Aug24
Who Pays For The First Date?
<< Previous Pages: 1 2
WHAT PEOPLE SAY:
HER: He should WANT to pay for me.
Yes, and, generally, that is the case. Being generous, especially to someone you care about, is an incredible feeling - right up there, I’m told, with having everything paid for by someone else. The one time I forgot my wallet on a date, she gracefully picked up the check and told me not to worry. This was both extremely classy, and extremely appreciated.
HIM: She EXPECTS me to pay for everything.
Yes, and that’s the precedent that was established way before you were born. Don’t fight it, just do it with a smile, ’cause if you don’t, you ain’t getting another date.
HER: He SHOULD pay, especially at the beginning.
This logic is a little dicier. Why should a man pay? Because it’s chivalrous? Consider that chivalry started at a time when men worked and women didn’t. Women, literally, could NOT pay. Thus, men picking up the check sprung out of necessity, not out of kindness. It has since been codified into a gentleman’s code, which is considered in very poor taste to question. I’m not questioning, but see how angry you are that I’m even bringing it up?
HIM: But SHE asked me out.
So what? If etiquette says that you pay for the first date, and she expects you to pay for the first date, and you can afford to pay for the first date, then pay for the damn first date.
HER: It doesn’t matter what he makes. A gentleman always pays. It indicates how he feels about me.
If a guy makes a ton of money, I can assure you, it’s his absolute joy and pleasure to spring for every last drink and spa treatment. But there’s a big difference between being cheap and being poor. Cheap means the guy asks the woman to pay for the fish when he ordered the less expensive chicken. Poor means that the guy has trouble making rent if he has to pay for five dates in a month. Put yourself in his position: it’s hard to blame him for wanting to alternate checks.
My solution is, not surprisingly, an equivocation. Let’s all try to understand one another.
Guys, be as generous as possible, not only because she expects you to, but because it’s genuinely rewarding to "be the guy" and make life easier on her.
Women, be sympathetic to the grad student or schoolteacher that doesn’t have the means to be as chivalrous as he’d like. You may not be our sugar mamas, but please don’t take it for granted that we’re your ATM’s, okay?
Postscript: A version of this article was written five years ago. Since that time, I find myself in a much greater position to be generous. I remain sympathetic to men who can’t blindly pick up every single check.
My slightly revised position for who pays on a first date is this:
He grabs the check immediately.
She does the "fake reach".
He waves her off and insists on paying.
She thanks him for his generosity.
End of scene.
Presuming the man can safely afford it, this script should play out on every date during the courting phase.
HOWEVER:
You, as a man, can’t get mad if she doesn’t make the offer to split. If you offer to take her out, expect to pay for the whole thing, and be pleasantly surprised if you don’t have to.
You, as a woman, can’t get mad if he accepts your reach. If you offer to split, and he lets you split (or even pick up) the check, he has done absolutely nothing wrong. It’s not a game or a test, unless you treat it like one.
One final, overriding note for men: It doesn’t matter if it’s coffee or dinner, whether you make more or she makes more, whether you asked her out or she asked you out. You can never go wrong by paying.
Pages: 1 2 << previous
Filed Under Dating Tips & Advice, Online Dating Tips & Advice
Read More...
- Best of Evan Marc Katz’s Advice From a Single Dating Expert
- Don’t Call Me Sugar
- Should Men Buy Flowers or Gifts for Women on First Dates?
- Should I Disclose the Number of Sexual Partners I’ve Had In the Past?
- Do You Know What a Man Expects out of a First Date?
smartcookie Aug 24th 2007 at 09:15 am 1
Evan,
When does the courting phase end? After 3 months???? Once you have the “we’re exclusive” talk?
I really enjoy reading your blog and am about to purchase your book.
Thanks, Jen
Sarah Aug 24th 2007 at 09:37 am 2
I’m 28, I have a good job, and I am completely willing and happy to pay my own way or take turns paying. In fact, I’m insulted if a guy never allows me to pay. It’s 2007! I want to be an equal in a relationship and if a guy feels a girl should never pay, I wonder what else he thinks I shouldn’t do. He can feel free to lift the heavy things though; I’m 5′1″ and just over 110 pounds so muscles aren’t my strength!
Ramon Thomas Aug 24th 2007 at 10:04 am 3
I disagree here. Men should not be expected to pay. If we all believe in feminism than we’re equal and that means splitting any bill. Yes it does not seem to do much for attraction but there are ways around it. I really suggest doing things that doesn’t require any money. And avoiding dinner dates at the beginning. They become like interviews. I wrote about it here and also in detail here. Again if money is not supposed to matter and love/chemistry/attraction is all important why stick to an age old tradition if we’re supposedly living in a modern/free/equal world.
ABF Aug 24th 2007 at 10:40 am 4
As a woman, I am frequently confused about this “tradition.” I don’t want some guy thinking I’m a mooch or a golddigger but I also want to know if this guy is potentially someone who will be generous and supportive in the future (and I don’t just mean financially but it is the first way a woman can get an inkling about a guy). From my end, the fake reach - comes off as just that - fake. I certainly don’t want come off as insincere. So, I have resolved to be gracious and thank him for his kindness when he pays. As far as when we start to split or when I pick up the tab - it usually takes me only two - four dates before I start to contribute (i.e. he gets dinner, I get the movie tix, He gets tickets to a play, game etc, I get dinner, drinks, snacks at the event) If the relationship goes beyond a few dates and I sense this guy might stick around for more than an easy lay - well, then I’m giving financially as much as he is (to the point each party can pay).
Sorry for the long winded response! : )
Andrea Aug 24th 2007 at 11:55 am 5
I agree with Sarah and ABF. My opinion:
Guy should always offer, especially on the first date, but when a date slaps down cash or a credit card I ask if I can contribute. Most often he won’t take the money, but I have to (and want to) offer. After going out with a guy a couple of times (like ABF’s 2-4 dates) I insist on paying while noting that he got the last dates and if it’s a guy that I’m consistently dating we more or less contribute equally.
Guys get shafted when it comes to dating. It costs them more than women. This doesn’t seem fair. Furthermore, I’m financially independent and personally independent and I want to exercise that independence.
Jaya Aug 24th 2007 at 02:01 pm 6
I think of it this way:
Splitting the tab: tacky
Taking turns: sexy
And as far as first dates go, I like the idea that whomever made the invitation pays for it. But it’s really classy for the invitee to do a small gesture like bringing flowers, paying for parking, etc.
Ramon Thomas Aug 24th 2007 at 09:56 pm 7
Please under what circumstances does a woman ever invite a man out on a 1st date? In my research almost 0% of the time the time and therefore they never, ever feel obligated or inclined to pay or go Dutch.
Lori Aug 25th 2007 at 08:09 am 8
It costs alot of money to date when you are a woman. To prepare, I need to visit the salon (new men do not want to see gray roots), have a manicure or pedicure or both (feet seem to be very interesting these days) and arrange for a sitter. Every first date ends up costing me over $50.00 at least. Follow up dates begin to cost less (hair hasn’t gone gray yet) but if you want to keep seeing the guy, you cannot let up on body maintenance at all. By the time the check comes, it just evens up the financials.
Guys, beauty costs $$$$$, so have some understanding
Jadee Aug 25th 2007 at 08:18 am 9
I only started dating again as a divorcee 3 years ago, and I can count on one hand how many times a man has paid for me. Two of which was just a single glass of wine. I have always had to pay my own way and is very tough being a single mom, because I am also having to pay for a sitter.
Is it some unwritten rule that if you have already been married/divorced that the man doesn’t have to pay? Or does the man think that I am getting child support and should be able to pay for dates? Either way, I am tired of getting screwed around on money.
For a first date, I would love to be “treated” like a lady. But I also love to be creative and cook at home, do a picnic, etc….I will be glad to make up for the “first date costs” with contributing to future dates.
I think I need to do what my friends have told me and leave my wallet at home! I just don’t want to ever be stuck out at dinner and then he doesn’t pay…then what?
Jared Meyer Aug 25th 2007 at 08:35 am 10
Great blog, great responses. Thank you for sharing everyone. I have a few thoughts I’d like to share, which are based purely on my preferences and priorities:
(1) Financial Responsibility. Anyone who forgets their wallet or to bring cash may appear to be financially irresponsible and unprepared. If a date were to attempt to grab the check, I’d ask her about her intentions, and make light of the situation. After all, we’re new friends and open communication would be required. “Whatcha doin?,” I’d ask. I’d then ask her why she was interested in either paying or splitting. Would I pay, though? Yes. Would I like that? If I really like her, I’d even give her an AMEX gift card as well as a “thank you” for taking the time to meet with me. I would be grateful.
