Author TheBigQuestion Posted September 21, 2011 Author Posted September 21, 2011 (edited) If you are able to identify the following as an arbitrary and useless social construct: Why can't you simply dismiss the "unfair social pressure" with the same facility? I did dismiss it by "dating" on my own terms. This thread, especially the posts I made on the first page, are far more about what one has to do to jettison the useless social construct than anything else. You and I are on the same page here. It's a bit inaccurate to say I have a fixation about paying or not paying. When this was actually relevant to my life, I didn't think about it. It's just the way my dating life turned out, and I figured it was worth sharing. Edited September 21, 2011 by TheBigQuestion
DorothyGail Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 I normally don't address posters who write with the grammar of a 5-year-old, but I'll humor you. I'm not "angry" about paying or not paying. I'm "angry" about people being dense, failing to take into consideration what I'm actually saying, and missing the point of what I say entirely. I'm not hurting in the money department. This thread is not about my bank account. It's about addressing what I believe is a useless social convention and ways to sidestep it. It's not motivated by anger. It's a genuine curiosity as to why this is perpetuated. Sorry to tell ya but I think your going to be single for a long time.
DorothyGail Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 lol no. My dad told me once how before he met my mum, he took a woman out for a 2nd date and he said 'aren't you gonna pay this time?' and she said 'I'm saving to go to America' and he replied 'not on my money you're not' and left her there in the restaurant to pay the bill. :laugh: My dad > her. The funny thing is my dad is a practicing Christian and this is very out of character for him. He's not aggressive in the slightest. I also agree that a man should pay. And it does show he is a gentleman.
eatNrM Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 I know one thing though: I deserve to have women pay for my dates. My presence is expensive.
DorothyGail Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 lol no. My dad told me once how before he met my mum, he took a woman out for a 2nd date and he said 'aren't you gonna pay this time?' and she said 'I'm saving to go to America' and he replied 'not on my money you're not' and left her there in the restaurant to pay the bill. :laugh: My dad > her. The funny thing is my dad is a practicing Christian and this is very out of character for him. He's not aggressive in the slightest. What worked for your dad doesn't work for everyone else. If a guy won't pay for dinner on the first date, he is IMO a cheapskate.
DorothyGail Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 I know one thing though: I deserve to have women pay for my dates. My presence is expensive. Are you a cheapskate too?
Author TheBigQuestion Posted September 21, 2011 Author Posted September 21, 2011 Sorry to tell ya but I think your going to be single for a long time. I'm not single. Nice try though. So me not paying makes me a cheapskate? What does that make you when you don't pay then? Something else? If so, you're subscribing to a BS double standard. You aren't entitled to preferential treatment just by virtue of your sex. You're still made up of the same stardust as everyone and everything else.
Ginger Beer Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 What worked for your dad doesn't work for everyone else. If a guy won't pay for dinner on the first date, he is IMO a cheapskate. lol So you don't have a problem with women not paying on a first date, but if a man doesn't, you do? Because he's a man? That is sexism. You can't get any more blatant about it than that. Whoever asks for the date should pay the first date.
Author TheBigQuestion Posted September 21, 2011 Author Posted September 21, 2011 lol So you don't have a problem with women not paying on a first date, but if a man doesn't, you do? Because he's a man? That is sexism. You can't get any more blatant about it than that. Whoever asks for the date should pay the first date. Agreed on all counts. If you ask for the date and you use phrases like "take you out," it's not hard to assume that you are the one who pays.
eatNrM Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I'm a feminist and therefore I insist on us splitting and I also like to pay. I would never let a man pay for me all the time because it is DEGRADING. It implies that I am weak. I like to show that I am competent and have FINANCIAL POWER , the same financial power as any men (I'm not one of those women who complain about making less than a man because I don't. I don't care about what other women earn, only myself). I don't need a man to give me anything. Not only a $3 hamburger from McDonalds. I insist on splitting or TAKING TURNS. I would rather die than have a man pay for me. I find it PATRONIZING. I don't like to be taken care of. I am competent and can take of myself; I am independent and self-sufficient. Even though I am a female I don't think being a female makes you more "special". I am not some lame delicate flower that needs to be taken care of. I am just as competent as any man. I'm not traditional either; I don't believe in having a man take care of me. Screw that crap. Woahh, J200...it's ok:laugh:
Disenchantedly Yours Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 Pierre, can I just commend you for your comments on this thread. You said: None of us is normal. I applaud you for recognizing that ALL of us have some issues. The next step in your recovery is not to act on those issues and to do what is counter to your ingrained impulses. So fabulously true! You Said: What I do on many dates is: When dinner is over I get up and pretend to go to the bathroom. I secretly find the waiter and pay for dinner and my date never knows what is going on. I try to avoid my date the stress of seeing the waiter come to the table with the check in hand. If I forget to fetch the waiter and the bill comes to the table I immediately give the credit card to the waiter without looking at the check. I assume that if I look at the check my date will feel uneasy. Most women that are keepers want men that take care of the bill even if they are not gold diggers. As was said above, if a woman insists on paying then you know she does not like you. This is extremely classy of you and I've never presonally experienced a man doing this but if a man handled the "paying" situation this way I would be vastly impressed by him and stunned. Thank you for being one of the rare men that understand that the whole paying thing isn't because women are gold diggers. TheBigQuestion, you talked about causual sex. You have no problem using women for sex yet you don't want to be used for your money. Think long and hard about that one.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 What the heck is wrong with this board tonight..garrrrrr...!
