Consolidated Discussion - Paying for Dates

[Eeyore79]

I wouldn't have a problem with a first date just being something cheap like getting coffee together. I'm dating him to decide if I like him and want to see him again, not to get a free dinner, so what we actually do on the date is irrelevant. It would be nice if he bought me a drink, but I'd be willing to buy the second round so everything is equal.

 

If, however, a guy invited me out for dinner then I'd probably expect him to at least offer to pay, seeing as he invited me. Of course, if I didn't like him and didn't intend to see him again then I wouldn't accept his offer to pay... it would feel like I was ripping him off. If I liked the guy and wanted a second date then I'd graciously accept his offer to pay, with the intention of giving him a thankyou kiss later on and taking my turn to pay for dinner next time.

 

I wouldn't be too bothered if a guy suggested going dutch, but I wouldn't be impressed, and would assume that he didn't like me and didn't expect to see me again. A guy who likes you and wants to see you again will usually be happy to pay for dinner, since he expects things to develop into a relationship and you'll pay him back eventually.

[spookie]

before i started making my own money, i was concerned about the "fiarness" of having men pay for me on a date, but now i expect and accept it.

 

imo, it shouldn't be a big deal to buy someone dinner if you asked for their company, and if it is, you shouldn't have asked in the first place, because you can't afford to be going out.

 

i don't demand a guy pay me back for ingredients when i cook him a meal, and i dont ask to be reimbursed when i come over with takeout. i'm not cheap, and i don't want ti be with someone cheap, either. if he thinks everyone is trying to take advantage of him, we have a problem, also.

[allanworks]

I've recently started dating someone. From the beginning he has not offered to pay for a single date. We are on our fifth date at this point and it makes me feel like he's not taking this seriously. We do chat all the time and he does make effort in calling me first. When we are alone he's very affectionate and passionate. He is from a different background than me. I don't know if it makes a difference. He is Jewish and I'm not. We both know that our parents would hate the fact that we are dating. Would that make a difference?

 

He's already told me that he does not plan on dating other people at the same time. However this makes me doubt him. (I know so old fashioned) Any advice would be appreciated.

 

he is jewish makes a big diffrence .hate to say this but he is a tipical penny pinching jew he was raised that way.you need to tell him that he is paying otherwise he wont .unless he is a poor jew yes they excist then your screwed.

[Eeyore79]

My first date with my ex was just meeting for coffee, but I was somewhat miffed when we ordered drinks and he didn't offer to pay or go dutch... I had to pay for both of us. We stood at the checkout, the server asked for the money, and he made no move to pay (not even for his own coffee)... eventually I reached for my own wallet in embarrassment and just paid for both of us. Bad first impression, and all for the sake of the price of a cup of coffee.

 

I should have guessed at that point where the relationship was headed; he turned up at my place every weekend, ate my food, slept in my bed, turned my heating up full blast, and never once offered me any money for food etc... although he did happily comment that he was saving money on his own gas bill by coming over to my place every weekend!

 

In the four months we dated, he never once took me out for dinner. On the two occasions that we went out for lunch I had to pay for him because, like before, he simply made no attempt to reach for his wallet! He never once gave me a thoughtful gift, though I gave him little things on a couple of occasions.

 

He then had the nerve to complain about my house, where he was staying for free every weekend, so I came to my senses and dumped him. One of the major reasons for me dumping him is that the relationship was far from equal and was actually costing me money (not to mention I was sick of him complaining). I am all for equality, but I don't see why I should pay to date a complete pain in the ass.

[janie423]

As soon as I hear a girl say she is old fashioned, I run for the hills.

 

Old fashioned is just an excuse to take advantage of a time when women couldn't make a living on there own, and apply it to dating now, when the playing field has evened.

 

Luckily for you girls there are tons of old fashioned men out there to fight over you.

 

But not me. I value thoughtful, compassionate, and emancipated women. Not women who are taking advantage of an archaic double standard.

 

And why is it that so many women think that if the man is good and pays for so and so many dates, her way of reward is to sleep with him? I can go down to a bar and get laid tonight. Sadly I am working right now otherwise I would doing that... But the way I look at it is that woman is lucky that I chose to pursue her, not that I was lucky that she's letting me pursue her.

