TV Program to Profile an American Man Seeking FSU Bride

[Admin]

A television production company in Canada has been in contact with me, and seeks to profile an American man seeking an FSU bride.

The plan, at present (subject to change), is the TV crew will come to Denver in a few weeks to interview already-married couples and their families. They wish to feature an American (or Canadian) guy who is seeking a wife from the FSU, and will be interviewing him - possibly here in Denver. They also wish to travel to the FSU - interview the lady - and then also interview them as a couple.

Anyone who may be interested, please contact me via PM.

- Dan

[ecr844]

"Dan,"

     Do we know of what ilk and bias these 'journalists' have and what their background is? Is there any links available to their past 'work'?
Thanks,
ECR844

[Admin]

"Dan,"

     Do we know of what ilk and bias these 'journalists' have and what their background is? Is there any links available to their past 'work'?
Thanks,
ECR844

Yes - they first contacted me some weeks ago. Since then, I have been exchanging emails with them, and they have sent me samples of programs they produced in the past. They have also been monitoring RWD and they may be registering soon - we shall see.

To be sure - the primary 'draw' that brought them here is the public perception that "Mail Order Brides" feature salacious underpinnings and this is exactly the sort of thing which sells programming. What I discovered in the samples they provided is that they take some VERY delicate subjects with a mature theme, and portray it candidly and with a non-sensational 'bent'.

Anyone who would agree to participate will have full benefit of reviewing their past programming, and speaking with their production chief prior to being interviewed.

I should also say that there is the possibility that I have been 'snookered' into believing they will be fair and balanced where others in the past have not. I don't think so - but everyone will need to make that determination for themselves prior to participation. I continue to hope we will find a mass media outlet - and I hope this is it (and have expressed that hope/desire/expectation in no uncertain terms) - which will portray the realities of what we are involved with and the journeys we have taken. As they say - hope springs eternal.

- Dan

[ecr844]

"Dan,"

Thanks for the additional info.

ECR844

[philb]

Maybe Pike would be interested. 

[jb]

As in the case of previous "researchers", I don't trust them.

They never want to interview a well adjusted couple, or a successful RW in the process of making a new home here, they only want to look at those couples which are troubled, or mismatched, so they can sensationalize certain issues to make all of us look like morons.

I'd prefer the "researchers" stay away altogether, we are not a bunch of lab rats to be put under some liberal social worker wannabe's microscope for entertainment value.  This latests one, Jen, has already stated her "feminist" views, therefore we are damned before we open our mouth.  She knows little of the strife and stress we endure to bring our wives and g/fs here and will only report from that bias.  For example, I'm sure my wife would not be an interesting case,,, she, having worked hard to 1st become an adjunct professor, then an accredited professor, then 3 years later achieving Academic Fellow status at the college where she teaches.  This will not sell to the feminist,,, ever.  They want couples like T/G and VWRW with a 40 year age difference, vastly different social and economic backgrounds, little in common,,, and a great likelyhood of failure, etc., this makes sensational copy.  Crap sells...

So far each of them has come aboard and put lots of lipstick on the pig, but the pig isn't any prettier in the end.  Bad business, I say.

[ecr844]

"JB,"


   I would agree and recommend that anyone considering this should read "Jen's" paper at the link posted. It reads like something right out if a NOW newsletter.

ECR844

[Son of Clyde]

Dan,
I know of one situation where it turned into a hatchet job.
I hope these people will show both sides of the story, the positive and negative.

[Son of Clyde]

Please, not Pike. 

[Admin]

As in the case of previous "researchers", I don't trust them.

They never want to interview a well adjusted couple, or a successful RW in the process of making a new home here, they only want to look at those couples which are troubled, or mismatched, so they can sensationalize certain issues to make all of us look like morons.

