dispatch3d Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 The fact that you don't see that you were doing what you're accusing me of is hilarious and sad at the same time. You said one thing, I disagreed. I said one thing, you disagreed. You go your way, I'll go mine. Okay? Or do you want to keep going? Ever check your own posts to make sure you aren't a hipocrit?
jerbear Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Not trying to thread-jack, but I have a question: After the first date, should the man continue to pay? Would opting not to pay turn a woman off in that scenario? Or is it more balanced at that point? It does get more balanced. From my experience, she'll buy groceries and we'll have dinner at her place, eventually. Also from experience, after a few dates, she ACTUALLY is happy, giddy and forceful as in saying you want sex, you let me pay, non-negotiable. At that point I let her pay and I'll repay later. She'll let you know. She'll be forceful to pay 100% or find a way make it more balanced; like she makes home cooked meals and we (I pay) go out once a week.
Star Gazer Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Exactly. If that's what you think is the purpose behind paying for the date, like she's a ****ing prostitute, then it shows more about your character than it does about gender equality. This is what Star, Hokie et al are trying to tell you. You're thinking about this from a fundamentally negative angle and that negativity is communicated when you don't pay, and it's unattractive. THANK YOU!
collegeguy_24 Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Exactly. If that's what you think is the purpose behind paying for the date, like she's a ****ing prostitute, then it shows more about your character than it does about gender equality. This is what Star, Hokie et al are trying to tell you. You're thinking about this from a fundamentally negative angle and that negativity is communicated when you don't pay, and it's unattractive. To put it another way: I understand your principle. I do. It is, in some way, unfair or antiquated that the man is "expected" to pay, just by virtue of his owning a penis. I get that, really. But another life skill -- one that's much more important when sharing a life with someone in particular -- is choosing your battles. Is it really that important to pick that moment to get on your podium? Do you really need to risk a good time -- and an opportunity to treat someone you care about to a meal -- just to prove a point about how unfair life is? And then your date gets turned off, and you put on her, like "God, what a bitch -- how entitled!" Yet she didn't go on this date to be reminded at any point about the worser things in life: that there's inequalities in the world, that dating is in some ways an awkward exchange, that money is a stressful and complicated motivator for all the world's politics. Yes, life sucks, but you are reminding her that it sucks -- by making a point of it, with her at the butt. And who wants to be around that? She went out with you to have fun, and you've ruined it because you were too busy riding around on your high horse to make a small gesture of sacrifice and do something nice for a change. You don't want to make her feel special because it is you, jamesum, who feels entitled, not her. Yes, it's theoretically unfair -- but it's only bad when you make it that way. You could just as well have paid the $10 that you would have spent on a 6-pack anyway and lent to something and someone that you could at least pretend was at least, for this moment, just a little bit more important than your own enjoyment. And if you really can't spare that $10, then you really shouldn't be looking to add someone to your life anyway. I like this post!
Star Gazer Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Ever check your own posts to make sure you aren't a hipocrit? I don't need to, because I know I'm not. You're the one literally telling me to change my view/perspective. How many times do I have to say it? You do what works (or doesn't!) for you, and I'll do what works for me.
skydiveaddict Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 From the beginning of thread, Mad Max and I merely said that whoever asks the other out has to pay, doesnt matter the gender. But you and your medieval buddies were the ones who were jumping on us and were forcing us that what we think is wrong. Its like you just cant accept if others dont see the way you see. No, you are doing more than that. Throwing out insults for one. (medieval buddies). And No one was "forcing" you to think anything.
denise_xo Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Well, I can't "dump" someone after ONE date. But yes. Admittedly, there was a very nice, super good looking, very funny, smart, charming, successful dude that I went on a date with over the summer... and he LET ME PAY for half of the first date. It bothered me. A lot. I was actually really torn about it, I didn't know what it "meant." But regardless of what it "meant," it bothered me enough that when he suggested we go out again, I actually said no. The right guy for me would never let me pay for half of the first date. Wow. Very nice, super good looking, very funny, smart, charming, successful - and you break it off over paying half? I guess it's just a cultural difference, but I don't get it...
