First date - should I pass on her for this?

[CaliforniaGirl]

23 minutes ago, MaleIntuition said:

Sigh. Your questions was rhetorical at best (somewhat less clear when you edit your posts thoug). OP hasn’t been her for a month or so.          

This is the part I was commenting on, and strongly disagreeing with:

This is not a question, but a statement. And the mindset behind this statement (that is; your mindset) seems to be of the transactional idea of sex. As in; sex is a currency - like money - that can be given. 

Okey-doke...so this is the last I'll say to you in the subject because you really are acting personally offended and this was never aimed at you, I don't think I've ever even communicated with you before...I have no clue who you are. But everything I say only inflames you more so I will explain one last time and then whatever you think is whatever you think.

1. I already stated I believe most men are *not* like this.

2. I stated that I have never actually experienced complaints of this nature anywhere but the internet.

3. I said every time *I have seen* a thread like this, eventually it comes down to someone saying if there is no sex the woman should pay...which, yes, would make it transactional.

4. it s a fact that this is what I have *seen.* That indeed is a fact. Not sure how that means the idea of sex for fried rice was my original idea.

5. Unfortunately, this thread was no exception. Literally there is a post outlining no many dates without sex = the woman pays. Then actual number of dates. As apparently a formula. Again...NOT my idea. I READ it. On this thread. So can you. You probably already did.

6. Then *someone else* mentioned the idea that the OP may have been doing expecting sex in exchange...or that's what the comment appeared to be. I quoted that and asked. The. Original. Poster. Asked (pause) the original poster.

7. I mentioned that I have never seen these complaints when the poster had sex with the woman he "paid" to feed. And I haven't. Not sure how you can say it isn't a fact that I've never seen this. If the OP says they did it and it was amazing then that particular streak will be broken.

How on earth you could have possibly have extrapolated from all that (indeed, from any of it) that I, personally, think of sex as transactional and as someone giving it v. both having it, I can't imagine. Honestly I think you just want to see it that way. I don't know why but that's your thing to figure out. I can't think how I could even explain this any more clearly, I feel silly even having to reiterate all this. But there you have it. I know you're going to keep being angry but I won't address this again because literally...I can not possibly explain in any more meticulous detail, information that you can literally read for yourself right above here, in order of comments, including mine.

 

23 minutes ago, MaleIntuition said:

Sigh. Your questions was rhetorical at best (somewhat less clear when you edit your posts thoug). OP hasn’t been her for a month or so.          

This is the part I was commenting on, and strongly disagreeing with:

This is not a question, but a statement. And the mindset behind this statement (that is; your mindset) seems to be of the transactional idea of sex. As in; sex is a currency - like money - that can be given. 

Still waiting g to hear back from the OP. 

Edited May 7, 2020 by CaliforniaGirl

[Shining One]

8 hours ago, CaliforniaGirl said:

I don't think I've ever seen a man complain about paying for the dinner if he got sex afterward.

I generally don't complain about having paid for a single date, but I do complain about paying for several. I have complained more than once on this forum about having paid for several dates, despite having sex with the women in question.

I personally wouldn't consider a transactional woman of this type (I buy dinner, she has sex with me) as relationship material. However, I do prefer them over women who do nothing, which is the majority of the women I've dated.

1 hour ago, CaliforniaGirl said:

Reaching back into my memory bank...I feel like it used to be kind of a code we all followed...like, a way to say "not interested" without humiliating the person. Again, could have just been an old-fashioned thing that was dying out even then.

It could also be another one of those things you see more often on the internet and rarely see in real life.

[CaliforniaGirl]

3 minutes ago, Shining One said:

I generally don't complain about having paid for a single date, but I do complain about paying for several. I have complained more than once on this forum about having paid for several dates, despite having sex with the women in question.

I personally wouldn't consider a transactional woman of this type (I buy dinner, she has sex with me) as relationship material. However, I do prefer them over women who do nothing, which is the majority of the women I've dated.

It could also be another one of those things you see more often on the internet and rarely see in real life.

^ I don't think so because this was before about 2000, which was the last time I dated. Maybe it was regional? ETA: that was an answer to the last part of your post.

