# What is the point of the bait and switch?



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

I am trying to wrap my head around those who pull the classic bait and switch to get married.

My understanding of it is to put out sexually in order to get a stable relationship or get married. Once that is done, the sex slows way down or stops altogether.

In some situations I can understand a bait and switch, such as someone looking to gain a financially stable relationship (such as a golddigger) or someone who maybe looking to gain other material items, such as a home, or a father/mother figure for their children from a previous relationship.

But in most cases, those who seem to pull the bait and switch (based on what we read on boards such as TAM) do so solely as a means to get into a relationship/marriage and then drop the sexual activity rapidly after that. Many stories are of people who aren't rich, and the sex died off even before children.

As such, why would these people in those situations even want to pull the bait and switch? What is so special about being in a relationship (which is low/no sex) to them that they are willing to go to such measures to get it? Why do they stay when they have no desire for their partner sexually?


----------



## east2west (Oct 19, 2012)

I think that most single people in their twenties experience intense pressure to settle down and get married. It comes from family as well as friends. For women there is whole biological clock problem. 

But most people in that age group are not very experienced sexually, and are carrying around a lot of nonsense beliefs about sex and marriage. The main one being that a good sex life is not that important to a marriage. Most parents don't teach their kids anything about sex, and go to tremendous lengths to appear as asexual beings in front of their children. So it's not really a surprise that a lot of people enter marriages where the sex is not good, thinking that this is a minor thing that will eventually work itself out.

At the same time, most people also understand that we need to act sexual in order to attract the opposite sex. So they use sex as bait, ignorant of the fact that sex is the most critical component of a healthy marriage. Sex should be something you use to evaluate possible partners not something you do in order to lure someone into a marital commitment for financial or medical reasons. But the notion of splitting up with someone who seems like a good marriage partner just because the sex isn't there seems wrong to a lot of people. 

Do parents ask their kids how the sex is before giving their blessing for marriage? 

No, but they should.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

Guys who have little interest in sex don't want to look wimpy or *****, so they get married. Look at all the gay guys who leave their wives after 15 years and 3 kids and move to the gayborhood.

Most women "settle" for a guy who doesn't really do it for them, but he's the best they can get. Those husbands are already behind the 8 ball and typically can't maintain whatever small sex rank they had in the beginning.

See a movie called "Blue Valentine."


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

Interesting views. I'm just not sure I quite agree.

east2west, I do find it a bit hard to fathom that there is such a large amount of people who know that you need to act sexual to get a partner, yet also think that what gets you a partner won't matter a year or two after marriage. It sounds like saying you know putting gas in your car is a good idea now, but you expect your car to just start running on it's own in a couple of years.

I agree though that there is a societal push to get married and a grim lack of communication on the sexual component of marriage, and its importance not just by parents, but by all of society. Hopefully as it gets to be more mainstream in the media, and we are seeing inroads in that regard, it will grow as a thought more in peoples minds.

Machivelli, I don't know if I can agree that men marry to not look wimpy or *****. I can see them 'playing the field' so to speak to achieve that level of appearance, but men don't face the same stigma that women do for sleeping around. There doesn't seem to be the same trapping of marriage to prove your sexual prowess for men as there is for women. 

I do agree with you on the women aspect, but it once again brings me around to my original question; why get married to someone who doesn't do it for you anyways? Even if the best you can get for marriage is Mr. Mehh, why marry him? What is it these people are gettig? In most cases, people don't marry simply for security or medical or financial reasons anymore.


----------



## Jane_Doe (Aug 9, 2012)

You forgot to factor in a crippling fear of loneliness and self-esteem issues that a lot of people, women 18-30 especially, carry around with them at all times and cause them to believe being with Mr. Meh is infinitely preferable than spending time in their own company.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

It's financially rewarding. It's like playing the lottery without any risk and a guaranteed pay-out.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

unbelievable said:


> It's financially rewarding. It's like playing the lottery without any risk and a guaranteed pay-out.


