Who pays on the first date? - CNN article

[Frank2thepoint]

I know, I'm beating a dead horse. The caustic and divisive topic of who pays for first dates, or subsequent dates, is not going away. Someone or some people, years or decades ago, opened this Pandora's Box to men and women's chagrin, and it will never be settled. But at least we could find some understanding and common mode of operation (aka rule) that would ease the confusion about who pays for first and subsequent dates.

 

Before anyone jumps down my throat, as a NYC man, I agree with some of the points the article makes. Since I do ask a woman out on a date, it is customary and appropriate for me to pay for the first date. I'm the one that invited the woman out, so it makes sense. There's a person in the article, named Michael, that actually does this and respectfully declines the woman's offer to pay or split the first date by just simply saying "It was my suggestion".

 

The second date I am a bit up in the air about. I have no problem with covering the cost of the date once again, since I did invite the woman out for date #2. But it would also be nice if the woman offered to at least pay part of the date, and hopefully she wouldn't get miffed if I accepted her offer.

 

As for the third date, I believe the woman needs to take the initiative and treat the man to a date. Even go as far as plan the third date too. Give the man something that he knows the woman likes him too. As for beyond, it should be alternated by the man and the woman.

 

It's 2015: Who pays on the first date? - Sep. 7, 2015

 

So what do you guys think about the article and the message it sends?

[Els]

Meh, IMO the only real rule is that you should do whatever feels right for you. If you really want to go dutch on the first date, then do that. If you want to pay, do that. You're just filtering for people with compatible viewpoints, so I don't see any downsides - if they don't like it, they probably wouldn't be compatible with you anyway.

 

My experience has been that the guy always paid, but that is probably very much a cultural thing, as I only dated while in Asia and was already paired up by the time I moved to a Caucasian country. Here, I see lots of couples going dutch a lot of the time, whereas I can count on one hand the number of times I saw it back in Asia. So geography does play a big part, I guess, and it's possible that the author's suggestion is appropriate for NYC. But I still feel you'd be real miserable if you had a strong stance on something and had to ditch it just because of the culture you were in. Better to have a smaller dating pool while being yourself IMO.

Edited September 10, 2015 by Elswyth

[mrldii]

Meh, IMO the only real rule is that you should do whatever feels right for you. If you really want to go dutch on the first date, then do that. If you want to pay, do that. You're just filtering for people with compatible viewpoints, so I don't see any downsides - if they don't like it, they probably wouldn't be compatible with you anyway.

 

My experience has been that the guy always paid, but that is probably very much a cultural thing, as I only dated while in Asia and was already paired up by the time I moved to a Caucasian country. Here, I see lots of couples going dutch a lot of the time, whereas I can count on one hand the number of times I saw it back in Asia. Whatever works for the individual couple.

 

This^^^. It's so very, very this.

[carhill]

Lever has found the modern dating world looks like this: About 10% of heterosexual daters are looking for something very traditional where the man pays for everything. Another 10% are looking for 50/50 from the very first date. The rest are somewhere in between.

 

That sounds reasonable, though I don't know how pervasive it is across generational and demographic boundaries.

 

As example, custom and practice might be markedly different where the OP hails from, in their age and location demographic, NYC, from my location and age demographic in rural California.

 

However:

 

Over 75% of men report they still feel guilty accepting women's money, according to research by Janet Lever, a professor of sociology at California State University, Los Angeles. She has studied relationship trends for years and surveyed over 17,000 people.

 

This is something men do to themselves. We choose to feel guilty.

 

Myself, being socialized by a feminist, I never felt guilty about women showing or exerting their economic or social power. I celebrated it. That, combined with the tradition of my generation of 'whoever asks, treats' in my dating life, usually meant I was the one who asked so I treated, and the social tradition generally trumped positive feelings I had about women's advances in socio-economics and they generally concurred.