I'd prefer the "researchers" stay away altogether, we are not a bunch of lab rats to be put under some liberal social worker wannabe's microscope for entertainment value.  This latests one, Jen, has already stated her "feminist" views, therefore we are damned before we open our mouth.  She knows little of the strife and stress we endure to bring our wives and g/fs here and will only report from that bias.  For example, I'm sure my wife would not be an interesting case,,, she, having worked hard to 1st become an adjunct professor, then an accredited professor, then 3 years later achieving Academic Fellow status at the college where she teaches.  This will not sell to the feminist,,, ever.  They want couples with a 40 year age difference, vastly different social and economic backgrounds, little in common,,, and a great likelyhood of failure, etc., this makes sensational copy.  Crap sells...

So far each of them has come aboard and put lots of lipstick on the pig, but the pig isn't any prettier in the end.  Bad business, I say.

Yep - the skepticism we feel toward the media and the most of the academics who have 'researched' this phenomenon is well-earned.

Facing reality though, we need to also recognize that the feminists, the researchers, and the media are NOT going to go away. We can either do our best to explain the realities and hopefully showcase the successes - and if somebody REALLY gets serious - maybe participate in some REAL facts/stats collection - all aimed at balancing the scales and presenting a factual representation, rather than an over-sensationalized one.

- Dan

[Admin]

"JB,"


   I would agree and recommend that anyone considering this should read "Jen's" paper at the link posted. It reads like something right out if a NOW newsletter.

ECR844

Please be careful to not mix-up the two. We have a new member, jen, who is a cultural anthropologist at Georgia State University.

SEPARATELY, I made the announcement of the Canadian TV production.

They are NOT the same thing.

- Dan

[jb]

who is a cultural anthropologist at Georgia State University.

Not sure I understand what that is,,, still sounds like a liberal social worker wannabe.  She will make you look bad if whatever you say goes against the feminist agenda.  So stated by herself,,, she already has a bias.

Ban these people as soon as they show their true colors.  We will sleep better without them.

[Admin]

Not sure I understand what that is,,, still sounds like a liberal social worker wannabe.  She will make you look bad if whatever you say goes against the feminist agenda.  So stated by herself,,, she already has a bias.

Ban these people as soon as they show their true colors.  We will sleep better without them.

Feel free to ASK, rather than assume, what her "feminist agenda" may be.

Like I stated earlier, I am highly skeptical - but at the same time, I am a pragmatist and the pragmatic reality is, we can run from people who want to learn more about us and our journeys - or we can engage them in the hopes they will begin to see that we are only normal people without some of the hype and stigmas so often found in the mass media.

I tend to think if we are going to get a fair shake at all - it will come from academia who has a real interest in sound research.

Anyway - THIS topic is about the TV production. You can raise your questions, civilly, in the topic jen has started in the Introductions forum.

- Dan

[Turkey]

I would argue the exact opposite than what has transpired here on this thread!  What better way to send out the 'right signals' than to have RWD couples 'exposed' for the well adjusted romantic families they are?  I mean if you want to change public perception then get the word out! 

Yes, there are the sex tourists but most of you guys would be great ambassadors. 

[ecr844]

I would argue the exact opposite than what has transpired here on this thread!  What better way to send out the 'right signals' than to have RWD couples 'exposed' for the well adjusted romantic families they are?  I mean if you want to change public perception then get the word out! 

Yes, there are the sex tourists but most of you guys would be great ambassadors. 

The issue with that is thus. One would have no control and or say over what went into the final cut. I think that most would agree with common technology you can 'spin' nearly anything to fit your bias and or preconcieved message and outcome. Even the 'Cleavers' a picture perfect couple can have a great interview and all goes perfect. In the end they decide not to use that footage or they distort the 'picture' to cause a completely different perception. At the end of the day this all would hinge on the individual productions 'journalistic integrity. Even if the individual reporter and crew were onboard whose to say their 'employer' won't feel differently and skew things after?

[Vaughn]

Lemme add one comment here: aside from the final cut etc, I could never
recommend to a serious WM nor RW/UW that they subject such a fragile and
delicate thing as an East-West relationship/engagement to this sort of major
distraction. It smacks of reality show sensationalism - which, IMO, could easily
cloud the better judgment of either party.

Sheeesh! My wife and I, when courting, reveled in anonymity, and valued our
privacy. I fail to see any benefit forthcoming, except to the producers themselves.