(2) Competitive Advantage. I have the feeling that many of us forget about the competitive nature of dating in the 21st century. Unlike in the past, the number of people we can meet and date now is abundant. If I meet a woman I’m wild about and don’t remain competitive by showing generousity with regard to my time, money, and heart, I will lose out on courting her. It’s nothing personal, it’s just the business-like nature of dating. If she has two gentleman callers, both of whom are attractive, funny, and smart, and both of whom share wonderful chemsitry with the woman, guess which one she’ll go for most? The one who values generousity, security, and “investing in the best.” Let’s face it, money is not bad at all. It provides freedom and flexibility. Who doesn’t want that?
(3) Invest in the Best. For many years, I had had a negative attitude towards dating and the investment required. Why do you think that is? Aside from being raised a certain way with regard to money (”it’s hard to make,” “you don’t need to spend it,” “save it just in case,” “is it really necessary?,” etc.), I recently realized that the reason I was against paying for dates was because I was dating women that weren’t right for me. You put me in touch with an awesome woman that I can’t wait to meet and I would GLADLY drop $100 on a date. Present me with a nice woman who’s a time-filling distraction in my attempts to meet a life-long partner, and I will resent both her and the Starbucks at which we meet.
Perceptions, preferences, and priorities. Which are yours and what are you waiting for? Invest in the Best!
Erika Moore Aug 25th 2007 at 11:54 am 11
Okay, okay, nearly everyone has a point here. But why has NO ONE commented on the rude behavior of the “Sugar Mama” shrew? This woman had “forgotten” her wallet (please), OFFERED to pay for a next date (talk about disingenuous), manipulated a low-earning guy into buying theatre tickets, finally offensively making it clear that she had no INTENTION of paying for the next date. Is this really the kind of woman you guys want for a girlfriend (regardless of chemistry)?
While of course it’s nice to be treated like a princess (and boy oh boy, do we appreciate it!), I always thought that there was sort of a sliding scale: If my date is pulling down the big hedge fund bucks, it’s a pretty simple decision for me not to jump on a check (probably forever, if it comes to that, my reciprocity taking the form of nurturing acts like home-cooked dinners). If I’m sitting across from a starving actor, it just seems MEAN to let him pick up much more than coffee.
Anyway, it works for me, it’s what I tell my clients, and I’ve been personally blessed in the great men department.
Judy Aug 25th 2007 at 03:10 pm 12
Just throwing in my 2 cents - there are more ways to pay than with money (okay, get your heads out of the gutter). Because of my age (59) and traditions about dating when I was young, I am very uncomfortable paying for a date. However, I’m one of the most generous people you’ll ever meet. So I invite my guy for dinners and brunches at my house (groceries cost money, too); house parties given by my friends; volunteer social activities where I have given the contribution. All these ‘dates” don’t cost him anything. So, as I see it, we’re both generous to each other - just in different ways.
Giyoret Aug 26th 2007 at 11:25 am 13
I posted this on Jewlicious–funny, this also came up in conversation with friends recently:
Splitting checks? Does not work. If everyone is gainfully employed, it’s just one of those social things that both parties understand. If I split with a guy, I feel like I’m trying to give him the message that I do not want to want to “owe” him anything and that I am buying the option not to be anything to him. C’mon. It’s not a financial transaction; it’s obviously an emotional one. If you approach dating as a good time, then maybe the splitting makes sense, because it’s entertainment. But if someone is looking for an exclusive, committed relationship, to me the money is just a means of investing in that. I’m not talking about wild extravagance here. If we end up getting married, my money and yours gets thrown in together in some fashion anyway, so how much time really is spent with the guy paying?
I think it demonstrates a willingness not to be petty and keep score. An ex of mine, who had an expense acct. and who was making close to $300k while I was a single mom with a spotty freelance income at the time, would sometimes give me the vibe that I should be paying the check. And I did, like an ass. In 9 months he never bought me a present, or flowers; it was obvious that money had many, many strings attached for him. I did a lot of other things for him and was very supportive. I thought, you know, each person contributes what he/she can and that’s good enough. If we had to limit our going out to what I could afford to reciprocate, we wouldn’t go out to places we were going.
I think economic stinginess correlates to emotional stinginess (it was in that case). Paying for dates, being polite and romantic gestures are significant because they are unequivocal messages: that the guy likes you, is interested in making you happy . Even if he thinks it’s a silly social constraint, a guy who is not willing to play the game demonstrates that he doesn’t care about the message he gives.
Who needs that???
Jen Aug 26th 2007 at 11:42 am 14
There are still girls in the world that think drinks are free at bars, spoiled by the fact that there will always be a sucker guy around to pick up the tab.
But that bitch was seriously rude. I would’ve shanked her in the throat.
mrs. vee Aug 26th 2007 at 11:05 pm 15
There really isn’t a right answer to this question of who’s to pay. It obviously varies by people’s tastes/preferences/upbringings. If it’s an issue to either person on the date, then there’s an incompatibility right off the bat. It doesn’t bode well for the stuff that actually matters - like… if you’re gonna be compatible in terms of lifestyle, morals & intellect - if you’re getting hung up on this goofy litmus test so early on in the courtship.
I also can’t help but comment on some of the warped senses of parity I’m seeing exhibited on this topic, even in this thread of comments. Sorry, but one’s trips to the salon for a mani/pedi and Brazilian wax do NOT count as financial contribution to the relationship. First off, it’s an optional step, as I know plenty of women content (or confident enough) in their looks to prepare for a date without professional grooming. And secondly, a lady’s upkeep is a pre-date expense, some thing you should be doing anyway regardless of your dating activity.
Anyway, simply put, if the petty financial stuff isn’t feeling comfortable to both parties, it’s probably not going to work.
belledujour Aug 27th 2007 at 04:08 am 16
i hate cheap men, i hate cheap men with ugly looking even more!
once i was involved with this cheapskate with a man who would buy a bar of chocolate for me (he said) then he halved it!! the same goes for sandwiches, hamburgers etc.. and sometimes he made complain that i never offered to pay (which was of course a hoax)
one day he told me that he got me a gift, guess what? it was one packet of oil blotting papers made from china! he never gave me anything for my bday, christmas, valentine’s day etc.. while i got him an expensive gucci belt for his bday, a whole set of gucci perfume, after shave, soap etc for valentine’s day
people consider me as a very good looking girl with great career, great personality and interesting social life, i thought that it would be a waste of time staying with that cheapskate so finally in the end i ditched him!
well nothing is free in this world, if he would like to go out with me, he should pay and if he’s willing to give me a gift, better give me appropriate ones, becoz those kind of cheap gifts was truly an insult!
trouble Aug 27th 2007 at 07:00 am 17
Just from a female perspective…
I think guys should look for tip-offs about how women deal with the money issue for insights into their personalities….
I think every woman should at least OFFER to pay on the first date. I always do. If the guy takes me up on it, fine, but he’s definitely paying the next time. Or, we can split it and go dutch. If a woman hasn’t offered to pay by the third date, she thinks you’re a meal ticket.
If you are okay with that role, fine. But, I’d personally think long and hard about women who force men into that role of having to pay for everything. I suspect you’ll find they are generally pretty selfish and have feelings of entitlement that are going to be a pain in the ass down the road.
Just my take on it.