 

Since I dated a lot, meaning dated for many years, first dates were often at places where I knew the proprietors so a bill never made it to the table; it was taken care of. Usually, that communicated the tone so it wasn't an issue if there were future dates. IME, I don't recall a woman asking me on a date, planning a date or paying for it until, at minimum, dating exclusively or being in a relationship already. Again, age and location demographics in play, so experience can vary widely. Since I did date a bit after my exW and I split up, so more recently, I found the relative dating and paying milieu to be relatively unchanged dating women of my generation, irrespective of their socio-economic status. To me, that makes sense.

[autumnnight]

I have no problem with paying or going dutch. In fact, I think being more financially egalitarian is probably a good idea. We all work, and we all struggle from time to time.

 

That said, a man who is obsessed with this topic is an immediate "next" for me, not because I don't want to pay, but because it says volumes about his attitude toward women and his priorities.

[Keenly]

I completely idea with the idea that by the third date and beyond the girl really needs to start initiating dates. I wouldn't even mind paying for the dates she initiates, but she needs to show that she wants me to be around, or I'm not going to keep chasing after her.

 

 

A simple " let's get some dinner" works for me.

[mrldii]

I have no problem with paying or going dutch. In fact, I think being more financially egalitarian is probably a good idea. We all work, and we all struggle from time to time.

 

That said, a man who is obsessed with this topic is an immediate "next" for me, not because I don't want to pay, but because it says volumes about his attitude toward women and his priorities.

 

Ditto. "Who pays" has just never been an issue/topic of conversation in any of my real-world encounters with members of the opposite sex. I refuse to let it become an issue/topic of conversation, no matter how often I'm barraged with the concept that it should be an issue/topic of conversation.

[mrldii]

I completely idea with the idea that by the third date and beyond the girl really needs to start initiating dates. I wouldn't even mind paying for the dates she initiates, but she needs to show that she wants me to be around, or I'm not going to keep chasing after her.

 

 

A simple " let's get some dinner" works for me.

 

Agreed. Men have just as much of a right/need/desire to know they are desired by the object of their affection as women do.

 

I'm also Old School like carhill and was raised with the concept that "Whoever issues the invite, pays"...and, I always issue invites when it's a man with whom I'd like to spend more time.

[Shining One]

That said, a man who is obsessed with this topic is an immediate "next" for me, not because I don't want to pay, but because it says volumes about his attitude toward women and his priorities.

I'm curious as to what conclusions you draw from men who firmly want a 50/50 split. To be clear, when I say 50/50, I don't mean splitting things evenly down to the pennies. I mean taking turns paying for dates. I know a few women who insist on 50/50 and I don't draw any specific conclusions from this behavior.

Ditto. "Who pays" has just never been an issue/topic of conversation in any of my real-world encounters with members of the opposite sex. I refuse to let it become an issue/topic of conversation, no matter how often I'm barraged with the concept that it should be an issue/topic of conversation.

I actually wish this topic were less taboo. As others have pointed out, who pays is a matter of compatibility. Would it not be logical to have this information before the first date rather than "waste" several dates to find out you're incompatible in this area?

 

My preference is 50/50 early on, but I'm flexible to an extent. If I go on several dates with a woman and she never reaches for her purse, she's not relationship material for me.

[salparadise]

I went on a first date last night- casual restaurant. When the check came she said let's split. I did the customary thing and said, that's ok I've got it. By that time she already had her card out and she just smiled and said, we'll split it. So we did, no further discussion.

 

My experience is that about two-thirds will offer, but quickly accede when I say I've got it. She actually has progressive ideals and can be assertive without making an issue of it. My experience is that less than one in ten actually want to split the check even if they offer. I've never had a woman offer to take the whole check on a first date.

 

Now I know what a lot of people are going to say... that she only paid because she had already decided that she's not interested. Nope. She texted this morning and said she had a nice time, and to let her know if I'd like to go out again and even suggested a day that she's free.