 

Beautiful women are very, very common. It's beautiful, compassionate, thoughtful, and intelligent women that are rare.

 

The fact that, as you say, you could get laid tonight is exactly the problem. Women have reduced their value by settling for treatment from guys with your attitude. It's like a BMW versus a Saturn. Yeah, you can drive a Saturn but it takes a lot more to pursue that BMW - but the rewards are greater. Women who give up their bodies easily to guys like you are like employees who work cheap - it dilutes the market with a lesser valued product.

 

And women don't necessarily sleep with a guy who pays either, but it's a necessary pre-condition that the man pay. And yes their are plenty of old-fashioned men fighting over girls like me right as we speak. Plenty.

[kdark]

The fact that, as you say, you could get laid tonight is exactly the problem. Women have reduced their value by settling for treatment from guys with your attitude.

 

So sex is the only thing of value that a woman can offer a man?

 

It's like a BMW versus a Saturn. Yeah, you can drive a Saturn but it takes a lot more to pursue that BMW - but the rewards are greater. Women who give up their bodies easily to guys like you are like employees who work cheap - it dilutes the market with a lesser valued product.

 

There you go again, assuming that sex is the only thing women can offer that has value to men. The women I have had casual sex with were all very great women, but I didn't want a relationship at the time. And they were OK with that. When I want a relationship I will get into one. Until then I will enjoy so called "cheap" women. They are a lot of fun to hang out with.

 

And women don't necessarily sleep with a guy who pays either, but it's a necessary pre-condition that the man pay. And yes their are plenty of old-fashioned men fighting over girls like me right as we speak. Plenty.

 

For you it may be a necessary condition, but not in my experience. And I'm happy for you that you have lots of old fashioned men flocking over you. I meet lots of new fashioned women who enjoy sex for it's own sake and don't hold it like a carrot on a stick in front of potential suitors.

 

To each his own.

[ADF]

My first date with my ex was just meeting for coffee, but I was somewhat miffed when we ordered drinks and he didn't offer to pay or go dutch... I had to pay for both of us. We stood at the checkout, the server asked for the money, and he made no move to pay (not even for his own coffee)... eventually I reached for my own wallet in embarrassment and just paid for both of us. Bad first impression, and all for the sake of the price of a cup of coffee.

 

I should have guessed at that point where the relationship was headed; he turned up at my place every weekend, ate my food, slept in my bed, turned my heating up full blast, and never once offered me any money for food etc... although he did happily comment that he was saving money on his own gas bill by coming over to my place every weekend!

 

In the four months we dated, he never once took me out for dinner. On the two occasions that we went out for lunch I had to pay for him because, like before, he simply made no attempt to reach for his wallet! He never once gave me a thoughtful gift, though I gave him little things on a couple of occasions.

 

He then had the nerve to complain about my house, where he was staying for free every weekend, so I came to my senses and dumped him. One of the major reasons for me dumping him is that the relationship was far from equal and was actually costing me money (not to mention I was sick of him complaining). I am all for equality, but I don't see why I should pay to date a complete pain in the ass.

 

Anybody would have dumped this guy. He sounds totally clueless. To be honest, he almost sounds like someone with Asperger's Syndrome or something. I am not saying he had it, but he sounds that oblivious to social cues. You're well rid of him.

[janie423]

So sex is the only thing of value that a woman can offer a man?

 

 

 

There you go again, assuming that sex is the only thing women can offer that has value to men. The women I have had casual sex with were all very great women, but I didn't want a relationship at the time. And they were OK with that. When I want a relationship I will get into one. Until then I will enjoy so called "cheap" women. They are a lot of fun to hang out with.

 

For you it may be a necessary condition, but not in my experience. And I'm happy for you that you have lots of old fashioned men flocking over you. I meet lots of new fashioned women who enjoy sex for it's own sake and don't hold it like a carrot on a stick in front of potential suitors.

 

 

To each his own.

 

The women I have had casual sex with were all very great women, but I didn't want a relationship at the time. And they were OK with that.

 

These women are "okay with that" because they did not have enough self-esteem to solicit anything beyond being your sperm dump. "Cheap women" are great to hang out with because they make no demands on you and require no effort.

