The whole courting process is unfair

[TheBigQuestion]

 

 

I don't know, probably for the same reason that men don't want to admit that they benefit from the custom that says women should be responsible for all household and child care duties, in addition to their full-time job. Truly, I never felt that I was benefiting financially by allowing a man to treat me to the first 2 or 3 cheap-ass dates we went on. (If we continued dating, that is usually the point at which we would start splitting the cost of dates.) I suppose I did get a few free slices of pizza, but I wasn't thinking about how much money I was saving. Free dinner is not a benefit that I care about. What I care about is the gesture behind it, because I give a lot to relationships and I do a lot for my boyfriend, and I'd like to be with someone who is equally giving and equally willing to do things for the person they care about. I don't want to be with someone who is always itemizing the bill, who is always saying "that's not fair" or "you owe me," who is never willing to give of himself without demanding something in return. Scrooge, basically. No one wants to date Scrooge.

 

So is that an admission, then?

 

I'm not sure what age group you are in, but I am in my mid-20s. From a very young age, both media and the public school system taught me that it was absolutely, unabashedly wrong to expect women to do all the chores or do all of the childcare. It was branded as chauvinistic, old-fashioned, and demeaning to women to think that way. And you know what? It worked. I can't think of more than a handful of guys I've known who actually expect their significant others to become housewives or be the primary cleaning/child-rearing partner. Most of those guys are extremely conservative and/or from a patriarchal culture. Every other guy I know bends over backwards to make sure that their significant other doesn't feel like they're shouldering the entire housework burden. From a broader perspective, the stay-at-home-dad phenomenon is increasing. A Time magazine article found that couples are equally busy and that the housework burden is pretty close to equal between married couples. I feel like I brought this up a few months back and you tried your damndest to debunk the articles findings. You weren't successful.

 

On the other hand, what education did the females of my generation get? Well, let's look at the results. Regardless of cultural or political beliefs, a majority of women continue to harbor the expectation that a man is going to pay her way through her early dates, without really knowing her very well, lest he be called "cheap," "poor," or "ungentlemanly." This is a belief that persists among women in pretty much every cultural and class background. It even applies to more extreme subcultures. I have a few friends and acquaintances who are militant vegans, crust punks, etc. Essentially, they are people who make Dennis Kucinich look like a hardened right-wing ideologue. Many of the women IN THAT HIGHLY P.C. SUBCULTURE still hold on to the expectation that a man will pay for them.

 

I think this difference in results can be explained by the fact that the old social norms that women were accustomed to were not denigrated throughout their childhoods by their families, by the education system, and by the media. THAT is what I take issue with. Dasein's rhetoric is a bit much for me at times, but his core message is correct: Stop trying to pick and choose which customs and freedoms to which you think you are entitled.

Edited January 12, 2012 by TheBigQuestion

[Queen Zenobia]

Please don't make me cite the earning gap between men and women. (I'll do it anyway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male%E2%80%93female_income_disparity_in_the_United_States) And then there's the glass ceiling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass_ceiling. Aside from that, just the fact that men are generally more respected and taken more seriously than women wherever they go is enough to illustrate the patriarchal attitude. We're all supposed to have the same rights, but in reality, we don't.

 

 

The wage gap myth has been debunked on this board and in other places. Women make about 98 cents on the dollar compared to men.

[Sanman]

So is that an admission, then?

 

I'm not sure what age group you are in, but I am in my mid-20s. From a very young age, both media and the public school system taught me that it was absolutely, unabashedly wrong to expect women to do all the chores or do all of the childcare. It was branded as chauvinistic, old-fashioned, and demeaning to women to think that way. And you know what? It worked. I can't think of more than a handful of guys I've known who actually expect their significant others to become housewives or be the primary cleaning/child-rearing partner. Most of those guys are extremely conservative and/or from a patriarchal culture. Every other guy I know bends over backwards to make sure that their significant other doesn't feel like they're shouldering the entire housework burden. From a broader perspective, the stay-at-home-dad phenomenon is increasing. A Time magazine article found that couples are equally busy and that the housework burden is pretty close to equal between married couples. I feel like I brought this up a few months back and you tried your damndest to debunk the articles findings. You weren't successful.

