3 Reasons Why Guys Should Still be Paying for Dates

[Got it]

Re-rebuttal

 

I disagree, Lean In covers far more. It is written primarily on a female focus but there is a larger sociological view on it as well as men "Leaning In" at home. It is great read, I think, and a fairly fast one. I read it and finished it on my flight to and from, on a business trip.

 

I would be interested to see where you are reading their is parity, can you send links? I haven't seen any research showing as much. I can tell you even at the executive level, you are not seeing the parity that you think. I can see it even at my company. There is still a lag in how women are viewed, their contributions and their value. I am in the middle of things and an executive.

 

What has shocked me is the difference between what is taught in school and what the workforce is like. I grew up just assuming equality and was raise as such. But what has amazed me, and I am in a more predominantly male industry, is the gender differences. I am an assertive, smart, strong female. I carry quite an image from this. More along the lines of Darth Vadar. Actually the owners' nickname for me is "bulldog". I am fine with that.I am actually proud of it. But I do know that having these characteristics as a male would have less of an impact on people and seen more acceptable.

 

Women are expected to be softer, more congenial, and more team focused than "I" focused. They are expected to promote/advocate for others and not themselves. Men are the reverse and nary an eyebrow raised if they do so. We assume so many gender stereotypes and think they are fact when they aren't.

 

So for dating, work, etc. I do not believe in anything along gender lines. These are societal expectations that are really based on little more than stereotypes. I think, do what whatever one wants to do, if the focus is to keep things balanced, and an openness to a fluid back and forth, then it is a better recipe for success in dating, marriage, etc.

 

I have deeply appreciated both my ex husband and my husband that neither had strong expectations based on gender lines and both appreciated a strong smart woman who would challenge and appreciate them. I am not sure if I appreciated it enough with my ex but I was/am blessed by how open, caring, and appreciate of the person each man approached their relationships.

[Got it]

When a lot of men think of feminism they envision the feminists who are embracing their masculine energy. Nothing wrong with that just as there's nothing wrong with men embracing their feminine energy. But to masculine men, masculinity is unattractive in a romantic partner.

 

Reluctance is not necessarily a fear response. It's the absence of attraction that leaves some men uninterested.

 

What is masculine then? What does that encompass? And what about the characteristic is innately male?

[Got it]

Ow - great dialogue, thank you. Really getting interesting and appreciate your openness for discussion.

 

Really a great discussion across the board from all contributors, thank you!

[Arieswoman]

Pinkinthelimo nails it here ;-

 

I don't understand why some men make such a big fuss about paying for the first date. For starters, I prefer the first date to be a short coffee date. I don't even care if I have to pay for my own coffee or both our coffees.

 

The first date should be about getting to know each other a bit more and seeing what you have in common. So a nice, no-pressure meet-up for coffee/brunch etc should do the trick.

 

After that you can decide between you where it goes next ...

[Got it]

And one piece about leadership, and Sheryl Sandberg speaks to, is looking at the characteristics that define leadership and look at the gender that also shows the same characteristics.

 

So if the two genders are seen as different, and have different characteristics to describe them, how does the one that is different cross into the characteristics without then being "hit" for being unlike their gender characteristics?

 

It becomes a damned if you do damned if you don't.

 

What ties into this is the idea of calling young girl's bossy, for showing leadership, but young boys are not used with the same descriptor. Why? Because they are expected to take charge, be competitive, lead, have a hierarchical structure. Girls crossing over into these characteristics are not see as positive attributes. Why?

[Michelle ma Belle]

When a lot of men think of feminism they envision the feminists who are embracing their masculine energy. Nothing wrong with that just as there's nothing wrong with men embracing their feminine energy. But to masculine men, masculinity is unattractive in a romantic partner.

 

Reluctance is not necessarily a fear response. It's the absence of attraction that leaves some men uninterested.

 

Then I was right. You don't really know what a true feminist is or looks like apart from stereotypes created by the media and perpetuated by ignorant people.

 

Shame.

