Shaun-Dro Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 It's gotten a lot farther and more "fair" than what you're describing. It's become more even, but it still isn't completely even in who is the "pursuer" and the "one who is pursued." Well, what it comes down to is you're a dude. Tough s***. To me, what women have to go through with child bearing more than makes up for me having to chase them to be the one worthy of making her go through that hellhole. It doesn't always have to turn out that way, though.
imfromhoiland Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 It doesn't always have to turn out that way, though. I know it doesn't always have to turn out this way, but guys chase girls usually for two reasons. 1. To date (which, will eventually lead to sex, even if it is until marriage). 2. They just want to have sex. Both can lead to child bearing, even if unintentional
Sanman Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Did you really just bring up slavery in a discussion of dating norms?! The two have nothing to do with each other and are in no way comparable. It's difficult to move on from that, but I'll try. There's no need to end a perfectly pleasant evening by telling a guy you aren't feeling it. That would be awkward for both parties. I hope a man never says that to me on a date. When you're on a date both people are deciding whether they like the other, not just the woman. I always ask a man if he'd like to split the bill, but they never accept, and some even seemed offended that I offered. Often the man will grab the bill and say "My treat" or "I got this." From my experiences, men don't mind paying for a woman at all. Those with disposable income seem to enjoy doing so. The last guy I dated always insisted on paying, which started to make me feel uncomfortable. I beat him to it with drinks one night. He kept saying I shouldn't have done that and that it made him made him feel bad. I lived with someone for several years. I did all of the cooking and cleaning, and that was fine. I enjoyed doing so because I felt like I was taking care if him. Who cares that he didn't help? We both worked and I went to school on top of working. Not everything is perfectly equal between men an women. If you don't want to do something for someone or will resent them for it, don't do it (rather than complaining about it). Be shocked by the comparison if you would like. However, it is an apt comparison. Slave owners were not the tyrants you make them out to be. Both slavery and courting behavior were considered traditional social norms of their time. Much like slave ownership, courting behavior is predominantly present in the more socially conservative south. If you do not want to end a nice date by telling a man you are not interested, how would you tell him? lead him on? not answer his calls? In the end this is simply a defense for making the dumper less uncomfortable. Being dumped sucks no matter how it is done. Again, men will accept you splitting the check. I know because I am a man and I have gladly accepted. It may be that the men you CHOOSE to date are not comfortable with this. Also, no one here is talking about longer term dating or relationships. I don't care if I pay more for my gf than she does for me. I do care if I bought a dinner from a woman who then does not have the courtesy to even return my calls.
Sanman Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Some men are chivalrous, not because they expect anything in return, but because it's a part of their character. I'm not sure why that's hard to believe. Oh, please!
norajane Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Back in the day before online dating, a man would meet a woman out and about, they'd hit it off or at least enjoy talking to each other a bit, and he'd offer to take her out. He'd pay because he'd be trying to win her over, to court her favor. These days with online dating, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that guys pay on first dates all the time because they're strangers and it's not a scenario where he's trying to win her over - they're meeting for the first time and have nothing at stake. Personally, I'd split the check in those circumstances. However, if he asks for a second date, then it would seem that he IS trying to win her over and he'd want to pay for that reason...whatever it takes to make his case and win her over. I've never done online dating, but it seems to me it's just a way to find someone to meet up with, and not a date, really. It's a pre-date. Splitting the check is fine, but I can see how if a guy figures out that he does like her and wants to see her again, he'd pay because he wants her to agree to see him again.
