the thing that pisses me off most about the bold type writers is that they'll introduce some storyline or another, work to get the audience invested, and ultimately pull the rug out from under us and reaffirm our initial expectations
they introduce sutton and richard's relationship, and initially we feel a little wary about the age gap and the power imbalance, the fact that they may want different things out of life. we speculate that, despite the fact that they genuinely care for one other, it will end in tears. then the writers spend multiple seasons developing on their relationship and showing us that richard wholeheartedly adores sutton. we watch them overcome hurdle after hurdle, only for them to be torn apart by something stupid. we know they work well together and communicate, so why attempt to pull a plot twist on the audience by implying that they never once talked about having kids before tying the knot?
same goes for jane and pinstripe: we expect that pinstripe will always be a player, are strung along for an entire season in the hopes that he will change, and eventually our worst suspicions about him are confirmed. this even applies to sutton's relationship with her mom; the writers put in so much effort to try and prove that babs has changed, only to undo all that progress when sutton comes home and her mom is back to her old ways
which begs the question: why get invested if if all that development is for nothing? why engage only to watch all that potential get squandered? it's poor writing, it's cheap and unsatisfactory and treats its audience like idiots. sure, sometimes we have high expectations of people and they end up blowing their shot. it's life, that happens. however when you string your audience along time and time again they will question the quality of your writing, and why you seem so intent on taking axes to mended fences.