 

This is my kind of woman! Because she's smart, progressive, self-assured and sees equal as equal. She meets half way, even initiates, but at the same time it's not (or doesn't feel like) the feminist agenda. She's highly educated (PhD) and successful and also feminine, engaging, non-judgmental and easy to talk to.

 

It's about damn time! It's been a year since my last relationship ended and I'm so tired of coffee dates and first meetings that I want to scream. I'm going to see where this goes. I believe we're tuned to the same frequency.

[autumnnight]

I'm curious as to what conclusions you draw from men who firmly want a 50/50 split. To be clear, when I say 50/50, I don't mean splitting things evenly down to the pennies. I mean taking turns paying for dates. I know a few women who insist on 50/50 and I don't draw any specific conclusions from this behavior.I actually wish this topic were less taboo. As others have pointed out, who pays is a matter of compatibility. Would it not be logical to have this information before the first date rather than "waste" several dates to find out you're incompatible in this area?

 

My preference is 50/50 early on, but I'm flexible to an extent. If I go on several dates with a woman and she never reaches for her purse, she's not relationship material for me.

 

I have no problem with trying to be egalitarian, like I said. But there is casual and natural give and take, and then there is the man who you can just TELL is constantly doing math in his head to make sure we're "even." The latter man is petty, IMO.

[mrldii]

...I actually wish this topic were less taboo. As others have pointed out, who pays is a matter of compatibility. Would it not be logical to have this information before the first date rather than "waste" several dates to find out you're incompatible in this area?...

 

I don't see that it's "taboo", especially by the number of online discussions brought up about it; personally, I don't see it as "taboo"...just "unnecessary".

 

As an earlier poster suggested, each party on a date should simply do whatever it is that they do (not just limited to "Who pays"), as that is the purpose of dating: to find someone who is compatible. I find it redundant to *make a rule* ensuring what each of us will do while dating...the fact that I (and whomever I may be dating) have a birth certificate is evidence and authority enough that each of us can, will, and should do whatever it is that we will do while on that date or at any other time.

[autumnnight]

This is one of many things that are a result of us expecting some sort of good relationship guarantee before we even begin dating.

 

It doesn't work that way.

[Shining One]

I have no problem with trying to be egalitarian, like I said. But there is casual and natural give and take, and then there is the man who you can just TELL is constantly doing math in his head to make sure we're "even." The latter man is petty, IMO.

That makes sense and I agree. I used to go to dinner with an ex and a bunch of her friends. At the end of the meal, a bunch of iPhones come out to determine exactly how much should go on each card. It was annoying to say the least and I felt sorry for the servers. I started carrying cash so I could just pay and leave.

[autumnnight]

To me, it would be like the man asking the woman every week "do you still wear a size 6" or the woman asking the man every week "do you still have your job?"

 

I get it, appearance is important and keeping a job is important. But when it becomes such a "thing," then something is amiss. I mean, of someone comes to me with a spreadsheet after a couple of months of dating and says "I have invested 5.00 more in this relationship with you," I'm not going to be impressed.

[writergal]

The article in the OP is quoted to say that over 75% of men feel guilty accepting women's money, and that most couples surveyed and interviewed by CNN Money do not split the bill 50/50 on the first date, even when men call themselves progressive or women call themselves feminists. Do any LoveShack men agree with that percentage? Just curious.

 

According to the article, this is what modern dating looks like: 10% of men pay for the 1st date, another 10% of men expect the woman to go Dutch on the 1st date, and the rest of men are somewhere in between with their expectations about who pays on the 1st date. Again, to the men on LoveShack do you think that's accurate?

 

I think traditionally men should pay for both people on the 1st date. After that, it's up to both people to decide who pays and for what, on any dates that follow.

[loveflower]

A man who mind this sort of thing is just doesn't come across as manly at all.

 

I will lose all respect and physical appeal...I can't help it. It's automatic.