Edited May 7, 2020 by CaliforniaGirl

[Shining One]

51 minutes ago, CaliforniaGirl said:

I don't think so because this was before about 2000, which was the last time I dated. Maybe it was regional?

I've seen quite a few posts from women on this forum in recent years who say they insist on paying their share when not interested. However, I can count on one hand the number of women who have done that with me. As you say, it could very well be regional. My dating experience is largely limited to South Florida.

[Els]

 Did not read the whole thread. But IMO it's rather rude and presumptive of someone to not even offer. If the man wants to pay he can say that he's got it, but otherwise both parties should expect to pay their share. It's a gift, you don't just assume you're getting one, although it's fine to prefer gift givers if you're a gift person.

[nospam99]

So let me get this straight. Is a woman insisting on paying half now a 'code' for ''I'm not interested''? Should I not ask her out again if she insists on paying for half? (Not being a fan of 'codes', my personal preference is to ask again and see if she flakes or refuses.)

[SumGuy]

3 hours ago, CaliforniaGirl said:

Reaching back into my memory bank...I feel like it used to be kind of a code we all followed...like, a way to say "not interested" without humiliating the person. Again, could have just been an old-fashioned thing that was dying out even then.

My memory is in college (way pre-internet) it was split costs more as a sign of equality thing, but then again we had so little free cash that going out on the traditional dinner date was pretty rare.

Decades later I wondered when women offer to split the check, insisted on splitting, or insisted on paying because had heard it was a away of saying not interested.  The first in a long line of internet misinformation around dating; thank goodness I ignored it.

Found no correlation between their interest level and the payment.  Have had women split or even pay the whole thing who had no interest.   Have had women do the same that were uncertain, i.e. we saw each other again.  Had women do the same (pay all or split) who were all over me. Also all three scenarios have arisen when I paid and can't recall if they offered or not.   

So it is a predictor of nothing for the women I attract and seek.   It is also not correlated with how much money they have except have noticed the women who paid and who were all over me apparently did have a lot of money.  The same action, paying, splitting, not paying is used as a different signal of interest by different women.

It fascinates me then that people read so much into how the bill gets paid, or frankly care so much about the signals and dance around it.  If the cost of dating is an economic strain, fight the materialistic mantra you have bought into and do things you can afford.

[SumGuy]

Just now, nospam99 said:

So let me get this straight. Is a woman insisting on paying half now a 'code' for ''I'm not interested''? Should I not ask her out again if she insists on paying for half? (Not being a fan of 'codes', my personal preference is to ask again and see if she flakes or refuses.)

A bit of cross posting but for the women I seek and who have sought me it can mean anything.   It is code for nothing.   

When I go by how the night went, not how the bill is paid, is a much better predictor if she is interested.  Rarely have if she is interested been a question, rarely have women flaked, but I think I give off a vibe that it is perfectly chill with me for her to say she is not feeling the connection, and every time she has that feeling is mutual.

Caveat: I am seek and go out with women who place next to no credence in the "traditional" gender roles as a way to approach relationships or view the sexes, who could care less about material status, who are intelligent and accomplished in their own right, who are can do, and open minded.

[CaliforniaGirl]

37 minutes ago, nospam99 said:

So let me get this straight. Is a woman insisting on paying half now a 'code' for ''I'm not interested''? Should I not ask her out again if she insists on paying for half? (Not being a fan of 'codes', my personal preference is to ask again and see if she flakes or refuses.)

Obviously not for everyone, LOL! I was saying "insisted," FWIW. And a first date thing. Usually I would offer to pay on a first date but nearly all the time the man would refuse it. I even had an "I'm insulted" reaction a few times that I recall. However, most guys would be fine with "well, let me get it next time" and in any ongoing relationship I've had It always switch of and on, no scorecard, both just paying over time. Same with my friends. I mean we were all working.

For those insisting it's no big deal, though, I dunno...I see threads like this all the time on relationship boards... seems like it's a big deal to a few? Along with what sure looks like scorecards to me. So...it's bugging somebody, LOL! ETA and...didn't I read that there's some combined thread about it? Or am I hallucinating? I feel like I saw that. I mean, this subject is a perennial, obviously not everyone is on the same page and assuming the same things for all dates.

