now for 10 years, said no to Black women, too?

Logan Levkoff did a TH that explained that while Black male applicants seemed to not want to marry Black women, the Black women applicants expressly desired Black husbands. This whole thing caused controversy at the time, with Cilona taking to SM to explain that MAFS was speaking only of its applicant pool, not society in general. Unfortunately for him, he came across as unnecessarily condescending in his reply to a challenger, so that turned into a mess.

I believe Tres's TH during the Matchmaking episode said he dated whomever he liked, regardless of race. To my memory, he didn't express a preference or a proscription.

I hate it when people ignorantly limit and deprive both themselves and society by excluding entire groups of people, but I can't crawl into their heads. (And I don't want to either! I value my sanity.) All I can hope though is that SOME of them can keep their hearts and minds open to the CHANCE that maybe there exists a surprising person or experience or career that could enrich their lives beyond all measure.

Did the show ask the White guys if they'd date outside their race? If it did, I don't remember seeing it on air.

Edited March 15, 2016 by sleekandchic

[Kira53]

In the event this show ever gets another couple to stay together past the 6 week mark, it should be mandatory that they have to continue regular counseling until at least the 6 month mark, unless the couple really wants out and the counselor agrees they are beyond help and in the event of that, they have separate counseling in dealing with the breakup. Vanessa looked so defeated at the 6 Months Later. I respect Neil for taking and admitting he took the optional therapy once the show was over with.

 

 

Please no mandatory therapy.  That's like mandatory anger management counseling- often it doesn't work because the person doesn't really want the help. That said, I wish they would offer therapy on their dime (not filmed).  Individual therapy during and after the 6 weeks.  Individual therapy rather than couples might be more effective in helping people to grow into the relationship.  Joint therapy without a foundation of trust can be difficult for the participants - so much exposure and vulnerability.  But any kind of therapy they want would be great, but I don't see TPTB offering anything that they can't film.  IMHO that is one of the reasons that the "experts" are useless to the participants.  What kind of confidentiality do the experts offer?  They are doing the production"s bidding.  The "Experts" really aren't there for the married couple.  They are there to shape the narrative of the show not to help the "client".   Well, actually the Show is the "client" TPTB are the ones who direct the "help" anyone gets. 

 

Love to see them ask the White guys if they would date out of their race.  But that would get the show off track.  It is kind of like the Batchelor. In about 18 seasons neither franchise has never had persons of color in the lead or chosen.  Usually they were out very quickly.  

 

I hear "Unreal" is going to have a Black Batchelor in season 2!  If so that is going to be explosive. BTW, great show for people who like reality dating shows.  Very good acting and the pace is swift, writing is interesting and provocative.  Addictive as hell and great to discuss the character and plot.  Coming back in July.  Can't wait.  Maybe Hulu or Netflix has season 1.  The show is about how the producers shape the narrative and manipulate the contestants.  And of course everyone is sleeping around.

[Snarklepuss]

Logan Levkoff did a TH that explained that while Black male applicants seemed to not want to marry Black women, the Black women applicants expressly desired Black husbands. This whole thing caused controversy at the time, with Cilona taking to SM to explain that MAFS was speaking only of its applicant pool, not society in general. Unfortunately for him, he came across as unnecessarily condescending in his reply to a challenger, so that turned into a mess.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and take a stab at a hypothesis that a lot of upwardly mobile black men such as those considered for this show might tend to see a white woman as a symbol of their upward mobility and a kind of "trophy wife" in that sense.  I would love to test that hypothesis but lack the grant money, lol.

 

That said, one of my major beefs with the show concerns the age of the participants.  I think it should be upped to early 30s.  No one should be considered who is under 30, and preferably at least 31.  The percentage of people marrying is shrinking with every generation, plus the average and median ages of first marriage are continuing to increase.  But I think the real issue is the fact that marriage is on the decline and has been for several decades.  Plus it's continuing to become less popular as time goes on.  So it's no wonder this show has been mostly unsuccessful.  I think they would have better luck with people who are at least in their early 30s in general because most Gen Y/Millennials who do envision marriage are postponing it later than even the statistics right now show.  I think the average age in the US for a man marrying now is about 28 and for women 27, but that's among people who've already gotten married - those still putting it off until a later age and those potentially even younger will likely push the average age up even more.  Plus it varies by state.  My two states (NY and CT) have some of the highest ages at 28.8 for women and 30 for men or thereabouts.  It's a tad younger in Georgia but what about among upwardly mobile, college educated Georgians?  I'll bet it's higher and getting higher all the time.