Cypress25 Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 A woman should offer to pay for her meal regardless of whether she's "not feeling it". Not even offering to pay is extremely rude and presumptuous. I would never go on a second date with a woman who did that. Most women do offer to pay their half. And most men decline the offer and pay for the whole date. That has always been my experience. I offer, he declines, and I graciously accept the romantic gesture. I'm not going to argue with him. I'm a cheap date anyway; I never order a drink or dessert, and I make sure to order an inexpensive meal. I can honestly say I have never cost a man more than $15 on a date. Optimally the rejecting party should cover the entire meal, though that could be cost prohibitive for picky people. I understand paying for yourself, but it's ridiculous to pay for the other person as consolation for rejecting them. That implies that the "rejecting party" should feel guilty for not wanting a second date, and they should do something to make up for it. The "rejecting party" isn't doing anything wrong. Everyone has the right to decide if they want a second date or not. This is also assuming that both people know how they feel about each other by the end of the date, but most people don't announce their intentions like that. By the end of a first date, I have no idea if he'll call me again; I just have to wait and see. When you're on a date both people are deciding whether they like the other, not just the woman. This. The man and the woman are both trying to impress each other. They are both deciding how they feel about the other, and they both run the risk of getting rejected. I always ask a man if he'd like to split the bill, but they never accept, and some even seemed offended that I offered. Often the man will grab the bill and say "My treat" or "I got this." From my experiences, men don't mind paying for a woman at all. Those with disposable income seem to enjoy doing so. This has been my experience as well. Believe it or not, some men actually like paying for the woman on a date. It makes them feel good to do something nice for her and know that she appreciates it. Like when you give someone a gift, it makes you feel good too, right? So why must the corresponding norm of men being expected to pay for dates (lest they risk being considered "cheap" or "un-gentlemanly") persist? I think it's because the man is usually the one who asked for the date in the first place. If you invite someone out to dinner, that person is your guest. If I asked a guy out, of course I would pay for him. Just like I would provide food for my guests if I hosted a party. I wouldn't invite people over for a party and then make them pay at the door. I'm sorry but I don't buy this. What kind of a man would get "offended" and "feel bad" about a woman paying for herself? Even if a guy didn't mind picking up the tab, he sure as hell is not going to be offended or feel bad if a woman wanted to chip in. I know it's hard to believe, but not all men are like you. Some guys feel emasculated if the woman doesn't let him pay. They like to feel like they're taking care of her for the evening. I once had a date look at me, stunned, when I offered to pay for my $2.50 coffee and he said "How cheap do you think I am? It's just coffee." He then extended the date to include dinner, and he insisted on paying for that as well. He wasn't rich, but I didn't want to insult him by forcing him to accept $6.75 from me to cover my veggie burger. He asked me out and he wanted to treat me. That's pretty common behavior, actually. I do care if I bought a dinner from a woman who then does not have the courtesy to even return my calls. What do you want, a refund? I never heard of this attitude, men refusing to pay for dates unless they are guaranteed another date. A date is not a fee-for-service transaction; there is no money back guarantee. Everyone (men and women) invests time, energy, and money in dating and relationships. You can't ask for it all back when said relationships don't work out. Sometimes you get a return on investment, sometimes you don't, that's life. A few dollars for one meal seems like a pretty small investment, so I don't know why guys are getting so bent out of shape over it. If I knew that a guy was fuming over the $8 that he spent on my pizza because I wouldn't go out with him again, I would think there was something seriously wrong with him.
TheBigQuestion Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I think it's because the man is usually the one who asked for the date in the first place. If you invite someone out to dinner, that person is your guest. If I asked a guy out, of course I would pay for him. Just like I would provide food for my guests if I hosted a party. I wouldn't invite people over for a party and then make them pay at the door. This is an invalid but convenient excuse. It's precisely BECAUSE a man does the asking out 90% of the time that a woman should sincerely insist to pay for her part of an early-encounter date. Likewise, the woman should not harbor any expectation that a man pay for her, and judge him as cheap or ungentlemanly as a result.