BeenThruTheWars Aug 27th 2007 at 08:11 am 18
Evan says he dislikes “The Rules.” But “The Rules” are tradition in dating codified. I’m a strict Rules Girl and credit them with helping me find my amazingly wonderful and sweet second husband, who treats me like gold and gets treated that way in return. (I also credit Evan for personally helping me rewrite my online profile, but that’s off topic.) At the time we were dating, I made six times more than my now-husband makes. However, he paid for almost everything the first 2 1/2 months we were dating, about 12 dates, until he asked me to be exclusive. During that time, I bought him a drink and appetizers once in return for helping me set up a spreadsheet; provided the wine (expensive/good stuff) when we had a nightcap at my house before he went home; and paid for valet parking during a date downtown (big city, valet was $15, it was one component of an expensive evening he planned, and he graciously accepted my offer to pick that up). About four of the dates were what I would call expensive (more than $50 out of his pocket for the evening’s food and entertainment). The rest were a movie and a pizza, or dinner at a little neighborhood Mexican joint and a lovely walk afterwards, or $10 lawn tickets to a concert with a picnic, or him having me over and cooking dinner for me, or taking me to a party to meet his friends, etc. etc. Relatively cheap evenings given the big city we live in, but we still had a blast in a casual setting. In short, he provided what he could comfortably afford, I graciously and gracefully received whatever it was he had to offer and thanked him for it and expressed my appreciation through affection (not sex until after we were exclusive) and the pleasure of my company. I was evaluating: “Do I enjoy and appreciate what he has to offer me as a companion and a potential partner?” and he was evaluating me as, “Is this the kind of woman who I can make happy with what I have to offer, do I like how I feel when I can provide these things for her, is she easy to be with?” etc. etc. He did all the calling, all the asking out, and never expected me to pay; he was the man, I was the woman, and that’s how he was brought up to do things, period. He’s old-fashioned and so am I. He loved pursuing me — he told me with something akin to awe on more than one occasion, “You are the first woman it was ever totally my idea to be with and pursue.” All the other women he’d dated threw themselves at him, asked him out, slept with him on the first or second date, and promptly started hinting about moving in with him — which made him promptly head for the hills. None of them acted like a lady and expected him to properly court her. I did, and he responded happily; it gave us a solid foundation to get to know each other, grow to become friends, fall in love and commit — all in the right order. He never felt uncomfortable paying for dates because he never spent more than he could afford. He always picked me up and brought me home, so he was paying for gas and keeping his car immaculate and spending his time driving, too. As some of the women above commented, I spent plenty of dough as well getting as prettified as possible when he came a-courtin’ (manicures, pedicures, hair done, nice clothes, etc.) After we were exclusive, I cooked him dinner sometimes, offered to pick up a tab once in a while, sprang for play tickets (I have a subscription), etc. But he still drove, courted me, and paid for 80% of everything — and he did so gladly, because he was proud to introduce me as “my lady,” then “my fiancee” (after six months of dating) and now “my wife.” Now that we’re married, yes — I pay for 80% of our living expenses, which is as it should be proportionate to our current incomes — however, whenever we have “date night” on Friday night, he pays for everything, opens the car door for me, helps me on with my wrap, etc. He loves doing it and I love being treated that way. If we go to dinner and a play, I pay for the tickets, he gets dinner… now it’s fully reciprocal. But in the early days of courting me, before we were exclusive — no way. That is what was comfortable for us. It might not be comfortable for everyone. But this “Hey, get with it, it’s 2007, the girl can ask a guy out and pay for everything!” stuff… it never worked for him or me. He’s in his mid-30s, by the way, I’m in my mid-40s, so it’s not like we’re ancient relics. I know casual hookups and girls being aggressive and asking guys out has become normalized behavior for those in their teens and twenties, and well… to each his own. But if you ladies (and gents) out there would like another perspective pick up a copy of “All The Rules” and take a peek next time you’re at a bookstore roaming around with your cappuccino. It’s “how things were done” back in the day when men were gentlemen and women were ladies — and today among gentlefolk, still, in my humble opinion. The Rules are great as a starting point for this very worthwhile debate, if nothing else.
BeenThruTheWars Aug 27th 2007 at 08:19 am 19
P.S. — for you guys out there who really wanna be cool and impress your date? The absolute best response to my attempting to pick up the check on an early date was from a guy I went out with for a few months about 10 years ago (before I knew about The Rules). He smiled at me (check firmly in hand) and said, “Sweetheart, if you can get to the check before I do — it’s all yours.” Now THAT was a classy move. I will remember that moment fondly as long as I live. (This is the same fellow who, on his dating profile, in response to the question “Do you wish to have children?” answered it with “Only if I meet their mother.”)
Jaya Aug 27th 2007 at 08:50 am 20
Jared wrote, “You put me in touch with an awesome woman that I can’t wait to meet and I would GLADLY drop $100 on a date. Present me with a nice woman who’s a time-filling distraction in my attempts to meet a life-long partner, and I will resent both her and the Starbucks at which we meet.”
Great point, and also a reminder how the person doing the inviting has some ability to predict costs by choosing the venue. The first dates when you’re just screening for compatability don’t need to be expensive, long drawn-out affairs.
I was reading this thread with interest because I just started dating again after a 7 year relationship. Last night, I had my first date with a guy I met online.
Here’s how we navigated it: He suggested dinner, and asked me where would be a good in my area. I gave him a choice of 2 places: the more upscale restaurant with the nicer ambiance, but also said “and the tacqueria in town is amazing, too.” I felt like that gave him some control over the budget (though I still didn’t know how the bill-splitting thing would go.) When the check arrived, he said, “I’d like to buy you dinner… I want to. It feels like you’re the kind of woman who appreciates that.” Totally. Besides Jared’s point about wanting to feel that the date was a worthwhile investment, I think women need to show guys who pay some appreciation. Acknowledge them for being gallant gentlemen, and they generally love to act that way.
sheseizereason Aug 27th 2007 at 10:16 am 21
Was belledujour for real? If so, the lady’s a liability for the rest of us gals (and fellas please know she’s just ONE type of female on the dating scene, and a vaguely racist and illiterate one at that). I don’t understand why ‘belle’ even stayed in the relationship long enough to last thru 2 holidays and invest in a Gucci belt if the guy was so repulsively “Chinky” to her.
I’m the first to admit that finances are a genuine measure of longterm compatibility. A well-earning woman (or man) has the right to limit her dating choices to only those partners who won’t interfere with their financial goals. But with silly stuff like token gifts and who bought the coffee last time? If you’re serious about the guy, and especially if you’re in a lower tax bracket than him, it’s really not fair to judge him on his generosity.
Bottom line: you can’t fashion your relationship into a perrenial game of tit-for-tat. If you do, then you deserve a guy as shallow as you (which means it’s fair game for him to dump you when someone younger and hotter than you comes along).
You can have a nurturing relationship where the two of you grow from each other and like being in each other’s company for better or worse. Or you could be in constant “what have you done for me lately” mode, adding up the cash value of his gifts and focusing on what YOU’RE getting out of the deal. You can’t have both.
Miss Julie Aug 28th 2007 at 08:15 am 22
Obviously there’s a lot of variation on this one, but my feeling as a feminist is “if I asked, I expect to pay.” So if I contact the guy and say “let’s do something” I expect to pick up the tab. If he wants to, that’s very kind of him and will probably let him (depending on what I judge to be the sincerity of the offer), but I wouldn’t be upset if he didn’t offer to pay. Now, if he asks, I expect him to pay, and I wouldn’t be thrilled if I were expected to contribute. After the first couple dates back and forth, this issue seems to iron itself out, but that’s how I start out with a new guy.
BeenThruTheWars Aug 29th 2007 at 11:58 am 23
I’ve always been interested in the argument that letting the guy do the asking out, the pursuing, and the paying — at least in the early going — while the woman graciously receives what the man has to offer while evaluating whether to continue seeing him — is somehow incompatible with the goals and ideals of feminism.
I consider myself a feminist to the extent that I acknowledge with extreme gratitude the sacrifices our foremothers made so that we daughters of the revolution could truly do with our lives whatever we wanted and succeed according to our own gifts and determination; and that I view men’s and women’s worth in the workplace, legal system, and other such venues to be equal and worthy of equitable compensation. (Notice I didn’t say “equal” because our society is closer to a meritocracy than a true democracy.)
But… when it comes to dating and romance… men are different from women. This is worth repeating: Men are different from women.
This viewpoint isn’t about sexual politics; it’s about biology and instinct and hundreds of thousands of years of human development. So if a woman is all about ideology, that’s cool — ask guys out, pay for the dates, do the calling and pursuing, lavish him with trips and expensive gifts, and feel great about being “equals.” But then please don’t scratch your heads later and wonder why he stopped calling, or suddenly got REALLY busy at work, or dumped you for someone new (and more mysterious and elusive), or just didn’t seem to be that into you and won’t commit.
By being the romantic and sexual aggressor, you took his job away. Men are all about what they do/accomplish/conquer. When you usurp their natural role in the romantic scheme of things, they either get lazy and put it in park and happily let you provide everything until you feel sucked dry and totally taken for granted; or else quickly lose interest and seek that challenge that gets their motors humming elsewhere.