[acrzybear]

As a Police Officer I have seen the media misconstrue and sensationalize things to push their agenda or to get higher ratings-So needless to say I don't trust them.

  Not only, that why would I want to put myself through that meatgrinder, when developing an international relationship
 is difficult/stressful enough without the media sticking their nose in it.

[ecr844]

No news in the truth. No truth in the news

[Rvrwind]

I mean if you want to change public perception then get the word out!

I fully agree & after my wife & I being involved in a show that was produced for Russian Television I can say it can be done.
The one we were involved in also included a couple of agencies in Moscow & unfortunately not the best of them. The segments with my wife & I were actually not too bad & portrayed us in a decent light except for a couple of small things.
I have met several people in my day to day life here that saw the program & think it was quite good & always want to shake my hand or chat with me.
The only thing I would say is a must is that you sign a contract & state that the final cut cannot be aired without your written authorization. In other words you get to see it before it goes public & you get the final say as to whether or not it does get aired or should they air it without your approval you will sue their azzes off. Might be hard to get that, but if they have the right agenda & are reporting in a favourable light I should think they would have no problem with that.
JMHO

[I/O]

we can run from people who want to learn more about us and our journeys - or we can engage them

You neither need to run from nor dance with the devil. Dan IMO you should be realistic enough to acknowledge there is a minimal chance that a positive result will come out of an involvement such as this.

Let me put it this way, if you were a freshman here suggesting a program of meeting a lady which involved the same level of risk as you are talking by being involved with some sort of media production, you would be copping the clue bat hell west and crooked, with IMO every justification.

I/O

[MaxxumUSA]

Lemme add one comment here: aside from the final cut etc, I could never
recommend to a serious WM nor RW/UW that they subject such a fragile and
delicate thing as an East-West relationship/engagement to this sort of major
distraction. It smacks of reality show sensationalism - which, IMO, could easily
cloud the better judgment of either party.

vaughn,

I totally agree with your comment here.

My first thought when I read this post was "Damn...  me and Elena would make a great example of a success story.  Only about 8 years age difference, both somewhat successful in our own rights, truly in love, fairly attractive as a couple.  Get along great with little or no arguments."  Plus her interview is coming very soon - Aug 21st.

Then my question to myself was - what GOOD could this do for OUR relationship?

I can only see this as a possibility of hurting our relationship.  For instance they could interview her or me or film us being ourselves and shed that in a bad light.  Not that I say anything bad about Elena behind her back - BUT if taken out of context some of the things anyone says could cause confusion and hurt the other partner.

I see no good that could come out of this for me and my Elena.  Not saying it would necessarily harm us - just stating I don't see how it could help us.

I have had my own hesitations of even posting trip reports and other information here on the web.  AND I AM THE AUTHOR.  Even here when I am authoring my own story for others to view things are taken out of context occasionally.  I remember being extremely upset when one member here took many of my words out of context and try to make me look like a six year old fool.  Imagine if that member was the actual author of my trip report!  I'm sure I would have been made to look like even more of a bafoon.

Yikes.

[Sohkay]

I agree with Vaughn and Maxxum. I would never subject my engagement to this. Almost inevitably, there will be editing and who knows how that will make people look. It could actually be something that could cause a relationship to fail, if the editing was bad enough.

Dan, maybe you think it's good for "clicks for tricks", but I would never participate.

[Admin]

I agree with Vaughn and Maxxum. I would never subject my engagement to this. Almost inevitably, there will be editing and who knows how that will make people look. It could actually be something that could cause a relationship to fail, if the editing was bad enough.

Dan, maybe you think it's good for "clicks for tricks", but I would never participate.

Sohkay,

I think that is the second time you have accused me of promoting something out of a desire for "clicks for tricks." To some extent, it is understandable that my motives might be questioned - but I think I have been completely transparent about my views, and interests, in this project/program.

I am certainly not twisting anyone's arm to participate. I *am* getting the word out - and encouraging people to perform their own 'due diligence.'

