Consolidated Discussion - Paying for Dates

[Woggle]

Guys just think of this as a filter. This is how you tell the difference between genuinely interested in getting to know a guy and a woman who just wants the princess treatment. The funny thing is that once a woman proves herself to me I have no issue spoiling her but somebody I just met is not going to get that kind of investment.

[FrustratedStandards]

Guys just think of this as a filter. This is how you tell the difference between genuinely interested in getting to know a guy and a woman who just wants the princess treatment. The funny thing is that once a woman proves herself to me I have no issue spoiling her but somebody I just met is not going to get that kind of investment.

 

Did you ever think that a man has to prove himself also? And a part of proving himself as worthy is by showing a woman how he can take care of her and be a gentleman?

 

It goes both ways.

[Woggle]

Did you ever think that a man has to prove himself also? And a part of proving himself as worthy is by showing a woman how he can take care of her and be a gentleman?

 

It goes both ways.

 

How about both prove themselves by being interesting people that each other wants to get to know better instead of him buying her love and affection?

[FrustratedStandards]

How about both prove themselves by being interesting people that each other wants to get to know better instead of him buying her love and affection?

 

Ugh. Again with this whole buying thing.

 

It's not about spending money. A part of what makes a man interesting and attractive is his ABILITY to SHOW a woman that he is CAPABLE of taking care of her. If a man doesn't care to show these qualities off, then what's the point of asking her out?

 

A man asks a woman out because he is interested. He is free to act like a douche, let the door close in her face, not bother having good conversation and then making her pay for herself, but then what's the point of the date?

 

It's like a girl saying "I'm not going to bother looking pretty for the date, he has to like me for who I am and not what I look like". So she shows up in ripped and stained clothes, messy hair and a face like she just woke up in the morning.

 

Does she still sound appealing to you? No. And that's exactly how a man is when he doesn't pay for a date: no longer appealing or attractive.

 

Dates are to put your best foot forward and hope it goes somewhere. Not picking up the tab is a huge turn off and it goes from "I went on a date" to "I went to dinner with some guy".

Edited May 19, 2012 by FrustratedStandards

[Lostinlife4now]

I like chivalry! I think it is hot when a man pays the tab. But I always ask if I could leave the tip! Since unemployment is rampant right now, I don't mind helping out!

 

And I like to tip well! My daughter is a server, and it just makes me feel like I am doing something good!

[Woggle]

I can forgive older women who are used to that because they come from the days when both genders had their roles but young women who just want the princess treatment while offering nothing in return are just a turn off.

[veggirl]

I seriously don't care who pays. As long as neither feel like their taken advantage of. I find each partner should contribute.

 

I agree with this, totally.

 

And I think that dinner dates (which seems the topic? A dinner date and the bill arrives is what people seem to be refering to) should be saved for later in a relationship, what a dull way to get to know someone. I can see how splitting a dinner tab could be awkward.

 

First dates should be fun and light-hearted. Activities and a drink or something. One person pay for the first half, the second the next half. What's wrong with that?

 

I don't like a guy to pay all the time. It makes me feel uncomfortable I do worry he would resent me for it or think *I* am cheap. IF I were to go on a dinner date for a first date, and he picked up the check no I'm not going to *insist* on paying half, but I would offer, and if he did not accept, I would ABSOLUTELY be paying for the 2nd date.

 

I'm not sure how paying would make a guy feel more MANLY. That is pathetic.

 

I pay often, and I'm a girl (duh), it doesn't make me feel MANLY. It makes me feel good, like I'm doing something nice for the guy. A guy that needs to bust out his wallet to feel manly is NOT the guy for me

 

Anyway, I've never met so many dudes against paying or so many girls insistant on a guy paying (early on) IRL like I have on LS. It's weird. People on here are so RIGID on this.

[FrustratedStandards]

I can forgive older women who are used to that because they come from the days when both genders had their roles but young women who just want the princess treatment while offering nothing in return are just a turn off.

 

That's not fair.

 

So just because a woman is young and has this old-school mentality, all of sudden it's princess treatment?

 

You should be slapped for saying that. A mentality is a mentality, and just because it is less common today, doesn't mean that if it still exists it becomes a bad thing.

 

Men back in the day never complained about picking up the tab. Now that there are other options that are acceptable, all of a sudden they've all gotten cheap.

Edited May 19, 2012 by FrustratedStandards

[Woggle]

That's not fair.

 

So just because a woman is young and has this old-school mentality, all of sudden it's princess treatment?

 

You should be slapped for saying that. A mentality is a mentality, and just because it is less common today, doesn't mean that if it still exists it becomes a bad thing.

 

Men back in the day never complained about picking up the tab. Now that there are other options that are acceptable, all of a sudden they've all gotten cheap.

 

I am sure some men did but women also complained much less about living up to their role and being loving and loyal to their men. Bring that back and I will be all for men treating a woman on a date. If women want chivalry they would be worthy of it.

 

It's princess treatment because many younger women think it is beneath them to do the things for men that men like but demand men still be gentlemen. It is a two way street.