Edited May 7, 2020 by CaliforniaGirl

[Realitysux]

6 hours ago, poppyfields said:

For me it was more about not feeling guilty afterwards for allowing a guy to spend his hard earned money on a woman who had absolutely zero interest in him.

Total self-interest on my part, I hate feeling guilt!  

If I have no interest then I don't let him pay for me either. I would feel bad about that too! Tomorrow I am going out with a guy for lunch but I have no interest so I will be buying my own lunch. I think that also sets a boundary and sends a clear message to him. 

Edited May 8, 2020 by Realitysux

[Marc878]

Maybe it’s just me but I never allowed anyone to pay.

[JS84]

I have no idea why men are still taking women out to restaurants for a first date these days anyway. There are cheaper, not to mention free, options out there. But honestly unless it's a charity or a homeless person, I don't care to spend money on someone I don't even know. I don't care how attracted I am to them. Especially when there's a decent chance they're just in it for a free meal. Restaurants should be for 3rd or 4th dates. That's just my opinion though.

 

[MaleIntuition]

15 hours ago, CaliforniaGirl said:

Okey-doke...so this is the last I'll say to you in the subject because you really are acting personally offended and this was never aimed at you, I don't think I've ever even communicated with you before...I have no clue who you are. But everything I say only inflames you more so I will explain one last time and then whatever you think is whatever you think.

1. I already stated I believe most men are *not* like this.

2. I stated that I have never actually experienced complaints of this nature anywhere but the internet.

3. I said every time *I have seen* a thread like this, eventually it comes down to someone saying if there is no sex the woman should pay...which, yes, would make it transactional.

4. it s a fact that this is what I have *seen.* That indeed is a fact. Not sure how that means the idea of sex for fried rice was my original idea.

5. Unfortunately, this thread was no exception. Literally there is a post outlining no many dates without sex = the woman pays. Then actual number of dates. As apparently a formula. Again...NOT my idea. I READ it. On this thread. So can you. You probably already did.

6. Then *someone else* mentioned the idea that the OP may have been doing expecting sex in exchange...or that's what the comment appeared to be. I quoted that and asked. The. Original. Poster. Asked (pause) the original poster.

7. I mentioned that I have never seen these complaints when the poster had sex with the woman he "paid" to feed. And I haven't. Not sure how you can say it isn't a fact that I've never seen this. If the OP says they did it and it was amazing then that particular streak will be broken.

How on earth you could have possibly have extrapolated from all that (indeed, from any of it) that I, personally, think of sex as transactional and as someone giving it v. both having it, I can't imagine. Honestly I think you just want to see it that way. I don't know why but that's your thing to figure out. I can't think how I could even explain this any more clearly, I feel silly even having to reiterate all this. But there you have it. I know you're going to keep being angry but I won't address this again because literally...I can not possibly explain in any more meticulous detail, information that you can literally read for yourself right above here, in order of comments, including mine.

 

Still waiting g to hear back from the OP. 

And you are calling me upset? I’ve never been angry nor upset while discussing this topic. Neither have I resorted to personal attacks. Literally the only thing you’ve gotten right thus far is that you don’t know who I am.

Right here. Right now: In your point 7, You explain how you brought sex into the equation. You say that you’ve never seen this complaint if they had sex afterwards. My point is; that is a completely irrelevant observation to OPs original question of whether or not her behaviour was a red flag. Sex is not, and should not, be a part of this discussion: and the only way to make it a part of the equation is indeed to commodify it. Which is exactly what you did when you said: they don’t complain when they get sex.

And no: I’m still not angry.

[poppyfields]

2 hours ago, JS84 said:

I don't care to spend money on someone I don't even know. I don't care how attracted I am to them. Especially when there's a decent chance they're just in it for a free meal.

 

Hey, no judgment from me, whatever works!  Which begs the question, how has it been working for ya?