Author TheBigQuestion Posted September 22, 2011 Author Posted September 22, 2011 How on God's green Earth does casual sex automatically entail "using?"
eatNrM Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 taking turns is fine. One day he can pay, the next time I can. However I insist on it being equal. Not him paying for an expensive dinner while I pay something cheap. I have equal financial power as any man. I am a very independent person. I moved out at 18 and lived on my own since then without 1 penny from parents. I don't need anything from anybody. It's ok Just don't forget to let the man love you.
D-Lish Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 How many times can you miss the point in the same post? I'll respond tit for tat. 1. You have a very interesting definition of cheapness. All I propose in my OP and in every subsequent post is that there are alternatives to traditional style casual dating that don't involve a man spending money. I have no problems planning dates and paying for women that I have good reason to believe are loyal to me. Dating happens to be the only social convention I know of in which paying for a near total stranger is not only acceptable but is in some antiquated circles (i.e. yours) considered compulsory. I think this is silly. In spite of this, you can choose to call me cheap if you want to, so long as I get to call you a sucker. 2. Everyone has insecurities. I do, you do, every girl I've ever dated does, every poster on this board does. Pulling this card is poor argumentation. Try again. And if you'd bother to read anything I've written, doing things the way I did them HAS obviously gotten me somewhere. 3. Yes, I like being the master of my bank account. Big deal. Well I think a lot of women on here have demonstrated that they are fine with splitting, which should indicate to you that not all of us run with that antiquated notion as women. Despite the fact that I ususally offer to split, it would be impressive if a guy quietly excused himself and paid the bill in secret (as one poster says he likes to do). I also like the values that men like Pierre demonstrate- and that's the kind of man that I'd actually want to have a second date with. I'd still offer to split, but I'd feel appreciative of an insistence to pick up the tab. Honestly, if a guy asked ME out and then told me what my share of the bill was when it came... I'd turf him on the spot. Not because I expect that the man should always pay: because the vocal suggestion would be tacky.
Author TheBigQuestion Posted September 22, 2011 Author Posted September 22, 2011 Well I think a lot of women on here have demonstrated that they are fine with splitting, which should indicate to you that not all of us run with that antiquated notion as women. Despite the fact that I ususally offer to split, it would be impressive if a guy quietly excused himself and paid the bill in secret (as one poster says he likes to do). I also like the values that men like Pierre demonstrate- and that's the kind of man that I'd actually want to have a second date with. I'd still offer to split, but I'd feel appreciative of an insistence to pick up the tab. Honestly, if a guy asked ME out and then told me what my share of the bill was when it came... I'd turf him on the spot. Not because I expect that the man should always pay: because the vocal suggestion would be tacky. I take no issue with Pierre's romantic gestures. They're all good and fine. I addressed him because in that post and every post he's written in this thread, he's missed the point entirely.
Ginger Beer Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I would find it patronizing for someone to pay ahead of time. I can appreciate the gesture but it's not even giving me a CHOICE but making the choice for me. You cannot decide for me; I decide for myself. It's just as patronizing as a man ordering for me; I have a voice, I can order for myself. I can understand why women who like to be taken care of may like this but I am more independent than most men I know. I've been fending for myself since I was born; I don't like being taken care of. I find it presumptuous for a man to pay ahead of time and for him to assume that's what I want. Nothing makes me angrier than people assuming this about you. You should not ASSUME that I want someone to pay for me just because I'm a woman. It's frankly insulting and pretty damn sexist. No it's not. Sexist is saying men are cheapskates if they don't pay but women are allowed to not pay.