[Kamille]

Since I have yet to encounter a dearth of men who refuse to pay for dates, I'm wondering how true it can be that women no longer want to be loyal and loving to their boyfriends. Certainly, my friends are loyal and loving to their men.

 

Women with an entitlement complex surely exists. But I think rumors of their expansion are greatly exaggerated.

[FrustratedStandards]

I am sure some men did but women also complained much less about living up to their role and being loving and loyal to their men. Bring that back and I will be all for men treating a woman on a date. If women want chivalry they would be worthy of it.

 

It's princess treatment because many younger women think it is beneath them to do the things for men that men like but demand men still be gentlemen. It is a two way street.

 

Then those women are stupid. You shouldn't always assume, though, that just because a woman expects her man to pay that she is a selfish brat. I am more than willing to cook and clean for my man, and I have always done it in the past.

 

It's princess treatment if the woman is a b*tch, but not if she believes in gender roles and understands that she has shoes to fill too.

[Woggle]

Then those women are stupid. You shouldn't always assume, though, that just because a woman expects her man to pay that she is a selfish brat. I am more than willing to cook and clean for my man, and I have always done it in the past.

 

It's princess treatment if the woman is a b*tch, but not if she believes in gender roles and understands that she has shoes to fill too.

 

This I agree with but sadly some women these days don't deserve the chivalrous treatment. Treat men better and most men would be more than willing to be gentlemen again.

[FitChick]

I think the resistance to paying from younger men on LS comes from the fact that they have less disposable income than someone older and established in a career. A man their own age who is doing well financially is seen to have an unfair advantage when dating because he has no qualms about picking up the tab.

 

I also think that the younger generation, most of whom come from broken homes, have no experience of seeing their fathers picking up the tab. They see their mom and her friends going dutch. Their mothers are their only adult role models. However, since women their own age have the same experience, they don't mind going dutch either because it's all they know.

 

You're essentially calling men in my generation a loser if you split the bill or pay the whole thing. That would bring further dating to a screeching halt. It is not usually insulting for the woman to pay for coffee / quick snack if the couple has been dating for a while. The cost must never be extravagant. The woman can also pay the tip, as was previously mentioned. I do both of the aforementioned.

[Woggle]

I also think that many men are just plain fed up with the state of relationships these days and saying the hell with chivalry is a response to it.

[d'Arthez]

It is all about expectations. If you meet a man / woman it is in a certain social setting. Such a setting gives important cues to what the expectations of both people involved are. If people try and meet people through OLD, their profiles should contain enough clues to tell you what expectations are.

 

If for some reason I decided to date a Southern Belle, I know she will have slightly different expectations than if I decided to date a $200k / year corporate lawyer in New York.

[FrustratedStandards]

This I agree with but sadly some women these days don't deserve the chivalrous treatment. Treat men better and most men would be more than willing to be gentlemen again.

 

That is why I blame women for the decline in chivalry. I made a thread about this not too long ago titled "Feminists ruined men".

 

I also think that many men are just plain fed up with the state of relationships these days and saying the hell with chivalry is a response to it.

 

THIS I don't agree with. Lots of relationships go to sh*t but that doesn't mean you have to turn into an a**hole about it. I'm single now because my past relationships didn't work out, and you don't see me walking around being a b*tch to every single guy.

 

This I blame the men for. If it's not working out, then becoming more bitter isn't going to help you. I would think these men would continue to be nice until they found a woman who actually appreciated it.

[Kamille]

I also think that many men are just plain fed up with the state of relationships these days and saying the hell with chivalry is a response to it.

 

So, if a man is chivalrous on a date, does that mean he's not bitter about the state of relationships?

 

Because, in my experience, there is no death of chivalrous men out there. Not only that, but I would rather date a man who enjoys women then one who sees everything as if it was a power struggle. I want a man who is capable of making his relationship and marriage a priority.

[FrustratedStandards]

So, if a man is chivalrous on a date, does that mean he's not bitter about the state of relationships?

 

Because, in my experience, there is no death of chivalrous men out there. Not only that, but I would rather date a man who enjoys women then one who sees everything as if it was a power struggle. I want a man who is capable of making his relationship and marriage a priority.

 

How chivalrous a man is has nothing to do with priority. And you're right, just because he pays doesn't mean he isn't bitter. But NOT paying because he IS bitter about relationships is far worse.

 

That's the same as him giving up on being a man because his relationship experience has been bad. If a man stops paying out of BITTERNESS (and nothing else) then it shows a great deal about his character, and no one wants a man like that.

[Els]

How chivalrous a man is has nothing to do with priority. And you're right, just because he pays doesn't mean he isn't bitter. But NOT paying because he IS bitter about relationships is far worse.

 

That's the same as him giving up on being a man because his relationship experience has been bad. If a man stops paying out of BITTERNESS (and nothing else) then it shows a great deal about his character, and no one wants a man like that.

 

True, that. I think there are some men who don't pay genuinely because they want to encourage modern non-adherence to gender roles, and that's fine, really, as long as they are willing to give up traditional expectations of women as well. But that doesn't strike me as the reason many of the posters here have (not all, of course, I think some like kaylan are genuinely the former).