I would have agreed whole-heartedly on this years ago when women weren't as independent. Nowadays, more and more women have their own careers and in many cases now are making more than there spouses. On the flipside, a lot fewer men state that their wives income is much of a factor in selecting a marital partner. So I think the idea of a financial incentive for marriage is still there, but deminished compared to the past.

Once again though, that goes against what my original post was about, as I ruled out financial reasons from the equation.


----------



## CandieGirl (Apr 27, 2011)

Simply put, the point of the bait and switch is to get what one wants.

When I started dating my H, he was so hot and sexy, I did something I'd never done in my entire life...I slept with him right away. Things were hot for awhile, then they dwindled a bit...then we moved in together...they continued to dwindle slowly...then he proposed...they dwindled some more...you get the idea.

He wanted me, he came after me, he got me...then he decided he didn't have to do the work anymore (sex-wise), and that's when some of our problems started.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

I think most people don't intend to do this when they originally get married.

Keeping sex alive and exciting takes work. You can ride the most thrilling roller coaster in the world everyday, but eventually the excitement fades. 

I think many people don't realize that it takes work to keep it fresh and exciting. Many people just feel that it is natural for the excitement to go away. They don't put any work into it and this leads to not very much sex.

I still want sex. I put in the work, but my wife doesn't. She tells me that I need to talk to her more. I need to listen better. I need to do more around the house. I do those things and then she complains that I don't do ENOUGH of those things. Then when I do more of those things, she accuses me of only doing them because I want sex.

I like to think that my wife didn't PLAN to marry me and then make my life miserable by with holding sex.


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

Just because there was a dramatic switch doesn't mean that what preceded was a bait. A person could be convinced that marriage will magically make everything better and find that it isn't the case leading to immediate behavior change right after the wedding.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

I guess my question would then be SadSam why does your wife not want an exciting sex life? Or even a sex life period (not saying you don't have one, just read on here)?

I get that excitement wanes. It totally does. But does it really wane so much that a wife thinks planning a game of cards on the computer is a better way to spend an hour than being with her husband (or vice versa), or was it just not really there to begin with and she simply worked at making herself be 'in the mood' before and now she doesn't bother?

Because really, if you work at doing anything during dating and then elect to stop working at it after marriage, that's a bait and switch, whether or not it's sex, doing the dishes or taking the dog for a walk. Baiting and switching regarding sex is just much more damaging in all likelihood.


----------



## CandieGirl (Apr 27, 2011)

SadSamIAm said:


> I think most people don't intend to do this when they originally get married.
> 
> Keeping sex alive and exciting takes work. You can ride the most thrilling roller coaster in the world everyday, but eventually the excitement fades.
> 
> ...


You're right. My husband started off with sex because he thinks that's what you're _supposed_ to do in the beginning...then, after an acceptable (in his mind!) amount of time, it stops. He doesn't think couples have all that much sex, especially if they've been together a long time. He thinks its natural progression...he doesn't think it's normal for people to continue having sex like they do when they first hook up.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

VermisciousKnid said:


> Just because there was a dramatic switch doesn't mean that what preceded was a bait. A person could be convinced that marriage will magically make everything better and find that it isn't the case leading to immediate behavior change right after the wedding.


But is that because the spouse changed as well? If you go into marriage and then lower your sexual output because your spouse also stopped doing what he/she did pre-marriage, that's not a bait and switch. That's just losing appeal for your spouse.

If your spouse however continues to be the same person, or even tries harder, yet you simply don't see marriage as some fantastic fantasy, that's a bait and switch. Maybe not an intentional one, but you still used sex as a means to get to your pre-conceived fantasy world.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

I tend to think they start out believing their partner is the right one for them. I think time and life experience with that partner reveal to them their true inner strength and abilities due to the partner helping to bring this out in them.

Once this happens, the marital partner who was interested in lots of sex, realizes this "new" wife or husband that has come out is not the person they married and who brought them pleasure. 

