(11-18-2016, 07:34 AM)izzy Wrote: That pretty much sums it up. The facts are pretty simple. Adalind is a girl who engages in very casual sex, and she is KNOWN to use her sexuality to manipulate people to advance her agenda. Nick knows this. Given, at the time, he had no romantic feelings toward Adalind he would have to be a complete and total idiot not to demand a paternity test of Adalind to prove he was the child’s father. I cannot think of any male I know (and I know some true idiots) who would not challenge any alleged paternity of a woman of Adalind’s persuasion. And any friend would have questioned about it, repeatedly. Friends don’t let friends become cuckolds.
So the first obstacle in Adalind’s story is her promiscuous tendencies, the second is the counting backward exercise. No matter how you view it Nick would have to have been a total fool not to demand a paternity test.
I just watched another television program the other day where the female comes up to the male, only this time with a baby in the carriage, and tells the guy, "Guess what? You're the father". We were watching the guy's reaction, and he believed her.
The first thing out of my husband's mouth was, "get a paternity test".
I can understand teenagers falling for this, they don't have a lot of adult life experiences. But these 30 something men believing what they're told with no question is completely beyond my understanding.
Izzy, you brought up some thoughts about friends and what they wouldn't let other friends do. I was thinking about and wanted to throw out some comments because this is an interesting perspective.
First, Hank. Now this is the man who had absolutely no issue pulling a gun on Juliette when she started to get out of hand. Yet he has nothing to say to Nick about Adalind moving in and playing house in the fome. She tried to murder him. I can't imagine a guy just shrugging that off like it never happened.
Then there's Monroe. He has an opinion about everything, and had no problem continuing to look for a cure when Nick lost his Grimmness, even though Juliette asked him not to. Yet he too has nothing to say and ends up putting together baby furniture.
It goes way beyond hack writing because it make Nick look like a weak person who has even weaker friends.
(11-18-2016, 08:28 AM)degrimm Wrote: i think the whole point of season 5 and ending of season 4 is a desperate move on the part of the writers- to get us believing adalind was actually a good person (despite her bad reputation which we should relate to her mum) and that she wont necessarily/unnecessarily kill someone even if she has the power to do so and vice versa for juliette that for all the good she has in her, she has a potential to be bad, if given a power to get back at anyone-- why so so much more emphasis is kept on her trying to kill a baby and her association in killing their house neigbhors unnecessary and nick' mum.
that's them telling us adalind has a better morality high ground than juliette. but the writers forget that this is a seasonal show and not a one season/one episode show.
i remember when nick tried keep up morality high ground with sean renard for killing a man and sean told him he has been killing people so how is that different.
Same morality high ground he had with juliette in the station where he had a conflict with juliette about attiitude towards killing a baby.
i wont be surprised if juliette would be the one to betray nick again with the stick of life and adalind loyal to nick.
Adalind has both Nick, Renard, baby Kelly and Diana. Monroe has Rosalee, Trubel has a new career and Juliette has zippity doo dah.
My thought is that there's way too much imbalance here and Adalind's going to lose a few things in the next 13 episodes.