[gaius]

Feminism is more oppressive to women than anything else. Especially if they don't fit what's expected, which a vast majority don't. Just look at how many disclaimers Michelle had to go through at the beginning of the thread before admitting she likes getting paid for. And even then she didn't say exactly that, she let an article do the talking.

 

Most women find that attractive and it's fine to admit it.

[Michelle ma Belle]

Feminism is more oppressive to women than anything else. Especially if they don't fit what's expected, which a vast majority don't. Just look at how many disclaimers Michelle had to go through at the beginning of the thread before admitting she likes getting paid for. And even then she didn't say exactly that, she let an article do the talking.

 

Most women find that attractive and it's fine to admit it.

 

Are you f*cking kidding me?

 

I like getting paid for what exactly?

 

With regards to the article, and not that I have to explain anything to YOU but it was something I came across on a friends FB and given the abundant chatter on a previous thread about dating and who pays for what, I thought it would be a FUN discussion. PERIOD. I already said I am the first to slap down a credit card for heaven's sake.

 

I already made the disclaimer NOT TO SHOOT THE MESSENGER which means I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH IT.

 

As for your sweeping summary about women and feminism, I'm willing to bet that you fit in that category of men who blames for your own short comings as a man.

 

Give me a break.

[BlueIris]

Feminism is more oppressive to women than anything else.

 

Oh, pfft. This is the kind of statement that has rewritten history for some kind of agenda I can not understand.

 

60 years ago- pre-feminism- I would not have had the education and job I have now. My college was all male and went co-ed in the early 70’s. I would not be making the money I make now. I would not have been able to buy a car or house without a male co-signer. I would have been shunned for being single. In 1960, my mom had to take unpaid leave as a teacher when she got pregnant because being pregnant was something considered sexual that kids weren’t supposed to see. She also made less than the janitors at her school on the justification that she didn’t have a family to support and men did (whether the men were single or married). She was a few credits short of a PhD making less than men with HS diplomas. No, no, no… women haven’t been oppressed by feminism.

[Michelle ma Belle]

"blames feminism for your own short comings as a man"

[Got it]

Feminism is more oppressive to women than anything else. Especially if they don't fit what's expected, which a vast majority don't. Just look at how many disclaimers Michelle had to go through at the beginning of the thread before admitting she likes getting paid for. And even then she didn't say exactly that, she let an article do the talking.

 

Most women find that attractive and it's fine to admit it.

 

What do you think feminism stands for? What do you think what defines it?

 

I am always fascinated with the misconception of feminism and the current viewpoint on it.

 

For me it is a very open, compassionate view point that is continuing to address issues and concerns to work towards equality of the genders.

 

That is all feminism is. It is not about women being better than me, wanting to be superior towards me, or denegating men in anyway.

 

So, if I see it as equality between the genders, how on earth is that oppressive?

 

I am, have been for many years, a feminist and have always been proud of it. I am also for the promotion and equality of all individuals and working towards a society where we are not seen by our sex, color, religion or handicap, but seen by our actions and contributions that define who we are.

[carhill]

1. Makeup and Underwear

 

Back when my exW and I were dating, I was the one who had to, or chose to, spend more on my 'stuff', simply because she worked dressed up and made up and I worked in a pair of coveralls in a dirty shop. She liked that I could shop for myself and put together good outfits, but of course at a cost. I felt we were pretty equal there, but she did have an enormous shoe budget

 

2. Men Still Make More

 

IDK. In my line of work, a female machinist makes the same as a male machinist. Generally, though, women aren't interested in doing such work, even though it pays quite well. Too dirty I guess. My exW and I were pretty evenly matched, income-wise, but I had a lot more assets since I had been slowly building wealth for decades. Her, not so much.

 

Generally though, I think the trend still reflects this precept, in that women are selective for males who make more than them. IOW, if I'm making 50 grand a year, a woman making 100 grand wouldn't be interested in progressing anything with me. Different league, socio-economically. Very different from my parent's generation, when women worked lower paying jobs. 'Making more' was different and more men qualified.