Author TheBigQuestion Posted September 22, 2011 Author Posted September 22, 2011 I think you could make a good argument that both are pretty sexist.
denise_xo Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I agree with J200 in many ways. I think the 'man pays for woman' set up is patriarchal and very outdated. I'm from a culture where the norm is to go dutch and had never had anyone offer to pay for me until I first visited the US. I find it extremely uncomfortable but have agreed at times when I've seen that splitting the bill wasn't going to fly and I was making more of a scene than was appreciated
PratyekaYana Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I'm a feminist and therefore I insist on us splitting and I also like to pay. I would never let a man pay for me all the time because it is DEGRADING. It implies that I am weak. I like to show that I am competent and have FINANCIAL POWER , the same financial power as any men (I'm not one of those women who complain about making less than a man because I don't. I don't care about what other women earn, only myself). I don't need a man to give me anything. Not only a $3 hamburger from McDonalds. I insist on splitting or TAKING TURNS. I would rather die than have a man pay for me. I find it PATRONIZING. I don't like to be taken care of. I am competent and can take of myself; I am independent and self-sufficient. Even though I am a female I don't think being a female makes you more "special". I am not some lame delicate flower that needs to be taken care of. I am just as competent as any man. I'm not traditional either; I don't believe in having a man take care of me. Screw that crap. If only women with your perspective were more plentiful!
Ginger Beer Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 No one should assume they have the right to pay for me or that I want them to pay for me. It's also not true that women will want a guy to pay if they like him and that if a woman insist on paying that she doesn't like the guy. I paid the most for the ones I used to care about the most. For my ex bf I paid for his part of the rent, bought him gifts, paid for meals, paid for his car too (it was a cheap car, I still paid for it), dental bills, just about everything. So it is not true when guys say that it's rejection if the woman insists on paying. I pay because I want to. I agree, it's patronising at worst, but not sexist, he's not doing it BECAUSE you're a woman, you just HAPPEN to be a woman (not you specifically but you get what I mean). The poster who said he'd pay discretely is paying because he doesn't want to make the other person feel awkward, regardless of sex. If he was a gay man I assume he would do the same, thus not sexist. The poster who said it's fine for women who don't pay on first dates, but not fine for men, made the rule for a whole gender. She is saying she'd have no problem with a woman skipping the bill but she would have a problem with the man doing it, presumably because he's a man, which is sexist.
denise_xo Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 I agree, it's patronising at worst, but not sexist, he's not doing it BECAUSE you're a woman, you just HAPPEN to be a woman (not you specifically but you get what I mean). The poster who said he'd pay discretely is paying because he doesn't want to make the other person feel awkward, regardless of sex. The poster who said it's fine for women who don't pay on first dates, but not fine for men, made the rule for a whole gender. She is saying she'd have no problem with a woman skipping the bill but she would have a problem with the man doing it, presumably because he's a man, which is sexist. This doesn't add up. Men pay for women because they are men and are expected to pay for women. I don't see how you can't see that as a 'whole gender rule'
Ginger Beer Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 This doesn't add up. Men pay for women because they are men and are expected to pay for women. I don't see how you can't see that as a 'whole gender rule' See edited post. And how do you know he hasn't asked for the date, if he asked for the date, he should pay, so how is that sexist?
denise_xo Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 See edited post. And how do you know he hasn't asked for the date, if he asked for the date, he should pay, so how is that sexist? The point is that the 'man has to pay for woman' set up puts genders in particular relationships to each other which, IMO, are quite outdated. Whether it's sexist or not is a longish debate, but the point is that the 'gender rule' of 'man asks out woman and pays' is no less of a gender rule than any other gender rules. I'm assuming the poster in question paid for the woman because it was a date and it was an expectation that he (being the man) should pick up the bill.
D-Lish Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 No one should assume they have the right to pay for me or that I want them to pay for me. It's also not true that women will want a guy to pay if they like him and that if a woman insist on paying that she doesn't like the guy. I paid the most for the ones I used to care about the most. For my ex bf I paid for his part of the rent, bought him gifts, paid for meals, paid for his car too (it was a cheap car, I still paid for it), dental bills, just about everything. So it is not true when guys say that it's rejection if the woman insists on paying. I pay because I want to. You're way too extreme. Calling yourself a Feminist is outdated and antiquated. Feminists have already paved the way for modern women to have a voice. We have our voice, we are equal today because Feminists in the late 60's and early 70's set the precedence and gave women a voice. Not that women won't still face obstacles, but we have that voice to dispute those obstacles now thanks to those women that burned their bras in the 60's. It's paved the path for minorities in North America to find a voice- we are past feminism and into a movement that is more about humanism. If you'd find yourself THAT offended that a MAN would pay for your date in secret as a kind gesture- you're so far off the map in terms of what feminism was originally intended to provide women. You're attitude is really more bitter and over the top. Someone paying for your date without giving you the option of paying for your half is a kind gesture. The fact that you see it as an insult to your independence is, well, ridiculous.
Recommended Posts