Why? Because men are different from women.
It just depends on what your goal is, ladies: to feel like you are being ideologically correct, or to be happily married or partnered up with a man who feels like he went out and worked hard and earned himself the catch of all time, and treats you accordingly. To be a success in the workplace requires a completely different set of skills and strategic behaviors than being successful in the search for a compatible life partner. Take it from me, I learned this the hard way (and it only took me 35 years)!
Susan Aug 29th 2007 at 12:17 pm 24
Very interesting discussion. As a modern woman, I have often wondered why men are still expected to pay for all dates. This seems ridiculous now that women are earning salaries too–albeit at 70 cents on the dollar. That said, I think it’s a really classy gesture if a man offers to pay for a first date. Still, I will always offer to contribute. (But, yes, I have to admit it impresses me more if he refuses my offer.) After the first date, I think it’s entirely appropriate to alternate picking up checks casually. (Not keeping fanatical track of who spent what, in other words.) I’d much rather do that than split checks, which is just tacky.
Oh, and we ladies really should get credit for other contributions we make. When I started dating my ex, many of our first dates were lush picnics which I shopped, paid for, and prepared the food, brought wine, etc. Even though I wasn’t taking him out someplace fancy, there was real expense involved, and more importantly time, consideration, and effort.
I also agree a bit with the woman who commented on a man’s financial generosity reflecting his emotional generosity. I’m quite poor, and to be perfectly honest I’ve VERY uncomfortable with men spending money on me. So I truly don’t want any big gestures. But little ones really do mean a lot to me. You picking up coffee equals me baking you cookies. We appreciate little gestures; it doesn’t have to be painting the town red.
Lisa Aug 29th 2007 at 01:14 pm 25
If someone resents the cost of dating, perhaps they should think of different types of dates. Some of the best dates I’ve had were simply sitting on the couch watching a movie on cable, talking, going to a party, having friends over for a pot luck. Sure it’s fun to go to a restaurant once in awhile, or a concert, or an event, but is it really necessary to do something that requires a cash outlay just to spend time together?
I don’t pay for dates. But I also don’t expect to be “treated” to something pricey every time either.
Miss Julie Aug 30th 2007 at 07:32 am 26
For me it’s more important that I be true to what I think is right and fairly represents me than it is that I tantalize a guy. My personal brand of feminism tells me that if I initiate contact with a guy, then it is my responsibility to be able to pay for that contact. If this turns a guy off, well, then he and I weren’t going to last for very long anyway. In other words, yes, it is more important to me to be ideologically correct (according to my personal ideology, not some dictate by the media about “Feminism”), than it is for me to have a boyfriend. Fortunately, I have the luxury of having both, at the moment.
PORTIA Sep 5th 2007 at 09:14 am 27
It took me a long time to come around to this - 17 years of living in the South - but if its a date, the guy pays. Men in this part of the world can get pretty offended if a woman even offers to pay.
Having said that, as a public interest lawyer, I’m sensitive to how expensive it can get if the guy isn’t living off his trust fund or Google stock. I eat out a lot on my own, so I don’t need to be taken to a restaurant that runs $100 a piece for dinner. The guy should, at least in the beginning, pick the place, so it should be somewhere you can afford. If for some reason I’m picking, I generally go with something on the nicer end of what I could afford if I were paying. And any woman who starts ordering lobster and a bottle of the most expensive wine on the list doesn’t deserve a second date.
My attempt at reciprocity is that after several dates, I will offer to cook dinner or pickup takeout if that’s appropriate. I also think if the relationship gets to the point where you are traveling together, its good to split. I will offer to pay for the hotel if he pays for food. This seems equitable, but doesn’t embarrass someone who doesn’t like it when a woman pays.
BTW, I would never think of having a date get expensive theatre tickets unless I knew he could really afford it or he offered. That chick needs to be kicked to the curb.
JuJu Sep 5th 2007 at 03:16 pm 28
Not children (and the related expenses) and being blessed with hair that does not require professional intervention to look stunning, I still have to reiterate the point on the sheer expense of being presentable, for a woman. A man can have three pairs of shoes (sneakers, dress shoes, and sandals) and a single suit (if his job doesn’t require him to wear them) and be content. If I, however, wear some dress to an event where all (or some of) my friends are present, I will not be able to wear it again, as everyone’s already seen it. And should I even mention shoes? Truly, no amount is ever enough!
I disagree, Mrs. Vee. Yes, indeed I like it better with the Brazilian, for myself, but a lot of expenses are purely dating related (impractical sexy lingerie comes to mind - by the way, I briefly dated a significantly older man of 42 who was astounded to hear that an average bra costs around $45), and I am sure some of the self-maintenance procedures I would not have undergone if it weren’t for their sex appeal value.
There is also the factor of most men I meet making upwards of $100k a year (it’s just that a disproportionately large number of Russian Jews [who happen to be my target audience] are computer programmers ;), which is incomparably more than what I earn. If on top of all my other expenses I had to pay for going out, I’d be downright broke.
But then, I don’t mind going out for just coffee or drinks when we first meet, or even an entirely “free” date, like going to a park. I realize that a man who is seeing me for the first time in his life does not owe me anything.
All the points made above about generosity are indeed valid, just a small note to Jared: of course it’s all about it being “worth it” (and so many of my dates just felt like a waste of make-up), but before you meet someone for the first time, how can you know whether you’ll like her? Just suggest something inexpensive so you don’t feel so resentful afterwards. It is truly her problem if she deems you a cheapskate for doing that.
JuJu Sep 5th 2007 at 03:19 pm 29
Not having children, I meant to say.
Sorry.
Nick Sep 5th 2007 at 08:45 pm 30
There is definitely an answer to this, and I have it for you, I’m officially closing the case. The day women and society wanted equality and started working is the day I started paying for a woman. Why on earth should I pay for someone who has two hands and two feet, and earns their own money? Sorry, but this is NOT the 18th century anymore. Only suckers pay for women. I don’t need to “buy” a woman to get a date. I don’t care what you guys say, this is the way it should be for all, I don’t care how blindly traditional you are. Paying for a woman was done when she didn’t have a job, and she stayed at home ironing my underwear, and taking care of my children all day. You stupid stupid stupid guys who are paying for women. You will only attract gold diggers that way, and women who appreciate you for you’re services not for you. If she really likes you, she doesn’t care about who pays or not! That woman who this guy talked about in the beginning should be put to sleep. Rape isn’t any worse than what she did. Guys stop paying. I never pay for dates, and I get laid plenty.
sheseizereason Sep 6th 2007 at 12:33 am 31
I say Nick and belledujour oughtta get together just so we can watch the battle royale that ensues.
And Juju, sorry, but mrs.vee had it right. Your $45 bra is not for anyone but you; it’s what YOU feel you need to wear on a date. One’s dresses, hair, makeup, and other prettifications are optional. Plenty of women don’t need expensive items or preparations to feel ready and sexy for a date. It’s YOUR choice to part with the cash.
Oh well. All I can say is that often women who rationalize, “I spent $50 bucks getting ready, so he now owes me dinner” will end up with men that think “I spent $50 bucks on dinner, so now she’s gotta blow me.” And thus the world stays in balance.
Livvy Sep 6th 2007 at 06:33 am 32
I feel that in this day and age, it is important to gauge each situation individually. I am very happy to pay/go dutch but I would like to refer to one date I experience.
I was a university student and he was a fast rising city bussiness man. He new of my situation and invited me out to dinner when I was next back from university. He chose where we went, which turned out to be a rather expensive restaurant in London (England). He was charming, interesting, very attractive and I had a fabulous time. Until the bill came; it was placed on the table and he pushed it over to me and said “There you go.” He was serious. I couldn’t belive it. He knew there was no way that I could have afforded it, and he didn’t mean just splitting it. I stood up and walked out.
I would like to stress that if we had gone somewhere else, less expensive, or I had picked the restaurant I would have been happy to contribute (as he invited me) or if I had invited him I would have picked up the cheque.
It is about give and take. We nolonger live in a society where women can not earn any income, we are financially independant. But it is nice to be looked after.
Take each date individually, and be sympathetic, this goes for women too.
