S13.E11: Week 10: The Final Rose / S13.E12: After the Final Rose

[catrice2]

3 hours ago, OhIKnow said:

Call me crazy, but I have a feeling the Rachel we saw in the live portion of that finale was more of the "real" her.  No way to cut out the shade being thrown on that stage during the live show. I'd guess there is plenty on the cutting room floor, though. 

The problem with Rachel is that she wants to portray herself as an Oprah/Michelle Obama-dignified and mature..."when they go low, we go high," but in reality she is acting like more of a Donald Trump by responding to Twitter/Instagram trolls or trying to make others look bad, "when I get hit, I hit back harder." 

If she is so happy and living her best life, she shouldn't have time to respond to social media trolls.  She has nothing to prove.....just live your life and be happy.  Go for it girl!  

 Just another of her contrary statements.....before the show aired she talked about how she would not care what people say because "they don't know me."  If  she lived without Instagram and Twitter as a normal or important part of her life before the show, ignore it now and don't engage. Oh, but she needs it to push products, etc., right?  Rachel was happy to receive the adoration and praise,  but she is having a hard time ignoring the negativity.  

[yorklee2]

Wow after all the pages and pages of comments there isn't anything that hasn't been covered so not much to add. I just want to say that I honestly didn't like either one of the F2 for Rachel. I never warmed up to Bryan but time will tell if he's sincere. And all that Peter drama. Glad she didn't pick him but for all the differing opinions on both men the truth always seems to fall somewhere in the middle. Both sides of the argument has some truth to it. But I think what would have been a truly shocking ending is if she had went with Eric! Couldn't have been any worse than Bryan or Peter. At least she would have had a great foundation of friendship.

As for Peter being the next Bachelor I'm just going to take it as it comes. It's hard not to think he would be hypocritical if he takes the lead spot but maybe he would be more at ease if he were in control. Who knows? We'll see how that goes. Unless by a slim chance they go with someone else but it's not looking likely right now. I would like them to pull a big surprise like they did with Nick and go with somebody totally unexpected.

Edited August 11, 2017 by yorklee2

[Fable]

The more I read this forum, the more convinced I become that the Rachel/Peter breakup was contrived and that they were both in on it.  She claims that she was not begging for a proposal, and in so much as it seemed clear Bryan was going to be her choice anyhow, I believe her.  That’s why it made no sense that she and he both said, she looked directly at him at the rose ceremony and stated she wanted a proposal.  It would have made far more sense to have kept Eric.  At some point, I think they both realized they were on different pages, but because, I believe, TPTB wanted Peter for the next Bachelor they were given a script to follow to give the show a controversial ending. 

There are quite a few reasons I believe this, but the live show really was telling, especially Rachel saying she cried her eyelashes off and then Peter saying her eyelashes stayed on the floor for 2 days, and he wasn’t about to pick them.  LMAO!!  What a weird thing to say.  Someone had to have written those corny lines because WTF!    

[nutty1]

17 hours ago, ByTor said:

I guess I'm really in the minority, but I didn't think the "mediocre" comment was all that bad.  I think it was, as I bolded in your post, 100% egotistical.  I don't think his comment had anything to do with insulting or throwing a jab at her, it was all about "Any life except a life with wonderful me me me me will be mediocre."

I took the mediocre comment as meaning "if it is me you want but won't take the chance, thing have a mediocre life with a guy you want less". I do not think it was a slam on Bryan, I think Peter was just thinking that he was the one she really wanted.

I am not saying it is how she really felt, but that he thought that at that moment.

Of course,just my take on it.

[Kerri Johnson]

Rachel lost me with the "this show isn't for you comment". Bitter betty. She spent months rehearsing that line when she should have been with Bryan.

 

Peter told her "I'm not scared of marriage". He has no problem falling in love quickly, proposing, or getting married. His only problem is doing all of that with Rachel.

 

He was never into you, Rachel. From the first kiss where you shoved your face up at him, from all the times you begged him to kiss you and continuing to beg for him to propose up until the last minute. 

 

He played you but it was your fault you should have sent him home. I don't blame him for not leaving, he's trying to get his 15 minutes.

 

I will happily watch Peter and his journey, when he will obviously propose with ease come January 2018.

 

Rachel will be watching every step of the way as well, still seething with anger she was rejected.

[CalamityBoPeep]

On 8/10/2017 at 8:57 AM, SnapeCharmer said:

I think she had deep feelings for both men. But was leaning toward Bryan most. Peter kept dangling a carrot (pushing and pulling) and that was causing her to second guess herself. So, to the point of that other poster, I think her wanting him to propose is true to some extent. She wanted him to want her as much as she wanted him. 

I think this is the key point that has been stated in so many ways, but has been buried: He wanted her.... as much as she wanted him. He did. She didn't say she wanted him, and only him. She made out with him, but she didn't give him an indication that he was her final choice. The reality is that she wanted him to want her more than she wanted him. She wanted him "all in" when she withheld her own deeper truths and had another man in the background that he knew was also "all in."

To be fair, I think the leads are contractually barred from revealing too much. But most leads seem to find a way to let their final 1 know that he or she is actually the final 1. Every time I hear "I can't say," or "I can't answer that," (from anyone... lead or contestant), I translate that to "the producers and my contract won't let me get that specific with you." Including with Peter's answer to the question of why he felt attacked. If the answer involves the behind-the-scenes shenanigans, odds are they'll end up saying "I can't say." Because the television gods have decreed that talking about decisions made by production is verboten. 

This is such an f-ed up way to have a relationship develop anyway, and yes, people can say "that's the premise of the show!" Which is somewhat legit, but I do think the contestants have been told before that they don't have to propose if they aren't feeling it. And I have a really hard time believing that just because a contestant knows the score before going into the show, that things in their minds don't shift dramatically if they find themselves in the running. It'd be easier to just assume you aren't the one, than to think you might be the one, but you aren't sure. 

19 hours ago, SnapeCharmer said:

I've always maintained that they all signed their names on the dotted line AND most are there for more than just romance and to find true love. That's a given. But in Rachel's defense, she has been upfront about what she wanted at the end and never wavered. There's no way around that. Where I fault her in the case of Peter is that when he told her in Geneva that at once point he considered leaving, she should have cut him loose then and there. No matter what he said after that. As soon as he spoke those words, he should have been gone. IMO, once a guy admits he was willing to bail on you, then that's a full sign he doesn't see you as someone worth fighting for. 

 

I don't think it's really comparable to an individual, private-sphere relationship. Odds are good, in the situation you mention with the two guys in your life, that you were probably letting complicated guy know that you wanted him. (Not that I know you... I just think in the real world, people are not usually so reluctant to say that they're into someone, "all in.") I think that Peter ends up looking like that a bit, and going on Rachel's current interpretation of events, it looks like she wants to feed that impression. But the fact is that she wanted him "all in" and committed, when she herself gave him no reason to be so. And yes, the power dynamic of the show is that the lead gets to choose. A decent person though, empathizes with the person they ultimately have to hurt, and allows them to keep their dignity. Hell, Nick did for her. Why did she insist that Peter needed to propose if she didn't want him? 

18 hours ago, fib said:

So I have a few more thoughts on Rachel, Bryan and Peter:

1) Bryan seems a lot more likable and telegenic in his interviews than he ever did during the season.

2) Bryan calling Peter wishy-washy during the last chance date, when Rachel had already told Bryan she was choosing him is rich.  

3) Peter wouldnt have been wishy-washy if he had gotten any validation at all from Rachel.  Instead, he got lectured by her in public, and strung along when she knew she was choosing Bryan. 

 

Exactly. Your point #3 above is also why I could see why he said he "felt attacked". I believe that his inability to explain why didn't strike me as being because he's inarticulate, but because his answer would also involve mentioning the actions of the production team.

17 hours ago, SnapeCharmer said:

I'm going to let Peter's words speak for themselves. Here is a transcript of the first part of the conversation that was aired.:

• "I am in love with you. That became very clear to me today. But these feelings are so recent.
• They've been growing to this point, all throughout. But I don't feel that I'm ready to ask you to marry me tomorrow.
• But I don't want to stop being with you. I do see a future with you. And I want to make those steps but in time.
• And I'm sorry that its taken me this long. But I'm not able to act on impulse, and I feel like just now realizing the feelings I have for you is not enough for me to say that I want to spend the rest of my life of my life with you.
• But I know that I want to try hard. Like, really hard. But it's too new to say that I'm gonna give away the one thing that I hold so special and dear to my heart that I'll never get back. I have one opportunity and I want to make sure that it's the right one.
• I choose to have one opportunity. And that is my choice.
• I want to build a relationship with you. I'm not able to tell you why it was not an instant I want to marry you for me.
• Rachel: I'm not looking for an instant I want to marry you. I just feel like if you had gotten to this point, that's what you would want right now. And I just - I don't know how many times to say it - I just want somebody who wants what I want, and then wants that with me.

Keeping in mind that we only observed a portion of the three hour conversation they had on that last chance date,  I omitted most of Rachel's replies, because Peter did most of the talking and she really didn't begin talking outside of some small acknowledgements until the second half of the aired conversation (after commercial break).  Call it push and pull, wishy-washy, indecisive, or whatever, but even in this very small portion of the conversation, her doubts are confirmed. 

Her doubts are confirmed because what he's saying in all those words, is that he is not confident in what she's shown their relationship to be, in this timeframe, with this set of parameters. He isn't able to approach this relationship, in this setting, as an equal partner. Because the f-ed up nature of the show won't allow it. To me, that doesn't read as wishy-washy, push-pull, distancing, indecisive. It reads as pretty legit. And yes... maybe finding love as one of 30 guys on a show isn't for Peter. But I suspect that it might not be his standard operating procedure, in the real world. People are reading into Peter's actions while he was on a bizarre show that has an incredibly f-ed up set of expectations, and putting their own spin on it, based on their own history in the real world with relationships that lasted longer than 6 weeks, and didn't have cameras and producers all over the place. I feel like a little empathy might be called for.

Not that he was entirely right in his approach, but he wasn't a bad guy for not being able to "get there" in this framework. I also don't think it would be hypocritical of him to become the Bachelor. I hope that he would have more empathy for his runner-up than Rachel has shown for him, and not slag her in interviews after the show ended. His change of tune, after Monday, wishing Rachel the best, says that he'd at least try to keep to the high road after his season was over. (Assuming he's chosen as the next Bachelor. No idea, on that.) 

 

16 hours ago, kingshearte said:

Ultimately, I really do think this show would work better if we can get to the point where a woman proposing to a man is a perfectly acceptable and unremarkable thing. Because to have one person do the choosing, and the other do the proposing really sets up this situation. It's one thing to ask someone if they would be willing to accept a proposal if you offered one, because being proposed to means being chosen. But to insist that someone be prepared to propose when they don't even have any kind of assurance that they've been chosen just seems really screwed up to me.

 

I've been thinking this for a long time. And this season really brought home why. If the Bachelorette has all the power throughout the taping, except for the very last choice, that's just cruel. She shouldn't have to beg for a proposal, and the men shouldn't have to take the leap of giving a proposal when there is another man in the wings, also giving a proposal. She should be able to ask her final 1 if he'll marry her, and let the runner-up leave with his dignity in tact, not having bent the knee only to be rejected.

[truthaboutluv]

1 hour ago, Kerri Johnson said:

Rachel lost me with the "this show isn't for you comment". Bitter betty. She spent months rehearsing that line when she should have been with Bryan.

 

Peter told her "I'm not scared of marriage". He has no problem falling in love quickly, proposing, or getting married. His only problem is doing all of that with Rachel.

 

He was never into you, Rachel. From the first kiss where you shoved your face up at him, from all the times you begged him to kiss you and continuing to beg for him to propose up until the last minute. 

 

He played you but it was your fault you should have sent him home. I don't blame him for not leaving, he's trying to get his 15 minutes.

 

I will happily watch Peter and his journey, when he will obviously propose with ease come January 2018.

 

Rachel will be watching every step of the way as well, still seething with anger she was rejected.

 

So Rachel, you're a bitter loser and still wrong because you allowed yourself to be played by this guy who never wanted you and was only there to be the next lead. Now shut up and don't you dare try and ruin his goal to be the next Bachelor. Okay. 

Meanwhile, some of Peter's friends who Rachel met on the HTD have taken to dragging her on social media. The one black guy basically accuses her of sending Will home because she was only looking for a man to grope her, they're mocking her weave and her edges. One of the white girlfriends are in on the action of how much Rachel attacked Peter on the AFTR and she's so bitter and salty but claims to be living her best life. Oh and Peter's dad is retweeing some T-Shirt company thing that's calling Bryan a rebound or some such thing. 

I don't know if it's because social media wasn't as bad back then - we did have Twitter and Facebook but it's certainly increased exponentially in the last few years - but I have never seen something like this from this franchise. I thought the Arie love was intense but this makes the Arie stanning seem like amateurs. I'm done.  I think it's very telling how easily some can get wrapped in a passably looking guy to where nothing and everything he does is okay and everyone else are the bad guys and monsters. 

I really and truly do want Peter to be the next Bachelor. Because I will be fascinated to watch that fall from that very, very high pedestal. 

Edited August 11, 2017 by truthaboutluv

[Dittohead]

Calamity, I really appreciate your articulate, eminently sensible take on this whole Peter/Rachel scenario.  You put into words exactly my thoughts, much better than I could have. 

Edited August 11, 2017 by Dittohead
spelling correction

[ljenkins782]

18 hours ago, fib said:

I agree.  I think they changed the format so that people would watch all 3 hours.  What they got was people emotionally rxhausted and done with the show before Bryan proposed.  This was a production fail.  The peter/rachel break up was really compelling tv, but i had nothing left at 10pm when i was getting to the Bryan part of the show.  

I just finally watched yesterday, so I guess that about says it all about my enthusiasm for this ending. Definitely a different feel to the edit and having Rachel sitting there watching it for the first time was an interesting premise. The scenes with Peter were interesting to watch in an uncomfortable way and the whole back half of the show when it was down to just Bryan was rather dull. 

I will say that Bryan speaking Spanish is somehow far more compelling than Bryan speaking English even though I don't speak Spanish. I'd somehow rather listen to words I can't understand spoken with nuance and inflection, for some reason, when he speaks English, his voice goes all flat and his cheesy lines and trite sayings are so bland. 

I guess I can't see the genuine bond between Rachel and Bryan because I don't feel like we ever got to know Bryan's personality. I'm sure that's down to editing, but I can't think of anything in particular about Bryan himself even after all his screen time this season. So it's just less interesting to me as an ending. 