jobaba Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 What do you want, a refund? I never heard of this attitude, men refusing to pay for dates unless they are guaranteed another date. A date is not a fee-for-service transaction; there is no money back guarantee. Everyone (men and women) invests time, energy, and money in dating and relationships. You can't ask for it all back when said relationships don't work out. Sometimes you get a return on investment, sometimes you don't, that's life. A few dollars for one meal seems like a pretty small investment, so I don't know why guys are getting so bent out of shape over it. If I knew that a guy was fuming over the $8 that he spent on my pizza because I wouldn't go out with him again, I would think there was something seriously wrong with him. Ahaha. You got me thinking. I might start asking my dates to go dutch if it's an obvious trainwreck from the start. But nah. I'm too much of a gentleman. And I don't get many dates anyway. $8, huh? I've spent over $200 on first dates. Lol.
norajane Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 This is an invalid but convenient excuse. It's precisely BECAUSE a man does the asking out 90% of the time that a woman should sincerely insist to pay for her part of an early-encounter date. Likewise, the woman should not harbor any expectation that a man pay for her, and judge him as cheap or ungentlemanly as a result. It may be judgmental, but it's almost impossible not to compare a guy who doesn't pay to all the other guys who do. In my social circle, men pay. If someone doesn't, compared to all the other guys, he is ungentlemanly. But, I'm 44, so I don't know if this discussion even applies to men and women of my generation.
norajane Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 $8, huh? I've spent over $200 on first dates. Lol. :eek: $200 on a first date? That must have been some special bottle of wine!
jobaba Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 :eek: $200 on a first date? That must have been some special bottle of wine! In NYC, that's easy... $30 cover charge x 2 2 drink minimum @ $9/avg drink x 4 2 appetizers cost of $13 each 2 entrees cost of $25 each 2 more beers @ $7 ...with 15% gratuity ~ $214. I don't take women on real expensive first dates anymore, but even romping around a few medium priced places in NYC can add up to around $200 pretty quickly. I am not a cheap date and never have been. I'm surprised more women didn't use me when I was younger and more gullible.
Cypress25 Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 This is an invalid but convenient excuse. It's precisely BECAUSE a man does the asking out 90% of the time that a woman should sincerely insist to pay for her part of an early-encounter date. Likewise, the woman should not harbor any expectation that a man pay for her, and judge him as cheap or ungentlemanly as a result. Then stop asking women out. Then you'll never have to pay. There, problem solved. Everyone expects their date to be polite and courteous to them. If you're rude to your date, of course she'll judge you negatively. Inviting someone out as your guest and then making them pay is rude. Just as rude as a woman who doesn't even offer to pay half. So you judge a woman for not offering to pay, but she's not allowed to judge you for not offering to pay? Men expect certain things from women, but you're saying women shouldn't expect anything from men. $8, huh? I've spent over $200 on first dates. Lol. How the hell did you do that?!
aj22one Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 What do you want, a refund? I never heard of this attitude, men refusing to pay for dates unless they are guaranteed another date. A date is not a fee-for-service transaction; there is no money back guarantee. Everyone (men and women) invests time, energy, and money in dating and relationships. You can't ask for it all back when said relationships don't work out. Sometimes you get a return on investment, sometimes you don't, that's life. A few dollars for one meal seems like a pretty small investment, so I don't know why guys are getting so bent out of shape over it. If I knew that a guy was fuming over the $8 that he spent on my pizza because I wouldn't go out with him again, I would think there was something seriously wrong with him. I think people don't like the insinuation that a man invests less in other parts of the dating process (emotions and "looking nice" or what have you) so asking him to pick up the tap for the whole thing is therefore acceptable. It's actually kinda sexist if you think about it. It's bad enough to go on a date with a nice, cool, girl who decides she's not really into you; it just adds insult to injury when the whole ordeal also ended up costing you 20 bucks. Thing is women invest the same level of emotion into dating as men do the only difference is that you think men should have to pay financially as well. No one "owes" anyone anything just because one party picked up the tab. But it is kinda sneaky and backward (and morally suspect) to lead them on, eat their food (or the food they bought) and then leave 'em high and dry. I'd hope you'd agree.