Wouid you consider yourself a successful dater?  Meaning many women wanting to date you a second, third, fourth time, do you have a girlfriend? 

And just out of curiosity, when you and other men say they fear a woman is only out for a "free meal," you realize this reflects poor self esteem and lack of confidence -  that YOU consider your only value to a woman a free meal.   In your mind, have you nothing else to offer?   

You're under no obligation to take her to a restaurant, there are lots of other things to do besides that, that cost little or no money.  Filter women out that way if you're so concerned about being looked upon as a "free meal." 

I'm sorry, I just find that attitude and mindset very sad, as wanting a "free meal" is not why most women date nor is it how most women think. 

 

Edited May 8, 2020 by poppyfields

[JS84]

15 minutes ago, poppyfields said:

Hey, no judgment from me, whatever works!  Which begs the question, how has it been working for ya?

Wouid you consider yourself a successful dater?  Meaning many women wanting to date you a second, the third, fourth time, do you have a girlfriend? 

And just out of curiosity, when men say they fear a woman is only out for a "free meal"  that shows a lack of confidence on your part -  that YOU consider your only value to her a free meal. 

How very very sad for you, I'm sorry. 

But again, if this approach and mindset has been working for you, then who am I to judge?

All the best....

Actually I've been single for years. I'm pretty jaded towards relationships in general at this point in my life (age 35). I've actually had to turn down about 4 women in the past couple of years who were interested just because I don't even feel like bothering anymore. My last girlfriend is married with a couple of kids now. My level of trust is down to damn near nothing when it comes to relationships and the opposite sex. The only women I trust are my mother and my grandmothers and unfortunately my grandmothers are dead. I plan on being single for some time if not for a long time. I do pretty well on my own and my social life is very stress free with little to no drama.

And to be honest I don't really care about the free meal thing too much myself. When I was dating and I took a woman out to a restaurant at the end of the day I'd be out what? $25 or $30??? Not a huge deal to me personally. It's not like I was dating left and right anyway. And I know the vast majority of women aren't looking for a free meal, but I don't think it's as uncommon as a lot of people like to portray. Especially women who aren't in the best financial position. But again, not exactly a felony as far as I'm concerned.

But the sheer amount of men out there complaining about spending money on dates that lead to nowhere is tired. As far as I'm concerned it's their own fault spending money they apparently don't want to lose on women they barely know or who most likely aren't even interested or won't be in the end anyway. Maybe it's different since I live in Chicago, you have a lot of options outside of restaurants so my perspective is a bit different in that regard.

Back when I did date though I thought I did pretty good. It was rare to go out with a woman and not really hear from her again. 

Edited May 8, 2020 by JS84

[poppyfields]

Thanks for responding JS, tbh I didnt expect that.

Yeah, I know of many men choosing to "go their own way" (MGTOW), for whatever reason and imo that's OK!

I went through a period when I myself chose to go my own way, breaks can be good and beneficial, even loooonnngg breaks.  Or choosing to remain single forever even.

From your last response, you sound like a cool man and sorry to hear you've become jaded.  I get it, BTDT.. 

I worked past it though, went back to dating and now in a great relationship! 

 

Edited May 8, 2020 by poppyfields

[JS84]

WHOOAAA I am not a part of that MGTOW crap lol. No way. Now those guys are misogynistic losers. I do not hate women. I sure as hell don't think they're any worse than men. I just think relationships more often than not go bad, and most people stay in them instead of walking away. And I'm not into men so they're not the ones I'm wary of when it comes to dating.

Edited May 8, 2020 by JS84

[poppyfields]

Apologies, didnt mean to offend. I shouldn't have even mentioned it, I don't know enough about it to know whether it's a misogynistic group of men or not.

I just thought it was men choosing to not date or have relationshios and "going their own way" for whatever reason.

Guess I was wrong. 

 

Edited May 8, 2020 by poppyfields

[JS84]

There is actually a MGTOW website and a forum section if you want to check it out sometime. Don't expect to see a lot of intellectual heavyweights though lol. For a group of men "going their own way" they spend a lot of time complaining about and obsessing over women.