 

This article is from 2011, but I'll bet the marriage rate has continued to go down since then:

 

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/12/14/barely-half-of-u-s-adults-are-married-a-record-low/

 

The median age of marriage in every state (2014):

http://mic.com/articles/92361/the-median-age-of-marriage-in-every-state-in-the-u-s-in-two-maps#.969YlCPJN

 

So I think the show is working off outdated assumptions about what age the younger generation is most ready for marriage.  The show is also suffering from the decline in the overall popularity of marriage as well, but I think it at least should work with the age group most likely to be ready to settle down to maximize its success rate.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Snarklepuss

[Jack Sampson]

To fix the show, in the vetting process, they need to ask each candidate what they think would make them a good wife/husband. Then ask specifically what that means on a daily basis - that way vague answers like "be there for my spouse" are clarified.

Then cut in THs of them saying what they would do into footage of them either doing or not doing it. It wouldn't increase the success rate, but it would be entertaining to see the lies people tell to get on the show.

You could have a scene with Trashley rejecting David cut in with video of her talking about how she doesn't want a relationship based on looks. Or maybe she just meant she doesn't want it based on HER (faded) looks.

[qtpye]

It is true that the institution of marriage is declining, but not in a way that is obvious.

 

Divorce numbers are high, but that includes the people who marry and divorce many times.

 

Even with this, people are getting divorced in record numbers. 

 

However, the marriages that are lasting are phenomenal.  People are on average expecting their spouse to fulfill them spiritually, emotionally, etc.  A couple generations ago people did not have such lofty ideals.  This being said, a good marriage will always require hard work and open communication.

 

I figure if someone is actually emotionally healthy, mature, and "ready for marriage" reasonably attractive, and reasonably financially situated in life, they are most likely already married or at least in a serious long term relationship.

 

 

There is a problem, that women have been out achieving men in education.  There is a backward idea that women should not marry men who are less educated then them.  You add this to the fact, that a healthy population has more women then men, and you have an imbalance.

 

The truth of the matter is there will be awesome women out there, who will not find partners.  This could be potentially devastating or no big deal, depending on the attitude of the women.  Also, women are at a disadvantage, because there is only so long they can wait to have children, if that is what they want.

 

For many generations, marrying well, was a woman's main job...of course time have changed.

[lazylou]

I don't think this show will ever successfully match people...Jason and Cortney being beginner's luck, I guess...if they disregard factors such as cultural, religious, and educational background, hobbies and interests, as well as personality traits. I have three sons who moved thousands of miles from home (for their jobs) where they all married women they met in their new locations.  Although the wives seem very different from each other, in fact they have common family backgrounds and interests in one way or another with their respective husbands and even tend to have matching physical attributes...  I keep thinking about the second season, when no thought whatever was given to matching people whose jobs put them in proximity to one another.  

 

The other big problem for the "experts" is that they are casting a reality TV show...they want to find conflict, not to find couples who will actually like and enjoy each other.  If no conflict existed, they would have to find some.  Otherwise, there is no show.

[Nffftshewasgone]

I think given the template that so many shows use now (preview snippet, actual footage, recap, next preview snippet, etc.,), there's no way to change or improve this show. If they decided to really try to make decent matches and support them properly, AND change the layout of the show, we might stand a chance of seeing real people really trying to make a real go at being married. As it is right now, we have complete nonsense.

[okerry]

The other big problem for the "experts" is that they are casting a reality TV show...they want to find conflict, not to find couples who will actually like and enjoy each other.  If no conflict existed, they would have to find some.  Otherwise, there is no show.