 

3. It Encourages You To Date Quality Over Quantity

 

I would agree with this, as someone who nearly always paid for all of early dating experiences. Dating was expensive, especially since I dated single mothers with kids mostly. So, hence, indeed, I had to be selective, simply because my income wouldn't support multi-dating or similar.

 

 

I do have one memory which I think explains my takeaway from years of dating and being married. I recall one young lady who very much impressed me, even though I always insisted on paying for dates; one evening she suggested we go for a walk in the snow and we did, wandering about the downtown area of the city she lived in, her arm in mine. Suddenly, she ducked me in the door of this little restaurant and grabbed us a table and interpreted the menu to me; I selected a local dish I wanted to try, we had dinner and I went to pay for it and she told me she had already taken care of it. I could read the menu well enough, and knew exchange rates well enough, to know that that dinner must've cost her a week's wages, but she said nothing, just smiled and off we went walking in the snow, arm in arm. I can still see her face today, illuminated by the dim light of the streetlights with the snow softly falling. Heck, that was nearly 20 years ago in what now is called western Ukraine.

 

That's how life goes.

[Phoe]

I almost wish we could have a new name for what feminism really is, and leave the word "feminism" for those who practice the bad stereotyped version.

 

Feminism is gender equality, but it's more than that. Equality for genders, sexual preferences, races, religions, ages, etc.

[StanMusial]

And one piece about leadership, and Sheryl Sandberg speaks to, is looking at the characteristics that define leadership and look at the gender that also shows the same characteristics.

 

So if the two genders are seen as different, and have different characteristics to describe them, how does the one that is different cross into the characteristics without then being "hit" for being unlike their gender characteristics?

 

It becomes a damned if you do damned if you don't.

 

What ties into this is the idea of calling young girl's bossy, for showing leadership, but young boys are not used with the same descriptor. Why? Because they are expected to take charge, be competitive, lead, have a hierarchical structure. Girls crossing over into these characteristics are not see as positive attributes. Why?

 

I was unwittingly part of a "social experiment" during junior high school. We had some old hippie teacher and I was in the advanced classes. So we went on a nature hike and supposedly got lost in the woods. Although we were still on trails. There were mainly girls in the class and then me and one sort of effeminate guy and one other guy. So they followed me out of there even though I had never been there before and had only a general idea of where to go.

 

In class the next day we discussed the scenario and teacher said why did everyone follow StanMusial. Why did StanMusial take charge. And I said because we had baseball practice that afternoon and if we show up late coach makes us run banks.

[Ruby Slippers]

I think people should own their behaviour and preferences and not hide behind biology as we are socially evolving and it simply isn't true that we want the same or are wired the same or expect the same.

Just because a person doesn't consciously want what biology is driving them toward doesn't mean biology isn't operating subconsciously. People using birth control don't want to reproduce at that point in time, but their sexual responses are still driven by biology. If they were not creatures driven by their biology, they would have no desire to have sex.

 

Biology drives my behavior and preferences to a large extent, and I own them. It's natural and normal for a woman to be attracted to a man who is a good provider, and I have no qualms about declining to date a man who is not.

 

But if a woman chooses a different approach, that's fine.

[Redhead14]

The reason men ever paid for dates was the fact that women didn't usually work at a young age and if a woman was working, they made significantly less than men.

 

It was also about demonstrating that a man could support a woman.

 

This was a long time ago. Nowadays, the dynamics have changed. Men should pay for the first date as an expression of interest or few dates and a woman should reciprocate at least sometimes. It's expensive to date and why not start out sharing the responsibility for a possibly growing relationship. After all, if it does become a relationship, they are Both in it.

[Got it]

Just because a person doesn't consciously want what biology is driving them toward doesn't mean biology isn't operating subconsciously. People using birth control don't want to reproduce at that point in time, but their sexual responses are still driven by biology. If they were not creatures driven by their biology, they would have no desire to have sex.

 

Biology drives my behavior and preferences to a large extent, and I own them. It's natural and normal for a woman to be attracted to a man who is a good provider, and I have no qualms about declining to date a man who is not.