 

 

I meet lots of new fashioned women who enjoy sex for it's own sake and don't hold it like a carrot on a stick in front of potential suitors.

 

Women who demand good treatment also enjoy sex for its own sake. However, it is the attitude and respect of the partner that determines who we enjoy it with. I will demand good treatment because I can get it. You can keep your Saturns.

[sally4sara]

I wish people who hated sex didn't dilute the market with expectations of free kiddie meals.

[janie423]

I wish people who hated sex didn't dilute the market with expectations of free kiddie meals.

 

Here's the scoop: I earn more than most of the men I have dated. Much more. That said, these men still want to pay for the dinner. When I offer to pay as a courtesy,they say things like "what do you think I can't afford to pay?" . It emasculates them if I pull out my wallet. That's the man I want. The acid test.

 

By the way, I drive a BMW that I bought myself.

Edited April 17, 2010 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[sally4sara]

How pathetic that you think that way. Here's the scoop: I earn more than most of the men I have dated. Much more. That said, these men still want to pay for the dinner. When I offer to pay as a courtesy,they say things like "what do you think I can't afford to pay?" . It emasculates them if I pull out my wallet. That's the man I want. The acid test.

 

By the way, I drive a BMW that I bought myself.

 

I too have my own acid test. When I'm getting to know someone, I expect they have interests and experiences I know nothing about. I want them to share THAT with me. I already know how to get food for myself and learn nothing new by having them buy food for me.

Edited April 17, 2010 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Els]

My first date with my ex was just meeting for coffee, but I was somewhat miffed when we ordered drinks and he didn't offer to pay or go dutch... I had to pay for both of us. We stood at the checkout, the server asked for the money, and he made no move to pay (not even for his own coffee)... eventually I reached for my own wallet in embarrassment and just paid for both of us. Bad first impression, and all for the sake of the price of a cup of coffee.

 

I should have guessed at that point where the relationship was headed; he turned up at my place every weekend, ate my food, slept in my bed, turned my heating up full blast, and never once offered me any money for food etc... although he did happily comment that he was saving money on his own gas bill by coming over to my place every weekend!

 

In the four months we dated, he never once took me out for dinner. On the two occasions that we went out for lunch I had to pay for him because, like before, he simply made no attempt to reach for his wallet! He never once gave me a thoughtful gift, though I gave him little things on a couple of occasions.

 

He then had the nerve to complain about my house, where he was staying for free every weekend, so I came to my senses and dumped him. One of the major reasons for me dumping him is that the relationship was far from equal and was actually costing me money (not to mention I was sick of him complaining). I am all for equality, but I don't see why I should pay to date a complete pain in the ass.

 

Why did you even continue past the first week? I can understand women who stay in relationships where the guy began to treat them badly after some time - because the guy was actually good in the beginning and they got attached. But why date a freeloader who'd already shown his stripes from the very beginning??

[janie423]

I too have my own acid test. When I'm getting to know someone, I expect they have interests and experiences I know nothing about. I want them to share THAT with me. I already know how to get food for myself and learn nothing new by having them buy food for me.

 

 

There is a much broader implication than just buying a meal for someone, it goes beyond that simple act, but I hereby respectfully agree to disagree with your analysis.

[Eeyore79]

Why did you even continue past the first week? I can understand women who stay in relationships where the guy began to treat them badly after some time - because the guy was actually good in the beginning and they got attached. But why date a freeloader who'd already shown his stripes from the very beginning??

 

Why did I continue dating him?

 

Well, to begin with I rationalised that he had driven an hour to meet me while I had just taken the bus into town, so I figured it was reasonable for me to buy him a coffee because he had spent more on fuel. The same applied when he used to come for the weekend - I figured it had already cost him fuel money to get to my house, so I didn't mind making his dinner, and I was sure he'd square up with me eventually for all the additional costs of him staying at my place...

 

Approximately ten weeks passed where he came every weekend and never parted with a penny, never took me out anywhere, didn't reciprocate when I bought him a gift, and I got sick of the relationship costing me money. I knew he was between jobs so I tried to be reasonable and give him a chance, but he wasn't even looking for a job, he never manned up and took me out for dinner or anything, or even squared up with me for all the food he was eating at my place.