Some of the comments here make imminent good sense, and I have echoed those comments already. I also have the benefit of seeing the results of this particular producer's work (as would anyone who entertains the possibility of participation), and seen, first-hand, the professional treatment of difficult subjects. For that reason, I have reduced my skepticism to the point of making the announcement - with all the requisite disclaimers intact.

And just for the record, there has been no increase in "clicks" as a result of this announcement - and none anticipated.

You guys often complain about the lack of positive press in the media. You bitch about being misunderstood - by politicians and society in general. Just how is it you think that; (a) the preconceptions which plague/follow us came into being in the first place, and (b) those preconceptions/stigmas are going to change if GOOD people are not willing to stand up and be heard ??

Do you think we might benefit from a fair and balanced reported accounting of what 'life' is really like in pursuit of an international relationship and marriage ?

Sure... I know... the argument is that we will NEVER get a "fair and balanced" program from mass media. You may be correct. What is certain - ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN - is that the media has not accurately portrayed the men and women who have chosen to become involved in international marriages to date. Would ANYONE deny the veracity of that statement?

If that really *is* certain - then we have little to lose by making an effort to try to improve things. I fully recognize that most people will be disinclined to make the effort. Do I blame them? No, not at all. Each individual must make a choice about what principles they stand for - what risks they will take. Is this a worthwhile risk? For most - probably not. For some - maybe. The door is open. And it has absolutely NOTHING to do with "clicks for tricks" - whatever the hell that means.

- Dan

[Tristan]

Webmaster of www.onlinedatingrights.com here.

Let me say that I, too, do not know how the Canadian film product will turn out, but I don't see it as a negative sign that they want to interview happy couples.   When Lifetime TV broadcast their hate screed against men like us two years ago they hardly portrayed a happy couple; instead the portrayed abuse.

When Vatican Radio broadcast their hate-filled message a few months ago (details on my site - see box on left site of home page if you go down a bit) allowing Layli Miller of Tahirih to state that most of us are "serial rapists", they didn't interview any happy couples (or any couples at all) but just interviewed Layli Miller, her lawyer and Sen. Sam Brownback, one of the bill's sponsors.

So I agree with Dan, if they (the media) do want to interview the real deal, it seems counterproductive to deny them the opportunity.

And regarding Jen let me say this.  Have anyone of you bought the book written by another anthropologist, Nicole Constable entitled Romance on a Global Stage that I posted about elsewhere on this site?  Well, if you have, you will know that her study essentially vindicates our lives.  She interviewed hundreds of men and women, foreign and domestic NGOs, owners of dating companies and feminist groups and she proved scientifically what we already know: that most of us are normal, well-adjusted men who care deeply about our relationships with our foreign wives.

Now that I have discovered her book I will begin to challenge the phony kneejerk feminist "studies" that claim the opposite.  Her book will get mentioned in every place that the kneejerkers mention their fake studies (I already got it mentioned in the "mail order bride" entry in Wikipedia and it only got deleted once by a kneejerk obscurantist, but I put it back.)

Had the men Professor Constable interviewed refused to cooperate with her research as has been suggested by some men here, perhaps her book would never have been written.

I am not saying Jen will write the same book; she will write whatever she sees fit to write.  But I do know that unlike the fake researchers who write downright slanderous material about international relationships WITHOUT GETTING TO KNOW A SINGLE ONE OF US, Jen, like Prof Constable, is sincerely and actively trying to understand us and the women we marry.

Tristan Laurent

[jen]

Hi all,

Somehow I entirely missed this thread until now (and no, I'm not Tristan as was suggested on another thread, I just saw the alert that a new post had been added here 

Well, regarding the skepticism about me, I understand it and I think we have hashed through the issue elsewhere on this board, so I won't reiterate. You are right that there is a lot of negative press out there, so I get it. I also understand the trepidation about being interviewed for a film where you ultimately will not have control over how you will be portrayed. It's a stressful prospect. Obviously, everyone has to decide for themselves whether they think the chance is worth it.  As a researcher myself, I'll say again that I am grateful that some are willing to take that chance, and that I completely understand that not everyone wants to.

j.