 

But if a woman chooses a different approach, that's fine.

 

There is nothing in our DNA saying we must seek out a man with money. Sexual drive and wanting a man who can pay for something are world's apart.

 

All of those starving artist/musician wouldn't get the girls they do if that was the case.

[fortyninethousand322]

I almost wish we could have a new name for what feminism really is, and leave the word "feminism" for those who practice the bad stereotyped version.

 

Feminism is gender equality, but it's more than that. Equality for genders, sexual preferences, races, religions, ages, etc.

 

I hope that's what it is.

 

Unfortunately it often looks and sounds very left leaning, beyond simple equality. A lot of ideas like "social justice" or "economic justice" get thrown around. Like socialism with a female face. To put a spin on Alexander Dubcek's famous line.

Edited October 1, 2014 by fortyninethousand322

[Woggle]

I fully support the dictionary definition of feminism but much of what passes for it today is just misandry under the guise of feminism. Since I have self respect I don't support anything that hates me.

[jay1983]

Whenever someone points out a flaw in feminism (there are too many) women say, those are the bad feminist.

 

So who are the good feminist, I'm curious?

[insert_name]

Where the hell are these people going for their first dates?! Sounds like some grand gestures are being made, or expected to be made.

 

I've never had a problem going for a drink for the first date where we alternate buying a round, always got a 2nd date with this method. Its a good way to play it as paying for drinks is a little bit different than splitting a bill in a restaurant. Then if they get 3 dates down the line I would be happy to pay for a meal as they would have indicated by that point that they are not expecting to be wined and dined straight off the bat regardless of whether there is any sort of connection.

 

I would also take issue with the point raised about effort put into the dressing up aspect. This is not typical in my experience and is poor justification for a man paying. I've had girls turn up for the first date looking like they have just rolled out of bed, for me this is pretty much a dealbreaker as it shows how much she wants to make a favourable impression. I can't imagine she would turn up to a date with David Beckham dressed like that so she obviously does not hold a date with me in high esteem.

[insert_name]

I fully support the dictionary definition of feminism but much of what passes for it today is just misandry under the guise of feminism. Since I have self respect I don't support anything that hates me.

 

Feminism is defined as the belief that we can make the genders equal by concentrating on the wants and needs of only one of them.

[insert_name]

Just because a person doesn't consciously want what biology is driving them toward doesn't mean biology isn't operating subconsciously. People using birth control don't want to reproduce at that point in time, but their sexual responses are still driven by biology. If they were not creatures driven by their biology, they would have no desire to have sex.

 

Biology drives my behavior and preferences to a large extent, and I own them. It's natural and normal for a woman to be attracted to a man who is a good provider, and I have no qualms about declining to date a man who is not.

 

But if a woman chooses a different approach, that's fine.

 

Out of interest, would you have any qualms about telling a man that you were with that part of the reason you are attracted to him is because he makes for a good provider for you?

[Natsu21]

I keep it simple. I have paid for dates, I've had dates pay for me....and vice versa. Despite my current situation, where I have sworn off dating not because of my financial issues, but because I was dating girls who, clearly, I was settling for(i.e. trashy women) I still believe that money should NOT be a focus. A part...but not a focus.

 

 

You know what my first dates are usually? NEVER in restaurants...it's usually pretty simple, like a lake or a park. Something intimate where money is not the focus and we can get to know each other. If that goes well, then we can move on to more dates where money is involved.

 

I may be an urbanite living in the country, but if a woman makes a big deal about money on the FIRST DATE?....don't get me wrong, I can understand her position, but I probably wouldn't continue dating her.

 

I have been homeless over forces I couldn't control. I don't want to deal with some woman who will flake if a tornado destroyed our home.

 

Find out who they are, and then worry about finances later. That's how I play it. Rather be single than worry about details.

[Natsu21]

Out of interest, would you have any qualms about telling a man that you were with that part of the reason you are attracted to him is because he makes for a good provider for you?

 

I've learned that men who are good providers don't always hold the loyalty of women. I've seen men bust their butts for women, just to be cheated on