[Shining One]

The article in the OP is quoted to say that over 75% of men feel guilty accepting women's money

I would feel guilty about accepting a disproportionate amount of money from a woman, but I don't feel guilty about her contributing her fair share.

do not split the bill 50/50 on the first date, even when men call themselves progressive or women call themselves feminists.

I usually pay for the first date. I only go Dutch if she insists. Once, a woman paid for the entire first date. She had a tab already open when I got there and she had told the bartender to put all of my drinks on her tab.

I think traditionally men should pay for both people on the 1st date. After that, it's up to both people to decide who pays and for what, on any dates that follow.

I think Person A should pay for the first date and Person B should pay for the second. Person B should offer to split the bill on the first date if they have no intention of seeing Person A again. I'm not a fan of going Dutch. I take turns with most of my friends.

A man who mind this sort of thing is just doesn't come across as manly at all.

 

I will lose all respect and physical appeal...I can't help it. It's automatic.

To each their own. I lose respect for women who don't offer to contribute, so they are no longer in the relationship material category. I find equality attractive.

[loveflower]

Small things affect small men. It's just so diminutive...

 

A man who thinks a woman is as 'equal' as him, might as well be substituted by a woman...

[eye of the storm]

Small things affect small men. It's just so diminutive...

 

A man who thinks a woman is as 'equal' as him, might as well be substituted by a woman...

 

My son is very masculine. Chicks dig him. But he treats them as equals. Why? Because he understands the fact that they are equal to him. And he is confident enough in his manhood to let a woman be all that she is.

 

A man who feels the need to defend his masculinity is not fully confident in his masculinity. Super unattractive.

 

A woman who demands a man pay for everything is not looking for a partner. She is looking for $$. And to me, as a woman, it is unattractive.

 

A man who refuses to let me pay my fair share is not someone looking for a partner either. To me it says he thinks I am incapable of contributing and that makes me less than him.

 

Now, on a first date, I offer. If it isn't accepted, no issues. Maybe even the second date no issues, but by the third date if I am not allowed to either pick up the tab without an argument or minimum pay my own tab then we are into issues.

[autumnnight]

her fair share.

 

Her fair share of money. His fair share of money.

 

When I am in a relationship I give 100%. I cook, I help, I don't mind paying for things.

 

But this whole modern concept of relationships where my main concern is supposed to be to make sure I don't give one iota more than they are? Where I add up how much I spend on groceries, how much he spends on dates, how many of "my" cookies he eats....etc. I'm sorry, I think it's childish, petty, materialistic, selfish, and a bit narcissistic.

 

If you cannot give to another human being with adding up some cost benefit analysis, then no thank you. If I am with you, you have all of me. I'm not going to date a calculator.

 

Wanting guarantees ahead of time, wanting a formula for a yes, adding up the spreadsheet, weigh-ins, yelling at a man for holding the door open, dismissing a woman because she didn't whip out her credit card fast enough....

 

I don't want to live in 2015 anymore. It's just way too sad.

[eye of the storm]

Autumnnight, My point is both people should contribute to the relationship. And if every time we go out I am not allowed to contribute then, I feel like I am not considered an equal part of the equation.

 

That being said, there are different ways of contributing and if both people are happy with their contributions...then it is their relationship and nobody else's business.

[Keenly]

A man who mind this sort of thing is just doesn't come across as manly at all.

 

I will lose all respect and physical appeal...I can't help it. It's automatic.

 

Who's the one that's making a big deal about it? The man that wants to split, or the Woman that loses respect because the subject is even brought up?

 

A puzzling question.

[autumnnight]

Who's the one that's making a big deal about it? The man that wants to split, or the Woman that loses respect because the subject is even brought up?

 

A puzzling question.

 

Oh I don't know....who makes the most threads and who is usually the first to use it in a debate?

[popcornpuff]

I'm a man and I've always paid for the first date unless she offered to split it. I don't think of her any differently if she pays for it or not. Honestly, I'm not sure why so many people are making such a big deal out of this. It's such a small thing!