 

Then he started criticising my place, saying it wasn't clean enough and it smelled etc, complaining about my dog and generally being sulky. So I told him I was busy and he couldn't come for the weekend, and after distancing myself for a few weeks I ended the relationship.

 

I'm not a greedy grasping woman, I don't expect a guy to pay for me, and I tried to give him a chance to find a job and at least even things up between us... but quite frankly he was taking the p***, so in the end my patience and generosity was exhausted and I just wanted out.

[sally4sara]

It is terms like "freeloader" that get applied to men who don't even contribute to their own tab when out on a date that have contributed to my reasons for always going dutch. It isn't the only reason, but one of many.

 

See, if a guy who is traditional in his dating style asks a girl out, he will pay for both meals. She may of may not offer to split, she may or may not pay for drinks, she may or may not buy tickets or dessert or whatever. But she will not be looked at as a "freeloader".

 

Let a guy do this, and he will be seen this way. Because the context of "freeloader" in this implies one who expects to get something for nothing. If a woman is not a "freeloader" by having her expenses paid my the man, what is it a woman is offering or the man is expecting to get that absolves her of the "freeloader" tag?

 

But what are you learning from someone paying for your meal? You already know what it is like to be catered to in this way. You parents did this for you when you were a child. And now you are an adult and dating other adults. What will it add to the adult relationship to function under the same standards you did as a child? You are not showing your adult skill set. You are not indicating anything about how self sufficient you are that they might consider as an indication of how viable you would be as an adult partner. And you are not guaranteed to learn anything from the person paying your way other than they have some money on hand.

[PhillySpecial]

I once met a guy online and we made plans to meet up for dinner. On the day we were supposed to meet we were talking on the phone and he starts telling me that on his past few dates he's been paying $200+ for dinner and drinks, etc. and there was no 2nd date so basically he was losing money and therefore he wasn't willing to spend that kind of money on me. He said if I wanted to do something "cheap" he might be up for that.

 

So at the same time I got a call from a GF who said she had an extra baseball ticket and she wanted me to come along so she could introduce me to a male friend of hers. So I quickly dumped the internet loser guy and went to the game. My GF introduced me to who was to become my next BF. He bought us both drinks and hot dogs. He probably spent about $15 on me because I don't drink alcohol, I think he brought me a soda and 2 hot dogs, and we went on to date and have a lot of fun together.

 

So it wasn't about the first guy not wanting to spend $200, we could have easily went somewhere a lot less expensive and had a great time. But the mere fact that he was tacky enough to even bring up money and paying for the date, it was a big turnoff and I found it to be extremely distasteful. I followed my instinct and walked. Guys can easily take a girl out somewhere inexpensive and really, what are they out? When a guy makes something like this an issue you have to question is he really just a loser. Most of the time the answer is yes.

[kdark]

These women are "okay with that" because they did not have enough self-esteem to solicit anything beyond being your sperm dump. "Cheap women" are great to hang out with because they make no demands on you and require no effort.

 

Oh trust me. These women would run faster than me if the words commitment or relationship were brought up. Not every girl is looking for a relationship. And sperm dump is bit harsh.

 

Women who demand good treatment also enjoy sex for its own sake. However, it is the attitude and respect of the partner that determines who we enjoy it with. I will demand good treatment because I can get it. You can keep your Saturns.

 

Oh get off your high horse. The women I meet aren't damaged or "Saturns". They are just looking for something different than you are.

[janie423]

Oh trust me. These women would run faster than me if the words commitment or relationship were brought up. Not every girl is looking for a relationship. And sperm dump is bit harsh.

 

 

 

Oh get off your high horse. The women I meet aren't damaged or "Saturns". They are just looking for something different than you are.

 

You're right I am probably a bit rough on this topic, apologetically so, and I wish I could make you understand that it is not about the dumb food or the dinner tab, it's about the gesture. I'm not that young and I have been there, I have allowed men to not pay for anything, and I end up with someone who in the long term becomes lax in other areas. That is what I am trying to say. Even if the guy buys a box of pretzels for the girl, it is the implication that his little sacrifice might turn into a big sacrifice later on, like driving the woman to the hospital during labor. But I can't seem to get that point across. Don't mean to offend you though.

