Guys paying on the first date ...

[MissBee]

I think men paying for dates is a myth, because I have yet to encounter a man that didn't take the money for my share. I go into everything not only fully expecting to pay, but also expecting to cover someone else in case they need help. it's not so much about dating, but just being smart/prepared for anything. it would make me really happy to meet a guy who would treat me to something, and I mean like a coffee or ice cream. I can't even imagine scoring a meal, let alone a $25 one! my gosh that seems really unfair to make someone pay that for you anyway.

 

Wow...I would wager that you're in the minority.

 

How old are you?

 

In any case, from my teenage years right up until now I have gone on plenty of dates and have only gone dutch twice. Otherwise, 98% of the time every man I've been out with offers to pay, well it's not even an offer, as it happens seamlessly. But you go in expecting to pay and I guess you seem to always offer, so I think that may be why you've experienced higher levels of this.

 

If you want a man to treat you to something, date men who will! How come you're admonishing the OP because she expected this guy to pay, yet you also wish that somebody would treat you? You don't seem too happy about the fact that you've never been treated and you shouldn't be happy about it either IMO.

[Emilia]

This who pays what when is NOT ABOUT NEED. It's about expectations.

This is exactly the problem I have with it. Wrong expectations IMO. Paying for meals is meaningless, it doesn't indicate a man's true character or what he wants from a woman, it doesn't help with sifting through unsuitable candidates since most are capable of getting a job that will pay for reasonably priced meals. Yet a huge amount of importance is placed on it in many circles.

 

Instead of speding time with someone to work out his true character and personality, he is judged a gentleman because he pays. I know a good woman won't only judge you by what you pay for but it should not come into the equation at all. I read the more traditional ladies' posts on the matter and they seem to equate it as a man's true intentions - while we know how many men pay for things for an impressionable woman. He doesn't have to show who he really is, he hides behind his wallet.

 

But then I suppose the women who fall for that deserve it for not being smarter or for being superficial and putting a priority on his money over how decent a human being he really is.

[Emilia]

Women have a HUGE upper hand over men when it comes to dating nowadays.

Not really. It is still easy for a man to pretend he wants a relationship and only go for sex. Perhaps she benefits by getting a few dinners but can still end up being duped. Hardly call that an 'upper hand'. That's a misguided view.

[angel.eyes]

OP, neither of you did anything inherently wrong. You're simply two strangers trying to figure each other out. The clearer the messages you send the better.

 

If I like a guy, I don't offer to split the bill, pay, etc. I don't reach for the bill or my purse. I prefer that the guy pay for our first few dates (and all the signals I send are consistent with that preference). Now, if I am not interested in the guy, I'll pay my half, regardless of how heavily he protests. I don't want to leave any impression that there will be a repeat.

 

I don't believe it's an age thing since I date over a very wide age range. Only once did a guy ever suggest we split the bill, and he was in his forties and the oldest person I had ever dated.

[soccerrprp]

Offcourse women still want men to play a traditional role. It's to their advantage that men initate everything, put in all the effort and pay for all the dates and buys her gifts and so forth.

 

Which was understandable in the past. But nowadays when women do have their own careers it just seems kinda ridicilous.

 

Women have a HUGE upper hand over men when it comes to dating nowadays.

 

Hey, I'm not saying it should continue to be that way, rather, it IS that way for many. Many people still have traditional views on who pays in dating and that is both women AND MEN.

 

I can be frustrating, but one needs to recognize this fact and not get bent out of shape about it as it will ultimately make dating more difficult.

[MissBee]

I see.

 

Here's my view on the subject.

 

In the past it was the norm for men to pay for a woman when taking her out. However in the past women didn't make a whole lot of money, if any at all.

 

Nowadays, women make their own money. They don't "need" men to pay for them.

 

The times have changed. Women have careers, they have success. They old days of men paying for dates and in effect everything while the woman eventually stayed at home and raised kids are not coming back.

 

I think the one who does the asking should pay, and if the woman then offers to pay for her part she shouldn't be surprised if the man calls her on it.