At that point, the attraction slowly dies and so does the sex. New and different men or women are introduced into the wayward's life who were never a possibility before. This due to the change which the BS helped to create in the person they married.

Now, it's just a matter of time till the WS finds the new appropriate partner instead of realizing the one who helped make you the better person you are now, is really the one you ought to have respect, admiration, love, affection and attraction for.

It's a short term memory problem coupled with a lack of understanding the dynamics of how they got to the point where they were attractive to new prospective partners.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> Machivelli, I don't know if I can agree that men marry to not look wimpy or *****. I can see them 'playing the field' so to speak to achieve that level of appearance, but men don't face the same stigma that women do for sleeping around. There doesn't seem to be the same trapping of marriage to prove your sexual prowess for men as there is for women.



I'm guessing you're younger than me (most people are). Marriage isn't, perhaps I should say "wasn't", a way to prove male virility in times gone by, but to prove normalcy. Think of Abe's boyfriend Joshua Speed being forced by his family to marry a woman. The shake out on these guys seems to be about age 40 when they have to let their "real self" out to play publicly. Now that male homosexuality has society's stamp of full approval and encouragement, there should be less of this. Theoretically.

Similarly, prior to 30 years ago, even coxmen were always under pressure to settle down and marry. It was expected that men wished to pass their genes on to another generation and marriage was the accepted institution for that in Western society. This is changing fast, but it still goes on. 



kingsfan said:


> I do agree with you on the women aspect, but it once again brings me around to my original question; why get married to someone who doesn't do it for you anyways? Even if the best you can get for marriage is Mr. Mehh, why marry him? What is it these people are gettig? In most cases, people don't marry simply for security or medical or financial reasons anymore.


Every woman wants a wedding day.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

unbelievable said:


> It's financially rewarding. It's like playing the lottery without any risk and a guaranteed pay-out.


I forgot that. And sometimes it's an outright set up for divorce theft.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

kingsfan said:


> I guess my question would then be SadSam why does your wife not want an exciting sex life? Or even a sex life period (not saying you don't have one, just read on here)?
> 
> I get that excitement wanes. It totally does. But does it really wane so much that a wife thinks planning a game of cards on the computer is a better way to spend an hour than being with her husband (or vice versa), or was it just not really there to begin with and she simply worked at making herself be 'in the mood' before and now she doesn't bother?
> 
> Because really, if you work at doing anything during dating and then elect to stop working at it after marriage, that's a bait and switch, whether or not it's sex, doing the dishes or taking the dog for a walk. Baiting and switching regarding sex is just much more damaging in all likelihood.


I think what you are missing is the work aspect. You keep saying that people work at it in the beginning but quit working on it when they get married

What really happens is that for the first few years, there is very little work required. It just happens!


----------



## that_girl (Jul 6, 2011)

east2west said:


> I think that most single people in their twenties experience intense pressure to settle down and get married. It comes from family as well as friends. For women there is whole biological clock problem.
> 
> But most people in that age group are not very experienced sexually, and are carrying around a lot of nonsense beliefs about sex and marriage. The main one being that a good sex life is not that important to a marriage. Most parents don't teach their kids anything about sex, and go to tremendous lengths to appear as asexual beings in front of their children. So it's not really a surprise that a lot of people enter marriages where the sex is not good, thinking that this is a minor thing that will eventually work itself out.
> 
> ...


Yes. :iagree:


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

Machiavelli said:


> I'm guessing you're younger than me (most people are). Marriage isn't, perhaps I should say "wasn't", a way to prove male virility in times gone by, but to prove normalcy. Think of Abe's boyfriend Joshua Speed being forced by his family to marry a woman. The shake out on these guys seems to be about age 40 when they have to let their "real self" out to play publicly. Now that male homosexuality has society's stamp of full approval and encouragement, there should be less of this. Theoretically.
> 
> Similarly, prior to 30 years ago, even coxmen were always under pressure to settle down and marry. It was expected that men wished to pass their genes on to another generation and marriage was the accepted institution for that in Western society. This is changing fast, but it still goes on.
> 
> ...