Good luck
Alison Sep 6th 2007 at 09:31 am 33
Woah,
Nick sounds like a guy who has learned to take advantage- and not someone who knows how to show appreciation and generosity- He may get laid. That seems to be his objective as he bragged about. Most of ‘his’ women eventually may also perceive that and be happy to move on.
Many women (and men ) wish to be loved and adored. How can we show it? It can be with an expensive meal and travel, or simple desert bought on the spur of the moment. How about having a loved one’s car washed and offering a homemade meal, take someone on an impromptu hike - or for a ride in a private jet? There are many ways to attract another, and show attention towards winning affection.
So much of what you feel comfortable with is effected by where you come from, and then dependent on what you hope for, want to show about yourself, and are able to do to attract and enagage a prospective partner.
I think most men and women like to know/feel they are worth the effort and attention. Asking a woman out, treating her, shows her YOU think she is worth it- the time AND expense. And yes, as BeenThruTheWars says- there is biology and years of socialization at work here.
The emotional meaning goes beyond the factual that many women CAN indeed pay and take care of themselves. Yes - and many men want to feel capable and able - with right to choose- so give them a chance!?
Many of the women here have expressed it just fine. We will show our gratitude and ‘giving’ natures in other ways or when we do the inviting…..
I think much of what is given and offered (and accepted) may have to do with whether we feel we have a ‘choice’ or not. It can all be negotiated with good communication.
Not every woman or man has the same standards. (Culture is at play too)
That said- I was asked and sought out by a 50+ year old man (from an online site) who arranged to meet inexpensivley for coffee and then did not even offer to buy me a cup. He showed no consideration while waiting on line, no inquiry as to whether I’d like desert with it or not, no helping to find comfortable seating for our conversation, no interest or regard as to my tastes at all.
Needless to say-this was a clear sign to me that this was not a man to be interested in or bet on. ( In additon to the facts that he had never had a very long term relationship and still seemed attached to his mother - focused on only his own creative interests)
IF I had invited him out or into my home, I would have offered to treat, and appreciated it if he picked up some of the tab or brought something as a sign of giving- sharing- acknowledgment. Good manners can help things along. I would hope for this from friends. Why not a potential companion?
Another time one man and I agreed to meet for breakfast, also a relatively low ‘investment’. When he took a break and went to the bathroom (?) 2 checks showed up on the table. I assume he must have asked the waitress to divide the bill. As it was busy- I doubt she would have done this on her own, and especially as we seemed engaged like a couple in conversation. I took it as an immediate sign of his lack of interest and knew there was no go. His behavior certainly diminished my potential interest.
For $5 I still think it would have shown some generosity and class for him to pick up my tab, even just for the time I took to come out and meet him , regardless of what the future would hold. I could have thanked him, offered to contribute anyway - or not. There still would have been time to say - “hey- nice talk- but don’t think we are a match” - but with some consideration and respect. This way he sort of sleezily slipped away without being direct- and I felt disregarded and taken advantage of and certainly he gained no respect from me. It was not the $5 I had to pay, it was the attitude, that led me to conclude “Cheap and Inconsiderate”. I felt more objectified and devalued since it seemed that as I was to be of no ‘use’ to him, I was not worth his time or even little money.
There was no sense that this was done out of respect for women’s equality - What hogwash-
Feminism is often used as an excuse now for men to put in little effort towards their continued effort to get booty. (And for some women to remain hard, in control, unforgiving, and distant in relationships).
Feminism and the sexual revolution, and much of the 60’s values- - failed by allowing bad behavior to go unexcused. (See HAIR, Alice’s Restaurant) Believe me I lived through it. We learned the hard way that some of the old Rules evolved for GOOD reasons.
Nick Sep 6th 2007 at 10:37 pm 34
If the old rules evolved for good reasons then please prove it by staying at home, and take care of laundry and wash my bedsheets while I bring home the bacon. Then you are justified to be treated. Put yourself in a man’s position. How the heck do we know, if the woman knows she will be treated that she is out for us, or for the food? Im not prepared to spend money like that on a total stranger. If she doesn’t want to see me unless I’m paying for her, then screw her, I don’t want a gold digger. If you say you are independent, then BE independent. And also guys who buy drinks for women in bars, you will never EVER get laid that way, they will drink your drink and leave. Don’t be a pussy.
Collins Sep 29th 2007 at 01:10 am 35
Nick thinks much like I do on this issue. (Is he a reader/listener of Marc Rudov, as am I?) I agree that the 1st few dates should be dutch, since at this point the parties are still strangers & screening each other. I also agree with Nick’s sentence, “[G]uys who buy drinks for women in bars, you will never EVER get laid that way…” A woman’s libido is activated by TALK, not money. (Of course, it’s gotta be talk other than pickup lines & cliches.) The likes of Elvis & the Beatles could, with their voices alone, sexually arouse millions of girls they didn’t even know, much less buy dinner for; in fact the GIRLS paid money to see THEM! Whatever dynamic is established during dating, will be the same dynamic that comes into play during divorce (assuming a r’ship gets as far as marriage in the 1st place, then ends in divorce in the 2nd place). I could go on & on, but if enough men would realize all this, we as a gender could gain respect, both among ourselves & from women, & the M-F r’ship dynamic would be a lot more balanced.
Sam Nov 15th 2007 at 09:09 am 36
I have another question for the women on this site . . .
Let’s say you had a $40-$50 first date. If you offered to pay and your date refused to go 50-50, but said he would accept a $10 bill or let you pay the tip, would you think he was cheap? (assume that his income is merely above average, assume that you picked the restaurant yourself or you picked it out together.)
chiara Nov 16th 2007 at 12:20 am 37
Nick-
I can’t help but wonder about one thing: if, you “never pay for dates, and … get laid plenty.” what are you doing on a blog called “Advice from a single dating expert?”. Surely you have a great system that works for you, and you need no pointers, right?
What I look for the most in men is FLEXIBILITY. I like ones who are cool about paying or don’t mind going Dutch. Clearly anyone who lives intransigently by a rule against paying for women has a chip on his shoulder. I like to see a certain generosity of spirit. I like buying meals for my friends, so I expect a guy who likes me to do the same.
Francisco Dec 8th 2007 at 11:27 am 38
I don’t get the whole dinner thing for the first date anyway. I’d rather do something simple in order to get to know the woman by focusing on her and not on what we’re doing.
Besides, in a world where men are expected to do the pursuing, unless he finds a woman where there’s mutual chemistry in a short amount of time, a guy can get into major financial trouble over the course of a year.
If he goes out just three times a week and only spend $50 each time it adds up to almost $8000 a year which could equate to a year’s worth of car payments, rent or student loans. Add it up, you’d be shocked.
The money could be considered well spent if you end up finding “the one” but how often after 3 or 4 dates it’s realized that the chemistry isn’t there and the each has to start over from square one, but each start over for a guy costs him around $200. Heaven forbid they go out more than 4 times.
So I say stay away from the dinners, movies and concerts until after each of you determine that there’s enough chemistry that both are willing to put forth an effort which lasts more than just a couple of weeks. After that, why not show appreciation for each other? Why not take turns taking one another out be it out to a restaurant or one preparing dinner at home for the other; still better yet, together?
Rusty Jan 9th 2008 at 05:13 pm 39
Wow, hot topic! It’s no wonder than most divorces happen because of financial troubles. Money represents quite a bit here, doesn’t it?
The year: 2008.
Equal Rights Amendment: Ratified.
Womens’ salaries: Equal to (hopefully) or better then Mens’.
Fairy Tale Romance: A Fairytale.
-If I ask a woman on a date, I’ll pay. But I guarantee I won’t be stupid enough to set up a first date at a 5-star restaurant. And, I won’t ask too many women out too often so as to drain my bank account.
-If she offers to help pay after a dinner, I will refuse or allow her to get the tip. I think thats fair. Sometimes I’ll let her grab desert later on. My experience is, that women like to be treated equal. If she is insistent, then Yes, I’ll let her pay whatever she is comfortable with.
-If she asks me on a date, especially if its to a show or movie, I’ll let her pay. But, I will usually pay for some part of the evening whether she “lets” me or not.
-If she is a single mom who is not independently wealthy then I will take into account the cost of a sitter and the effort that goes into creating time to be with me. Even if she asks me, I will more often than not pay for more than half, if not the whole thing. Again if she wants to pay I will let her get the tip or dessert, etc.