 

On the other hand, what education did the females of my generation get? Well, let's look at the results. Regardless of cultural or political beliefs, a majority of women continue to harbor the expectation that a man is going to pay her way through her early dates, without really knowing her very well, lest he be called "cheap," "poor," or "ungentlemanly." This is a belief that persists among women in pretty much every cultural and class background. It even applies to more extreme subcultures. I have a few friends and acquaintances who are militant vegans, crust punks, etc. Essentially, they are people who make Dennis Kucinich look like a hardened right-wing ideologue. Many of the women IN THAT HIGHLY P.C. SUBCULTURE still hold on to the expectation that a man will pay for them.

 

I think this difference in results can be explained by the fact that the old social norms that women were accustomed to were not denigrated throughout their childhoods by their families, by the education system, and by the media. THAT is what I take issue with. Dasein's rhetoric is a bit much for me at times, but his core message is correct: Stop trying to pick and choose which customs and freedoms to which you think you are entitled.

 

I have to agree with this. Also, most of the women I have met and dated really do not have domestic skills better than most men. I have yet to date a woman who attempted to coo me more than a single meal. I usually help as well and cook for them more often as I enjoy cooking and am pretty good at it. I can also sew, while most of the women I know cannot. Some the women I have date barely knew how to do laundry. They do usually clean better than I do though. Is that really taking care of all the household chores? I have fixed cars/stuff and done 'man chores' as well. The truth is that most people of this younger generation, male or female, have little idea how to perform household chores properly.

 

Cypress, your whole argument is that there are other inequalities in life and, thus, we should simply accept one more rather than striving for fairness and parity between the sexes.

[dasein]

Poor baby! Some mean authority figure is forcing you to go out on multiple dates to fancy restaurants with women who demand to be treated to expensive dinners. And they're making you do this several times a week, every week, for the rest of your life! And you don't have any choice in the matter, how horrible.

 

Rationalize however you like, the "gentleman tax" adds up to quite a pile of cash over the dating life of the average man. Over 100k with interest in my case. And if you don't pay it, get ready to be slandered by a harpy nest of privileged shrews around the brunch table on Sunday.

 

But really, I don't see how it's "rottenly, unabashedly dishonest, privileged and self-absorbed" to say that the average cost that I incur on a date is $10. It's the truth.

 

Oh, you said that? Had just skimmed the thread. Makes perfect sense now. Here's a test I apply to "facts" I post here on LS: If you said the factual claim in question IRL to a table full of average neutral people and they spit up their spaghetti in laughter, it's probably not the type of "fact" you should advocate for. Claiming that men spend an average of $10 of gentleman tax per date is one of those "spaghetti spitting" type facts.

 

I don't know why that's so hard to believe. Nor do I understand why dating should be a "lifetime tax on men." Don't most men eventually get married and then have access to a joint checking account that includes their wife's income?

 

Men pay more than women in relationships, there are exceptions, but the generalization is accurate. The gentleman tax consists of three components: 1) The early date tax, expectation that men foot 100% of the bill for early dates. Quite a few working women out there expect the man to pay for ALL dates even today. 2) The relationship expense tax, men pay more for activities during relationships generally. I went to lunch with friends recently, a relatively cheap lunch. They owed me, so my friend made a huge deal that his GF (who hardly pays for anything ever) would be paying for the lunch... with "her very own money!!" Well Hallef-ing lujah... her very... own... money. How truly lucky I was to be there for that.

 

IME, men pay about 80% of relationship expenses, women pay about 20%, regardless of income... unless he looks like Brad Pitt, then she will "keep" him while out looking for a provider/sucker to take care of the both of them.

 

The final form of gentleman tax is the gift tax. Men spend about 200-500% more on gifts for women than women spend on gifts for men IME. This includes all the big gifting holidays together with the BS marketing holidays women demand patronage for also. A friend had his GF get mad because he didn't get her anything for mother's day... she has no children. LAWLZ, but typical.