I think that the experts and show runners *think* the viewers want conflict and trainwrecks and so that's what they set up, but I still maintain that the audience for this show wants to see people live Happily Ever After and Find True Love. They really, sincerely do. There is almost universal disappointment that most of these couples have been so crappy and there's really only one marriage out of it - Cortney & Jason. Jamie & Doug are in it for the paychecks and I don't think it's the kind of marriage anyone would want in real life.

 

I keep thinking of Constance Zimmer's character on UnReal admonishing her producers to drum up some romance among the cast - "True love, people! We're selling true love here!"

 

MAFS needs to do the same!

[qtpye]

think that the experts and show runners *think* the viewers want conflict and trainwrecks and so that's what they set up, but I still maintain that the audience for this show wants to see people live Happily Ever After and Find True Love. They really, sincerely do. There is almost universal disappointment that most of these couples have been so crappy and there's really only one marriage out of it - Cortney & Jason. Jamie & Doug are in it for the paychecks and I don't think it's the kind of marriage anyone would want in real life.

 

 

I think most people are rooting for happy outcomes, particularly if the audience likes the coupling.

 

However, there is a certain game show aspect of the show.  It is fun to guess and speculate who will and will not stay together at the end of the six weeks.  Since all the matches have been bad and no one has stayed together for the last two seasons, this has taken away from the enjoyment we feel from this aspect of the show.

 

We need some success, because if all the matches are failures from the start, then there is no point to watching the show.

[BBDi]

Yeah I think they (the producers, the experts, etc?) want to convince themselves that they are scientific, classy, not like those other reality shows or whatever. I don't think they cast looking for drama in the negative sense at all.

Unless they want to go more Jerry Springer they are not going to cast for that.

Instead they edit and do their teasers to try to make it look like there's a possibility of "love" for each couple, when it was pretty clear from the get-go that love was never gonna happen for at least 2 of the couples.

[Snarklepuss]

I don't think they cast deliberately to fail, but I think they know that people will tune in anyway.  I get a lot out of the show just from a what does/doesn't work in relationships standpoint so my satisfaction is not as dependent on whether or not any of the couples succeed.  There's something to learn from the failures too.  Then too, I realize I'm not typical!  They bill the show as a "social experiment" which to me means that it can go either way and it's not primarily about producing fairy tales and happily ever afters but about being curious about what would happen if you threw two specific people together kind of thing - Whether that means they get along or they don't.  I've watched plenty of shows on that basis so this one is no exception.  Remember that show "Blind Date"?  I used to tune in more for the train wrecks than the successes, LOL.

[Neurochick]

I'm going to go out on a limb and take a stab at a hypothesis that a lot of upwardly mobile black men such as those considered for this show might tend to see a white woman as a symbol of their upward mobility and a kind of "trophy wife" in that sense.  I would love to test that hypothesis but lack the grant money, lol.

 

 

I'll go out on a further limb, those men were just douchebags.  Because according to that logic, upwardly mobile black women should desire white men a lot more than black men, and yet:

 

Logan Levkoff did a TH that explained that while Black male applicants seemed to not want to marry Black women, the Black women applicants expressly desired Black husbands.

 

 

Looks like the problems are with the men, something's wrong with them IMO.

[still hoping]

The one thing you can't fix is the "desire"...the way 2 people click...the way they smell, taste, feel..

hard to measure that.

 

Now also factor in the "fame game" and social media....check the bachelorette everyone was excited about - now her ex spills to the gossip rags that she was with him after the show (he had sent her letter on the show) and that she broke up with him again to be the star of "bachelorette"

 

Who knows..she might well get back with him - others have gone back to their ex's. The way these people get slammed...hell people called Ashley a stripper and an escort - when she refused a stripper at her party and would not even kiss David let alone go to bed with him LOL

[HumblePi]

I think the best 'fix' for this show would be to sit the 3 couples on a dais in pairs, have one professional judge, preferably Dr. Pepper because she's cute and little and smart. Have the men go offstage and have Dr. Pepper ask six questions to the wives to answer. Then bring back the men and ask them those same questions to see if they line up with what their wife answered. Then do that in reverse sending the wives in seclusion and ask the husbands some new questions to be compared to the answers the new wife will give.