Perhaps, though I guess my focus is more on now, not what went on 10-40 years ago. The entire acceptance of gay marriage has been radically transformed between now and then as well. 

Btw, I'm 35. 

Also, I do get the appeal of a wedding day for a woman (my fiancee is planning ours and even though we got engaged in April and the wedding day isn't until July, 2014, she's been going on about it almost daily) but do you really think that having a wedding day is so important that a woman would get married? That seems like a lot of consequences for one special day. I'm sure some do, but I'd believe they'd be in the minority.



SadSamIAm said:


> I think what you are missing is the work aspect. You keep saying that people work at it in the beginning but quit working on it when they get married
> 
> What really happens is that for the first few years, there is very little work required. It just happens!


I do agree that sex is much easier to get aroused for in the beginning. My point is more towards relationships we see on TAM where a couple goes from having sex say 2-3x a week to once every few months after. Does it really seem likely that a simple drop in arousal could account for such a dramatic shift in frequency, or was the LD spouse simply working harder at getting in the mood before marriage and now is no longer trying, along with the lack of that initial excitement?


----------



## VermisciousKnid (Dec 27, 2011)

kingsfan said:


> But is that because the spouse changed as well? If you go into marriage and then lower your sexual output because your spouse also stopped doing what he/she did pre-marriage, that's not a bait and switch. That's just losing appeal for your spouse.
> 
> If your spouse however continues to be the same person, or even tries harder, yet you simply don't see marriage as some fantastic fantasy, that's a bait and switch. Maybe not an intentional one, but you still used sex as a means to get to your pre-conceived fantasy world.


I would think it would be because the spouse didn't change. It sounds silly, but some people expect the marriage itself to improve things and when they stay the same it throws them. It's like when a marriage is bad and they think that having a baby will be the magical "missing ingredient."

Sex could be good before the wedding because the couple is living in the fantasy at that point. The expectations which are so unrealistic still haven't been crushed so the couple is excited and happy and the sex is abundant. The wedding marks the end of the fantasy. The root of the problem is unrealistic expectations.


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> I am trying to wrap my head around those who pull the classic bait and switch to get married.
> 
> My understanding of it is to put out sexually in order to get a stable relationship or get married. Once that is done, the sex slows way down or stops altogether.
> 
> ...


I don't think it's normally a conscious decision. I think as long as they're dating the person realizes there is potential competition out there and works harder to make sure they don't lose out to that competition. Once they're married they feel secure thinking there partner can now only have sex with them so they no longer feel any pressure to step things up. 

It's kind of like the tendancy to study the night before a big exam. When the exam is weeks away it's too easy to get distracted by other activities. Once you feel the pressure of the exam being right around the corner you focus. 

That's why when people here ask the question is lack of sex a reason to end a marriage I wholeheartedly say yes. Both sides in a marriage have to feel like the marriage can fail if they give up working at it. If people feel like the marriage will stand no matter how they behave they're not as motivated to make the effort.


----------



## east2west (Oct 19, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> Interesting views. I'm just not sure I quite agree.
> 
> east2west, I do find it a bit hard to fathom that there is such a large amount of people who know that you need to act sexual to get a partner, yet also think that what gets you a partner won't matter a year or two after marriage. It sounds like saying you know putting gas in your car is a good idea now, but you expect your car to just start running on it's own in a couple of years.


It sounds like you believe people are rational creatures. Haven't you met people who hit the gym like it's their second job when they are single but once married completely let it go? Or people who dress and groom well during their single days and then keep wearing the same beat up clothes for decades after getting married? Or people who are studying for high powered careers that bail on those careers after marriage?