-If the first date includes a woman asking me out or a woman wanting to go to three or four different places that require me to spend money without so much as an offer to pay anything, then that is our last date, if I don’t end the date early. She obviously has trouble with empathy.
-Going Dutch is also perfectly acceptable at any time. After all, I am not trying to buy a woman’s affection and attention. I am trying to find out if our personalities match enough to continue seeing her and/or become exclusive with her. This can become an expensive endeavor in the dating potential matches phase.
Its about mutual appreciation. There should never be any “money memory” going on. If money is tight, then make the date for one of the hundreds of things you can do with little or no money. Be creative. Its more fun and often more rewarding. My best and most fun dates have been when the woman planned an inexpensive but memorable date with me. We had wine while watching a meteor shower on a blanket with light from a large candle in a hurricane vase one time. My girlfriend surprised me and came to my work at lunch for a small picnic in the car. Some of my dates have hand-written or crafted thank you notes to me. The thoughtfulness of the action makes the time spent more valuable than a $50 dinner, a $100 show or a $2 cup of coffee.
For the writer that talks about “being treated like a lady.”
What makes you think you should be treated like a lady? What does being treated like a lady mean? Is there a book on being a lady and how I should treat her that I must have missed reading?
Women also talk about “being treated like a Princess” and how much they appreciate it. Well, do you not think that a guy likes to be treated like a Prince? Does money factor into a woman treating a man like a Prince as it apparently does for being treated like a Princess?
Post#14 cracked me up, mostly because a woman wrote it.
Post#38 makes a lot of sense.
verbosity Jan 10th 2008 at 11:01 am 40
This thread brings up other sentiments in other threads (Women Who Make More than Men). However, I would like to point out some philosophical points and real-world ones. Keep in mind my points speak in generalities. There are of course exceptions to nearly every statement.
If I understand Nick’s posts correctly, his POV is that since women can do everything men can do, they are hypocrites for expecting men to pay for everything in the dating arena. I think the unsaid message is, “If she can and/or does make the same as me, why do I have to shoulder the financial burden of dating? If you want equality, be equal. Don’t seek to have your cake in the career and other fronts and eat it too on the relationship end.”
OK…Not the best turn of phrase, but I think it makes the point, which is that guys find it hypocritical that women can do everything men do (and earn more doing it - see http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0334472920070803 and http://www.forbes.com/ceonetwork/2006/05/12/women-wage-gap-cx_wf_0512earningmore.html) but still expect men to pick up the tab for everything as if it were 1946 and women did earn 1/10th what men earned.
I also think many ladies made some terrific points. Portia mentioned making dinner (buying groceries and wine), others mentioned alternating picking up tabs, etc.
Here is where the philosophical ideals crash into real world realities. I think Nick’s philosophy is that everything should be ‘dutch’ or equal given their equal work and often greater income. (Philosophy). However, the real world experience that most men have is that the VAST majority of women find this off-putting at best. Several posters above commented on this (Real World). So if Nick lives in accordance with his philosophy he will likely have far fewer relationship options as a result of this issue on the first date.
The reverse also occurs. Women who kick back and expect men to do all of the paying for not only the first date, will likely reduce her relationship options.
As a side note, I would note that many men have a very strong argument it is offensive that women insist men pay for everything, in that this practice values her companionship, personality looks, etc. as somehow worth more than his.
The reality is that it is a pay to play game where men must pay up front to maximize their chances of success. It appears that many lady posters above do recognize some of the inequities above and act accordingly. Kudos. One can only hope that such a paradigm spreads, and that the challenges surrounding this issue diminish.
JuJu Jan 10th 2008 at 11:34 am 41
It amazes me how quickly societal norms change when biological evolution no longer happens. In the western world, it’s been at the most 150 years that women are even allowed to work, but look how quickly the perception changes.
I’ve heard complaints from men that women are no longer feminine and nurturing, are “ruined by feminism”. To which I respond, “Perhaps they were always truly this way, it’s just the greater independence that allows them to be any which way they want now?” After all, I observe, women (for the most part) are subservient only until and unless their situation requires it.
But it is a no less surprising outcome that men, as it turns out, aren’t exactly eager to take care of women (again, given hundreds of thousands of years of history, what could be responsible for the sudden shift in outlook? and if we are talking serious independence - I think women only had it for the past 25 years or so, tops).
Well, there will come a point in your relationship (that is, if your goal is finding a life partner) when she will depend on you, regardless of whether you want it or not. That time will be during her pregnancy and after she gives birth. After all, not that many people earn as much as to have a year’s expenses worth of savings, or more.
That is one of the many reasons, I am sure (at least unconsciously), women commonly reject the “cheap” man. If he puts up such a struggle paying for a mere date, what can she expect from him in the future? And most women do date for the possibility of a future, rather than purely having fun in the present.
No, it doesn’t mean you should go broke trying to find love. Many points made above are valid, I won’t repeat them. Just use your common sense and intuition.
I personally believe that while class may be an expensive trait, ultimately it pays off.
verbosity Jan 10th 2008 at 12:55 pm 42
Juju’s points took the concept of paying of r the 1st date beyond the 1st date, but let’s take it further for discussion. Much of what I’m about to write is discussed more fully in another thread, so I’m copying much of what I wrote.
JuJu wrote, ” . . . there will come a point in your relationship (that is, if your goal is finding a life partner) when she will depend on you, regardless of whether you want it or not. That time will be during her pregnancy and after she gives birth. After all, not that many people earn as much as to have a year’s expenses worth of savings, or more. That is one of the many reasons, I am sure (at least unconsciously), women commonly reject the “cheap” man. If he puts up such a struggle paying for a mere date, what can she expect from him in the future? And most women do date for the possibility of a future, rather than purely having fun in the present.”
I am going to thrown a bunch of points out there right now, not to cast stones at women in general, but to reflect the context in which men make many of their dating and mating choices now.
I may overstating things, but I believe Maureen Dowd wrote a NYT article some time ago about how women do not need men for anything, that men are in effect, obsolete. Secondly, as I noted above, women can, and do, earn more than men for the same work, so many men find the expectation for men to foot the whole bill hypocritical.
However, a vast majority (74%) of American women say they would marry for money. http://biz.yahoo.com/wallstreet/071214/sb119760031991928727_id.html?.v=1 To be fair, plenty of men polled said they would also, but significantly few #’s than women. this is also borne out by most men’s personal experience. JuJu alluded to reasons for looking at men’s income and generosity (pregnancy and birth).
There are also other reasons women want men who make substantially more so that women have options (have kids, not have kids, stay home, pursue additional education, etc.) Many men feel women ignore this fundamental imbalance - that women, no matter what they earn, see having these options as their right (via men who earn more), but that men have no such option….it is simply their job to earn. I grant there are exceptions, but they are so few & far between so as not to be mentionable. The simple point is that we as men are just to earn so she has options.
I actually had this conversation with my mother recently when she questioned why I do not want to marry. When I made my point about how I have no options but that women do (see above), she said “That’s what you’re supposed to do as a man.” (Yes, even she knows the deck’s stacked in her favor.) I said, “Mom, they banned indentured servitude 200-plus years ago. It seems a better option for me to keep my freedom and options.” Her response…”Well, I don’t want to argue about this anymore.”
Lastly, one cannot discount the divorce rate and the effect of divorce laws. Women initiate divorces about 70% of the time (See AARP and Discovery Health). Further, depending on where you live, the divorce rate exceeds 50% in most highly populus places (esp. ‘no-fault’ states). In AZ, it was 65% in 2005 (See cdc.gov). CA, the 800 pound gorilla in terms of population (and who do not report divorce stats to Census), is very high:
Year, CA Div.,L.A. Div.,CA Mar.,Divorce %
1996 169,416 38,026 219,039 77.35%
1997 165,547 37,501 237,669 69.65%
1998 161,905 35,706 194,108 83.41%
2000 156,078 36,551 196,896 79.27%
2001 154,672 38,850 224,241 68.98%
2002 160,854 40,468 217,880 73.83%
2003 148,511 38,811 194,914 76.19%
Average Divorce Rate: 75.54%** (Reference: Court Statistics Reports for 1996-2004.)
I’m not going to comment on divorce laws and how they operate to divide property. That is a definite subject of another thread Evan may start if he wished. Is does exist, though.
