S13.E09: Week 9: Overnight Dates

[ladle]

On 7/24/2017 at 10:53 PM, ridethemaverick said:

whether he's talking about hating Bryan

Also, what was that about?  Did we know already that he hated Bryan?  That seemed to come out of left field, and I wanted to know more! 

On 7/24/2017 at 10:05 PM, catrice2 said:

She feels as if that will make her look foolish. Since she did not see the entire edit, she didn't realize that she had looked foolish long before that. 

Like when she signed up for a reality dating show?  :)

On 7/24/2017 at 10:25 PM, truthaboutluv said:

I admit I cracked up when Rachel looked like she was this close to telling the brother in law to just shut it and that he had no say. 

I thought it was so weird that the brother-in-law was that involved!  I could see having that type of conversation with my brother, maybe, but a brother-in-law?  But perhaps Rachel's just closer to her in-laws than I am... or anyone I know is.

[waving feather]

That brother in law was already overly involved, in my opinion, since Nick's season when he met her family. I don't get it either. I wouldn't let my bro in law have any say.

[dleighg]

they showed neither Peter nor Bryan's overnight

[kingshearte]

4 hours ago, ladle said:

Did they show Peter's??

If you believe in what's implied by cliffhangers (not recommended), he might not even get one, thanks to his irrational belief that getting engaged means you want to get married.

[fib]

Lol.  I hated this episode, so it took the whole week to catch up with the thread. My thoughts: 

Brian struck me as mansplaining the situation with Rachel and him to her family, which is partly why it didnt play well. He seemed to make a lot of assumptions about what they thought, and addressed those, instead of just explaining his feelings.  It rubbed me wrong too. Nothing bugs me like be not listened to and not having my questions taken seriously.  

Fwiw, her friends did the same shit. Telling Rachel and Brian how thy perceived them to be.  And Rachel ate that up.  So I think a) she likes that, and b) it was validating cause she is into Brian.  

Lastly, I think Rachel really likes booze (no judging - so do I), while Peter is into a cleaner lifestyle (based on his instagram). I think that is part of the hang up with him:  She may be out of his league, but if you dont want someoneone who drinks all the time, youre not gonna be into them.  & if Rachel's booze intake is like most of the lawyers I know, and it seems from the show like it might be, A wellness guy like Peter might balk. 

[JudyObscure]

On ‎7‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 6:02 PM, slade3 said:

Rude white cashiers become flustered when they realize they've behaved badly while another white person is watching.

Behaving badly?  I've been a cashier or bank teller most of my life and we are always told by our managers to card customers we don't know. Some places we are told to card everyone because the computers demand driver license numbers to make sure we looked at an ID.  I have had my paycheck docked many times because checks I cashed have bounced. 

Doing your job is not "being rude,"  or "behaving badly." The cashier being flamed in the video was guilty of not remembering a regular customer,  that's all.  I've worked with  cashiers who only rarely remembered anyone, some who remembered a half dozen people for odd reasons like having nice jewelry,  and others who would have carded their own mother just to cover their asses in case of a bounce.  If she cashes a check that's on that "don't cash" list and it bounces she could lose her entire paycheck depending on the store's policy.  I've lost hundreds of dollars when I could least afford it.

I've carded generals while working in the Pentagon, but one thing I never, ever, did was card a black person because I knew it would be taken personally, just like the woman in the video did.  (This actually caused me to get grilled by the FBI when an African American kited several big checks I had cashed but that's a risk I knew I was taking.)

"Uppity?"  No one on this thread even used that word, but for some reason we're getting a lecture about it and a video that proves absolutely nothing.  White people get carded every day.  I get carded every  single time I go to my bank where we have had a rather large account for 17 years.  They just don't remember me and I'm fine with that.

[Ohwell]

Can't we get back on topic and just talk about the show?  Please?

I'm still curious as to whether Peter actually had a Fantasy suite date, and if so, what happened.  

15 hours ago, fib said:

Lastly, I think Rachel really likes booze (no judging - so do I), while Peter is into a cleaner lifestyle (based on his instagram). I think that is part of the hang up with him:  She may be out of his league, but if you dont want someoneone who drinks all the time, youre not gonna be into them.  & if Rachel's booze intake is like most of the lawyers I know, and it seems from the show like it might be, A wellness guy like Peter might balk. 

You might have a point there.  Peter definitely comes off as somewhat health conscious, so perhaps the drinking could be a turnoff to him (along with those eyelashes).

[mostlylurking]

Are we getting an actual episode tonight or is it just the Men Tell All?

[OnceSane]

Just The Men Tell All, @mostlylurking.

[slade3]

On 7/31/2017 at 10:47 AM, JudyObscure said:

Behaving badly?  I've been a cashier or bank teller most of my life and we are always told by our managers to card customers we don't know. Some places we are told to card everyone because the computers demand driver license numbers to make sure we looked at an ID.  I have had my paycheck docked many times because checks I cashed have bounced. 

Doing your job is not "being rude,"  or "behaving badly." The cashier being flamed in the video was guilty of not remembering a regular customer,  that's all.  I've worked with  cashiers who only rarely remembered anyone, some who remembered a half dozen people for odd reasons like having nice jewelry,  and others who would have carded their own mother just to cover their asses in case of a bounce.  If she cashes a check that's on that "don't cash" list and it bounces she could lose her entire paycheck depending on the store's policy.  I've lost hundreds of dollars when I could least afford it.

I've carded generals while working in the Pentagon, but one thing I never, ever, did was card a black person because I knew it would be taken personally, just like the woman in the video did.  (This actually caused me to get grilled by the FBI when an African American kited several big checks I had cashed but that's a risk I knew I was taking.)

"Uppity?"  No one on this thread even used that word, but for some reason we're getting a lecture about it and a video that proves absolutely nothing.  White people get carded every day.  I get carded every  single time I go to my bank where we have had a rather large account for 17 years.  They just don't remember me and I'm fine with that.

When white cashiers "behave badly" toward me, it's usually when they are rude to me. My husband will walk over and they'll say "Good morning, sir, I'll be with you shortly" and then always says "Oh, you're together?" in a an embarrassed tone. We've also experienced cashiers pretending to be busy when I'm waiting on a different line. When my husband walks over to me, they will say "I'll take you next, sir." This has happened many times. I've also walked over to my husband and had cashiers say "I'll be with you in a minute, please step aside" in a nasty tone, and they get really flustered when we say we're together. I've been asked to show ID when white white customers have not - though it's true that all customers are asked to show ID when buying alcohol at our local NYC Whole Foods. But you would know about my experiences better than me because you're an actual cashier, right? 

[JudyObscure]

1 hour ago, slade3 said:

 But you would know about my experiences better than me because you're an actual cashier, right? 

Sorry.  Since you quoted the entire  video and then said, "Thanks for the video" just before your remark about cashiers behaving badly -- I thought you were talking about the cashier in the video.

[PhysNerd]

On July 26, 2017 at 0:07 PM, ljenkins782 said:

In a way, I can kind of understand the concern around a 29-year-old man who's never had a serious relationship suddenly jumping into marriage, especially since Rachel is many steps ahead as far as relationship experience goes. It would be quite an adjustment and they would be working through first time relationship issues in the most serious relationship there is. 

But in thinking more about it, it probably shouldn't be that big a deal. There would be a benefit in the lack of baggage from prior relationships and it would probably feel more special that you aren't just one of a string of relationships. 

Honestly, it doesn't matter whether someone has had zero past relationships or a dozen relationships.  What matters is the maturity level of the person.  It's easy to forget that most people experience their first relationships during their teens or early 20s, which is a time when many people are very immature and narcissistic.  This why many of us associate the "first relationship" with silly mistakes and general relationship blunders. People during this life stage are learning about who they are as a person, how to navigate life and what they want out of life.  It becomes difficult to focus on other people when you are still learning the basics about living as an adult.  

Eric is a late bloomer.  He is 29, which is an age when people typically get serious about life and what they want.  He has had time to grow and focus on developing himself as a person. He has had the opportunity to live out his "selfish" years, so now he can focus on being a good boyfriend or husband.  I don't think he and Rachael are a good match romantically, but I think he would make a good husband for someone else.                                       

[dleighg]

10 minutes ago, PhysNerd said:

Honestly, it doesn't matter whether someone has had zero past relationships or a dozen relationships.  What matters is the maturity level of the person.  It's easy to forget that most people experience their first relationships during their teens or early 20s, which is a time when many people are very immature and narcissistic.  This why many of us associate the "first relationship" with silly mistakes and general relationship blunders. People during this life stage are learning about who they are as a person, how to navigate life and what they want out of life.  It becomes difficult to focus on other people when you are still learning the basics about living as an adult.  

I totally agree. Both my DH and both my kids were/are kind of "slow to the party". In all cases more focussed on schooling/career. I have no concerns that they'll be ready when they are ready.

ETA: my big red flag (not the case under discussion here) is if someone goes straight into a serious relationship (living together) or marriage without living independently for a good amount of time. I think it can be dangerous to not develop the confidence in life skills on your own. 

Edited August 9, 2017 by dleighg

[PhysNerd]

On August 9, 2017 at 5:24 PM, dleighg said:

ETA: my big red flag (not the case under discussion here) is if someone goes straight into a serious relationship (living together) or marriage without living independently for a good amount of time. I think it can be dangerous to not develop the confidence in life skills on your own. 

I completely agree!  It's so important that people learn to live on their own especially if their spouse suddenly dies.  It's dangerous for one person to be completely dependent on their spouse.