aj22one Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Then stop asking women out. Then you'll never have to pay. There, problem solved. Everyone expects their date to be polite and courteous to them. If you're rude to your date, of course she'll judge you negatively. Inviting someone out as your guest and then making them pay is rude. Just as rude as a woman who doesn't even offer to pay half. So you judge a woman for not offering to pay, but she's not allowed to judge you for not offering to pay? Men expect certain things from women, but you're saying women shouldn't expect anything from men. You know, women could start asking men out on dates. Then maybe the who pays for who thing would be 50-50. But you can't say that "men should be the pursuers and should ask women out" and then say "and because they are the askers, they should also pay". It's like double the risk for the same exact reward. I just don't get the logic here.
fortyninethousand322 Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Then stop asking women out. Then you'll never have to pay. There, problem solved. I'm in. I've long advocated that men boycott women to prove a point. This idea fits perfectly into that philosophy.
Dust Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I'm in. I've long advocated that men boycott women to prove a point. This idea fits perfectly into that philosophy. Oh brother. Cypress25 is a lovely women I'm sure but I happen to disagree with everything she says. Boycott women at your own expense... business has never been better for me! haha
aj22one Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Oh brother. Cypress25 is a lovely women I'm sure but I happen to disagree with everything she says. Boycott women at your own expense... business has never been better for me! haha You ever get the feeling that 49 can't possibly believe the things he says?
Sanman Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 (edited) Then stop asking women out. Then you'll never have to pay. There, problem solved. Everyone expects their date to be polite and courteous to them. If you're rude to your date, of course she'll judge you negatively. Inviting someone out as your guest and then making them pay is rude. Just as rude as a woman who doesn't even offer to pay half. So you judge a woman for not offering to pay, but she's not allowed to judge you for not offering to pay? Men expect certain things from women, but you're saying women shouldn't expect anything from men. How the hell did you do that?! Or you could simply date a woman who believes in paying her fair share in dating and a relationship. That is what I did. I still fail to see what chivalry or being a gentleman has to do with paying for a meal. Even if it did, should a lady not be forthright and honest with such a gentleman and let him know she is not interested? If it is the man's role to pay, what is the role of a true lady in such a situation? Also, I find $8 as ridiculous a sum as $200. Where are guys taking women for $8? Most dates I went on cost a minimum $40-50. Many women I know would call spending so little cheap and ungentlemanly, real woman should be treated to a proper meal according to them. See how that works. Anything women disagree with is considered not gentlemanly. It seems any woman is the sole arbiter of what a gentleman is as there is no real consensus. Edited January 11, 2012 by Sanman
Cypress25 Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I think people don't like the insinuation that a man invests less in other parts of the dating process (emotions and "looking nice" or what have you) so asking him to pick up the tap for the whole thing is therefore acceptable. Well, it is true that most men get lazy once they're in a relationship and they think they don't have to try anymore. Most women know that after 3-6 months with a guy, he'll go into "lazy boyfriend" mode and she won't even be able to drag him off the couch and away from the TV, and he'll forget to wish her a happy birthday, and he'll be more interested in his video games than in her, etc. So I think some women have the attitude of "If he isn't even willing to try in the beginning, when the hell is he willing to try?" Case in point: In college, I dated my boyfriend for 2.5 years. It was mostly a great relationship. I always paid for myself on dates; we were college kids, neither of us had much money. But he got lazy real quick, once he felt like he had me. I don't think I ever got lazy. I always went out of my way to do things for him, drive him places, make him feel special, etc. On our 1-year anniversary, we were planning to go out for dinner. Nowhere fancy or expensive, and he knew I'd be paying for myself anyway. At the last minute, he decided he didn't want to go because he didn't feel like getting dressed. I kid you not. We ended up doing nothing