 

I don't "need" a man to pay for me, I don't "need" him to open my car door, I don't "need" him to buy me birthday presents, I don't "need" breakfast in bed, I don't "need" him to help me down a flight of steers when I'm in 5 inch heels...but I sure like it!

 

Needing something, being unable to do something for yourself and simply liking it and appreciating it are not the same things and liking those kinds of things have nothing to do with equality.

[soccerrprp]

This is exactly the problem I have with it. Wrong expectations IMO. Paying for meals is meaningless, it doesn't indicate a man's true character or what he wants from a woman, it doesn't help with sifting through unsuitable candidates since most are capable of getting a job that will pay for reasonably priced meals. Yet a huge amount of importance is placed on it in many circles.

 

Instead of speding time with someone to work out his true character and personality, he is judged a gentleman because he pays. I know a good woman won't only judge you by what you pay for but it should not come into the equation at all. I read the more traditional ladies' posts on the matter and they seem to equate it as a man's true intentions - while we know how many men pay for things for an impressionable woman. He doesn't have to show who he really is, he hides behind his wallet.

 

But then I suppose the women who fall for that deserve it for not being smarter or for being superficial and putting a priority on his money over how decent a human being he really is.

 

I truly do love you, but have to disagree. I don't know, personally, any woman who believes that the single act of not paying determines the overall character of an individual. Not one. And I doubt that there are women who really do. But, it IS A determinant for many women. Especially if the not paying is accompanied by attitude. You or some women are convinced that the paying is a values issue. And it is for many. It is a single determinant and for some, it should not be ignored.

 

Again, really, I don't believe women believe that paying for a meal reveals all there is about a person.

 

Also, I don't believe the expectations to be WRONG. Just different. Different from yours, many men, some other women. It's just my thought on this.

[PegNosePete]

I'm sure alot of men would like women to do those things or similar for them to.

 

But women don't do stuff like that for men.

What? I don't need help with the car door or walking down stairs in heels, but I've certainly had a cooked breakfast in bed (after a 2nd date!), had a woman buy the first round, give me a gift on the 2nd meeting, and got birthday presents. Some women certainly DO do those things for men, and much as I don't NEED Them, I definitely liked them!

[Emilia]

I truly do love you, but have to disagree. I don't know, personally, any woman who believes that the single act of not paying determines the overall character of an individual. Not one. And I doubt that there are women who really do. But, it IS A determinant for many women. Especially if the not paying is accompanied by attitude. You or some women are convinced that the paying is a values issue. And it is for many. It is a single determinant and for some, it should not be ignored.

Haha you don't have to worry about disagreeing with my srp

 

Yes to the bolded. I have seen many many men impress women over the years with money. The men were guilty playing the women, the women were guilty playing along with it. I'm sure you don't know women like that, perhaps you move in nicer circles but there are a lot of posts here on LS that indicate otherwise. It's funny how money is picked as an indicator of chivalry. Not laying a red carpet under her feet. Or anything that's free.

 

As for negative attitude: that's always a turn off, regardless what it is.

Again, really, I don't believe women believe that paying for a meal reveals all there is about a person.

I think you are being generous.

Also, I don't believe the expectations to be WRONG. Just different. Different from yours, many men, some other women. It's just my thought on this.

I think when it comes to how some people/women define a 'gentleman', it is the wrong way to go about it, yes. Otherwise it doesn't matter.

[Emilia]

I didn't mean those exact things. I meant doing generous acts of love or affection in general. Women don't tend to do that.

Again, not true. Many of us cook for our men for example. Find out what his favourite meal is and cook it for him, learn to cook it for him. Acts of service is a very common love language practiced by women.

[soccerrprp]

I'm sure alot of men would like women to do those things or similar for them to.

 

But women don't do stuff like that for men.

 

Just had the two best birthdays of my life from my gf in the past 2-years. One while we were not even dating and the other just recently (while dating). I've had women open the door for me, really. One woman would open my door as soon as she got inside the passenger side. I was a little taken-back. Had a number of meals in bed and received poems, random gifts, sent songs, etc. Women, many women do these things.

 

You haven't met a considerate, committed woman yet.