What I try to show by the above points is the context within men are making their dating choices. Many women and men are told by major publications (NYT) that men are unnecessary. (Except to pay for the dating/mating) Women can and often do earn more than men (see above). JuJu herself mentioned that in seeking men who earn more (and are generous with it) women have more options than men. Depending on where you live, the divorce rate far exceeds 50%, with 70% of those divorces (and, by proxy, long term relationships) initiated by women.
Is it any wonder that increasing numbers of men chafe at paying nearly everything in the dating/mating dance? From day 1, men have to pay to date. JuJu noted that women want men who will give them options regarding children (and my addition of other options). Men have no options there (generally). They must work for her options. Women seek men who make more money than they. Then, once married and legally entitled to 1/2 of his income and property, they initiate divorce 70% of the time. And then men pay in the end. (I grant there are exceptions, but they are so few in number, so as not to merit mention.)
I do not say this by way of complaint. I do, however, notice that the vast majority of women who have posted on this site and in my travels in general, have zero sympathy or empathy and absolutely no acknowledgment of the points’ validity for men or their point of view on this matter. I think Nick’s posts illustrate this (Nick, correct me if I am mistaken). Others say it is a lack of respect as well.
We are individually responsible for our dating choices. I simply express my opinion that I hope more men remember this context and act accordingly in their own best interests. Hoping women will respect their situation is folly.
JuJu Jan 10th 2008 at 09:32 pm 43
Verbosity:
First of all, I think the egregious sense of entitlement you describe is uncommon. (Would other women weigh in?)
Secondly, I was only implying that women are the only ones capable of giving birth.
You have to take some basic physiology into account when assessing the “equality” of the sexes.
I personally prefer the generous men because I myself am generous (and also sometimes suffer for it, albeit in different ways than paying for dates). It’s a non-negotiable personality trait in a partner, for *me*. Nothing to do with some perceived personal gain down the road. At the time of the first date, I certainly don’t even think that far ahead. But I wouldn’t be able to tolerate a cheapskate at that moment.
What I really want is the magnanimity of spirit.
On a slightly different note, has is ever occurred to you, any of you, that being ever so on guard against being used (or any potential pain, for that matter) robs you of the pleasure of life?
verbosity Jan 11th 2008 at 10:38 am 44
JuJu,
With all due respect, you have said nothing whatsoever that refutes what I posted. I specifically cited surveys and articles to support my conclusions. I do not describe an egregious sense of entitlement, simply the state of things. Perhaps the sense of entitlement DOES exist, based upon the evidence. Ignoring it does not mean it does not exist. Assuming it does exist, based upon the non-refuted evidence, why not acknowledge it?
Additionally, regarding the physiology difference, so what? I know this sounds cold, but but it does nothing to refute my point about women’s options.
I understand your desire for magnanimity of spirit. I do not disagree with it. However, my main point is that, given the above unrefuted evidence, it is accurate to say that the ‘playing field,’ the ‘rules,’ and the ‘other team’ do not equate to an even game for men in general, let alone one that favors them. Again, I ask why not acknowledge this, particularly when no contrary evidence is offered.
Lastly, your last paragraph tries to insinuate that I am ‘ever so on guard’ against being used. Hmmm, let’s look at that. First, it is an ad hominem attack against me and anyone who agrees withe the analysis (ie. - shoot the messenger) that tries to portray me as irrational and unreasonable absent any fact.
Secondly, it infers I am a coward (by being ‘ever so on guard’) In doing so she essentially tells me and others who have the same opinion they have an irrational fear of dealing with women. There is a difference between courage and and stupidity. And blindly playing a game that looks like it is financially stacked against men in general would fall into the stupidity category. Furthermore, in taking any risky action (such as dating and marrying), a reasonable person take only calculated risks. In taking these calculated risks, you weigh costs and benefits, and in doing so, many men are finding out that many (arguably most) women fail a cost-benefit analysis.
angelique Jan 11th 2008 at 01:55 pm 45
verbosity…
I am just curious: are you here to obtain relationship advice, or to advance your amateur sociological theories?
verbosity Jan 11th 2008 at 04:17 pm 46
Angelique,
Curious how you fail to respond to anything I said…Another attempt to ’shoot the messanger’ and ignore the message.
DeAngelo Feb 6th 2008 at 01:09 pm 47
Well the man should pay for the first few,I would say a 3 atlease. But the see the issue comes in after that if she’s not willing to offer nor is she making you dinner on a regular basis. If thats not happening, that means that she is becoming complecent off the mans finances. And if you are NOT married yet,then the woman should be offsetting some of the cost after that 3rd date because he has to pay bills as well is she do. In todays society its really not a case if the woman got the money or not, its just a man showing his gentleman like ways. I dont mind paying, but if we arent married then we will definitly be splitting the cost after the 3rd date because my wife seems more of a guaranteed investment than someone ‘m just meeting. At lease I know if I am puttin goney into my wife, one way or another I will be getting back also me and my life live inthe same household so she helps me pay bills that I accumulate too. The whole point here is reciprocation. If a man pays for your dinnerthe first few times, cook him dinner or some way show your gratitude by showing him that it was appreciated, dont just let him keep paying thinking that yo uhave a meal ticket. He has bills and responsibilities too that I’m sure no contributions will be made to on your behalf. Also dont be one o fthose women that makes a big deal out of it because all that does is pit it in our minds that you may be a golddigger and or you are very selfish. In Biblical terms”God loves a cheerful giver”,it didnt say a cheerful man giver or a cherrful woman giver,people is what its saying. Some women look at the whole what he pays for as a rescue trap, thinking that he’s proving that he can take care of you. But let me tell you something, he probably can but no man wants a woman that just want to be taken care of just off of normal circumstances. We want to know what can she bring to the table too. I feel that way because if a woman starts being the way and then if I so happen to no thave enough or I’m not financially set, she may start looking towards a richer guy and here it is I have already been used. she exhausted me to go to the next guy. THAT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Dont want one of those women who just take men on a test drive to see how many times and how much a man is going to spend on her. But if that woman always coking dinner for you,then yes she desrves to have her dinner paid for. Another bad thing to do is keeping tabs on who paid for what. Thats why after those first few dates they should take turns.
JDaters Anonymous » Who Pays? Let’s Find the Answer, At Last Apr 1st 2008 at 06:21 am 48
[...] we’ll come up with a definitive answer, once and for all. Need some help making your choice? Check out this post and see if it persuades [...]
Alexander Stone Apr 1st 2008 at 09:50 pm 49
The issue of ‘who pays for a first date?’ has NOTHING to do with the actual money involved – it is all about finding out whether the person you are with (both the guy AND the girl) has any manners. As a guy, if you are expecting a woman to pay for anything on a first date, you are a dick – especially if you were the one who invited her out (and if you are expecting ’something in return’ because you paid, you are an even bigger dick). That being said, however, I DO want to know that the woman I am out with appreciated my gesture, and is not a ‘professional dater’ that never had any real interest in me and was only out for free food/entertainment at my expense because she had nothing better to do that night. So I will certainly be paying attention to whether you at least make an offer to pay, as well as the sincerity of your “thank you.” There are FAR too many great women out there for any guy to have to waste their time with someone that has a bad attitude.
Eda Apr 2nd 2008 at 04:05 am 50
Alexander,
Thank you for saying that lots of great women exist. It’s nice to read a post from a man who has something positive to say about women.
A-L Apr 2nd 2008 at 03:19 pm 51
Most of my first dates are quite inexpensive (coffee dates) and I’ll usually let the guy pick it up, but if I got there early then I’ll go on ahead and by my own drink. And regardless of which # date I’m on, I always say thank you, and offer to pay, and frequently cook dinner for a guy I’m seeing (sometimes as early as the 2nd date).
But one thing that hasn’t been commented on yet is about men who continue to pick up the tabs when they aren’t well-to-do. When I’ve gone out with men whose salaries are less than stellar, but they continue to insist on paying for the entirety of our dates, I begin to wonder about their finances. Since I’m a big fan of saving money for a rainy day (not to say that I don’t spend money, as I do, but I am fiscally conservative) I worry that the man is more of a spendthrift, who probably has high debt and/or no money in the bank. And that is a turnoff. Not because I need someone to support me, but because if I’m interested in a long-term future then I’ll want to build a savings cushion, nice retirement, etc, and if the money is constantly going out every month, that’s not going to happen. Just a different perspective on this whole “who pays” issue.