for our 1-year anniversary because he couldn't be bothered to put on pants. And I know he's not the only guy to experience "lazy boyfriend" mode. No one "owes" anyone anything just because one party picked up the tab. But it is kinda sneaky and backward (and morally suspect) to lead them on, eat their food (or the food they bought) and then leave 'em high and dry. You know, it usually takes at least one full date before you know if you want a second date. During that date, I'm not leading him on, I'm still trying to decide how I feel about him. And I'm sure he's doing the same with me. I never thought, "I better decide how I feel about him before the bill comes, because I can't let him pay for me unless I know for sure that I'll go out with him again." Is that how it works? You know, women could start asking men out on dates. Then maybe the who pays for who thing would be 50-50. But you can't say that "men should be the pursuers and should ask women out" and then say "and because they are the askers, they should also pay". It's like double the risk for the same exact reward. I just don't get the logic here. Women can ask men out on dates. Some women do. That's fine, if that's what they want to do. Personally, I have no desire to ask men out because I'm not comfortable being the aggressive one in that situation. That's a little too bold for me. It has nothing to do with money or who would be paying for the date, it's just not part of my personality to make the first move. One of my female friends is very forward and she asks men out all the time; she's not shy AT ALL. We can't all be like her. I never said men should be the pursuers. If men don't want to pursue, they don't have to. That doesn't necessarily mean that women will choose to pursue them though. It's a choice, everyone can choose whether or not they want to be the pursuer. I happen to prefer men who choose to pursue me, not because they should but because they want to. A guy asking me out is a sure sign that he likes me. And I think a guy NOT asking me out is a sure sign that he doesn't like me, so I'm not going to pursue that.
colliejoanie Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Some men are chivalrous, not because they expect anything in return, but because it's a part of their character. I'm not sure why that's hard to believe. I'm not sure either. I feel like I'm on a different planet sometimes in these posts......I have dated some A-holes, but honestly I've NEVER had this issue come up. It astounds me that this is such an issue with men. I'm wondering if I should be tackling the waiter when he comes out of the kitchen in order to get the bill first, so the guy I'm with doesn't think I'm an "entitled gold digger".......but then.....if I tackled a waiter, I wouldn't be percieved as feminine, right?
johan Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I think the original poster is jumping the gun on the courting thing. He clearly has not spent enough time wooing these women. First you woo, then you court. If you woo right, then courting is much easier.
Cypress25 Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Or you could simply date a woman who believes in paying her fair share in dating and a relationship. That is what I did. I do believe in everything being fair, whenever possible. That's why I always offer to pay my half. Still, I think it's polite and a nice gesture if the man declines my offer. I still fail to see what chivalry or being a gentleman has to do with paying for a meal. Even if it did, should a lady not be forthright and honest with such a gentleman and let him know she is not interested? If it is the man's role to pay, what is the role of a true lady in such a situation? It's not about being a gentleman, it's about being polite. Men and women should both be polite, don't you think? And the lady probably doesn't know if she is interested until after the first or second date. I can't always make up my mind about the guy before the bill comes, please forgive me. Also, I find $8 as ridiculous a sum as $200. Where are guys taking women for $8? Most dates I went on cost a minimum $40-50. Many women I know would call spending so little cheap and ungentlemanly, real woman should be treated to a proper meal according to them. See how that works. It was a proper meal. It was a cheese pizza and it was delicious, thank you very much. We went to some pizza place in Baltimore, I forget what it's called. I ordered it, knowing how much it cost, because I always try to be considerate of the guy who's paying for my meal. That's the thing: women don't judge men by how much they spend, they judge men by their attitude about treating a girl on a date. You don't have to spend a lot, you just have to show that you're willing to do something nice for another person. It's not about the money, it's about the gesture.