 

So the gentleman's tax has three components, all need to go.

 

And here I thought affirmative action was about race, not gender.

 

Spaghetti Test...

 

Even with all the changes in gender roles, we still live in a patriarchal society where men have every advantage.

 

Nothing anyone can say can convince you there isn't/wasn't/hasn't ever been some patriarchy holding women back, so will just offer that "the patriarchy" is an evil lie perpetuated by evil people without any further substantiation.

 

By the way, most men these days don't want a woman who stays chaste before marriage and then becomes a traditional housewife.

 

When they are courting looking for a wife lots do in fact.

 

They want a woman who will engage in wild sex on the third date

 

No, they don't really want to date these types at all, just bang them. The weaklings are the ones timidly trying to exchange dates for sex.

 

That's why women are better off dating men who actually like women. The ones who hate women, like you, can stay home alone and bitch about how much each date is costing them.

 

That's right, any man who doesn't toe the "gentleman tax" line must necessarily hate women. That's the usual way the slander goes after the "cheap-calling." "You don't want to pay; you just hate women." Perfect logical sense.

 

No one wants to date Scrooge.

 

No one wants to date a de facto hooker either.

[Cypress25]

So is that an admission, then?

 

No. Like I said, I don't feel that I benefit from the money that a man spends on a date. I'm not in it for the free meal. I only benefit if it's a good date and I have a good time with the guy and it leads to another chance to see him. (Hopefully he would feel that he benefits from a good date with me too.) If it's a bad date, there's no benefit to it whatsoever. A free slice of pizza can't make up for it. Women are not clinging to the benefit of free meals; we're clinging to the perceived benefit of dating a man who has a giving, caring nature. Treating a girl to lunch/dinner/coffee/whatever is seen as evidence of that.

 

I'm not sure what age group you are in, but I am in my mid-20s. From a very young age, both media and the public school system taught me that it was absolutely, unabashedly wrong to expect women to do all the chores or do all of the childcare. It was branded as chauvinistic, old-fashioned, and demeaning to women to think that way.

 

I'm in my mid-20s as well and I remember being taught the same things. But unlike you, I have not seen evidence that those teachings had any lasting effect. I know of a few couples who share their responsibilities equally, which is great, but they seem to be the minority. I thought my generation would be different, but I still see so many working mothers who get no help from their husbands at home.

 

I can't think of more than a handful of guys I've known who actually expect their significant others to become housewives or be the primary cleaning/child-rearing partner. Most of those guys are extremely conservative and/or from a patriarchal culture. Every other guy I know bends over backwards to make sure that their significant other doesn't feel like they're shouldering the entire housework burden.

 

I wish I saw more of that. Maybe some day I will.

 

A Time magazine article found that couples are equally busy and that the housework burden is pretty close to equal between married couples. I feel like I brought this up a few months back and you tried your damndest to debunk the articles findings. You weren't successful.

 

You're getting me mixed up with someone else, hon. I've never discussed this with you before.

 

On the other hand, what education did the females of my generation get? Well, let's look at the results. Regardless of cultural or political beliefs, a majority of women continue to harbor the expectation that a man is going to pay her way through her early dates, without really knowing her very well, lest he be called "cheap," "poor," or "ungentlemanly."

 

Actually, I think most girls our age were taught that it's polite to offer to split the bill on dates, but if the guy insists on paying, we should let him otherwise he'll feel bad. As one of my guy friends said to me in high school, "Don't be a bitch about it, just let him pay." Another important dating lesson for girls was to always order the cheapest thing on the menu. Despite what you may think, girls were not taught to act like spoiled princesses on dates. We were taught that it's polite to let the man pay because it makes him feel good (his way of being manly or something) but to be considerate about it so he doesn't end up spending too much.

 

It's a bit of a shock for those girls to grow up and encounter men who do NOT want to pay for even one inexpensive date because they do NOT see the value in such a gesture. To these men, the money is more important than the gesture of treating someone as a guest. They don't care about the date or the woman or the conversation or the act of getting to know each other. All they care about is money. They're so fixated on money that they don't even care if either person enjoys the date.