dispatch3d Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Exactly. If that's what you think is the purpose behind paying for the date, like she's a ****ing prostitute, then it shows more about your character than it does about gender equality. This is what Star, Hokie et al are trying to tell you. You're thinking about this from a fundamentally negative angle and that negativity is communicated when you don't pay, and it's unattractive. To put it another way: I understand your principle. I do. It is, in some way, unfair or antiquated that the man is "expected" to pay, just by virtue of his owning a penis. I get that, really. But another life skill -- one that's much more important when sharing a life with someone in particular -- is choosing your battles. Is it really that important to pick that moment to get on your podium? Do you really need to risk a good time -- and an opportunity to treat someone you care about to a meal -- just to prove a point about how unfair life is? And then your date gets turned off, and you put on her, like "God, what a bitch -- how entitled!" Yet she didn't go on this date to be reminded at any point about the worser things in life: that there's inequalities in the world, that dating is in some ways an awkward exchange, that money is a stressful and complicated motivator for all the world's politics. Yes, life sucks, but you are reminding her that it sucks -- by making a point of it, with her at the butt. And who wants to be around that? She went out with you to have fun, and you've ruined it because you were too busy riding around on your high horse to make a small gesture of sacrifice and do something nice for a change. You don't want to make her feel special because it is you, jamesum, who feels entitled, not her. Yes, it's theoretically unfair -- but it's only bad when you make it that way. You could just as well have paid the $10 that you would have spent on a 6-pack anyway and lent to something and someone that you could at least pretend was at least, for this moment, just a little bit more important than your own enjoyment. And if you really can't spare that $10, then you really shouldn't be looking to add someone to your life anyway. If the reason you are paying for her diner is to have sex with her then yeah she's kinda like a prostitute. How is it any different? Obviously if you are in some kind of relationship then it's different. To your second point about battles, I'd probably just pay the first date for the reason you stated. I wouldn't make a point of it so the third paragraph doesn't apply. Do I like a six pack more than a girl I barely know who I'm going on a first date with. Uhhhh. Well you have a point. I should probably wait till I like the girl more than the six pack to take her to diner. Hence why I think it's a bad first date idea.
Star Gazer Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 I present into evidence Exhibit A! You say you don't want to be bought, and yet you say that! Really? He sounded like a perfectly good guy, and because you had to shell out a little cash you tossed him. FOr someone who claims to not be selfish, everything you have said so far says otherwise. I truly don't know how to explain it to you any other way than I already have about 50 times in this thread. It has nothing to do with being "bought." I'm not a prostitute. Re-read welikeincrowd's posts - s/he phrases it better than I do.
Star Gazer Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Wow. Very nice, super good looking, very funny, smart, charming, successful - and you break it off over paying half? I guess it's just a cultural difference, but I don't get it... That's just it. You don't have to get it. It works for me.
welikeincrowds Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 I truly don't know how to explain it to you any other way than I already have about 50 times in this thread. It has nothing to do with being "bought." I'm not a prostitute. Re-read welikeincrowd's posts - s/he phrases it better than I do. (he) (10 characters)
Untouchable_Fire Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 I haven't been forcing you to do accept anything anymore than you have. My formula works for me, every single time. Hopefully yours works for you too. Different strokes... Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to give him the second date.
welikeincrowds Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to give him the second date. Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to _______, because he just bought you, and now you're chattel.
jerbear Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to give him the second date. This is a NO. Just because I pay doesn't me I want a second date with her.
USMCHokie Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to give him the second date. Ummm, no...her formula only has her LAUNCHing those who refuse to pay for the first date...so a 100% success rate under the formula can only imply that she's always been able to LAUNCH the ones she'd be incompatible with...it has nothing to do with what happens with the ones she is compatible with...
Star Gazer Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to _______, because he just bought you, and now you're chattel. Chattel!! That's it!! Women sell themselves as property! The sale is the date!
dispatch3d Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 This is a NO. Just because I pay doesn't me I want a second date with her. so in that case you are paying out of obligation? Or because you want to be friends with her? If you genuinely didn't like the person would you still pay? Not sure the reasoning.
denise_xo Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 That's just it. You don't have to get it. It works for me. I wasn't trying to convince you, was actually trying to understand. But I'm glad it works for you!
dispatch3d Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 I wasn't trying to convince you, was actually trying to understand. But I'm glad it works for you! Hum you just taught me something. I've actually read it before but obviously I don't practice it. Thanks.
Untouchable_Fire Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Bought chattel? Where are you from? It's common courtesy. This is a NO. Just because I pay doesn't me I want a second date with her. It's your option to pursue or not. Ummm, no...her formula only has her LAUNCHing those who refuse to pay for the first date...so a 100% success rate under the formula can only imply that she's always been able to LAUNCH the ones she'd be incompatible with...it has nothing to do with what happens with the ones she is compatible with... If she chooses not the see the guy again... she pays her half and walks away. This is the way its done.
jerbear Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 so in that case you are paying out of obligation? Or because you want to be friends with her? If you genuinely didn't like the person would you still pay? Not sure the reasoning. I pay because I invited her out for the first time. If I wanted to be friends I would have made that clear that time and the 2nd won't be a date just hanging out. If I don't like a person on the first meeting, just pay, thank them and move on. Why have drama, just get it over with.
Star Gazer Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 so in that case you are paying out of obligation? Or because you want to be friends with her? If you genuinely didn't like the person would you still pay? Not sure the reasoning. Do you understand that people treat one another without an ulterior motive? That they just like treating people?
skydiveaddict Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Bottom line! If the guy pays... you HAVE to give him the second date. Really? How is he going to manage that if the girl isn't willing? At gunpoint?
Citizen Erased Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Way to encourage the OP to actually come back and read her threads guys. I wouldn't want to be with someone that counts down to the very cent what "owed" on a date they suggested. I am of the pay my own way club but still, that's pretty fricking cheap.
Untouchable_Fire Posted October 6, 2010 Posted October 6, 2010 Really? How is he going to manage that if the girl isn't willing? At gunpoint? It's not possible. But it shows the girl lacks manners and courtesy.
Recommended Posts