aj22one Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 You know, it usually takes at least one full date before you know if you want a second date. During that date, I'm not leading him on, I'm still trying to decide how I feel about him. And I'm sure he's doing the same with me. I never thought, "I better decide how I feel about him before the bill comes, because I can't let him pay for me unless I know for sure that I'll go out with him again." Is that how it works? Look, do what you want and what's right for you. I'm just saying it is kinda a raw deal for guys and well it would be dishonest to deny that. Most of this is just me whistling Dixie anyway since a) I ask out women and b) I pay for dates (mostly because it's expected). I just don't get this idea that the dating process represents a 50-50 split of risk when it clearly doesn't. And I know he's not the only guy to experience "lazy boyfriend" mode. He might not be the "only guy" but I'd argue he's in the minority. Perhaps women who are dating lazy men merely need to pick better guys to date.
Sanman Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 I do believe in everything being fair, whenever possible. That's why I always offer to pay my half. Still, I think it's polite and a nice gesture if the man declines my offer. It's not about being a gentleman, it's about being polite. Men and women should both be polite, don't you think? And the lady probably doesn't know if she is interested until after the first or second date. I can't always make up my mind about the guy before the bill comes, please forgive me. It was a proper meal. It was a cheese pizza and it was delicious, thank you very much. We went to some pizza place in Baltimore, I forget what it's called. I ordered it, knowing how much it cost, because I always try to be considerate of the guy who's paying for my meal. That's the thing: women don't judge men by how much they spend, they judge men by their attitude about treating a girl on a date. You don't have to spend a lot, you just have to show that you're willing to do something nice for another person. It's not about the money, it's about the gesture. Some women do not consider cheese pizza a proper meal. That doesn't include drinks or other date activities. Unless all he got you was a slice of pizza, he spent more than that. I'm willing to do many nice things for other people. I hold doors, pull out chairs, and treat people with consideration. However, if i were to go on a single date a week for a year (at $50), I would spend over $2500/yr on women I will likely never speak to again. Even at $8 a date, that is $400 in pizza I could have saved for more important things. I do think that both people should be polite, so maybe both parties should agree to go dutch. Otherwise, how is a woman being polite to me as she is not paying for me? Much like others, I have paid for dates as well (sometimes dutch and sometimes all), I think the truth is that many more men than you think pay to have a shot at you rather than out of politeness or etiquette.
TheBigQuestion Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 Then stop asking women out. Then you'll never have to pay. There, problem solved. Everyone expects their date to be polite and courteous to them. If you're rude to your date, of course she'll judge you negatively. Inviting someone out as your guest and then making them pay is rude. Just as rude as a woman who doesn't even offer to pay half. So you judge a woman for not offering to pay, but she's not allowed to judge you for not offering to pay? Men expect certain things from women, but you're saying women shouldn't expect anything from men. Stop asking women out? Done. I have a girlfriend, and I didn't have to "take her out" on any dates in order for her to achieve that status (although I gladly pay for the majority of our activities nowadays. Why? Because she earned a place in my life). Neither did I have to do it with the previous three women I was involved with, all of whom were accustomed to being treated in such a way before meeting me. It's called ingenuity, even if I didn't realize my ingenuity as it was happening. I presently have no dog in this fight. I simply agree with the posters that say that it in this case, dating is quite a raw deal for men. Total non-monetary risks of dating + monetary risk of dating =/= non-monetary risks of dating. The first part of the inequality clearly exceeds the second part. Again, plenty of women will (thankfully) insist on paying their share and do not consider it rude if a man does not take her up on that offer. You claiming that it's rude is (thankfully) not some objective fact. Regardless of what anyone may think, the primary reason men end up insisting on footing the bill is because society has trained them to believe that by not doing so, they are being ungentlemanly. It is NOT merely a matter of politeness, because women are not taught to pay for the guys they ask out (or vice versa) in order to avoid being called "unladylike." It likewise is not the result of some embryonic sense of chivalry. It is all arbitrary nonsense, and the more men out there realize this, the less likely they'll lose out in dating.
Recommended Posts