And no offense taken. I can see why my post might make you think I'd be a part of MGTOW if you're not very familiar with it. Those guys just really suck though.

Edited May 8, 2020 by JS84

[miranda561]

On 3/12/2020 at 1:27 PM, Leojax said:

So I had a date with this absolutely gorgeous woman. The check comes and she didn’t offer to pay. I’ll admit she did say thank you. She ubered to the restaurant and I offered to take her home, which she took me up on. After I drop her off she texted me and said, “thanks again for the ride ”

Should I next her for not even offering to pay? She didn’t even do the fake grab at the check.

Its a first date!!! Its not the 50th date where you've been paying every single time.

Ive met a lot of different guys, and  on a first date they all pretty much paid the bills for everything. 

If everything  else was fine, i would give her a chance if i was you. But then again if this is the way you think perhaps its in her best interests to let her go. 

[CaliforniaGirl]

5 hours ago, MaleIntuition said:

And you are calling me upset? I’ve never been angry nor upset while discussing this topic. Neither have I resorted to personal attacks. Literally the only thing you’ve gotten right thus far is that you don’t know who I am.

Right here. Right now: In your point 7, You explain how you brought sex into the equation. You say that you’ve never seen this complaint if they had sex afterwards. My point is; that is a completely irrelevant observation to OPs original question of whether or not her behaviour was a red flag. Sex is not, and should not, be a part of this discussion: and the only way to make it a part of the equation is indeed to commodify it. Which is exactly what you did when you said: they don’t complain when they get sex.

And no: I’m still not angry.

...which I said as "good point" to *someone else* bringing it up. It is as simple as going back and reading where I first joined this discussion. You are like a dog with a bone with this and seem very triggered. You have taken it personally, have made it personal, and can not, even with explanations, let it go. You need to work this issue out on your own.

Edited May 8, 2020 by CaliforniaGirl

[CaliforniaGirl]

1 hour ago, miranda561 said:

Its a first date!!! Its not the 50th date where you've been paying every single time.

Ive met a lot of different guys, and  on a first date they all pretty much paid the bills for everything. 

If everything  else was fine, i would give her a chance if i was you. But then again if this is the way you think perhaps its in her best interests to let her go. 

Pretty much this...it is obvious reading this thread, and any other on the subject, that opinions vary (to say the least). If it is a really big deal to the person, a litmus test of sorts, then they're not a match, plain and simple.

Here's what I'm wondering, though: where is the OP? Did he make his decision on this?

[CaliforniaGirl]

6 hours ago, JS84 said:

I have no idea why men are still taking women out to restaurants for a first date these days anyway. There are cheaper, not to mention free, options out there. But honestly unless it's a charity or a homeless person, I don't care to spend money on someone I don't even know. I don't care how attracted I am to them. Especially when there's a decent chance they're just in it for a free meal. Restaurants should be for 3rd or 4th dates. That's just my opinion though.

 

I feel like most people just grab a coffee or grab a free concert or something. Restaurant first dates are kind old-fashioned. Years ago they were standard and nobody bitched, felt obligated or tallied whether they had been "worth it," but to be fair I think income to expense was a little higher then too. If I were dating today I would probably be doing coffee or a walk or the arboretum or park concert or farmers market or whatever for a first date. If you're the one making the date this is totally to your advantage as you can suggest the activity as well and this will probably all be happening in summer (when restrictions begin to be lifted) so you can be outdoors doing something casual. 

[CaliforniaGirl]

16 hours ago, Marc878 said:

Maybe it’s just me but I never allowed anyone to pay.

Yes, I think that's fairly rare. Years ago you'd hear a lot of guys say that.

[miranda561]

12 minutes ago, CaliforniaGirl said:

Yes, I think that's fairly rare. Years ago you'd hear a lot of guys say that.

There was only one i met where he was hesitant to pay..so i was like lets just split it. I found it pretty unpleasant if im honest. And im 100% on a first time meeting someone (whether unfair or not) the woman would  not be getting the best first  impression anyway. 

And with regards to the op, if he is like that with regards to the first date, what about  the rest of the dates and if it ends up as a relationship. Money is going to be a big issue.