[PegNosePete]

I didn't mean those exact things. I meant doing generous acts of love or affection in general. Women don't tend to do that.

Then you don't know the same women that I have known.

In my experience women certainly do do generous acts of love and affection.

Maybe it's just because I'm irresistible

[RedRobin]

I was answering another poster's thoughts on a more general sentiment as to why more people are going dutch now days. Personally, I don't believe it's b/c people are trying to be more fair, rather there are other negative dynamics that have led to the ever more pervasive "dutch" attitude. I shouldn't have used the word "creepy" or perhaps "dysfunctional."

 

I'm sorry you feel that way... and frankly, I resent it.

 

I've been offering to pay my way since I started dating back in HS. It never had anything to do with if I saw him as a friend or otherwise. There was no dysfunctional dynamic.

 

I was raised to fend for myself financially. Call it my Scandinavian heritage. ... and always having done so gave me empathy for men who were trying to get by, just like me. I was in school in a man's field, and was serious about fairness... on both sides.

 

It was the sincerest way I could express the idea that he doesn't have to PAY for my company. Or, well, I'm expecting him to show his interest in ways that can't be so easily managed with a few $$ either.

 

The whole idea of $$ is so rife with misunderstanding. That's why I insist on going on cheap or free things early on... to better focus on other things. But that is just me.

[soccerrprp]

Yes to the bolded. I have seen many many men impress women over the years with money. The men were guilty playing the women, the women were guilty playing along with it. I'm sure you don't know women like that, perhaps you move in nicer circles but there are a lot of posts here on LS that indicate otherwise. It's funny how money is picked as an indicator of chivalry. Not laying a red carpet under her feet. Or anything that's free.

 

Funny, I don't think of this who pays stuff having to do with money. More about power, expectations and control.

 

My gf, who gave me a lecture about being traditional and blah, blah...always pays for me now. It helps that she makes 3x more money than I do, but she is happy to do so. This is a traditional woman. She knows me very well and has confidence in me as a MAN and it helped that I demonstrated that I could meet her expectations. I don't have a problem with that.

[Emilia]

Funny, I don't think of this who pays stuff having to do with money. More about power, expectations and control.

Yes. Money in that example is a manifestation of power, expectations and control - though I wouldn't put that on a man who is just paying for a simple dinner. Often money is used as a sign of power though.

My gf, who gave me a lecture about being traditional and blah, blah...always pays for me now. It helps that she makes 3x more money than I do, but she is happy to do so. This is a traditional woman. She knows me very well and has confidence in me as a MAN and it helped that I demonstrated that I could meet her expectations. I don't have a problem with that.

Oh good. There is hope for you yet :love:

[RedRobin]

... and years later, being forced into the dating world again after a divorce...

 

....imagine my dismay at learning that some view my attempts at fairness as 'easy' or as disinterest in them romantically. What a shame. (shaking head)

[soccerrprp]

I'm sorry you feel that way... and frankly, I resent it.

 

I've been offering to pay my way since I started dating back in HS. It never had anything to do with if I saw him as a friend or otherwise. There was no dysfunctional dynamic.

 

I was raised to fend for myself financially. Call it my Scandinavian heritage. ... and always having done so gave me empathy for men who were trying to get by, just like me. I was in school in a man's field, and was serious about fairness... on both sides.

 

It was the sincerest way I could express the idea that he doesn't have to PAY for my company. Or, well, I'm expecting him to show his interest in ways that can't be so easily managed with a few $$ either.

 

The whole idea of $$ is so rife with misunderstanding. That's why I insist on going on cheap or free things early on... to better focus on other things. But that is just me.

 

Okay. I wasn't trying to claim that everyone that does this has some "problem." In fact, I posted to that effect. Also, I was thinking more about the men who insist on going dutch, not so much the women.

 

I was not clear on that. Sorry.

[Emilia]

... and years later, being forced into the dating world again after a divorce...

 

....imagine my dismay at learning that some view my attempts at fairness as 'easy' or as disinterest in them romantically. What a shame. (shaking head)

Oh anything like that just makes me think it's easier for me to sift through the chuff in the beginning. No worries at all.