 

Stop trying to pick and choose which customs and freedoms to which you think you are entitled.

 

Women don't think they are entitled to having men pay for them on dates. It's just that many women think it's a nice gesture if the man does pay, and they appreciate it because it says something about his character. It's not about the money, dude. You need to accept that. When I give my boyfriend a gift, it's not because he thinks he's entitled to it. It's because I enjoy making him feel special and I try to do that whenever possible. I don't begrudge him the few dollars I spent on his gift.

[TheBigQuestion]

 

Cypress, your whole argument is that there are other inequalities in life and, thus, we should simply accept one more rather than striving for fairness and parity between the sexes.

 

Exactly. I don't buy it at all. I do not to any extent believe that women should stay at home, "barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen" as the old saying goes. I know few other men whose attitudes about women even come close to approaching that, or that women should be the only ones doing the housework. So why should women persist in acting in a way/holding beliefs that are inequitable, and unjustifiably so?

[dasein]

Please don't make me...

 

You injected the same tired feminist claptrap into a very recent thread on men approaching women. You got schooled by others and myself in that thread in a very clear way. Yet here you are stirring up the same stuff all over again just a few days later as if that thread hadn't taken place. Par for the course. LS never ceases to entertain.

[Woggle]

The fact that some women view paying on dates as some sort of feminist payback for the sins of patiarchy is a perfect example of why men don't want to do it anymore.

 

Most men do not want to bring gender war crap into our dating lives.

[TheBigQuestion]

 

Actually, I think most girls our age were taught that it's polite to offer to split the bill on dates, but if the guy insists on paying, we should let him otherwise he'll feel bad. As one of my guy friends said to me in high school, "Don't be a bitch about it, just let him pay." Another important dating lesson for girls was to always order the cheapest thing on the menu. Despite what you may think, girls were not taught to act like spoiled princesses on dates. We were taught that it's polite to let the man pay because it makes him feel good (his way of being manly or something) but to be considerate about it so he doesn't end up spending too much.

 

It's a bit of a shock for those girls to grow up and encounter men who do NOT want to pay for even one inexpensive date because they do NOT see the value in such a gesture. To these men, the money is more important than the gesture of treating someone as a guest. They don't care about the date or the woman or the conversation or the act of getting to know each other. All they care about is money. They're so fixated on money that they don't even care if either person enjoys the date.

 

 

Women don't think they are entitled to having men pay for them on dates. It's just that many women think it's a nice gesture if the man does pay, and they appreciate it because it says something about his character. It's not about the money, dude. You need to accept that. When I give my boyfriend a gift, it's not because he thinks he's entitled to it. It's because I enjoy making him feel special and I try to do that whenever possible. I don't begrudge him the few dollars I spent on his gift.

 

You and every other woman who makes the assumption that paying on a first or second date says anything about a man's "character" are pretty misguided. It says nothing about a man's character at all, or your compatibility with that man. Case in point. In both active threads about this topic, is it really any surprise that most of the women who think paying on dates is related to character are either divorced or well into their 30s without having ever been married? It's obvious that their people-pickers are way off.

 

It's not about the money for me, either. Dasein makes a point that it can aggregate to quite a bit, but I don't see it as an issue. My problem is with the custom itself and the unjustified negative judgments that frequently occur if a guy doesn't comply with it. What person in their right mind would call me "cheap" just because I think it's appallingly stupid to spend money on de facto strangers who aren't your charity cases, who either expect the guy to pay for everything or assume that he will? What other custom do you know of where people are compelled to pay the way for strangers, charity cases notwithstanding?

 

I take issue not with the amounts of money involved but rather the cultural, moral, and psychological aspects of it. I thought I had made that clear, but I apologize if I didn't. I have no dog in this fight, seeing that I am in a relationship in which I do pay for quite a bit, but I have a girlfriend who is confident enough in herself to insist to chip in an equitable share most of the time. I just implore men to stop feeding this expectation. If it worked for me, and if it worked ON the last few women I've been involved with, it can work for anybody.