Of course you should expect that you will have to keep doing whatever it was that made you attractive to your spouse in the first place. But people do in fact believe that the car of marriage will fill itself with gas.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

After reading some posts here and doing some thinking on this myself, I wondering about the following being some causes:

-Living in a society which doesn't promote (enough) the value we should place on sex in our lives
-Open dialogue about sex in a relationship, including its importance to everyone and the effects a lack of sex can have. This should be done pre-marriage and fairly early into a relationship
-One spouse not being truthful about their sexual desires (IE: Being less interested in sex than they let on by their actions)
-A false sense that sex is not important in a marriage (thinking that sex should just naturally wane in a marriage over time)
-People not having sex prior to marriage
-People getting married to quickly 
-People 'settling' for someone rather than being alone despite the sex being of poor quality (eventually leading to a decline in sexual frequency)

Naturally this rules out the typical reasons that tend to pop up as well, such as financial security and medical reasons. A bait and switch for financial reasons could be percieved as being deliberate, while a medical reason is just something which is unforeseen. The above listed reasons aren't deliberate but do boil down to a bait and switch, whether intentional or not.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

SadSamIAm said:


> I think what you are missing is the work aspect. You keep saying that people work at it in the beginning but quit working on it when they get married
> 
> What really happens is that* for the first few years,* there is very little work required. *It just happens!*


That's because the missing element is sexual desire. It wanes in women at 4-7 years, until a kiss from "prince charming" or whomever reawakens it. No desire, no sex.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

MaritimeGuy said:


> I don't think it's normally a conscious decision. I think as long as they're dating the person realizes there is potential competition out there and works harder to make sure they don't lose out to that competition. Once they're married they feel secure thinking there partner can now only have sex with them so they no longer feel any pressure to step things up.
> 
> It's kind of like the tendancy to study the night before a big exam. When the exam is weeks away it's too easy to get distracted by other activities. Once you feel the pressure of the exam being right around the corner you focus.
> 
> That's why when people here ask the question is lack of sex a reason to end a marriage I wholeheartedly say yes. Both sides in a marriage have to feel like the marriage can fail if they give up working at it. If people feel like the marriage will stand no matter how they behave they're not as motivated to make the effort.


Interest point. I didn't take that into my thought process. I appreciate your reply.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

east2west said:


> It sounds like you believe people are rational creatures. Haven't you met people who hit the gym like it's their second job when they are single but once married completely let it go? Or people who dress and groom well during their single days and then keep wearing the same beat up clothes for decades after getting married? Or people who are studying for high powered careers that bail on those careers after marriage?
> 
> Of course you should expect that you will have to keep doing whatever it was that made you attractive to your spouse in the first place. But people do in fact believe that the car of marriage will fill itself with gas.


I do agree that some people should be like this. However, as a whole, yes I do believe people are rational creatures. There seems to be a lot more bait and switch cases than one should be able to attribute to the 'irrational' part of the human species.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> Perhaps, though I guess my focus is more on now, not what went on 10-40 years ago. The entire acceptance of gay marriage has been radically transformed between now and then as well.
> 
> Btw, I'm 35.


Yes, but for the normal guys there will still be pressure from family to settle down. BUT, the age of first marriage for males has moved from age 24 to 30 in less than 30 years. Plus, since women give it up so freely these days (and they were pretty free in my day, just not universally so) why would a man who is interested in sex want to marry at all, except to meet family pressure. I would guess this is even more the case with LD men.



kingsfan said:


> Also, I do get the appeal of a wedding day for a woman (my fiancee is planning ours and even though we got engaged in April and the wedding day isn't until July, 2014, she's been going on about it almost daily) but *do you really think that having a wedding day is so important that a woman would get married?*















kingsfan said:


> I do agree that sex is much easier to get aroused for in the beginning. My point is more towards relationships we see on TAM where a couple goes from having sex say 2-3x a week to once every few months after. Does it really seem likely that a simple drop in arousal could account for such a dramatic shift in frequency, or was the LD spouse simply working harder at getting in the mood before marriage and now is no longer trying, along with the lack of that initial excitement?


