Consolidated Discussion - Paying for Dates

[crude]

It seems that you have not understood the analogy. If men don't pay for dates, they run a higher risk of no second date than those who do. Presumably.

 

If women don't bother with their appearance before a date, they run a higher risk of no second date than those who do. Again, presumably.

 

 

Of course women also expect men to bother with their appearance. If a man looks like a slob, no second date. Women also expect the man to pick her up in his car, no car, less likely for a second date. Women also expect the man to be gainfully employed with a future, or less likely to be a second date. Men need to expect more from women.

[dasein]

When things aren't fair to women, we change laws, when things aren't fair to men, we say tough, life isn't fair.

 

A valid point.

 

YES! Make laws surrounding paying for dates!!!!!!!!!

 

... and the snide unreasoning, unreply to the valid point. The disingenuous fallacy here was in unreasonably leaping to seize on the "we change laws" part, as opposed to the reasonable point crude made about how men are greeted when complaining about certain types of inequitable treatment. Typical, seen it a thousand times here, a LS favorite particularly among certain female posters.

 

And then from me in snarky reply to the snark:

 

As far as whether there should be laws, there are laws, slander is a form of defamation. Good luck getting them enforced in femculture though. This is ironically a form of illegitimate and archaic social condescension against women who are presumed to be scatterbrained and loose tongued, so "their slanders don't do real damage." Of course where $$ and undue benefit are on the table, as we see so many times and in many ways, women tend not to care about social equity somehow. Imagine that.

 

Refer to above. You're the first person to bring slander and defamation into this thread, this morning. Backpedaling would be a...lie.

 

Context would be... a slice of crow pie for you. Enjoy it!

[tbf]

A valid point.

 

... and the snide unreasoning, unreply to the valid point. The disingenuous fallacy here was in unreasonably leaping to seize on the "we change laws" part, as opposed to the reasonable point crude made about how men are greeted when complaining about certain types of inequitable treatment. Typical, seen it a thousand times here, a LS favorite particularly among certain female posters.

 

And then from me in snarky reply to the snark:

Fascinating how the male perspective is valid and the female, snide. Monocular vision.

 

Context would be... a slice of crow pie for you. Enjoy it!

No crow at all. You brought the terms slander and defamation into the thread this morning. crude brought laws into the thread. Mine were just responses to male initiation. Point the finger accurately and quit playing victim.

[crude]

Just as much is expected of women nowadays. We're expected to be college educated with careers, wonderful wives and mothers, run a household AND be earners and maintain a slender figure in the meantime.

 

You're talking about marriage. This is the dating forum. What I expect from a woman is that she contribute equally by planning and paying for every second date. Don't use the words "lady, gentleman, cheap, court, wine and dine" like a club to force me to pay both our shares.

[dasein]

It seems that you have not understood the analogy.

 

I understand both the proper analogy "appearance v appearance" and the other BS one quite well, and have demonstrated its inaptness in this thread and several others. You and other adherents of the bad analogy would allow women to factor in any number of "self-focused" expenses not necessary for attraction, and the guy to factor in the Porsche he feels he needs in his pro rata "dating expense." I wouldn't. There are many men who spend just as much on looking good as women do today, from hair product to braces, tooth treatments to plastic surgery, and that's all on them, not at all necessary to do those things to be attractive, and not at all analogous to the social convention that men should pay for early dates.

[dasein]

Fascinating how the male perspective is valid and the female, snide. Monocular vision.

 

No, -your- distortion, not some "female perspective," of the plain point the poster made, in a transparent attempt to dismiss that point out of hand was what was snide.

 

No crow at all. You brought the terms slander and defamation into the thread this morning. crude brought laws into the thread. Mine were just responses to male initiation. Point the finger accurately and quit playing victim.

 

Keep telling yourself that, context is a bitch sometimes.

[tbf]

No, -your- distortion, not some "female perspective," of the plain point the poster made, in a transparent attempt to dismiss that point out of hand was what was snide.