[Sanman]

No. Like I said, I don't feel that I benefit from the money that a man spends on a date. I'm not in it for the free meal. I only benefit if it's a good date and I have a good time with the guy and it leads to another chance to see him. (Hopefully he would feel that he benefits from a good date with me too.) If it's a bad date, there's no benefit to it whatsoever. A free slice of pizza can't make up for it. Women are not clinging to the benefit of free meals; we're clinging to the perceived benefit of dating a man who has a giving, caring nature. Treating a girl to lunch/dinner/coffee/whatever is seen as evidence of that.

 

I'm in my mid-20s as well and I remember being taught the same things. But unlike you, I have not seen evidence that those teachings had any lasting effect. I know of a few couples who share their responsibilities equally, which is great, but they seem to be the minority. I thought my generation would be different, but I still see so many working mothers who get no help from their husbands at home.

 

First of all, paying for a slice of pizza has very little to do with a caring, giving nature. I believe it was you that complained about lazy bf syndrome. I think that many of the men here that prefer to split the bill are also willing to do more in a relationship in other ways. Something to think about.

 

As for women being taught to order the cheapest thing on the menu, I have yet to experience this for myself. I have had women order from all over the menu, I have had them order drinks and dessert, and I have even had them suggest expensive ($30-40 a plate) restaurants to try all the time. For most, I honestly do not think that they even consider how much I might be paying for them on a date. However, that signals to me that they are selfish and inconsiderate of my finances.

 

For me, splitting a check has a lot to do with the equality I look for in a relationship. My gf and I split the costs in our relationship. We both spoil each other with gifts when we can and are both considerate of the others' finances and obligations. She is my partner in every way. To me, the women who want men to pay and are not considerate of such things early on signal bigger issues in the future. I don't want to be one of those couples where the woman does not participate in finances, buries her head in the sand, and then blames me and leaves if there are ever money problems. I want someone who will work with me in all aspects of the relationship.

[kaylan]

Of course I want to be made to feel special. My gal spends a lot of time and effort on looking good for me. She makes an effoirt to say things to give encouragement to my work. She makes an effort to participate in activities I enjoy. she'll buy me an inexpensive but thoughtful gifts...perhaps a wedge of my favorite cheese or a nature guide book.

 

Both of us are rather well off but, to all you younger guys under 30, it would be an eye opener on 'how much' that girl sitting across from you may have spent to trying and look her best. The $50 tab for the meal might suddenly not seem like a lot. Also, taking 10 minutes to clean your car isn't much effort to the hour she took prepping before the date. Guys don't always appreciate the time, effort and expense our gals put into a date.

Im am going to repeat something I said earlier. Because this is bs reasoning you have here.

 

"And I dont dress to impress and take time to groom myself? Guys take the time to make a good impression too. Trust me, the guy who complains about a girl not dressing up all fancy is VERY rare. Most guys wouldnt give a crap if she dressed in a simple tee shirt with nice jeans and shoes. As long as she looks nice.

 

Simple can be well done. White tee, with blue jeans and nice boots are a classic. Add a peacoat and youre good. Hell throw a simple button down shirt or blouse over the tee shirt and you are even better. Id be SUPER impressed by a girl who could look good in seconds and doesnt take forever to get ready. If she can look awesome in something basic, well thats a girl who knows fashion imo...since most people make basic outfits look crappy.

 

Lets be real. Men buy nice clothes and try to look nice as well. That is not the sole realm of women.

 

Someone dressing nice for a date has NOTHING to do with whos paying. Both people should be trying to look presentable for one another. Im so sick and tired of hearing the tired old reasoning that women put "so much effort" into their appearance that a man should show appreciation by paying for the date. Um...how about I do the likewise thing and show her Im appreciative by looking equally awesome.

 

But then again, lord knows my type isnt the girl who feels she can trade of her appearance for cash. Like I said in a previous post. Any sort of entitlement I sense will have her end up in the friendzone or hookup-only zone. Ive already experienced that even with girls who were rather high maintenance when it comes to boyfriends, but will drop that requirement if they are attracted to the dude and dig him enough."