[mesmerized]

How chivalrous a man is has nothing to do with priority. And you're right, just because he pays doesn't mean he isn't bitter. But NOT paying because he IS bitter about relationships is far worse.

 

That's the same as him giving up on being a man because his relationship experience has been bad. If a man stops paying out of BITTERNESS (and nothing else) then it shows a great deal about his character, and no one wants a man like that.

 

 

One thing I've noticed that if a man is really into you, specially if he thinks you are very attractive, he will pay. He will not risk losing you by not paying. Now I don't require men to pay for me, I don't think I'm entitled to that. But if a man doesn't pay, I take it as lack of interest.

[Sanman]

I'll add a little fodder to this debate based on previous threads and my opinions. As a man in his twenties, Here is where I think the problem lies:

 

My biggest objection to paying for initial dates (I have no problem paying for later ones) is that dating has changed over the years. Currently, at least in NYC, dating whether online or in person includes minimal contact (a few conversations) previous to the first date and also likely means the other person is multi-dating other men at the same time. The vast majority of these dates don't go beyond 1-2 meetings where either I payed both times or we split the cost on the second date. However, it was not uncommon to meet 20-30 women before you met one worthy of a relationship. Whether I payed or not made little difference in whether I got another date. At some point, I realized that cheap dates and splitting the check just made financial sense. Most of the women I have dated do not know how to cook. I was in relationships for an average of 6 months and had about one meal cooked for me per relationship. Most of the time we ate out and I picked up the tab 50-70% of the time depending on the relationship. I have been a better cook than anyone I have ever dated and usually helped in the cooking. So, I don't know where you meet these men that just sit there.

 

Now, in my current relationship, we talked for 3 months prior to meeting. Neither of us was seeing another person. I drove to her city and paid for everything on a 7 hour long date. I had no problem with that because I knew here character and that she was invested in getting to know me. However, since that time, we have split dating costs. My gf is firmly of the belief that both genders are equal and that we should get equal treatment. That means I help out with chores, cooking, etc as well. We both try to make life easier for the other at every turn.

 

So ladies, it is not about simply being cheap. It is that on an initial date, many men feel that women have no investment in the process while men do (many women expect us to pay). Good women will reciprocate, but many women will simply disappear leaving us with no memory but a dinner on the credit card bill next month. In addition, many lack the traditional home-making skills that would supposedly balance out us paying for the bulk of the dates.

[Sid6.7]

 

So ladies, it is not about simply being cheap. It is that on an initial date, many men feel that women have no investment in the process while men do (many women expect us to pay). Good women will reciprocate, but many women will simply disappear leaving us with no memory but a dinner on the credit card bill next month. In addition, many lack the traditional home-making skills that would supposedly balance out us paying for the bulk of the dates.

 

This.

 

It really does not make any financial sense, the risk vs reward is too great.

 

As I have mentioned before I happen to think a man should not have to pay for the company of a female. Some would even go so far as to consider that kind of activity a profession.

 

This is why I stopped doing intial dinner dates and the like a very long time ago. I avoid it all together. Besides, those are boring and cliche' activities anyway that should be put to rest. Some men need to think outside the box more often with better ways of getting to know someone without having to empty their wallet. And for some women to expect this kind of behavior from a man is absurd. Exit stage left.

[veggirl]

One thing I've noticed that if a man is really into you, specially if he thinks you are very attractive, he will pay. He will not risk losing you by not paying. Now I don't require men to pay for me, I don't think I'm entitled to that. But if a man doesn't pay, I take it as lack of interest.

 

How contradictory is this?

 

So, you DO require them to pay. To show their interest in you.

 

Then we get threads on LS like "how can he not like me? He PAID FOR ME. Why would he PAY if he didn't like me?"

 

It doesn't indicate interest IMO.

 

Interest is "I had such a great time! Can I see you Tuesday?" regardless of who paid.

[FitChick]

Now, in my current relationship, we talked for 3 months prior to meeting. Neither of us was seeing another person. I drove to her city and paid for everything on a 7 hour long date. I had no problem with that because I knew here character and that she was invested in getting to know me.

 

Perhaps that is one reason I've never had a problem with men paying (although it's also generational). We became good friends in the weeks or months before we ever met. We were both invested in the relationship. I am only dating for marriage now, so the other type of dating with its myriad problems doesn't affect me.

[mesmerized]

How contradictory is this?

 

So, you DO require them to pay. To show their interest in you.

 

Then we get threads on LS like "how can he not like me? He PAID FOR ME. Why would he PAY if he didn't like me?"

 

It doesn't indicate interest IMO.

 

Interest is "I had such a great time! Can I see you Tuesday?" regardless of who paid.

 

Paying for me does not necessarily mean they like me. But not paying for me often means they don't like me.

 

I don't know how you interpreted what I said as I do require them to pay. If he doesn't pay but asks me out again and I like him, I will go out with him again. But I will have this on the back of my mind that he might not be truly interested.