"Hitched or Ditched"
by Motte Brown on 07/02/2009 at 8:43 AM
Disclaimer: Boundless had nothing to do with the production of "Hitched or Ditched" on The CW.
"Hitched or Ditched" is a one-hour reality show focusing on couples who are in long-term relationships but have not yet taken that big leap into marriage. Nominated by a friend who believes it's either time for the couple to tie to the knot or break up, each episode features a different couple who accept their friend's proposition to set a wedding date in one week’s time.
Throughout the week leading up to the big day, the couple is put through a series of personalized exercises that test their relationship, all while planning their dream wedding. They may have to confront their problems ranging from mending relationships with future in-laws to dealing with jealousy issues. When the wedding day arrives, the couple will make the final decision - will they tie the knot or call the whole thing off?
This week's episode:
Boston couple Anissa, 22, and Jesse, 31, have been dating for four years and their up-and-down relationship has left them looking for more. When Jesse's brother presents the couple with a surprise invitation to their own wedding, Jesse, a mortgage banker, struggles to convince Anissa's family that his playboy past is behind him, while Anissa, a systems analyst, defends their relationship to a long list of discerning friends and family.
When Jesse gets cold feet the night before the wedding, Anissa questions whether he will ever change his ways. There are five days until the wedding; will they be HITCHED OR DITCHED?
Final Disclaimer: This blog post is not an endorsement of "Hitched or Ditched."
HT: Boundless reader Elisabeth May
1. kaj said the following at 11:00 AM on Jul 2:
1
*sigh* I haven't watched a television show (save for some online) in weeks, just because I get bad reception where I live, and the switch to all-digital hasn't helped (and I refuse to get cable for budgeting reasons).
Having said that, there's enough dramas around me in "real life" I don't need television for a "reality show" or a "soap opera"--I've lived in one (and I do want out).
2. April said the following at 11:32 AM on Jul 2:
2
What is the relevance of posting about this?
3. Amir Larijani said the following at 11:44 AM on Jul 2:
3
Such shows are proof that too many people have way too much time on their hands.
4. brx said the following at 11:54 AM on Jul 2:
4
Relevance is -
Many readers here probably know some friends who need some loving and truthful encouragement to 'hitch or ditch'. Too many people say they want to build a marriage but get stuck/addicted in maintaining a relationship that isn't going there. Maybe your prayers and friendship can help them.
Grace, peace & adventure on The Way
5. Joseph said the following at 12:41 PM on Jul 2:
5
I'm wondering the relevance of this post too. I don't have tons of free time in my day and I'm proud bundless gets some of it but please have a reason for posts??
6. Ashley Harris said the following at 1:17 PM on Jul 2:
6
RE: Relevance
Even people with a secular worldview know that two people shouldn't date for an extended, undefined period of time.
7. Jayme said the following at 1:27 PM on Jul 2:
7
I'm confused too. There wasn't a question to answer in the post. There wasn't an invention to comment on the show. Is this just an FYI that the show exists, but Boundless doesn't endorse it?
8. Jeni said the following at 2:05 PM on Jul 2:
8
I think it's an interesting concept. Hopefully none of my friends feel the need to nominate me for that show!
It's strange to me that a couple would want to work through those sort of issues on tv for everyone to watch. But then, I think it's strange that a single man or woman would want to try and find their spouse while broadcasted on national tv, or that anyone would want to fight the battle of the bulge on national tv.
All right, I'll admit it: I'm not a big fan of reality tv.
9. Katy said the following at 3:40 PM on Jul 2:
9
I see the relevence. Boundless doesn't encourage people to eternally date and a secular tv show that agrees that people should get married or break up after a too long period of dating should be taken notice of because it is not what our culture usually promotes.
10. Jo said the following at 5:15 PM on Jul 2:
10
The secular view on this might change though, where both people have made a decision not to get married. I know a couple who have been together 5 years and live together, they are as committed as it's possible to be without getting married (I mean in attitude as well as practicalities) and also one of the happiest couples I know.