Distortion? Not at all. It brought the discussion back to first date paying from the conflation of first date paying with social inequality.

 

Keep telling yourself that, context is a bitch sometimes.

My perspective is objective in nature. It's fact that crude brought law into the thread and you brought slander and defamation into the thread. I only responded to male initiation. Cause and effect.

[dasein]

Is that (the bolded) even a word? I've noticed you use that, along with "unadvice," a lot. Or, should I say, in keeping with your trend, alot?

 

"Unadvice," and "unreply" are more polite ways to say much more colorful and pointed things that I'd rather avoid, would you prefer those?

 

I get paid to be precise, btw, if you'd like more precision and attention to my posts here, perhaps we can work out a package deal that includes all of my internet, text and AIM communiques. Where shall I send the bill?

[dasein]

Distortion? Not at all. It brought the discussion back to first date paying from the conflation of first date paying with social inequality.

 

People are well capable of reading the reply. It was snide and took crude's point out of context in a feeble attempt to make his valid point look ludicrous. You are now attempting to take my snarky retort to your snidery as grounds for the absurd "legalistic" derail you've perpetuated in post after post today. Not buying it, maybe the choir will, but I'm not.

 

My perspective is objective in nature. It's fact that crude brought law into the thread and you brought slander and defamation into the thread. I only responded to male initiation. Cause and effect.

 

I see, and anxiously await the legalistic result the next time someone puts the word "law" into one of their posts. Maybe you can turn all sorts of discussions legal, "law of the jungle," "law of supply and demand," even "law of cause and effect." Sky's the limit.

[dasein]

I really believe that you have no idea how weak your consistent "I'm right and you're a typical ranting female bitch so therefore, you're wrong" argument comes across. Seriously. It would not last one moment in a conversation amongst real life people I know, be they men or women, traditional or progressive.

 

Surely, you can do better.

 

You just don't like it that the true context of the thread's progression says other than what you and tbf want to claim it does, and are now proceeding with yet another in a long line of "lecture bad ole dasein" fallbacks.

 

So until the next "who pays" thread or the ilk, ta-ta! I don't like my posts being up here in the consolidated thread anyway where they can't be truly appreciated and learned from by everyone here.

[tbf]

*cries from shaming devices*

 

Anyways, since there's no new points being offered beyond attempted bike shedding, I'm done here.

[Ruby Slippers]

If a guy asked me to go dutch on a first date, or all our dates - or take turns paying - I would. No guy has ever asked me to do that, but I'd do it.

 

My boyfriend almost always pays, and I've initiated several conversations about it, suggesting that he let me pay more often. The other day, he reacted to his bank statement, which is full of debit charges because he's about to visit his family after not having visited for a long time, and has recently spent a lot of money on very nice gifts for all of them. He's a generous guy and goes all out when it comes to gifts for anybody.

 

We were figuring out where to go to lunch, and I suggested some affordable places and said I wanted him to let me pay. He refused - but he did let me buy our inexpensive dinner later.

 

dasein, have you ever asked a woman to go dutch in advance of your dates?

[Donna_Day]

For me it's not so much about who is paying or even the price. If the date suits the occasion, like the ambiance etc. then it's worth it It's nice when the guy pays but I rather see that he's put time and effort into choosing a date venue.

 

The link below is all about choosing a date venue. It's actually a survey but the topics it touches on highlights areas where a guy my fail in regards to setting up the date.

 

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Q2lTN0i_hTIHQQpGugC3PyAbar2X8c4o4GPGbGRneIk/viewform

 

Check it out

 

x

Donna

[GirlontheLam]

I recently had a funny experience (or multiple experiences). A while ago I met a guy. And during our initial chat, he offered to take my friend and I to dinner. We refused.