Collins Apr 2nd 2008 at 06:53 pm 52
A-L wrote: “Since I’m a big fan of saving money for a rainy day . . . I worry that the man [who always pays on dates] is more of a spendthrift, who probably has high debt and/or no money in the bank. And that is a turnoff”
Excellent point, A-L. This backs up my belief that always paying on dates can bankrupt a man, if not instill in him a false sense of owning you like some object. Like the title of one of my own blogs says, “Buying a woman dinner does not equal respect.”
And I like the idea of 1st dates being for coffee. Like businesses, dates should start small, then grow gradually as the parties get to know each other better. I like your idea of buying your own drink if you arrive 1st, then sipping it while you wait for the guy to arrive. Of course that can go both ways; I would most likely sip my own drink also while waiting for the gal to arrive. Once she does arrive, what she does (or doesn’t do) next could be a good indicator of her views on who pays, & on gender equality in general. Of course, coffee shops also have other goodies like muffins & croissants, so I might try buying drinks for both of us, & if she offers later to buy dessert for both of us, I’d accept in a heartbeat (or if she doesn’t I could do without dessert). Even when not saying so outright, we (of both genders) test our dates for signs that they care enough about us to make us feel special.
It may have made sense for the guy always to pay in days long gone, but in this era of equality it does not.
Angela Crisp May 10th 2008 at 11:39 am 53
This is a subject near and dear to my heart. I do love a generous man, but I seek generosity on many levels mostly emotional and supportive, an understanding sort of generosity. My solution has been to discuss who pays before we set a date to go out. One way I have of overriding the “gentlemen ethic” is to suggest that if he is driving further, I should treat, if I am driving further, he should treat, regardless of how we come up with where to go. Gas and time is money, so it helps to get a guy to relax and actually enjoy the evening. I think women should pick up more often then they do, but figuring out a way to do this without making a man feel “kept” is really quite difficult, but worth it too.
hunter May 11th 2008 at 08:34 pm 54
to Angela crisp,
you said,..”figuring out a way to do this without making a man feel kept”, how so? Please forgive us simple minds…
Lisa May 22nd 2008 at 06:17 pm 55
Just a couple of items for Verbosity and Rusty:
It’s 2008 and, FYI, the Equal Rights Amendment WAS NEVER RATIFIED. It is regularly reintroduced in Congress and never goes anywhere.
Second, don’t delude yourself: the wage gap between men and women persists. Furthermore, many (if not most) women earn less than their male counterparts over a lifetime, partly because of the wage gap and partly because women often stay home, go part time, or put themselves on the “mommy track” once the children arrive. Women receive NO SSI CREDIT for the years they stay home, or accept reduced salaries, to accommodate their families (and their husband’s career). This means that women are far less likely than men to reach retirement age and be completely underfunded.
Boys, if you want to slap down the women, you should get your facts right.
vino May 22nd 2008 at 09:38 pm 56
Um, Lisa, I just read this, and I have to tell you, I think you are off with your assertions. By the way, I notice you cited no facts.
Respectfully, from what I’ve read, there isn’t a wage gap. If employers could pay women 23% less (the approx ‘gap’), then no men would be employed at all! You yourself cited the reasons for the ‘wage gap.’ Women often stay home, BY CHOICE. They work part-time BY CHOICE. Take the “mommy track” as you put it, BY CHOICE. You also left out that women often do not take many dangerous, higher paying jobs (think mining, oil rigs, etc), BY CHOICE. So by your admission women in the aggregate CHOOSE to be paid less. This is somehow someone else’s fault other than those who CHOSE said course of action? Puh-leeze.
I think verbosity pointed out a study or 2 indicating that there is equal pay for equal work & that in fact many women earn more than men for comparable work in metropolitan areas, particularly. You may not want to acknowledge said facts & studies, but ignoring them doesn’t refute them, particularly if you are chiding someone about ‘facts.’
Um, sorry to further disagree, but women who do stay home ARE compensated. Who’s paying for the roof over their heads, the food consumed, the clothes worn, the cars driven, the gas for the cars, the home utilities, the cell phones, etc? They don’t materialize out of thin air.
Of course no SSI credit is received for the time when someone CHOOSES not to work or work less. Or am I to understand you want to be compensated further for not working?
If one CHOOSES to leave a job, any job, for a lesser-paying one, part-time or not to work at all, no matter what the reason (kids), it is not the responsibility of anyone else to foot the bill for or provide comforts for the person CHOOSING to work less. It’s called accepting responsibility for the consequences of one’s decision-making.
But what Lisa’s argument boils down to is that she wants someone else to pay for her choices.
On the subject of equal legal rights, I’m unaware of any legal rights men have that women don’t. However, I am aware of rights women have that men don’t. Women have the right to choose to make a guy a parent even if he doesn’t wish to be one (& the legal & financial responsibilities that go with it). Notice men have no corresponding legal right to force a women to have a child (& the legal & financial responsibilities that go with it). There are other things I could bring up as well, such as VAWA. but suffice it to say, women actually have MORE legal rights than men. So I think the ERA assertion is attenuated at best, and completely inapplicable at worst.
Rusty May 22nd 2008 at 09:55 pm 57
Hey Lisa…
Guess you got me there. Thank you for your item.
And nice job on the weak attack by using the novice “boys” disparagement. I think you’re the only one trying to slap anybody down. So this is the wonderful sight-unseen attitude for which a man should plunk his money down on a first date? No thanks.
Vive la difference!
Lisa May 23rd 2008 at 01:31 pm 58
Hmm, Vino, let me see if I get your arguments correct:
1) The wage gap exists because otherwise no men would be employed (wow, gotta love the logic on this one). We have to pay women less so we can pay men a salary that can support a family (never mind that many women are single parents, and if you think child support equals out the income differences, you have another big think coming).
2) Women are “compensated” for their sacrifices to the family by having a roof over their heads.
3) Women (and men) who choose to stay home and contribute to society by rearing their children and doing the bulk of volunteer work for churches, schools, Meals on Wheels, and other social institutions deserve nothing back from society (i.e., SSI) when they reach their golden years. If you never “worked” a day in your life, you get nothing, simple as that. Lucky you. I guess your warm memories will sustain you the next time you eat cat food casserole in the house you can’t afford to heat because you never “worked” to contribute to the social good.
You might be surprised to note that many countries do provide extended parenting leave with pay (to both sexes), and give credit toward retirement for those who are primary caregivers in the home. Those societies rank far above the US on many quality of life indicators. (If you REALLY want some citations, I’m happy to give them to you. I’m a university professor so I do understand their importance. Which citation style would you prefer? APA? Chicago? MLA? Just let me know.)
Don’t be disingenuous by suggesting that women “choose” these things by themselves, in a vacuum. Common sense often “validates” a lot of stupid opinions. Ask Thomas Paine.
I do think the 2nd wave of the women’s movement was off-base to push for equal treatment. What men and women need is EQUITABLE treatment, which is what many posters on this thread were suggesting. If you’re unsure of the difference, I can explain it further.
If you’re worried about being trapped into unplanned fatherhood, there are many solutions for that. Use your CHOICES ahead of time.
BTW, I never said I supported the ERA. I merely corrected Rusty’s facts and challenged your argument. You drew that inference.
And Rusty, I never said anything about the idea that a man should pay on the first date. I just said that you ought to check your facts before blowing hot air at the rest of us.
hunter May 25th 2008 at 08:34 am 59
Lisa, a university professor?….my goodness…..
Lisa May 25th 2008 at 12:03 pm 60
hunter, you’re right. I lost my humility and that was a cheap shot. I just didn’t like being lectured about the importance of citations. Pushed the wrong buttons. My bad.
Rusty May 25th 2008 at 09:20 pm 61
Wow Lisa, you’re just too ’smart’ for all of us. I was actually referencing the title of this post, not inferring that you had said anything about it. Although, maybe you should stay on topic, eh? Thank you for enlightening the dark hordes with you university professor skillz. (Yeah, I spelled that wrong on purpose, Prof.) So, do your wrong buttons include a giant RED one that says ‘PUSH ME’?
Yes, I already know I’m a bastard. But thanks anyway.
vino May 26th 2008 at 08:18 am 62
Lisa,
Talk about disingenuous arguments.
1) You obviously do not understand what I said, simple economics, or how businesses work. Your assertion that “the wage gap exists because otherwise no men w