Not saying this to approve morally of their choice, but to acknowledge that it has been a real choice, not one where the woman is 'deluded' or where the guy doesn't want to commit because why buy the cow blah blah blah. I honestly wouldn't be at all surprised if they're together for the rest of their lives. (Bear in mind I know a lot of women who live with boyfriends, and I wouldn't say that about any of them.)
Let the stone throwing begin...
11. Elisabeth said the following at 11:08 PM on Jul 2:
11
I randomly saw it advertised on youtube and watched a few episodes.
1. It promotes people getting married, not living together for life, which is a mixed message from TV culture.
2. You should hear some of the terminology they use on the show such as "deal breaker", "marriage is permanent" sounds really familiar. (mind you some of the show is definitely not family friendly, thank goodness for fast forward)
I don't know that we should be too excited about it due to some of the footage, but it does reveal some of the consequences of the decisions these people made, consequences we hear about all the time on Boundless. I just thought I'd send it in to see what other people would say about it....personally, it was eye opening.
12. Samantha said the following at 3:13 AM on Jul 4:
12
I normally don't watch reality shows, but I might give this one a try! There are a lot of reality shows the celebrate sin, thus far 'Hitched or Ditched' does not appear to be in that group.I guess we'll see what happens when there viewership increases...
P.S.Ted, or whomever is in charge of the blog, what's the deal with,'You might also like'?
13. Emily said the following at 11:36 AM on Jul 4:
13
In my opinion, I can't see myself being happy dating the same man for an excess of years and then seeing the relationship flatline into the same old pattern without progression or to just drop off the face of the earth. If somebody is going to want to spend time with me of that extent, he should respect my time by seeing a relationship as a progressive process and not a process of wasting five years and then having to start from scratch again.
I haven't seen the show, but I really think that it must be hard to get married, let alone maintain a long term relationship. In our culture, people date in isolation and then when they include their community and eventually start geting comfortable and being themselves, that is when some of the most wonderful or traumatic turning points occur. I have not dated somebody for a very long time, but I have dated enough to understand those dynamics.
That is why I have made a pact with God to be truly myself without hiding behind a proverbial fig leaf. Sure, there is certain risk behind that because I may "weed out" more prospects and wait a little longer, but it would be more gratifying to be authentic and for someone to want to be with me because I am Emily, and not because I am trying to be the image of what I think somebody wants.
14. BDB said the following at 7:40 PM on Jul 4:
14
It is relevant because it's a secular attempt to force people to choose whether they are going to fish or cut bait..
(For those of you who don't fish, if you are using real fish as bait, you might start the day by cutting bait fish into small pieces that can easily be put on a hook. At some point, you need to stop cutting bait and start actually fishing.)
15. BDB said the following at 11:49 PM on Jul 4:
15
To Jo (#10)'s point, there was once such a thing as Common Law Marriage, which is still valid in some states and recognized as valid by the U.S. Supreme Court and the IRS for tax purposes.
There's even a ceremony in the Book of Common Prayer for marrying someone in the church after they are already married before the law. (Same section of the book as vows...)
Personally, I kind of wish it was still valid for legal purposes. It might get society away from the idea that marriage is about wedding planning, per the OP.
16. brx said the following at 4:45 PM on Jul 5:
16
Re: BDB [#14],
Thanks for the insight on the "fish or cut bait" reference. I had always thought it refered to 'reel in a catch, or cut your losses and try elsewhere'.
Grace, peace & adventure!
17. BDB said the following at 8:18 PM on Jul 5:
17
brx (#16) wrote:
>>I had always thought it refered to 'reel in a catch, or cut your losses and try elsewhere'. <<
Well, that could work, too. Cutting off the bait...the only time I've done that was after catching a bullhead. They're yucky.
18. Sara said the following at 2:40 PM on Jul 6:
18
I watched part of this show, and although I do believe couple couples need a kick in the pants about whether or not to marry, I still think it is awful.
My reasons? First of all, pressuring a couple into deciding on one week is not a way to go about it. As far as I could see, they weren't receiving premarital counseling, just some help planning a wedding.
Secondly, it is very "wedding is about material goods" in a lot of ways. There was even one man who said, "A wedding isn't complete without a diamond ring". If anyone needs a ring to make their wedding complete, diamond or not, they aren't ready to be married.