Bachelorette 14 - Becca Kufrin - Episode 4 - June 18th - *Sleuthing Spoilers*

Imp wrote:

GuardianAngel wrote:

Imp wrote:snipped..

Oof, to be fair, that kind of violence was never implied by any of the images he liked, let's not get too carried away here. It's a bit far fetched to believe he's that kind of a monster.

I'm not sure what you mean by the bold. Why would it be far fetched if he actually liked not one but several.

For me it's not a matter of being fair, IMHO, he liked those pics and the post that accompanied it that specifically got the point across. I can get carried away because we can speculate how we feel.

Thrown AGAINST a wall? Punched? Where oh where did you see anything like that? The picture itself was playful, the implication was mainly political, and the combination of the two makes for a really awful insensitive and ignorant joke. I feel very conflicted to have to even have to defend something like that, but attributing a desire for gross physical violence against children to that one like (none of the other ones implied violence either) is STILL crossing a line and taking it a step too far. I think maintaining a level of fairness is not too much to ask.

I’ve tried not too get too involved in the Garrett stuff, but the picture of the border patrol office swinging a little girl with the caption about throwing her back over the wall in not playful IMO. That is down right nasty, no matter what your political beliefs are IMO.

The same goes for the picture he liked about the children who were murdered while trying to learn in school being actors and that it was all fake. That is not playful. That is nasty IMO. The list can go on here with Garrett.

It’s about human decency for me. I find it disturbing that he liked numerous pictures of this manner and I simply cannot get on board with someone like this. All JMO

ReneeM wrote:I think he's been and will continue to be great to Becca and that's why she doesn't gaf imo about the other stuff. Who cares if your man is a terrible human if he's good to you am I right? She probs better not bring up that feminism sh*t to him though just to be on the safe side . All jmo.

Exactly, that would never ever work for me, ever.

The only "ful" associated to those likes are hateful IMHO and playful is not part of them what so ever. You don't enjoy those types of posts and suddenly you have an epiphany after a few days.

IMO, there is something seriously off about Garrett. He might pour on the charm with Becca but there are reflections of his base character

Ash2214 wrote:
It’s about human decency for me. I find it disturbing that he liked numerous pictures of this manner and I simply cannot get on board with someone like this. All JMO

100%. No one here has argued against this. *edited*

And then can I re-iterate *edited* that the ONLY thing I argued against here was the very literal implication by @LiboLRC  that by liking that picture: "Garrett truly believes that immigrant children should be thrown against walls and be punched". That's not OK.

The second thing I said is that IMHO the picture without the text does not look like an aggressive picture of a man hurting a child, but a man playing with a child, but I guess that's a matter of interpretation, so I don't care.

IMO the likes were ignorant, I think thats obvious. But looking back, it's easy to analyze the deeper meaning of each like, come to our own conclusions on what we think it means, and assign that character trait to Garrett. I highly doubt the guy was like "I support every aspect of this photo, its deeper meaning, and what it means about me as a person."

With someone with ignorant views, labeling them, saying theres no hope for them, is literally not going to change anything. I don't understand the point of it, because IMO if he says he is willing to change and reevaluate his views, then I'm completely here for it. This, along with the fact that everything we've heard about him from people that ACTUALLY know him has been overwhelmingly positive, gives me hope that this tough lesson can turn out positive.

ALL IMO.

Oh, man. The whole "I have black friends" is like the most stereotypical defense that racists use.
Having Black friends doesn't mean that you're not racist. Being able to control yourself and not call a lesbian couple names while you're on TV doesn't mean you are accepting of the LGBTQ community. Being liked by your friends and family doesn't mean squat (think back to all the serial killers and rapists that have news articles written about them "His friends and family are shocked! They thought he was the nicest person ever!"). And, finally, Becca knows Garrett as well as Andi knew Josh or Jilly knew Ed or Byron knew Mary. Which is to say, not at all.

IMO.

Aria wrote:@mbl Yes! https://youtu.be/tvGJfMujorM

Wow he looks so young in that vid.

Aria wrote:Oh, man. The whole "I have black friends" is like the most stereotypical defense that racists use.
Having Black friends doesn't mean that you're not racist. Being able to control yourself and not call a lesbian couple names while you're on TV doesn't mean you are accepting of the LGBTQ community. Being liked by your friends and family doesn't mean squat (think back to all the serial killers and rapists that have news articles written about them "His friends and family are shocked! They thought he was the nicest person ever!"). And, finally, Becca knows Garrett as well as Andi knew Josh or Jilly knew Ed or Byron knew Mary. Which is to say, not at all.

IMO.

The point I was making is I do not see people stereotyped by the skin color they have. I do not believe Garrett does either. The same goes for lifestyle choices. It also does not mean I have to accept as right what I view as wrong- no one does. I do need to respect their right of choice. Garrett and Becca are not strangers so I could not agree with the- "not at all". His family and friends do know him is the point. We are not talking about a serial killer or rapist here. Speculation also is not fact. IMO

I will agree that he is not a serial killer but his character traits to me are not one I agree with. Yes I do not know him personally but his likes on many post are not humorous at all to me they are sick. Plus the fact that he has changed and deleted his IG account many times to me proves he did believe these post that he liked. He also accused his ex that did not sign up for this show as abusive WTH. I just know that I will not follow Becca or him on IG or anything that they are on. Like I said earlier it is Becca’s life not mine so she will have to deal with it. JMO

@Aria Totally agree with your post !

In my experience, folks that have not experienced any form of mariginalization are quick to let things pass as plain ignorance which is ok because we all see things via the lenses of our realities IMHO.

Folks that believe that G is an awesome person can continue to do so but they should also allow folks that don’t see the awesomeness to express how they feel as long as everyone is staying within the forum rules.

I only watched the first episode, G IMO totally came across as not being intelligent with that dumb & dumber shtick he had going on. And then reading here that he blamed the ex wife for the divorce further confirmed my thinking of his IQ level but that’s Becca’s deal and I wish them all the best as I do all couples from this franchise....all jmho.

Sadly (IMO) Garrett's views are shared by millions of Americans, and they have the right to feel that way no matter how repulsive others may find that attitude. What I am curious about is whether the subject of their political/cultural differences in viewpoints came up while the show was filming, whether either one or both minimized the depth/intensity of their convictions, and whether Becca is as passionate about her supposed liberal beliefs as everyone seems to think. How important is politics to her really? Some people just don't care that much, even if they occasionally post stuff, or even attend a rally, while others derive their total value system from it. I wish this would be addressed with the happy couple on ATFR but it probably won't be.

Imp wrote:snipped..

The second thing I said is that IMHO the picture without the text does not look like an aggressive picture of a man hurting a child, but a man playing with a child, but I guess that's a matter of interpretation, so I don't care.

I wouldn't even be discussing the picture if it didn't have text, he liked the picture which included the text. I'm not sure I understand your point.