I don't know about LD men (I'd say it's mostly hormonal with them - we are strongly influenced by Testosterone), but women seem to be programmed to lose attraction for their AMC at 4-7 years. This used to be called the 7 year itch, but it seems to be compressing, according to current research. Have you read MMSL?


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

Not sure I get the point of the picture machiavelli. I do agree a wedding day is important to women, but if you think that as a whole a wedding day alone is what would drive many women to get married then I think you are a bit off. It's like saying a stag party is enough for men to get married. Most people can look past the pure fantasy of one day and see the reality of the marriage beyond it.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

Have you ever noticed that in all the fairy tales, the hard working poor, peasant girl marries the handsome prince (rich guy) and "lives happily ever after"? There's no indication that anything else ever was required of her again after the ceremony. Most have little interest in being a wife but all want to be a bride.


----------



## CanadianGuy (Jun 17, 2012)

Is the bait and switch a preconceived act?


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

CanadianGuy said:


> Is the bait and switch a preconceived act?


I think in some cases it is intentional, but in most no, it is not. That said, I guess it opens the debate on what is and isn't intentional. If, as a hypothetical, you and Mrs. Canada (lucky ******) were married and had sex often before and shortly after marriage, only to see that slowly wean away before you finally one day point it out to her and she said "I hadn't really noticed but now that you mention it, yes, our sex life has really died down. That said, I don't really care either," and walked away, would you say that, due to her lack of effort to try and maintain at least the status quo from before the marriage that she is guilty of a bait and switch?

I would say yes, not so much an intentional bait and switch of sex, but rather an intentional bait and switch of effort towards making sex important in the relationship.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

unbelievable said:


> Have you ever noticed that in all the fairy tales, the hard working poor, peasant girl marries the handsome prince (rich guy) and "lives happily ever after"? There's no indication that anything else ever was required of her again after the ceremony. Most have little interest in being a wife but all want to be a bride.


Have you ever noticed that Cinderella and Snow White aren't banging the prince like a drum before marriage either? Hardly a bait and switch if he's getting after marriage what he was before.


----------



## CanadianGuy (Jun 17, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> I think in some cases it is intentional, but in most no, it is not. That said, I guess it opens the debate on what is and isn't intentional. If, as a hypothetical, you and Mrs. Canada (lucky ******) were married and had sex often before and shortly after marriage, only to see that slowly wean away before you finally one day point it out to her and she said "I hadn't really noticed but now that you mention it, yes, our sex life has really died down. That said, I don't really care either," and walked away, would you say that, due to her lack of effort to try and maintain at least the status quo from before the marriage that she is guilty of a bait and switch?
> 
> I would say yes, not so much an intentional bait and switch of sex, but rather an intentional bait and switch of effort towards making sex important in the relationship.


 In other words Mrs Canada becoming Mrs Antarctica. 

I will agree. It may or may not have been her intention to wean the sex but as far as treating something as important before the marriage only to disregard it later is a bait and switch and in that case both sexes have their issues.

I blame Disney and the Porn industry... ( just kidding ) 

Her- Where is my Prince Charming?

Him - Where is my insatiable *****?


----------



## east2west (Oct 19, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> Have you ever noticed that Cinderella and Snow White aren't banging the prince like a drum before marriage either? Hardly a bait and switch if he's getting after marriage what he was before.


True but his point is an excellent one. "Happily ever after" is about all the education about marriage that most people get until they are actually in one. Marriage is presented as an arrangement where the other person is will love you unconditionally, forever, without any further effort on your part. Who wouldn't want to get married if that was the case?


----------



## StargateFan (Nov 19, 2012)

For many the social status is a powerful incentive to get married. They love to show off that rock. The same applies to men, but to a lesser degree. Being single can be a career killer in the officer corps as well as in many business circles. "The good family man". Unfortunately, being childless is usually blamed on the female. 