If any couple scores lower than a 70% correct answers together, then they should be sent directly to divorce court. Oh wait, this sounds familiar. I think Bob Eubanks had this show already, yeah the Newlywed Game. But really, it was more fun, entertaining and real.

[ralph]

i'm probably late on this and everybody else knows...but in the previews for the new season it looks like there might be new "experts"

[Wings]

12 minutes ago, ralph said:

i'm probably late on this and everybody else knows...but in the previews for the new season it looks like there might be new "experts"

Excellent news.  I didn't watch last season and the 'experts' were a big part of the reason.  The man whose name I forgot is creepy. 

[Evil Queen]

3 hours ago, wings707 said:

Excellent news.  I didn't watch last season and the 'experts' were a big part of the reason.  The man whose name I forgot is creepy. 

Pepper is still there sadly but there are 2 new ones. I'm not keen on Pepper at all after how she was last season and some of the things I have read on her. I wish they would just give fresh "experts" with each season since it has now changed cities and will be again. 

[mentalquaducts]

Background checks and a longer vetting process of at least 6 months to help weed out the weak links.

A longer period than 6 weeks - maybe 12.

Give them regular, weekly counseling sessions with a real certified counselor not associated in the choosing process. It's hard to dive right in and in a real marriage they may seek outside help.

Don't send them on a honeymoon right away - let them move in together and be made to live in the same house / apartment whatever for a week or two before they can go on a honeymoon. This would give them some time to adjust and one or two counseling sessions (as mentioned above)

 

What makes the show work is that it felt, in theory anyway, more authentic. It does not feel like they have challenges etc... 

[Wings]

This is stressful enough, give them a fully furnished apartment, art on the walls and stocked kitchen including some frozen food purchased from a place other than a grocery store.  Make them want to stay there and not run home to their own apartment.  Go all out, make it look like a magazine photo.  It does not have to break the budget.  Supply games, cards and puzzles. Basically give them every advantage you can so they can focus on  having fun and enjoying each other as they would if dating.

In real life people often fall in love very quickly; there is room for that to happen in the absence of daily grind details, like drawing art for your bare walls when you have no talent. .   

Edited July 20, 2016 by wings707

[Evil Queen]

2 hours ago, mentalquaducts said:

Background checks and a longer vetting process of at least 6 months to help weed out the weak links.

A longer period than 6 weeks - maybe 12.

Give them regular, weekly counseling sessions with a real certified counselor not associated in the choosing process. It's hard to dive right in and in a real marriage they may seek outside help.

Don't send them on a honeymoon right away - let them move in together and be made to live in the same house / apartment whatever for a week or two before they can go on a honeymoon. This would give them some time to adjust and one or two counseling sessions (as mentioned above)

 

What makes the show work is that it felt, in theory anyway, more authentic. It does not feel like they have challenges etc... 

I agree about the background checks and vetting of these people being done. They should have been doing a WAY better job of it. Not letting anyone with a criminal record of any kind and keeping mentally unstable people out of it. Yet they will never do this sadly because one way or another it will bring drama in some form to things for the show or put its name out there. They really need to STOP putting people together because they think one will be good in some way to "fix" the other one for whatever the reason be. Its the stupidest reasoning they have given us for pairing couples and obviously does not work. 

   As for the honeymoon, at the very least they should be setting things up that each of them likes to do in their spare time or wants to try. It would open things up a little for them on getting to know each other in that manner. IMO it doesn't need to be a tropical island or whatever but keep it simple so its a mix of what the couple would enjoy. 

  Agree on the counseling, these people they have had are not good at anything. Which is why I am disappointed they kept Pepper. These ones coming in are not what I would be considering certified counselors either after reading up on them. They need REAL marriage counseling and not the joke of these so called "experts". 

   I do thing a few more weeks wouldn't hurt either. If things are really bad where one is taking abuse or there is no clicking between one or both that they need to be able to walk away and be done. Forcing them to tough it out and try for the whole time is not ok and creates more of a mess in some way, shape or form. Plus the so called "experts" should be seeing what is going on and is filmed as the days go on. So they can see the things they are missing and not hearing when there are problems like we saw last season with 2 of the couples. 