 

Months later, I met the same guy with a different friend. This time around, he bought us drinks and offered to take us to dinner again. (It didn't work out again)

 

There is a really long story in here, but I ended up meeting up with him last week for drinks. And he paid. Of course. I didn't even see the check change hands. It wasn't even a date.

 

A little surprising to me, since he is smack dab in the middle of the millennial generation. Millennial tend to like to go dutch.

 

I am old-fashioned. I think the man should pay in the early phases (if it is actually a date).

[D-Lish]

I had 2 OLD dates with the same guy a while ago. The first date, the check came, and he grabbed it and looked it over, then mentally calculated what I owed and what he owed- and we split it. This was even though he'd offered initially to take me out. I was sort of interested, but his nit-picking on the bill was a turn off.

 

He asked me out again, and I was reluctant at first, but eventually decided to give it another go since we had laughed a lot the first time. Same thing happened, but this time, when the bill came- he looked it over, then got up and went over to the waitress stand and had her split it into two bills for us. The place was practically empty and I could hear him going over each item with her. He went to the bathroom, and the waitress brought over MY portion of the bill- she was embarrassed for me because the loser had wanted her to split the app he had ordered- but her POS system didn't allow her to.

 

The dude then proceeded to try and get a make out in front of the restaurant after that:eek:. To this day - many months later- he still texts "wot happened????"

 

The bottom line is- I don't mind going dutch- but nit-picking the bill on a date is a huge turn off, especially when the guy was the one to offer to take me out.

[Els]

Ah, glad to see this gem of a thread is still going strong. What would LS be without it...

[KungFuJoe]

I had 2 OLD dates with the same guy a while ago. The first date, the check came, and he grabbed it and looked it over, then mentally calculated what I owed and what he owed- and we split it. This was even though he'd offered initially to take me out. I was sort of interested, but his nit-picking on the bill was a turn off.

 

He asked me out again, and I was reluctant at first, but eventually decided to give it another go since we had laughed a lot the first time. Same thing happened, but this time, when the bill came- he looked it over, then got up and went over to the waitress stand and had her split it into two bills for us. The place was practically empty and I could hear him going over each item with her. He went to the bathroom, and the waitress brought over MY portion of the bill- she was embarrassed for me because the loser had wanted her to split the app he had ordered- but her POS system didn't allow her to.

 

The dude then proceeded to try and get a make out in front of the restaurant after that:eek:. To this day - many months later- he still texts "wot happened????"

 

The bottom line is- I don't mind going dutch- but nit-picking the bill on a date is a huge turn off, especially when the guy was the one to offer to take me out.

 

I'm not even a woman and even I was cringing as I read your story.

 

Holy christ where do these people come from?

[Phoe]

i've never had a guy who paid for everything on the first date. seems normal to me! I buy my own food, he buys his food. If we're just getting know each other why should he spend his money on me?

[Simon Phoenix]

I have no problem paying for a date. What irritates me is the entitlement that some women have toward the process. They require it, therefore they don't appreciate it. I hate entitlement and I hate mooching. And I don't need a blowjob or sex to feel "appreciated". A simple, genuine "Thank you" would be nice. Or even offering to throw in a tip or paying their half. I'll reject the throwing in half (not because I think it's an indicator that the woman doesn't like me, but just because I want to pay), but I appreciate someone who appreciates the kindness, not one who expects it out of spoiled entitlement.

 

And I don't pay because it makes me feel more of a man. I pay because I want to do something nice. And I don't feel emasculated when a woman wants to pay for me -- honestly, I think it's pretty damn cool. My last girlfriend loved to pay for me and tried to buy every time. I would pay half because I didn't want to be a moocher, but the fact that she wanted to do that for me was cool as hell. And I let her know how much I appreciated that thought process.

 

I don't get angry at women who enjoy being paid for. People like to receive gifts and nice things and shouldn't be criticized for it. But the women who expect it, feel entitled to it and don't show any appreciation for it are the ones that ruin it for the rest of their gender.