[marsle85]

I don't see why people find this so offensive. The fact is- in the introduction of a relationship, two people have very little to build the potential relationship on. Since serious relationships take time to form, first impressions -are- everything... and typically based on more materialism. They set a clear precedent for how the remainder of the relationship will flow.

 

I think we've proven this by a previous post: One poster went dutch on the first date. Did he ever pay since then? No way. That sent the message: I don't have to pay. She's cool with it. Great.

 

Which isn't the worst thing in the world- some people don't mind going dutch. Some people do. My father always paid for my mother- even when she insisted otherwise. Not because he felt pressured, and she was gold-digger. But because this is what they were comfortable with, and how they envisioned the relationship to balance. For whatever reason- It comes own to how you fantasize a relationship.

 

I understand men may be wary of women who are using men for a free dinner/etc. I don't necessarily agree that it happens very often - because it's my experience that dating someone you not compatible with/attracted to isn't fun... the free food doesn't even enter the picture. Like I mentioned earlier. There are facets to the first meetings that are CLEARLY pointers to differentiate your date from others. Does he pay? Does she? Do you have sex after the first date? Does she order an entire bottle of wine? This is just another aspect of the dating world to see if you line up with another. If she expects you to pay for a bottle of wine every date, you evaluate whether you're capable and okay with paying for a bottle- and then make a judgment on her and your romantic compatibility based on that (and several other "material" portions of the relationship).

 

THIS ISN'T EVIL. It's purely part of matching up with someone or not.

 

We judge looks, smell, clothing style, cars, intelligence, sensitivity, peer relationships with others, among so many other things. A man may chat with a woman online for a few weeks, and meet her out at restaurant- decide that she isn't as attractive as he thought. The couple doesn't date again. He has set an expectation, she did not fulfill that expectation- and in turn, he will not see her again. Is it fair? No.

 

Some women (REGARDLESS of whether it's fair or not) carry an expectation for men to pay for the majority of dates. Whether a man fulfills that expectation (among the other material expectations) will reflect her satisfaction in the budding relationship. It just so happens when you reject someone because of their looks- it doesn't impact the person's wallet.

[janie423]

It is terms like "freeloader" that get applied to men who don't even contribute to their own tab when out on a date that have contributed to my reasons for always going dutch. It isn't the only reason, but one of many.

 

See, if a guy who is traditional in his dating style asks a girl out, he will pay for both meals. She may of may not offer to split, she may or may not pay for drinks, she may or may not buy tickets or dessert or whatever. But she will not be looked at as a "freeloader".

 

Let a guy do this, and he will be seen this way. Because the context of "freeloader" in this implies one who expects to get something for nothing. If a woman is not a "freeloader" by having her expenses paid my the man, what is it a woman is offering or the man is expecting to get that absolves her of the "freeloader" tag?

 

But what are you learning from someone paying for your meal? You already know what it is like to be catered to in this way. You parents did this for you when you were a child. And now you are an adult and dating other adults. What will it add to the adult relationship to function under the same standards you did as a child? You are not showing your adult skill set. You are not indicating anything about how self sufficient you are that they might consider as an indication of how viable you would be as an adult partner. And you are not guaranteed to learn anything from the person paying your way other than they have some money on hand.

 

 

I agree there is a double standard, big time. Just like men who sleep around are labeled differently than woman who sleep around. I will try to explain. There is inherent chivalry about the guy paying for the tab. It's like holding a door open. It is a mating ritual, similar to how male birds dance around when in the presence of a female they like. I don't know how it evolved, it just did. And it goes against the grain of most males to change it. Like I said, I pull out my wallet but the men want to pay. They are not paying for sex because more often than not they will not get it on the first date. I, as a very self-sufficient woman, am fully capable of paying for my meal. I don't see it as an exchange for sex or even company. I see it as a mating ritual. The funny thing is, even male coworkers want to pay for my meal.

 

Of course, once the initial courtship is over then it should even up.