[soccerrprp]

... and years later, being forced into the dating world again after a divorce...

 

....imagine my dismay at learning that some view my attempts at fairness as 'easy' or as disinterest in them romantically. What a shame. (shaking head)

 

Not me. I get it. My earlier posts were not as clear as I would have wanted them to be.

[PegNosePete]

....imagine my dismay at learning that some view my attempts at fairness as 'easy' or as disinterest in them romantically. What a shame. (shaking head)

On the contrary, I'd take your attempts at fairness as exactly that.

But then over-analyzing never was my strong suit

[soccerrprp]

Yes. Money in that example is a manifestation of power, expectations and control - though I wouldn't put that on a man who is just paying for a simple dinner. Often money is used as a sign of power though.

 

I mean you know that there are guys who won't even pay for a cup of coffee, right? So, not about the amount of money, rather control, power...

 

Oh good. There is hope for you yet :love:

 

I was married for 12+ years and learned a lot! But when I got back into the dating world after my wife passed away, I too, wasn't too certain as to what to do if a woman offered to pay. My gf is a doctor and very independent, so when she offered, I thought, okay, I better not insult her by not accepting her gesture. Sheesh, I was mistaken....Lol!

[Emilia]

I mean you know that there are guys who won't even pay for a cup of coffee, right? So, not about the amount of money, rather control, power...

Now I can claim that I've never encountered that. Most men I know will cover more than their fair share in one way or another. Even just by the fact that when we go for drinks in a bar, they'll often end up buying a decent quality bottle of something because they don't like drinking rubbish or whatever.

I was married for 12+ years and learned a lot! But when I got back into the dating world after my wife passed away, I too, wasn't too certain as to what to do if a woman offered to pay. My gf is a doctor and very independent, so when she offered, I thought, okay, I better not insult her by not accepting her gesture. Sheesh, I was mistaken....Lol!

Haha. Well she must be very busy so I'd imagine you look after her in other ways.

[RedRobin]

Not me. I get it. My earlier posts were not as clear as I would have wanted them to be.

 

It's ok. I do witness some of the dialogue going back and forth about it as having an undercurrent of anger.

 

Much the same as when women post about feeling taken advantage of in other ways. People ARE obliged to manage expectations and DO feel pressure to conform to social norms... often at the expense of true communication and compatibility..

 

I wanted to mention for the other readers my financial experience in my marriage (and ultimate divorce).

 

... during my marriage, we never once fought about money. We took turns balancing the checkbook, always discussed where money should be spent, had agreements about levels of acceptable free spending by the other partner, invested wisely together... and even when our divorce was ugly at times... we split our finances amicably too. Without even using an attorney or a pre-nup.

 

I'd like to think that my approach with money and sharing had something to do with that.

[soccerrprp]

...imagine my dismay at learning that some view my attempts at fairness as 'easy' or as disinterest in them romantically. What a shame. (shaking head)

 

And yet, you know that there are those who would view your gesture to pay as a lack of interest. I've seen post asking what does it mean if he/she insists on paying his/her share? Is she really into me? Or does she just want to be friends? Or does this mean that the date didn't go as well? This, especially if the woman is making the gesture.

[kaylan]

This is exactly the problem I have with it. Wrong expectations IMO. Paying for meals is meaningless, it doesn't indicate a man's true character or what he wants from a woman, it doesn't help with sifting through unsuitable candidates since most are capable of getting a job that will pay for reasonably priced meals. Yet a huge amount of importance is placed on it in many circles.

 

Instead of speding time with someone to work out his true character and personality, he is judged a gentleman because he pays. I know a good woman won't only judge you by what you pay for but it should not come into the equation at all. I read the more traditional ladies' posts on the matter and they seem to equate it as a man's true intentions - while we know how many men pay for things for an impressionable woman. He doesn't have to show who he really is, he hides behind his wallet.

 

But then I suppose the women who fall for that deserve it for not being smarter or for being superficial and putting a priority on his money over how decent a human being he really is.

Marry me:love: