LAST EDITED ON 04-06-04 AT 03:43 AM (EST)

First, let me say this. Good job Adam. You went with your instincts, and I can't fault you for that. I for one, am not disappointed in you. Why? Because your human.

Everyone on this board, and including yourself, had this very naive idea that a person, when given a choice between someone who is by relative definitions "attractive" versus someone who is not as "attractive", but by some obscure definition "a more genuine person", the person doing the chosing would pick the latter.

First of all, these two categories are not mutually exclusive. Meaning, an "attractive" person will posses some qualities that are "genuine", and a "geniune" person will have qualities that are "attractive". But I haven't revealed anything that most adults don't already know. I believe this crossover causes a person to chose a mate they find more "attractive" in the hopes that the more "attractive" person will continue to develop qualities he or she considers more "genuine".

Second, social desireability forces us say that we are in favor of substance over appearances. Yet when the moment arrives for US to make a choice between the two, we generally chose appearances. In reality, very rarely are we put in situations where we are confronted with this choice. Relationships normally occur in succession, not simultaneously. And unless the person who is "attractive" happens to be a total jerk, we'll tend to give them the benefit of the doubt, at least for a time. This is a natural occurrence in any relationship. But when juxtaposed with a relationship in which the other person isn't as "attractive", the decision may seem cruel or unbeleiveable.

Finally, as the saying in coaching circles goes, "you can't teach height or speed," neither can you teach passion. It is more realistic to presume that we can help a person we find physically desireable to become a better person on the inside, than we can help a person we find to be a great human being be more physically attractive on the outside. What we see is basically what we're gonna get.

We must be careful not be hypocritcal in our indictment of Adam. His decision making process and ultimately his final choice was not unnatural, in fact just the opposite. It was a decision that, if given the opportunity, the majority of us would've made. Yet nearly unanimously, all of us are pointing our fingers at him and saying, "That's the bad guy!"

$lick

"Why don't you try pointing that high-powered microscope at yourself and tell me what you see, or maybe you're afraid to?" - Clarice Starling

• RE: My Theory Holds!,OfficerDave, 03:42 AM, 04-06-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,Robotext, 05:52 AM, 04-06-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,Suess, 08:59 AM, 04-06-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,Chrissy gal, 02:29 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,Handola, 03:04 PM, 04-06-04
    • RE: My Theory Holds!,socalcandlegal, 03:14 PM, 04-06-04
      • RE: My Theory Holds!,Handola, 03:37 PM, 04-06-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,Oscirus, 03:08 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,Handola, 03:17 PM, 04-06-04
    • RE: My Theory Holds!,Oscirus, 03:22 PM, 04-06-04
      • RE: My Theory Holds!,Handola, 03:44 PM, 04-06-04
    • RE: My Theory Holds!,Big Slick, 00:57 AM, 04-07-04
      • RE: My Theory Holds!,DRONES, 06:55 AM, 04-07-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,sweetpea2, 03:37 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,Suess, 05:30 PM, 04-06-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,IslandFever, 05:42 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,PC452, 06:40 PM, 04-06-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,iMark, 06:09 PM, 04-06-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,hugodrax, 07:13 PM, 04-06-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,Zeus, 06:52 PM, 04-07-04
• RE: My Theory Holds!,joannie, 07:20 PM, 04-07-04
  • RE: My Theory Holds!,Big Slick, 08:50 PM, 04-07-04
    • RE: My Theory Holds!,escapedude, 07:39 PM, 04-08-04

Slick,

Well put and you are 100% correct, but with that said....

Adam sucks...

Perhaps Adam might have picked differently if he got to see the behind-the-scenes interviews with all of the women (especially Samantha & Rachel).

Samantha was definitely too "Sex & the City" for my tastes (and his family's tastes also it would seem).

While I agree with your theory, Adam went on the show for, in his own words, "all the right reasons". The right reason is not to be led into a relationship by lust, but to look at the total relationship and its lasting ability. He was so mezmerized by the fact that he could get a girl that he otherwise could never have dated. Didn't he realize that they never had any real conversations? All they ever did was kiss and dress her dog? While I don't fault him for his decision, I understand that the shallow decision he made did get him the shallow girl.

He said he had wished he had never gone home. He knew what his parents were saying was correct, but he didn't want to hear it. His heart and head said one thing but his body and ego, another. Well, he has his "trophy" girl and her dog. It will be good for his ego, but bad for his bank account.

I think you have the right idea Slick! I think Adam chose the woman who will fit into his current life style.

People are assuming that Adam should want a little house in the suburbs with a white picket fence and a little wife at home with 2.3 children and dinner on the table.

Adam is a day trader who lives in a big city and is part owner in a restaurant/bar. He wants a woman who fits into his lifestyle. He takes big risks on a daily basis and hangs out at his restaurant whenever he wants. Maybe his idea of a serious relationship is having someone who will meet him at the restaurant whenever he calls her and will be ready to be spontaneous and fun.

Someone described Samantha as a "Sex in the City" kind of woman. Maybe that is exactly what a New York City Day Trader wants!!

Lives in the suburbs in a cute little house with her husband and two children and has dinner on the table every night, but understands that not everyone wants the same thing!

I agree that people are being way too harsh about Adam's decision. Rachel may have seemed like the right girl by other people's standards, but if he wasn't feeling the passion, then all she ends up being to him is a good friend. I think Samantha fits more into his NYC lifestyle.

Overall, I don't Adam found anyone on the show that he knew would be "the one" forever. Just because someone goes on a reality dating show doesn't mean that they are going to find the soulmate of their life-what Adam found was someone who would make a good wife and mother but HE WASN'T PASSIONATE about her! Passion is key! Why throw away that gut, primal instinct for stability? Perhaps some would do that, but he didn't want to.

Also, the way things are edited, maybe Samantha got a bad reputation. I think that Rachel was ready to get married ASAP and it's cool that Adam doesn't want that right now and he knows it. As for the two previous AJ girls, well, I don't know about Melena but Larissa was the most shallow human ever to grace my tv set.

Well, as someone who has had both a "passion" relationship and a "partnership" relationship, I feel I am qualified to say that the passion doesn't last (with me, it lasted a year). If there was any spark in the "partnership" then it would have been the right choice.

However, I think why most people are mad is because Adam was portrayed as a "nice guy" who got jilted by Melena, who chose bod over substance - and he turned around and did the same. If he had been portrayed as anything else than a guy who was trying to find the "one", people probably wouldn't have been so upset. If he was out for a good time, he should have said so. He, and NBC, portrayed him as something different so people feel duped. In retrospect, the way he felt up and smooched all those girls makes me believe he probably is a snake after all...

I actually think they should have put a twist before his decision where he has a conversation with the two girls that he's lost all his money and seen how they would react...

Well, I've been in a "passionate partnership" ,you could say, for twelve years now so maybe I've just been out of the dating scene for too long, I don't know.

I see your point about NBC portraying him as someone trying to find "the one". I don't think that was misleading. I think he was trying to find "the one" and in the end, he just didn't find her in Rachel. He didn't really find her in Samantha, either, but because of his feelings for her, it seems he wants to invest some time trying to find out if she could maybe be the one. And, everyone keeps saying that he picked the chick with the hot bod over Rachel-Rachel was hot, too! In my opinion, he had two beautiful girls to choose from. She looked great last night and he knew it. Which solidifies even more that if you aren't feeling it, you shouldn't go there.

My guess is that Adam has not had too many girlfriends in his life and the prospect of someone like Samantha is very intriguing to him. He'll learn eventually.

I don't fault Adam for going with his instincts
The only thing I find messed up is his comments about being smarter Melaena and Larissa when he did the exact same thing.

Congragulations to the apprentice Mr Kwame Jackson

I can't speak for Melaena (sp?) but Adam is smarter than Larissa. Although, she did pick someone who was her intellectual equal, which isn't saying much.

I think we might end up seeing Rachel on the next "Joe"?

Anyone agree?

How's that? Lariisa didn't pick Brian for the same reasons Adam didn't pick Rachel.

Congragulations to the apprentice Mr Kwame Jackson

I do believe that Larissa is just a fool, but the bottom line is that none of these people felt that extra special something that a person should feel for their girlfriend/boyfriend/lifemate/whatever. Larissa didn't pick Brian because she didn't feel the same way about him as he did about her, and that's also true of Adam and Rachel-so, yeah you are right they did the same thing. Larissa's may have been a shallow choice, but she chose someone just as shallow so I can only conclude that she made the appropriate choice for her. I truly don't think that Adam was being shallow, he just fancied Samantha more.

Remember, too, that Adam sent the supermodels home. That says something. He may have chosen who some would say was the hotter of the women, but they were mostly all attractive women anyway. In his case, he didn't pick the "stud" or "supermodel" in the end because he didn't even allow for that. I think that's cool.

I think it would only be fair to have Rachel come back for one last shot at proving the theory wrong or right. In the end, that's all this is....Entertainment Theory. Just like all theories, this show started with a question:

"What if you take a hot woman and have her chose from 18(?) eligible (below) average bachelors. Then, after she has a chance to get to know them, throw in some beefcakes. Will she choose dorks or dirks?"

We all would have guessed dirks, and so far we're right. And Adam "doing unto others" only went to strengthen the affirmation.
Give Rachel her show and let the arguement be settled once and for all. She's going to do the same thing....guaranteed. Anyone who thinks she'd do otherwise needs a heavy dose of realitytv check.

It's not so much a flaw in the individuals, as it is a flaw in the design of the show. There's really not enough time to get to know anyone on any sort of meaningful level. So all things being equal, or relatively so, you have to go with your gut, libido, lust, instinct, whatever. Somebody tell me how long it takes to shoot one of these shows. Then when can begin to put this in some sort of perspective. As far as we know, it could've taken ten days to shoot Average Adam, maybe even seven. That sure isn't very long to get to know someone.

Rachel was every bit as good looking as Sam. Adam couldn't have gone wrong either way in the beauty department. L and M didn't have that same luxury.

DRONES

No Theories held...

Not saying he should've picked Rachel, but doggie lover was a BAD choice! His family even tried to tell him.

He himself said "I'm not here to find a date, I've done the dating thing ~I'm looking for someone I can see a future with"

You could really tell that Rachel was way more into Adam than he was into her... so not picking her was not a bad choice.
Just thought he could have chosen better~ way better/smarter!

I think what happens is we are all looking for "the good guy" and we thought we found that in Adam.....especially when he sent those models home. He seemed to have heart. When he acted like a "normal" person who was given the chance to go out with a woman who otherwise wouldn't have given him a second glance had it not been for fame and money, we were disappointed in his judgement.

I must add, tho', that the way Samantha was portrayed seems unfairly negative so I am trying not to judge too harshly. It could have been the way it was edited. Adam was too nice to be taken in by such a seemingly not very nice person, I have to believe.

On the other hand....maybe he couldn't find anyone he really wanted to be with long term, so his choice was to date the "girl of his dreams" knowing it was short term. In that case....good for you Adam. Everyone should have their fantasy come true.

I think the whole thing is contrived. Each Average Joe show ended the same way, give or take a little Fabio. Why did the shows end like this and edit Sam in such a negative light? Ratings. Controversy creates ratings and keeps us talking about the show. Plus it gives them material for new shows. I just don't buy it.

I didn't watch the show last night, but I've watched every other episode. I don't think she is as shallow as some people draw her out to be, I think she will be great for Adam (I thought all of the girls/participants/Average Janes were great or not the bad/ there was not one person that was alright obnoxious or arrogant, unlike the past two contests). You all see Samantha as nothing more than obessed dog-lover who only likes to shop for clothes. Well, let me say I think there are alot of women in New York, the United States, and the world who really like their dogs or pets and likes to shop for clothes. You (or Adam) don't know any of these girls history or what they are capable, so any choice would be risky no matter if it was Heather Caton, Stephanie Cahn, Jennifer L, or Rachel. Wish all everyone the best of luck!!

Why your theory got blown out or the water:

Rachel is more beautiful than Samantha; don't believe me? Take a poll. Plus, she is more beautiful even without a lot of makeup. With the right makeup, she would be drop dead exotically gorgeous. Next theory?

LAST EDITED ON 04-06-04 AT 07:14 PM (EST)

If you get a retard and give him a loaded gun he will probably follow his instincts and pull the trigger thinking its a toy, with the final result. 1 dead retard and one less bullet in the chamber.

Adam is a Social Retard, unable to choose the right woman.

Rachel was not only attractive but she was Poised, intelligent and nurturing, she was naturally beautiful. Samantha looked like an old hag who spent too much time partying.

Rachel is the kind of woman you want on your side when attending social events, she is also the kind of woman who will be there when you need her. A good woman makes a man stronger.

What do you do after having sex with samantha? Roll her over and have to listen to her yap hour after hour about her dog and shopping trips? Ever see the movie american beauty? That is what he will get.

Well, I hoped Adam would not prove to be a tool, but he did.

But, then, I had hoped NBC would finally demonstrate some class. My disappointment is complete.

Rachel was pure class throughout, and very lucky to have escaped from such a material man. If I were 30 years younger... well...

Adam, your mother must be so proud.

I think Rachel was WAY hotter than Samantha. Rachel was a natural beauty, inside and out. Samantha was more like an artificial beauty. She always had the make-up caked on. But Adam was hot for Samantha. I think because she knew how to give that "look", as Adam said, "The same look she gives her Daddy" when she wants him to buy her jewelry. He liked that she was playful and "fun".

I think we should pair Rachel up with that cute Matt from The Bachelorette.

Here's a fact that no one seems to want to admit...

RACHEL WAS BOOOOOORRRRINNNGG!!

Sure, she was sweet, caring, house-wifey-ish, had good morals (I hate that word, it's so elitist), whatever. But the reality is, she's no fun! In fact, she was kinda corny.

"oh, Adam, we're soulmates. We are meant to be together. I'll be a great wife! I might suck in bed, but you don't care about that. You're mother loves me because I'm a mini-her! Let's be together forever!"

I'm glad he didn't pick her. She needs therapy. Better yet, somebody fix her a stiff drink.....and buy her a table dance!

<<On the other hand....maybe he couldn't find anyone he really wanted to be with long term, so his choice was to date the "girl of his dreams" knowing it was short term. In that case....good for you Adam. Everyone should have their fantasy come true?>>

You hit the nail on the head Suess!

Girls like Rachel are a dime a dozen in NYC..Adam is still relatively young and has a chance to date someone who normally wouldnt give himthe time of day..Im realy losing faith in reality TV..Well especiallythe AJ series..I believe they are all contrived and too edited for ratings..