All that aside, I can understand Rachel (and Bryan) being pissed at the edit of this final episode because it definitely framed it as a sloppy seconds proposal, which is perhaps a bit ironic given Bryan's comments on Ellen, lol. Rachel may have had her heart set on Bryan from way back and the Peter stuff was just for show, but they're going to be answering questions about this for as long as the relationship lasts and most people are never going to believe that Bryan only won because Peter wouldn't propose. 

[ridethemaverick]

48 minutes ago, truthaboutluv said:

 

So Rachel, you're a bitter loser and still wrong because you allowed yourself to be played by this guy who never wanted you and was only there to be the next lead. Now shut up and don't you dare try and ruin his goal to be the next Bachelor. Okay. 

Meanwhile, some of Peter's friends who Rachel met on the HTD have taken to dragging her on social media. The one black guy basically accuses her of sending Will home because she was only looking for a man to grope her, they're mocking her weave and her edges. One of the white girlfriends are in on the action of how much Rachel attacked Peter on the AFTR and she's so bitter and salty but claims to be living her best life. Oh and Peter's dad is retweeing some T-Shirt company thing that's calling Bryan a rebound or some such thing. 

I don't know if it's because social media wasn't as bad back then - we did have Twitter and Facebook but it's certainly increased exponentially in the last few years - but I have never seen something like this from this franchise. I thought the Arie love was intense but this makes the Arie stanning seem like amateurs. I'm done.  I think it's very telling how easily some can get wrapped in a passably looking guy to where nothing and everything he does is okay and everyone else are the bad guys and monsters. 

I really and truly do want Peter to be the next Bachelor. Because I will be fascinated to watch that fall from that very, very high pedestal. 

Re: Peter's friends...all I'll say is that I saw it coming. His friends are extremely TYPICAL and I know you know what I mean.

So the "poor attacked Peter" narrative is still going full speed ahead. I'm not surprised but it's still disappointing.

[SnapeCharmer]

2 hours ago, Kerri Johnson said:

Rachel lost me with the "this show isn't for you comment". Bitter betty. She spent months rehearsing that line when she should have been with Bryan.

 

Peter told her "I'm not scared of marriage". He has no problem falling in love quickly, proposing, or getting married. His only problem is doing all of that with Rachel.

 

He was never into you, Rachel. From the first kiss where you shoved your face up at him, from all the times you begged him to kiss you and continuing to beg for him to propose up until the last minute. 

 

He played you but it was your fault you should have sent him home. I don't blame him for not leaving, he's trying to get his 15 minutes.

 

I will happily watch Peter and his journey, when he will obviously propose with ease come January 2018.

 

Rachel will be watching every step of the way as well, still seething with anger she was rejected.

And he knew that way before the final two. So, what does that say about him? Please. Spare me.

Edited August 11, 2017 by SnapeCharmer

[fib]

Found this tweet from Rachel to be interesting: 

Here's hoping she is recognizing that the show doesnt have her best interest in mind and that fan reaction to her is about her character as portrayd on the show not her actual self.  

[SnapeCharmer]

2 hours ago, CalamityBoPeep said:

I think this is the key point that has been stated in so many ways, but has been buried: He wanted her.... as much as she wanted him. He did. She didn't say she wanted him, and only him. She made out with him, but she didn't give him an indication that he was her final choice. The reality is that she wanted him to want her more than she wanted him. She wanted him "all in" when she withheld her own deeper truths and had another man in the background that he knew was also "all in."

To be fair, I think the leads are contractually barred from revealing too much. But most leads seem to find a way to let their final 1 know that he or she is actually the final 1. Every time I hear "I can't say," or "I can't answer that," (from anyone... lead or contestant), I translate that to "the producers and my contract won't let me get that specific with you." Including with Peter's answer to the question of why he felt attacked. If the answer involves the behind-the-scenes shenanigans, odds are they'll end up saying "I can't say." Because the television gods have decreed that talking about decisions made by production is verboten. 

This is such an f-ed up way to have a relationship develop anyway, and yes, people can say "that's the premise of the show!" Which is somewhat legit, but I do think the contestants have been told before that they don't have to propose if they aren't feeling it. And I have a really hard time believing that just because a contestant knows the score before going into the show, that things in their minds don't shift dramatically if they find themselves in the running. It'd be easier to just assume you aren't the one, than to think you might be the one, but you aren't sure. 

I don't think it's really comparable to an individual, private-sphere relationship. Odds are good, in the situation you mention with the two guys in your life, that you were probably letting complicated guy know that you wanted him. (Not that I know you... I just think in the real world, people are not usually so reluctant to say that they're into someone, "all in.") I think that Peter ends up looking like that a bit, and going on Rachel's current interpretation of events, it looks like she wants to feed that impression. But the fact is that she wanted him "all in" and committed, when she herself gave him no reason to be so. And yes, the power dynamic of the show is that the lead gets to choose. A decent person though, empathizes with the person they ultimately have to hurt, and allows them to keep their dignity. Hell, Nick did for her. Why did she insist that Peter needed to propose if she didn't want him? 

Exactly. Your point #3 above is also why I could see why he said he "felt attacked". I believe that his inability to explain why didn't strike me as being because he's inarticulate, but because his answer would also involve mentioning the actions of the production team.

Her doubts are confirmed because what he's saying in all those words, is that he is not confident in what she's shown their relationship to be, in this timeframe, with this set of parameters. He isn't able to approach this relationship, in this setting, as an equal partner. Because the f-ed up nature of the show won't allow it. To me, that doesn't read as wishy-washy, push-pull, distancing, indecisive. It reads as pretty legit. And yes... maybe finding love as one of 30 guys on a show isn't for Peter. But I suspect that it might not be his standard operating procedure, in the real world. People are reading into Peter's actions while he was on a bizarre show that has an incredibly f-ed up set of expectations, and putting their own spin on it, based on their own history in the real world with relationships that lasted longer than 6 weeks, and didn't have cameras and producers all over the place. I feel like a little empathy might be called for.

Not that he was entirely right in his approach, but he wasn't a bad guy for not being able to "get there" in this framework. I also don't think it would be hypocritical of him to become the Bachelor. I hope that he would have more empathy for his runner-up than Rachel has shown for him, and not slag her in interviews after the show ended. His change of tune, after Monday, wishing Rachel the best, says that he'd at least try to keep to the high road after his season was over. (Assuming he's chosen as the next Bachelor. No idea, on that.) 

 

I've been thinking this for a long time. And this season really brought home why. If the Bachelorette has all the power throughout the taping, except for the very last choice, that's just cruel. She shouldn't have to beg for a proposal, and the men shouldn't have to take the leap of giving a proposal when there is another man in the wings, also giving a proposal. She should be able to ask her final 1 if he'll marry her, and let the runner-up leave with his dignity in tact, not having bent the knee only to be rejected.

I would be on board with your take on Peter, but the idea that he is seriously considering being The Bachelor, negates everything you stated. He has ambitions - fine. He wants to be famous - fine. He wasn't into Rachel enough to want to propose to her - fine. What is not fine is lying, deceit, playing victim, throwing out dog whistles when you get called out on your actions and using friends, family and other surrogates to disparage this woman. A woman you know had deep feelings for you.  Rachel's family is not disparaging this man. Her real friends (not television friends) are not disparaging this man. The circumstances and environment do not matter. It's called human decency.

[Stinamaia]

I don't get all this anger about Rachel.  I'm naive I guess.  

i can't understand why anyone regardless of a connection with Peter would want to say ugly things about her on twitter.   I hope Rachel's connections aren't doing the same with Peter. That sort of thing reflects badly only on the people doing it, imo.  

'The only "winner" from all of that is the show's producers.  It probably promotes more interest in the next season.  From a purely cynical viewpoint, it's interesting how the show uses people and how those who appear on the show attempt to use the appearance for their own benefit.  I think the show comes out ahead generally speaking. Those who appear on it fade away for the most part.  I could have the wrong idea because I don't follow any of them on twitter/instagram/whatever.  

[Bean421]

1 hour ago, truthaboutluv said:

 

So Rachel, you're a bitter loser and still wrong because you allowed yourself to be played by this guy who never wanted you and was only there to be the next lead. Now shut up and don't you dare try and ruin his goal to be the next Bachelor. Okay. 

Meanwhile, some of Peter's friends who Rachel met on the HTD have taken to dragging her on social media. The one black guy basically accuses her of sending Will home because she was only looking for a man to grope her, they're mocking her weave and her edges. One of the white girlfriends are in on the action of how much Rachel attacked Peter on the AFTR and she's so bitter and salty but claims to be living her best life. Oh and Peter's dad is retweeing some T-Shirt company thing that's calling Bryan a rebound or some such thing. 

I don't know if it's because social media wasn't as bad back then - we did have Twitter and Facebook but it's certainly increased exponentially in the last few years - but I have never seen something like this from this franchise. I thought the Arie love was intense but this makes the Arie stanning seem like amateurs. I'm done.  I think it's very telling how easily some can get wrapped in a passably looking guy to where nothing and everything he does is okay and everyone else are the bad guys and monsters. 

I really and truly do want Peter to be the next Bachelor. Because I will be fascinated to watch that fall from that very, very high pedestal. 

Is Bryan's mom on social media? I can't imagine she's thrilled with the dragging her baby boy is receiving. If we're lucky she'll be like Josh's mom and I can pop some popcorn. 

[CalamityBoPeep]

4 minutes ago, SnapeCharmer said:

I would be on board with your take on Peter, but the idea that he is seriously considering being The Bachelor, negates everything you stated. He has ambitions - fine. He wants to be famous - fine. He wasn't into Rachel enough to want to propose to her - fine. What is not fine is lying, deceit, playing victim, throwing out dog whistles when you get called out on your actions and using friends, family and other surrogates to disparage this woman. A woman you know had deep feelings for you.  Rachel's family is not disparaging this man. Her real friends (not television friends) are not disparaging this man. The circumstances and environment do not matter. It's called human decency.

I assume that Peter's friends and family are making their own choices. I don't assume he's "using them" to disparage her. For instance, if my family saw me being disparaged and misinterpreted by an ex in public, they'd probably jump to my defense whether I wanted them to or not. Peter can quietly ask them not to do it, I suppose, but they make their own choices about what they can stand to see without saying something.
 

Rachel actually did say things, directly about him, herself, maligning his character and attempting to sandbag him, if he is inclined to become the Bachelor. Her family and friends don't feel any need to do it, I'd guess. She's doing it. Herself. Probably because she didn't like the edit that production gave the whole mess.

I don't hold him accountable for what others say. I hold both of them accountable for their own words and actions.

As for his "likes" on social media (not your point here, I know... just saw it mentioned earlier), it seems to me that generally speaking people use the "Like" choice as a way of saying "yep, saw this, thanks." I don't read into a "like" that Peter is shading Rachel and Bryan through social media either. I acknowledge that he's stated things about Bryan, on the show, and he made his crack about a mediocre life, which he apologized for. But I don't hold anyone's social media "likes" against them, because to me, "like" just doesn't provide enough information. And I'd be horrified if someone  used my "like" history as a window into my soul and intentions.

[wonald]

8 minutes ago, Stinamaia said:

I don't get all this anger about Rachel.  I'm naive I guess.  

i can't understand why anyone regardless of a connection with Peter would want to say ugly things about her on twitter.   I hope Rachel's connections aren't doing the same with Peter. That sort of thing reflects badly only on the people doing it, imo.  

 

From what I understand, they are too. But nobody brought it up here because the complainers about SM prefer to complain about the Peter fandom ad nauseum.

[SnapeCharmer]

1 hour ago, truthaboutluv said:

 

So Rachel, you're a bitter loser and still wrong because you allowed yourself to be played by this guy who never wanted you and was only there to be the next lead. Now shut up and don't you dare try and ruin his goal to be the next Bachelor. Okay. 

Meanwhile, some of Peter's friends who Rachel met on the HTD have taken to dragging her on social media. The one black guy basically accuses her of sending Will home because she was only looking for a man to grope her, they're mocking her weave and her edges. One of the white girlfriends are in on the action of how much Rachel attacked Peter on the AFTR and she's so bitter and salty but claims to be living her best life. Oh and Peter's dad is retweeing some T-Shirt company thing that's calling Bryan a rebound or some such thing. 

I don't know if it's because social media wasn't as bad back then - we did have Twitter and Facebook but it's certainly increased exponentially in the last few years - but I have never seen something like this from this franchise. I thought the Arie love was intense but this makes the Arie stanning seem like amateurs. I'm done.  I think it's very telling how easily some can get wrapped in a passably looking guy to where nothing and everything he does is okay and everyone else are the bad guys and monsters. 

I really and truly do want Peter to be the next Bachelor. Because I will be fascinated to watch that fall from that very, very high pedestal. 

And let's just call it what it is.

The negative perception of the most minute actions by Rachel might be contributed to racial stereotypes and some individuals' comfort with viewing others through those kinds of lenses. How many times has she been called sassy? How many times has the term "attacked" been used to describe her conversation with Peter. How many times has desperate been used in regard to the Proposal argument? Angry? Hostile? 

What played out on the show:  Rachel's casting is a product of ABC and the show's producers creating a narrative that clears them of former charges of racial bias in the franchise. But by casting men like Peter, that helps them set up and continue their usual formula in the upcoming season.  The other person that commented made a good point. There is a tremendous amount of Network and producer meddling in this situation. I think from the start the story line was set up and they knew they wanted Peter as the next lead. they ensured this in multiple ways: By casting people like Lee, Will, DeMario and quite of few others that also had no interest in her, and would only prove to devalue her and paint her as having poor judgement. By maintaining a makeup artist and hair stylist that are highly unskilled in working with Black women's skin and hair to feed into the stereotype of undesirability. I'm just keeping it real here.. I also think they accomplished their goals by helping Peter along throughout the season. Feeding him info to help win Rachel over. They do extensive interviews when casting. Including psychological evaluations. They know these individuals buttons through and through. Know how to manipulate situations to achieve a certain result.

But some things cannot be concealed. Many of us could see in the footage that aired, that Peter's body language and the delivery of his words screamed, not interested. He was not falling for her. That it was an act. But she was in the thick of it and just could not see for herself. She's not the audience at home or the puppet-master. She's in the middle of it, probably being pulled in a million directions.

I think now, that she can look back at the footage, compare it to what we didn't see and get a fuller picture of what happened and I think she feels humiliated and foolish. To the person that said, she should be careful because the Network is not on her side - I wholeheartedly agree. They are not on her side. I think her demeanor is an internal cauldron boiling over. She is kind of trapped between maintaining her dignity, and keeping smooth relations with the network, contractually and so she doesn't burn bridges (for future financial and career opportunities). Otherwise, I have no doubt dirty laundry would be aired. 

Edited August 11, 2017 by SnapeCharmer

[Chick2Chic]

Rachel is shading Peter in her interviews. I have zero issues with his friends having his back and clapping back at her. And the comments I have seen from them have basically been that she should stop talking shit about Peter and move on with her life with Bryan. That isn't too much to ask of her. 

Bryan calls Rachel his clapback queen, something she seems to appreciate as she likes to have the last word. That's fine but not everyone is going to lie down and take it when you come for them or for ones they love. If someone was trying to run my character down in interviews, I would hope my friends would have my back. They're not wrong for disliking Rachel's negativity towards Peter in national interviews and speaking out on it on their own social media accounts. Or is it ok for Rachel to trash Peter and be above reproach for her comments about him? She is free to speak her opinions just like Peter's friends are free to their opinions about what she is saying. She is pushing and they are pushing back. Back and forth.

I just wish Rachel would ignore random SM haters like Jojo/Jordan did and actually live her best life by focusing on her love for Bryan instead of her hate for Peter. Rachel should have no need to publicly hate on someone she said she didn't really want in the past if she has the perfect man in her life NOW. She should concentrate on that and stress her current relationship in her interviews and Instagram ads. Some folks are seeing her as petty because she seems too focused on the past - which is why there are accusations of her doing revisionist history about what ppl saw on their TVs vs what she says is the truth -  and not the present or her future. 

[truthaboutluv]

Just now, wonald said:

From what I understand, they are too. But nobody brought it up here because the complainers about SM prefer to complain about the Peter fandom ad nauseum.

Actually, no I haven't heard about Rachel's connections going at Peter. If so, by all means, I stand corrected. In fact, I've seen some comments about how quiet her family is being in general about all of this. Her sister, who is probably the most active on social media from the family hasn't even made a post about her and Bryan's engagement and some are choosing to see it as the family is equally unhappy with her choice. But like I said, I'm done. The show was Monday, it's Friday and the conversations are all just circular at this point. 

Some will move on to the trashiness of BIP, they'll announce Peter as the next Bachelor at the end of BIP and come January, it'll come full circle again with high expectations from some and declarations that it will be the best season ever. And somewhere between maybe the fourth or fifth episode, the criticisms and shade against him will start. And god forbid for his sake he doesn't choose the fan favorite. 

Edited August 11, 2017 by truthaboutluv

[saber5055]

Don't these people talk about real life during the FS overnights? When cameras are off? I'd think Rachel and Peter could have hashed out their relationship overnight, that Peter wasn't the one, and Bryan would have been told he was F1. I mean, they have maybe 12 hours alone, so why wouldn't what is suppose to/not suppose to happen on Proposal Day be discussed? Of course, that would STINK for ratings, so I guess I answered my own question. This season, the screwy ATFR show and the resulting controversy is a Fleiss Goldmine. HE is the winner of this season.

[Stinamaia]

1 minute ago, CalamityBoPeep said:

 

As for his "likes" on social media (not your point here, I know... just saw it mentioned earlier), it seems to me that generally speaking people use the "Like" choice as a way of saying "yep, saw this, thanks." I don't read into a "like" that Peter is shading Rachel and Bryan through social media either. I acknowledge that he's stated things about Bryan, on the show, and he made his crack about a mediocre life, which he apologized for. But I don't hold anyone's social media "likes" against them, because to me, "like" just doesn't provide enough information. And I'd be horrified if someone  used my "like" history as a window into my soul and intentions.

That's a different perspective than I have. As I've said I don't follow any of them much less bother to look up their "likes."  I know if I give a "like" on twitter it is because I agree with it or sympathize with the person.  For instance if someone I follow tweets "my mom died" (as does happen) I click the heart and send a message. I do the same if someone I follow sends me a news story that might interest me.   I don't give "likes" to  random things I disagree with or that disturb me.  I didn't think anyone did.  But, now I can see that it's possible to give a "like" simply because of a mention.

i use Twitter for tennis and politics only.  I only follow one actor and one figure skater. Heck, I barely follow any tennis players.  Politics is bad enough.  I can't imagine "reality" tv bickering.

[wonald]

3 minutes ago, truthaboutluv said:

Actually, no I haven't heard about Rachel's connections going at Peter. If so, by all means, I stand corrected. In fact, I've seen some comments about how quiet her family is being in general about all of this. Her sister, who is probably the most active on social media from the family hasn't even made a post about her and Bryan's engagement and some are choosing to see it as the family is equally unhappy with her choice. But like I said, I'm done. The show was Monday, it's Friday and the conversations are all just circular at this point. 

Some will move on to the trashiness of BIP, they'll announce Peter as the next Bachelor at the end of BIP and come January, it'll come full circle again with high expectations from some and somewhere between maybe the fourth or fifth episode, the criticisms and shade against him will start. And god forbid for his sake he doesn't choose the fan favorite. 

 

It might have been a friend of Bryan then. It was someone close to one of the two.  I don't follow SM so it was a screenshot I saw in a forum. And since I don't actually follow SM so that I can complain about it here, I am pretty sure there were more where that came from.

[Chick2Chic]

5 minutes ago, SnapeCharmer said:

The negative perception of the most minute actions by Rachel might be contributed to racial stereotypes and some individuals' comfort with viewing others through those kinds of lenses. How many times has she been called sassy? How many times has the term "attacked" been used to describe her conversation with Peter. How many times has desperate been used in regard to the Proposal argument? Angry? Hostile? 

As a Black woman, my lense is just fine. And crystal clear. There are likely folks that have some underlying issues with race & racism driving their comments about Rachel but that is certainly not the case for all who are finding some of her post show behavior problematic. 

[CalamityBoPeep]

1 minute ago, Stinamaia said:

That's a different perspective than I have. As I've said I don't follow any of them much less bother to look up their "likes."  I know if I give a "like" on twitter it is because I agree with it or sympathize with the person.  For instance if someone I follow tweets "my mom died" (as does happen) I click the heart and send a message. I do the same if someone I follow sends me a news story that might interest me.   I don't give "likes" to  random things I disagree with or that disturb me.  I didn't think anyone did.  But, now I can see that it's possible to give a "like" simply because of a mention.

i use Twitter for tennis and politics only.  I only follow one actor and one figure skater. Heck, I barely follow any tennis players.  Politics is bad enough.  I can't imagine "reality" tv bickering.

Heh. I just liked your post. This is getting so meta.

But, yeah, the reason I liked it was not that I necessarily agree, but that I see your point of view, appreciate the manner it was presented, and consider it a perfectly valid perception. I've liked things from the opposite political "side" than mine, merely for the fact that they present a cogent discussion without name-calling (a rarity these days). I like "food for thought." I like new things being brought into my circle of awareness. And I always "like" a direct tag, just as an acknowledgement that someone thought of me when they saw whatever it is they're tagging me in.

I don't always explain the like. But I don't really think I should have to. I'm basically an introvert, and am ok with keeping quiet, if so inclined. I see Peter as an introvert too, so maybe that's why I read nothing into his likes. I have no idea if he really is an introvert, since I don't actually know him, but I'm not interested in making a negative judgment of him or anyone else based on my own preferences. I'm also not angry at Rachel for choosing Bryan, nor at Bryan for any of his actions on the show.

I did find Bryan's mother kinda creepy though, for the record. ;-)

[SnapeCharmer]

6 minutes ago, Stinamaia said:

That's a different perspective than I have. As I've said I don't follow any of them much less bother to look up their "likes."  I know if I give a "like" on twitter it is because I agree with it or sympathize with the person.  For instance if someone I follow tweets "my mom died" (as does happen) I click the heart and send a message. I do the same if someone I follow sends me a news story that might interest me.   I don't give "likes" to  random things I disagree with or that disturb me.  I didn't think anyone did.  But, now I can see that it's possible to give a "like" simply because of a mention.

i use Twitter for tennis and politics only.  I only follow one actor and one figure skater. Heck, I barely follow any tennis players.  Politics is bad enough.  I can't imagine "reality" tv bickering.

LOL, yes, My Twitter has tumbleweeds rolling by and Facebook is too frantic.  I've followed some of the comments on the contestants Instagram pages the past couple of weeks due to all the fervor. But it's hard to keep up. I prefer sticking to forum discussions. 

[Stinamaia]

The season is over.  Emotions here inexplicably seem to be running high, mine included.  Bye to all the lovely posters here.  I'm sure I'll see some of you back for BIP and the rest for Peter's season. :D  

Hearts and kisses to all. 

[OnceSane]

Knock it off.  This thread is for discussing the final two episodes of the season ONLY.  Social media posts, INCLUDING Twitter wars, are NOT on topic.  And using a discussion about SM to snark each other is never okay.

[SnapeCharmer]

17 minutes ago, Chick2Chic said:

As a Black woman, my lense is just fine. And crystal clear. There are likely folks that have some underlying issues with race & racism driving their comments about Rachel but that is certainly not the case for all who are finding some of her post show behavior problematic. 

The operative word I used was might. You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. Take care.

[saber5055]

Because I tuned in late, I missed Eric's date. Did Rachel indeed wear flannel footie pajamas in his FS as someone posted several pages back? And then she wore sexy nighties with Bryan and Peter? I "sorta" saw those dates, but was doing other things and not paying a whole lot of attention. I did reply "Yes" to my teevee when Rachel asked her dates if they had ever 1. ridden horses and 2. been on a hot-air balloon flight. I just don't remember which bach got which of those dates. (And Eric's date I missed altogether, so don't know what he got.)

[ekmahon]

Rachel said in her People magazine blog that she had planned to break up with Peter that night, to tell him not to bother to choose a ring etc. If that was her plan, she went about it a really interesting way. I remember Ali telling Chris on her season that her heart was with Roberto and that there was no point in showing up tomorrow for the rose ceremony. If Rachel had truly wanted to break up with Peter, that's all she had to say to him, or just tell him since he's still set on not proposing, don't show up tomorrow. It would have taken 5 minutes. Or she should have let him go in Geneva when he said that he wasn't sure he was going to be ready to propose by the end.  I have no idea why she feels the need to keep throwing shade at the man. She has the ring and the man that she now says was always the one, so move on. 

[dirtypop90]

I don't think production would've let her easily cut peter in a few minutes. I've done some video editing so I could see how badly that scene was chopped up. They likely made them talk for hours, forced several takes, made them discuss certain subjects. Peter was their star this season. He could not get a simple goodbye. No surprise Rachel was such a mess. 

 

In other news, apparently during their FD, brachel rode horses in their undies lol would've preferred to see that lol 

[comosedice]

2 hours ago, Stinamaia said:

I don't get all this anger about Rachel.  I'm naive I guess.  

i can't understand why anyone regardless of a connection with Peter would want to say ugly things about her on twitter.   I hope Rachel's connections aren't doing the same with Peter. That sort of thing reflects badly only on the people doing it, imo.  

'The only "winner" from all of that is the show's producers.  It probably promotes more interest in the next season.  From a purely cynical viewpoint, it's interesting how the show uses people and how those who appear on the show attempt to use the appearance for their own benefit.  I think the show comes out ahead generally speaking. Those who appear on it fade away for the most part.  I could have the wrong idea because I don't follow any of them on twitter/instagram/whatever.  

I agree with you, but it seems Peter is now being blamed for his friends' actions. They no doubt are trying to defend and support him, and going about it badly. If Peter is aware of it, he needs to tell them to cut it out and delete all of the of their offensive posts. Rachel and Bryan fired the first shots, but there should have been no response from Peter's camp. Just let them go around badmouthing him until people get bored.

[fib]

1 hour ago, comosedice said:

I agree with you, but it seems Peter is now being blamed for his friends' actions. They no doubt are trying to defend and support him, and going about it badly. If Peter is aware of it, he needs to tell them to cut it out and delete all of the of their offensive posts. Rachel and Bryan fired the first shots, but there should have been no response from Peter's camp. Just let them go around badmouthing him until people get bored.

I was super impressed at Peter's non response immediately after the show.  Then he showed up GMA and I was glad I didnt publicly praise him for his short lived silence.  I agree his friends should cut it out, unless they are like my friends who are active on black twitter and such: Delightfully snarky with everyone and everything.  Since I dont follow them, I wont judge.  But i wont begruge anyone well-intentioned snarking.  

[Ohwell]

23 hours ago, kingshearte said:

It's one thing to ask someone if they would be willing to accept a proposal if you offered one, because being proposed to means being chosen. But to insist that someone be prepared to propose when they don't even have any kind of assurance that they've been chosen just seems really screwed up to me.

Exactly!

[Palomar]

I don't see what Rachel said that was so disparaging about Peter....certainly not enough for his friends to be keeping this going.  

 To be honest I am surprised this hasn't happened more often since I'll bet a big percentage of the guys that go on The Bachelorette aren't really looking for marriage...just the fame and whatever comes with it.

Edited August 11, 2017 by Palomar

[nlkm9]

5 hours ago, fib said:

Found this tweet from Rachel to be interesting: 

Here's hoping she is recognizing that the show doesnt have her best interest in mind and that fan reaction to her is about her character as portrayd on the show not her actual self.  

OMG. not a person to follow advice. ugh.

2 hours ago, Ohwell said:

Exactly!

it reminds me of andrew firestones season when he insisted Tina Fab show him her feelings for him and then boom she gets dumped that nite. its just not right, and whocan forget merediths "I would be honored if there was ring" she doesnt didnt want it from anyone but Ian lol.

[Dejana]

3 hours ago, ekmahon said:

Rachel said in her People magazine blog that she had planned to break up with Peter that night, to tell him not to bother to choose a ring etc. If that was her plan, she went about it a really interesting way. I remember Ali telling Chris on her season that her heart was with Roberto and that there was no point in showing up tomorrow for the rose ceremony. If Rachel had truly wanted to break up with Peter, that's all she had to say to him, or just tell him since he's still set on not proposing, don't show up tomorrow. It would have taken 5 minutes. Or she should have let him go in Geneva when he said that he wasn't sure he was going to be ready to propose by the end.  I have no idea why she feels the need to keep throwing shade at the man. She has the ring and the man that she now says was always the one, so move on. 

Exactly, as it was, Rachel dropped Peter before the final rose ceremony, so TPTB apparently didn't force her to keep him until then. Even if she was told she had to go to his room and bring up the proposal issue with him that night or else (not sure how that would work, but let's go with it), it really didn't have to turn into this four-hanky weep fest, if she really liked some other guy better anyway. I also remember Ashley looking rather mortified when Ben started to propose to her at the final rose ceremony. Not every Bachelorette was dying to have two proposals to choose from, and I agree with everyone saying it's 2017, the Bachelorette should do the proposing.

 

9 minutes ago, nlkm9 said:

OMG. not a person to follow advice. ugh.

Kaitlyn is still with her F1 despite all the naysayers, but doesn't have the greatest relationship with the franchise no thanks to her own words and actions, so it's kind of a mixed bag...

[ByTor]

10 hours ago, nutty1 said:

I took the mediocre comment as meaning "if it is me you want but won't take the chance, thing have a mediocre life with a guy you want less". I do not think it was a slam on Bryan, I think Peter was just thinking that he was the one she really wanted.

I am not saying it is how she really felt, but that he thought that at that moment.

Of course,just my take on it.

That's how I took it...not that he was bashing anybody but that he was propping himself.

[Kira53]

8 hours ago, ekmahon said:

Rachel said in her People magazine blog that she had planned to break up with Peter that night, to tell him not to bother to choose a ring etc. If that was her plan, she went about it a really interesting way. I remember Ali telling Chris on her season that her heart was with Roberto and that there was no point in showing up tomorrow for the rose ceremony. If Rachel had truly wanted to break up with Peter, that's all she had to say to him, or just tell him since he's still set on not proposing, don't show up tomorrow. It would have taken 5 minutes. Or she should have let him go in Geneva when he said that he wasn't sure he was going to be ready to propose by the end.  I have no idea why she feels the need to keep throwing shade at the man. She has the ring and the man that she now says was always the one, so move on. 

This http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-bachelorette-finale-was-absolutely-infuriating is so revisionist.   If I except this as Rachel's true intentions, then she looks pretty terrible for begging, pleading, and trying to force Peter to propose when she already knew she wouldn't except his proposal. Particularly when his whole argument was that he only wanted to propose once in his life. Is she really that cruel to try to manipulate him into proposing when she knew she wouldn't accept? Would she "waste" his proposal deliberately?  Did Peter sense that?  Or is she changing the narrative to protect her ego?   I don't think Rachel realizes that her instincts are really bad regarding public relations. I think she should just stop talking about Peter and talk more about her wonderful new life that she's looking forward to. 

 I'm still confused about the matching watches and how Peter was supposed to interpret that?  How was he supposed to think that he was Rachel's pick when Brian got the $8000 watch?  And it matched hers.   Maybe she decided on Bryan is a definite when she got him the watch paid for of course by production. But she got one he got one adding to pre-marital assets.

I find myself strangely troubled and confused still about the season. Looking back, Peter's dates were pretty simple and not extravagant.  His fantasy suite was pretty rundown and the wine experience was interesting but also relatively low-key and inexpensive. I think it was OK because Peter likes to share many of the simple things in life.  Bryan's  dates seem more high-end more expensive or exotic. I've been thinking that the producers wanted to make sure that Brian would stick to his wanting  A life with Rachel with the expensive car to drive an expensive watch which is more of his interest or style. Clearly he could see that he could enjoy a celebrity lifestyle with her if he proposed.  Oh, and his fantasy suite was at least decent maybe at least a really nice hotel instead of that horrible hovel that Peter shared with Rachel.

Rachel  probably wasn't interested in the simple life that Peter was talking about sharing with her in their marriage. It's starting to make more sense that she did decide on Brian  earlier but wanted to have two proposals and that's why she was pushing so hard on Peter. At least that's the sense I'm making out of it today. 

 Oh, and Eric was never in the running. Friend zone.  She was really happy to give the brother some good exposure for his business and books. I secretly think it has something to do with his aunt that's a Harvard lawyer because I'm sure Rachel knew all about her.  Aunt has a book and speaks all over the country and I believe she's done a few Ted talks. Rachel's knowledge of high-profile black lawyers would likely have included her. Why not help her nephew? Eric was willing to stay in his lane and enjoy the trip's and Rachel's company which was fun.  In a recent interview Eric revealed that Rachel came to his gym to train with another trainer just before he met her in the after the Rose ceremony in Nick's season.  Was it a coincidence or did you just want to observe him because you had the thumbs up that he was going to be in her season? I know I'm getting like conspiracy ideas.  Auntie could have contacted Rachel.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Kira53
Catching mistakes spelling

[SnapeCharmer]

11 hours ago, Kira53 said:

This http://www.thedailybeast.com/the-bachelorette-finale-was-absolutely-infuriating is so revisionist.   If I except this as Rachel's true intentions, then she looks pretty terrible for begging, pleading, and trying to force Peter to propose when she already knew she wouldn't except his proposal. Particularly when his whole argument was that he only wanted to propose once in his life. Is she really that cruel to try to manipulate him into proposing when she knew she wouldn't accept? Would she "waste" his proposal deliberately?  Did Peter sense that?  Or is she changing the narrative to protect her ego?   I don't think Rachel realizes that her instincts are really bad regarding public relations. I think she should just stop talking about Peter and talk more about her wonderful new life that she's looking forward to. 

 I'm still confused about the matching watches and how Peter was supposed to interpret that?  How was he supposed to think that he was Rachel's pick when Brian got the $8000 watch?  And it matched hers.   Maybe she decided on Bryan is a definite when she got him the watch paid for of course by production. But she got one he got one adding to pre-marital assets.

I find myself strangely troubled and confused still about the season. Looking back, Peter's dates were pretty simple and not extravagant.  His fantasy suite was pretty rundown and the wine experience was interesting but also relatively low-key and inexpensive. I think it was OK because Peter likes to share many of the simple things in life.  Bryan's  dates seem more high-end more expensive or exotic. I've been thinking that the producers wanted to make sure that Brian would stick to his wanting  A life with Rachel with the expensive car to drive an expensive watch which is more of his interest or style. Clearly he could see that he could enjoy a celebrity lifestyle with her if he proposed.  Oh, and his fantasy suite was at least decent maybe at least a really nice hotel instead of that horrible hovel that Peter shared with Rachel.

Rachel  probably wasn't interested in the simple life that Peter was talking about sharing with her in their marriage. It's starting to make more sense that she did decide on Brian  earlier but wanted to have two proposals and that's why she was pushing so hard on Peter. At least that's the sense I'm making out of it today. 

 Oh, and Eric was never in the running. Friend zone.  She was really happy to give the brother some good exposure for his business and books. I secretly think it has something to do with his aunt that's a Harvard lawyer because I'm sure Rachel knew all about her.  Aunt has a book and speaks all over the country and I believe she's done a few Ted talks. Rachel's knowledge of high-profile black lawyers would likely have included her. Why not help her nephew? Eric was willing to stay in his lane and enjoy the trip's and Rachel's company which was fun.  In a recent interview Eric revealed that Rachel came to his gym to train with another trainer just before he met her in the after the Rose ceremony in Nick's season.  Was it a coincidence or did you just want to observe him because you had the thumbs up that he was going to be in her season? I know I'm getting like conspiracy ideas.  Auntie could have contacted Rachel.

It's amazing to me that people feel such an affront to the idea of someone wanting to get married, on a show about finding a mate to marry. Makes no sense to me, but whatever! Everyday I have to wade through some statistic or think piece about how down and out Black women are. How there are so many out of wedlock births, so much romantic dysfunction. How professional Black women are not finding mates to marry. But here we have one on national television, saying look, I've got my education, my career, life experience, and now I'm ready to get married. So that's what she pursues. If someone else comes along and doesn't want those things, why is that her fault?