1 hour ago, wings707 said:

This is stressful enough, give them a fully furnished apartment, art on the walls and stocked kitchen including some frozen food purchased from a place other than a grocery store.  Make them want to stay there and not run home to their own apartment.  Go all out, make it look like a magazine photo.  It does not have to break the budget.  Supply games, cards and puzzles. Basically give them every advantage you can so they can focus on  having fun and enjoying each other as they would if dating.

In real life people often fall in love very quickly; there is room for that to happen in the absence of daily grind details, like drawing art for your bare walls when you have no talent. .   

They need to do something with the issue on them really living together. It really should be in the contracts that they must and not be running home to their place or it breaks the contract. Only reason I could see this being broken is if abuse in some manner takes place (which should be seen with them filming or some proof so its not an easy way to just leave because you don't like whoever) or there is no attraction at all and its like a David/Ashley situation where it should just end instead of forcing them to stick it out and try. 

Yes people can fall in love quickly. I know my husband and I did (15 yrs married) but we of course still didn't get married until 2 yrs later. We also met online before it was ok to do. When we did it it was sort of taboo still and people gave a side eye if you said it. Yet we got to know each other well though this way and before we even met. We talked a lot online before we even talked on the phone and then meet 2 weeks after our first phone call. That is what ends up lacking a lot in this show is that they don't show them actually talking to each other like you would when you are dating and getting to know each other. Either they want nothing to do with each other, just started acting like an ass, jump in the sack or something that doesn't equal really learning about each other. If they just treated it like dating in some manners it might work out a little better....that and if they actually matched because the people had things in common and not issues. LOL 

[okerry]

I still wish the people in charge of this thing would actually take it halfway seriously. It would make for some fascinating TV if they did. I love trash TV, too, but "trash" is one thing and "garbage" is another, lol. The first season was believable and kind of sweet, but it's gone straight to garbage since then.

Instead of putting out an open casting call, which is only going to bring out the famewhores, try looking on some of the dating sites like eHarmony where most people there are looking for something besides hookups and sometimes really do want to get married.

Comb the site for any who might make suitable candidates and then contact them privately to see if they'll agree to be on the show. And don't limit it only to under-thirty hotties. Let in some older couples and some who might not look exactly TV-ready but are serious about marriage. 

And get some "experts" who are serious about it, too, and not just those who want to be on TV and are really just hanging around to see if they can get strangers to have sex for a TV show. That's all Pepper and the "sex therapist" do. Pastor Cal might be all right, but the rest are worthless.

C'mon, Show! We haven't given up on you yet. We know you can do it!

[ketose]

49 minutes ago, okerry said:

I still wish the people in charge of this thing would actually take it halfway seriously. It would make for some fascinating TV if they did. I love trash TV, too, but "trash" is one thing and "garbage" is another, lol. The first season was believable and kind of sweet, but it's gone straight to garbage since then.

Instead of putting out an open casting call, which is only going to bring out the famewhores, try looking on some of the dating sites like eHarmony where most people there are looking for something besides hookups and sometimes really do want to get married.

Comb the site for any who might make suitable candidates and then contact them privately to see if they'll agree to be on the show. And don't limit it only to under-thirty hotties. Let in some older couples and some who might not look exactly TV-ready but are serious about marriage. 

And get some "experts" who are serious about it, too, and not just those who want to be on TV and are really just hanging around to see if they can get strangers to have sex for a TV show. That's all Pepper and the "sex therapist" do. Pastor Cal might be all right, but the rest are worthless.

C'mon, Show! We haven't given up on you yet. We know you can do it!

In the first season, they claimed to use people on dating sites. There was also Dr. Citronella's personality test. Of course, this is just a TV show and some people are not marriage material (David Norton). The big thing about this show is that it's about arranged marriages. If you went the historical route, you might as well draw names out of a hat. Using any kind of match maker is only marginally better. Some people lie, some people don't have chemistry. I think Jamie and Doug worked out because their common interest is being important and liked and this works for them.

The fact that Lifetime picked this up means the television experiment succeeded but the social experiment failed. It looks like the old fashioned method of dating people and marrying them is slightly more successful then getting picked by TV experts.