Although I have no direct experience with it, many have stated that in the African-American community being a mother brings respect and social status. Before that you are just a "ho". Marriage not required.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

It would seem from recent events that being married can be career suicide for Generals and for high ranking civilian dignitaries. A single General who has a girlfriend (or boyfriend) isn't news or even interesting. The press wouldn't care if he was sleeping with 15 women, a couple of guys, some goats, and a giraffe. Add a wife to the story and careers are flushed down the toilet.


----------



## StargateFan (Nov 19, 2012)

unbelievable said:


> It would seem from recent events that being married can be career suicide for Generals and for high ranking civilian dignitaries. A single General who has a girlfriend (or boyfriend) isn't news or even interesting. The press wouldn't care if he was sleeping with 15 women, a couple of guys, some goats, and a giraffe. Add a wife to the story and careers are flushed down the toilet.


Having a wife was not the issue. Was that sarcasm ? If so, lol otherwise what crackerjack box do you get your news from? Even Fox News seems to understand the real issue here.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> I am trying to wrap my head around those who pull the classic bait and switch to get married.
> 
> My understanding of it is to put out sexually in order to get a stable relationship or get married. Once that is done, the sex slows way down or stops altogether.
> 
> ...



I honestly think a great deal of bait n' switchers aren't doing it consciously, or maliciously. A lot of people get uber comfortable within the confines of marriage, and just relax into oblivion. And because there is a pervasive acceptance in the country that sex naturally dies in a marriage, some people feel like it's perfectly acceptable for the sex to taper off because, well, you're married and that's what happens in marriage.

Everyone puts their best foot forward in dating situations. Unless you were in a super long relationship prior to marriage, you don't fully know how you'll wear the skin of spousehood until you put it on.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

kingsfan said:


> *Not sure I get the point of the picture machiavelli.* I do agree a wedding day is important to women, but if you think that as a whole a wedding day alone is what would drive many women to get married then I think you are a bit off. It's like saying a stag party is enough for men to get married. Most people can look past the pure fantasy of one day and see the reality of the marriage beyond it.


The point is of course women marry for the wedding day. And there are always some who can't look past the fantasy.


----------



## that_girl (Jul 6, 2011)

I have known a ton of women who got married for the wedding day. They were still paying that one day off while they were getting divorced. Blew my mind.

But not all women get married just for a wedding. I did advice one friend NOT to get married and just get a fancy dress and have a party. She didn't listen. Her marriage didn't last either....but we all knew it wouldn't.

I have seen lots of baits and switches on both men and women's sides. People who completely change who they are, even. Some real eye openers for sure.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

The United States is a mass of contradiction.

Ever expanding waist lines, ever stinking standards of beauty.

Lower level interests in marriages, but more money spent on weddings than ever before.


It is incredible how many people put their time, energy, and money into elaborate weddings without thinking much at all about the actual marriage. That's like paying $14.50 for a movie ticket just for the previews, with no thought to the actual film you purchased.


----------



## that_girl (Jul 6, 2011)

I do agree with that. Our wedding was $1,500 bucks total and our cash gifts paid for it 

With the bait and switch, I think many of the people who do this have done so because they felt pressed to get married. Women pretend to be 'ready' to marry....men pretend to be ready...then it just blows up. 

I think it goes beyond being comfortable with someone. I think that somewhere deep inside them, they played a charade because they thought they HAD to get married. Once the wedding was over, they figured nothing could happen because it was now legal and their mate was stuck with them. So let the guts grow and stop the blow jobs.

I don't understand it. I wanted to get married to be married. But I was 33 and ready.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Machiavelli said:


> The point is of course women marry for the wedding day. And there are always some who can't look past the fantasy.


Tend to agree. Such women may not get married just for the wedding day. But, IMO, they certainly believe the wedding day (ceremony and build-up) - with it's focus on the woman and diminishment of the man - represents what should be the overall marriage dynamic. Then, when the reality of married life sets in, so does the trouble.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

DTO said:


> Tend to agree. Such women may not get married just for the wedding day. But, IMO, they certainly believe the wedding day (ceremony and build-up) - *with it's focus on the woman and diminishment of the man - represents what should be the overall marriage dynamic.* Then, when the reality of married life sets in, so does the trouble.


Excellent ****ing insight! So very true.

And it makes me think about my own wedding. It definitely wasn't "her" day. It was fully "our" day. Especially since we got married alone, in a foreign country, with not one wedding guest.


----------



## that_girl (Jul 6, 2011)

Sounds romantic!!

It was "our" day too. Our goal was to be as cheap and nice as possible. I chose the beach, he chose the restaurant for lunch (only about 20 people came  )


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

that_girl said:


> Sounds romantic!!


It was. Don't even get me started TG. It was the best day of my entire life. I could go on, and on, and on...



that_girl said:


> It was "our" day too. Our goal was to be as cheap and nice as possible. I chose the beach, he chose the restaurant for lunch (only about 20 people came  )


One of my wife's best friends got married on the beach. It was a really cool experience.


----------



## that_girl (Jul 6, 2011)

I hate to say it, but most of the "bait and switches" I've seen have been women who marry (wedding was all about them...it's THEIR DAY! OMG!  lol) and they choose a man who ADORES them but they are rather "eh" about the situation, although they do pretend to be all into it. They instantly pop out a child and everything changes. They got what THEY wanted...and the man was just necessary to fit the roll. I truly think that some women and some men marry ANYONE because it fits THEIR agenda. It's about their "timeline" or their "dream". It's not the person they are marrying that they care about....they just need someone to stand there and say "i do".


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

CanadianGuy said:


> Is the bait and switch a preconceived act?


Hmmm,

I'm not sure people get married and intend to specifically hurt someone else. But, some people do get married knowing that they will do as they please and not care about the impact to their spouses. And, between these two, it makes no difference.

I might not set out with the intention of hurting you. But let's say I care so little for your needs that I know I likely can't or simply am not motivated to meet them yet marry you anyways. If I do then I have been so negligent of your needs I might have well have set out to hurt you intentionally.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

east2west said:


> True but his point is an excellent one. "Happily ever after" is about all the education about marriage that most people get until they are actually in one. Marriage is presented as an arrangement where the other person is will love you unconditionally, forever, without any further effort on your part. Who wouldn't want to get married if that was the case?


To a point I agree, however, that could be said about anything in the marriage, from sex to common courtesy. It'd be an across the board bait and switch, not just sexually.



DTO said:


> Tend to agree. Such women may not get married just for the wedding day. But, IMO, they certainly believe the wedding day (ceremony and build-up) - with it's focus on the woman and diminishment of the man - represents what should be the overall marriage dynamic. Then, when the reality of married life sets in, so does the trouble.


I never thought of it like this before. I know the wedding day experience as a whole is more about the woman in general (I'd reason most men just want to get married and don't really need to spend thousands on a big celebration, fancy dress, etc.) but I had never thought of it as a dimishing act. Interesting insight.



that_girl said:


> I hate to say it, but most of the "bait and switches" I've seen have been women who marry (wedding was all about them...it's THEIR DAY! OMG!  lol) and they choose a man who ADORES them but they are rather "eh" about the situation, although they do pretend to be all into it. They instantly pop out a child and everything changes. They got what THEY wanted...and the man was just necessary to fit the roll. I truly think that some women and some men marry ANYONE because it fits THEIR agenda. It's about their "timeline" or their "dream". It's not the person they are marrying that they care about....they just need someone to stand there and say "i do".


This I can see as the true bait and switch overall. Just get a man (or woman) to fulfill the dream, but do so to get what you want. I guess my Op was more geared towards the discussion of spouses who bait and switch on the issue of sex solely (where a spouse will say "we have a fantastic marriage, but the only problem is our sex life), something we've heard countless times on TAm before.


----------