[kdark]

You're right I am probably a bit rough on this topic, apologetically so, and I wish I could make you understand that it is not about the dumb food or the dinner tab, it's about the gesture. I'm not that young and I have been there, I have allowed men to not pay for anything, and I end up with someone who in the long term becomes lax in other areas. That is what I am trying to say. Even if the guy buys a box of pretzels for the girl, it is the implication that his little sacrifice might turn into a big sacrifice later on, like driving the woman to the hospital during labor. But I can't seem to get that point across. Don't mean to offend you though.

 

I understand what you mean. The man paying is litmus test for how well he will provide later on in the relationship. But what I don't understand is that many women will go on an amazing date with a man, everything was perfect, but he asks if you could help chip in a bit for the tab, and all attraction you feel goes out the window. I'm sure our friendly neighborhood PhillySpecial has felt that before

 

Can't you at least give him the benefit of the doubt because all the other factors were great?

 

But then again, I don't know how many guys you might have gotten burned by to make you feel that you needed such test.

 

It's a double standard, and I hate all double standards.

[janie423]

I understand what you mean. The man paying is litmus test for how well he will provide later on in the relationship. But what I don't understand is that many women will go on an amazing date with a man, everything was perfect, but he asks if you could help chip in a bit for the tab, and all attraction you feel goes out the window. I'm sure our friendly neighborhood PhillySpecial has felt that before

 

Can't you at least give him the benefit of the doubt because all the other factors were great?

 

But then again, I don't know how many guys you might have gotten burned by to make you feel that you needed such test.

 

It's a double standard, and I hate all double standards.

 

Well, how about this. If a guy is leery about paying for a woman on a first date that may in all likelihood go nowhere, he can take her someplace that cost practically nothing. I once went on a date with a guy on a fixed income. We played miniature golf. And it costs him $4. And guess what, I was very flattered and very attracted to him. He did what he could, and again, did not let me pay.

 

It's weird, but some guys give a woman more value if they have to pay for the date, don't ask me why this is so. In my past, if I let a guy slide on the first few dates, that will dictate his behavior going forward! I don't think I'm the only woman who has experienced this.

 

It's not what he spends, it's the gesture. The mating ritual. And I didn't say it was fair. No less fair than the labels women get when they sleep around.

[kdark]

Well, how about this. If a guy is leery about paying for a woman on a first date that may in all likelihood go nowhere, he can take her someplace that cost practically nothing. I once went on a date with a guy on a fixed income. We played miniature golf. And it costs him $4. And guess what, I was very flattered and very attracted to him. He did what he could, and again, did not let me pay.

 

It's weird, but some guys give a woman more value if they have to pay for the date, don't ask me why this is so. In my past, if I let a guy slide on the first few dates, that will dictate his behavior going forward! I don't think I'm the only woman who has experienced this.

 

It's not what he spends, it's the gesture. The mating ritual. And I didn't say it was fair. No less fair than the labels women get when they sleep around.

 

Those creative cheap dates are always more fun than the expensive dinners.

 

And some guys, specifically old fashioned, show they care by spending money on you. That's why they refuse to let you pay. And old fashioned women are receptive to this. And I don't know if you do this, but some women use paying for their share as a way of showing they aren't interested. By paying for themselves, they are robbing the man of his gender role.

 

And be honest. You enjoy the double standards. Both male and female. The men treat you fabulous dates at no cost to show you they care. And the women who enjoy casual sex get labeled as a slut, which makes you look better to your dates since you aren't one.

[Eeyore79]

some women use paying for their share as a way of showing they aren't interested. By paying for themselves, they are robbing the man of his gender role.

 

If I don't like a guy, I won't accept his offer to pay... I'll pay my own share so I owe him nothing, then walk and never see him again.

 

By accepting a "gift" from him (i.e. by letting him pay) I'm putting myself into a situation where I owe him one and have to see him again in order to square up... at the very least I'd feel that I ought to kiss him.

[D-Lish]

If I don't like a guy, I won't accept his offer to pay... I'll pay my own share so I owe him nothing, then walk and never see him again.

 

By accepting a "gift" from him (i.e. by letting him pay) I'm putting myself into a situation where I owe him one and have to see him again in order to square up... at the very least I'd feel that I ought to kiss him.

 

That's how I feel.

 

If I like a guy and he insists on paying- I'll let him, because I know I'll see him again and be able to reciprocate. If I know I am not going to be seeing him again, I'll insist on paying my share.