But that's taking the show literal, at its word; that is believing it's main purpose is to match-make like-minded, marriage minded adults. No. This show is mainly about entertainment, and if love and marriage results, so be it. Since the author of that article cited UnReal (which is ironic, considering), here's a thought:

Production pushed her to keep Peter, because he was their top pick for the next Bachelor. I really don't think anyone else (not even Dean) was a real consideration. The final talk between Peter and Rachel was so producer driven. They trapped them in that suite for four hours! Don't believe me? Ask Sarah Gertrude Shapiro what kind of tactics they use to break these people down and get what they want. But I'm not going to go over it again. I think I laid out a thorough example in my earlier post of what I believed happened. Whether it's true or not, we'll probably never know. At least not anytime soon. 

I cannot wait until this franchise is cancelled so we can start getting the books and documentaries about what went on behind the scenes. For now, I guess all we have to reference is UnReal.

Edited August 12, 2017 by SnapeCharmer

[JenE4]

21 hours ago, saber5055 said:

Because I tuned in late, I missed Eric's date. Did Rachel indeed wear flannel footie pajamas in his FS as someone posted several pages back? And then she wore sexy nighties with Bryan and Peter? I "sorta" saw those dates, but was doing other things and not paying a whole lot of attention. I did reply "Yes" to my teevee when Rachel asked her dates if they had ever 1. ridden horses and 2. been on a hot-air balloon flight. I just don't remember which bach got which of those dates. (And Eric's date I missed altogether, so don't know what he got.)

That was me who posted that. Eric's date was the previous week's episode. But, yep, "the morning after" scenes had Rachel on Eric's date bundled up in a full fleece onesie like they were sleeping in the Arctic Circle, but for both Peter and Bryan she was wearing barely there silk pajamas and robes. Either the weather changed DRASTICALLY in Spain over the course of three nights, or she was sending the men and the viewers at home VERY clear messages that Eric was NOT getting any.

[Ohwell]

12 hours ago, Kira53 said:

 Oh, and Eric was never in the running. Friend zone.  She was really happy to give the brother some good exposure for his business and books. I secretly think it has something to do with his aunt that's a Harvard lawyer because I'm sure Rachel knew all about her.  Aunt has a book and speaks all over the country and I believe she's done a few Ted talks. Rachel's knowledge of high-profile black lawyers would likely have included her. Why not help her nephew? Eric was willing to stay in his lane and enjoy the trip's and Rachel's company which was fun.  In a recent interview Eric revealed that Rachel came to his gym to train with another trainer just before he met her in the after the Rose ceremony in Nick's season.  Was it a coincidence or did you just want to observe him because you had the thumbs up that he was going to be in her season? I know I'm getting like conspiracy ideas.  Auntie could have contacted Rachel.

I didn't know anything about Eric's aunt but I definitely think that he (and Rachel) knew pretty early on that he was not in the running, and he was there to just enjoy the ride.  If not for the obligatory kissing for the show, they struck me as more brother and sister or close friends, than lovers.

[Earlfor1]

I never thought Peter was number one. Bryan was.  Not only did he get the First Impression Rose, he was always called before Peter to receive his Rose.  During the meet and greet, the way she looked at Bryan when he walked away as she said, "mmh, I like trouble " compared to what she said about Peter "He's cute", was very telling.

Bryan had the better one on one dates (rappelling in Norway vs Barkfest in Palm Springs, luxury date with $9000 watches vs sledding in the Swiss Alps, meeting close friends before meeting the parents for Bryan, but not Peter, horse back riding vs grape stomping, hot air balloon ride vs visiting a priest).  There is no evidence that she favored Peter more than Bryan.  Personally, I believe that she was afraid of what she was feeling with Bryan because "he was too good to be true" and Peter was a safer choice earlier in the season. 

Her final conversation with him was not about him not proposing, but why she wasn't good enough for him to take that blind leep of faith.  Her emotions were raw due to her insecurities, not because she loved Peter more.  Yes, part of it was ego, because she wanted Peter to want her more, but she certainly didn't want him more than Bryan.  So I don't buy that she settled on Bryan.

Edited August 12, 2017 by Earlfor1
Prepositions

[rebel2u]

Quote

 

On 8/11/2017 at 0:10 PM, ridethemaverick said:

Re: Peter's friends...all I'll say is that I saw it coming. His friends are extremely TYPICAL and I know you know what I mean.

 

I don't.  What does this mean?

[SnapeCharmer]

Here's a great article that supports some of what a few of us have been saying:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/those-think-rachel-settled-bachelorette-183015451.html

[Ohwell]

Maybe Peter should have given her a "friendship" ring or "promise" ring like they used to do back in the day.  I would have cracked up seeing Rachel's face if he had done that.  

[comosedice]

1 hour ago, SnapeCharmer said:

Here's a great article that supports some of what a few of us have been saying:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/those-think-rachel-settled-bachelorette-183015451.html

That article was just shit. There is no evidence that Rachel's race had anything to do with the public's reaction to how things played out. I assume the writer is neither a scientist nor social scientist so saw nothing wrong with forcing the issue of race to explain the negative response of a large, diverse Bachelorette viewership based on pure conjecture.  I, a woman of color, am ready to move on to more pleasant topics and avoid having to look at Bryan. Rachel has made her choice.

[Earlfor1]

On 8/11/2017 at 9:57 AM, saber5055 said:

Don't these people talk about real life during the FS overnights? When cameras are off? I'd think Rachel and Peter could have hashed out their relationship overnight, that Peter wasn't the one, and Bryan would have been told he was F1. I mean, they have maybe 12 hours alone, so why wouldn't what is suppose to/not suppose to happen on Proposal Day be discussed? Of course, that would STINK for ratings, so I guess I answered my own question. This season, the screwy ATFR show and the resulting controversy is a Fleiss Goldmine. HE is the winner of this season.

Per her interviews, Rachel stated that she told Bryan that she was in love with him during the FS.  She stated that although she told others that she was falling in love or that she loves them, Bryan was the only one to receive the "in love with you".

 If Rachel and Peter's break up scene is any indication,  I believe he told her some of what she wanted to hear so she could keep him during their FS, if she was leaning towards letting Peter go. She seemed very distracted during the earlier part of her FS date with Bryan.  I believed she would have let Peter go instead of Eric if he didn't tell her what she wanted to hear.  I get the feeling that Peter said what ever he said during FS that "messed with (Rachel's) head" is because he didn't want to lose, and he isn't used to losing.

[comosedice]

14 minutes ago, Earlfor1 said:

Per her interviews, Rachel stated that she told Bryan that she was in love with him during the FS.  She stated that although she told others that she was falling in love or that she loves them, Bryan was the only one to receive the "in love with you".

 If Rachel and Peter's break up scene is any indication,  I believe he told her some of what she wanted to hear so she could keep him during their FS, if she was leaning towards letting Peter go. She seemed very distracted during the earlier part of her FS date with Bryan.  I believed she would have let Peter go instead of Eric if he didn't tell her what she wanted to hear.  I get the feeling that Peter said what ever he said during FS that "messed with (Rachel's) head" is because he didn't want to lose, and he isn't used to losing.

How do you mess with someone's head who has already made up her mind? She said she knew from when Bryan met her parents. There is nothing Peter, who she supposedly did not want, should have been able to say that would sway her or mess with her head, nothing.