[Woggle]

I have no problem paying for a date. What irritates me is the entitlement that some women have toward the process. They require it, therefore they don't appreciate it. I hate entitlement and I hate mooching. And I don't need a blowjob or sex to feel "appreciated". A simple, genuine "Thank you" would be nice. Or even offering to throw in a tip or paying their half. I'll reject the throwing in half (not because I think it's an indicator that the woman doesn't like me, but just because I want to pay), but I appreciate someone who appreciates the kindness, not one who expects it out of spoiled entitlement.

 

And I don't pay because it makes me feel more of a man. I pay because I want to do something nice. And I don't feel emasculated when a woman wants to pay for me -- honestly, I think it's pretty damn cool. My last girlfriend loved to pay for me and tried to buy every time. I would pay half because I didn't want to be a moocher, but the fact that she wanted to do that for me was cool as hell. And I let her know how much I appreciated that thought process.

 

I don't get angry at women who enjoy being paid for. People like to receive gifts and nice things and shouldn't be criticized for it. But the women who expect it, feel entitled to it and don't show any appreciation for it are the ones that ruin it for the rest of their gender.

 

Exactly. Nobody likes an entitled princess or prince mentality. Stop acting like an entitled and spoiled brat and it will get you further with people. Sadly some don't realize this. You can't just going around treating people like crap and expect them to bend over backwards for you.

 

Men's issues with paying have little to do with actually paying. It is a reaction to many other issues men have with modern relationships.

[will1988]

Yup. Men expect a dual household income but don't think they need to split the household chores and childcare down the middle at 50%. Most think emptying the dishwasher or taking out the garbage IS doing 50% - it ain't. But they'll sure squawk (at least here, anyway) about 'equality' when it comes to paying for dates, won't they?

 

The hypocrisy is unreal.

 

I pay for the vast majority of the bills, my fiance does the vast majority of the house work... thats how things work in my world. old fashioned, sure, but i like it that way. Now i do help out around the house frequently, as she does buy most of the groceries and does help out with some bills... but for the most part it is 1950s-ish.

[Ruby Slippers]

i've never had a guy who paid for everything on the first date. seems normal to me! I buy my own food, he buys his food. If we're just getting know each other why should he spend his money on me?

I brought this up with my boyfriend, asking why he wouldn't let me pay more often. He said that he wants to be "the man", the provider, and he wouldn't feel right letting me pay. He said it's always been his goal to provide for his family, he earns enough to do it, and he doesn't want me to have to worry about money.

[Emilia]

All these women and all they want is you to pay. Won't someone pay them?

I thought that was something you did?

[Red Wolverine]

The take from a traditional yet independent woman...

 

If a man asks me to dinner, he should pay for it. I'm assuming he made a decision about where he's taking me so he should establish his ability to pay up front.

 

If a relationship is established, I don't have a problem paying for anything. If "I" plan a weekend away, I typically take care of the hotel when I make the plans. When we are there, I think it would appropriate for him to pick up dinner, etc.

 

I don't like keeping score but I don't expect him to pay for everything. I don't play games but if I notice he is avoiding paying, I'm done. Cheapness is a turnoff.

 

I was once in a relationship with a man who felt very strongly about paying for most meals and activities. It was difficult for me but he felt emasculated if I paid. We worked through it.

 

Relationships are a partnership but if I have to think about or dread the "who's paying" debate, I'll stay home with my kids. They make it easy by expecting me to pay for everything.

 

Regardless of who pays, I don't equate who paid with anything sexual. If a man expected something from me because he paid, he's outta luck.

Edited August 14, 2013 by Red Wolverine

[Red Wolverine]

How many men have you asked to dinner?

 

On a first date? None. Again, I'm traditional and wouldn't ask a man out at the start of a relationship. I'll express interest and receptiveness but I believe in chivalry.

Then apply that to your men to avoid the stress. Pay for everything by default

 

I don't have stress. I don't choose to date men who can't afford a meal.