Dating & Money (for Men)

[Winter Storm]

Spunoff from the "Paying for your meal" thread, I'm curious as to the men's thoughts on dating and paying.

So which do you prefer or agree with more? (And I should add, this is assuming that the man initiated the dating).

[WorkInProgress]

None fit my views 100%, but I generally feel like whoever's asked for the first date (generally the guy) should pay for it, although the other person should sincerely offer to contribute and be prepared to do so.

After that, I kinda think it should be either a)whoever asks, b)dutch, or after the pair gets more comfortable, doing something more along the lines of switching off who pays, or paying for different parts of the evening.

You weren't really directing it at me, since I'm female, but I just can't help but crash a thread where I'm uninvited. :razz:

[dengeist]

If I'm askin', I'm payin'.

[Winter Storm]

I mainly posted this thread because there were so few men posting their thoughts on the other one. And naturally, I want to hear more from the guys.

Though I love it when a guy pays first the first date (if he asks), after that I kinda put everything up for grabs. I do however, bring money and prepare to pay my way on every date. Sometimes, I insist that I pay.

[cache]

1st and 2nd dates: I always want to pay, unless she insists. After that, who cares, as long as someone pays. But I will usually assume I am paying in most circumstances.

[weary]

If I'm askin', I'm payin'.

D - i'm single...

:razz:

[meatwad]

I'm confused. Does the last option mean you skip the date altogether and just jump in the sack?

[Winter Storm]

I'm confused. Does the last option mean you skip the date altogether and just jump in the sack?

Uhh....sure, if you wish, Meatwad.

[KCboy]

I expect to pay for everything (within reason) for the first few dates.

Then some sort of 'you get this, I get that'.


occassionally she has to pay because I go to the bathroom and never come back. hope she brought some cash.

[stonemonkey]

Until I get to know her better, I'm expecting to pay for everything. The one and only reason I would change that policy is if the girl feels offended that I'm oppressing her feminist liberation ideals. Apparently by paying for her, I'm somehow implying that she doesn't make enough money, that she's this precious, delicate flower who can't look after herself, and that in the end I'm going to keep her at home in the kitchen to make my dinner.

So yeah, it was just one brush with a particularly militant feminist and I've been hesitating at every act of chivalry since. I don't want her to feel like she's obligated to 'repay' me in some other way just because I paid.

[wordsmith]

Until I get to know her better, I'm expecting to pay for everything. The one and only reason I would change that policy is if the girl feels offended that I'm oppressing her feminist liberation ideals. Apparently by paying for her, I'm somehow implying that she doesn't make enough money, that she's this precious, delicate flower who can't look after herself, and that in the end I'm going to keep her at home in the kitchen to make my dinner.

My not being comfortable with being paid for has nothing to do with feminist liberation ideals or being offended at being treated or being told I don't make enough money (uh, I DON'T make enough money). For me, it has to do with not wanting to open myself up to a situation where it can be flung angrily back at me that I leeched off somebody for free stuff if it turns out that things don't pan out. And, yes, that has happened.

Nothing to do with spurning chivalry or militant feminism. Just don't wanna feel beholden to someone. And I don't want anybody ever to be able to say, "And she didn't even ever offer to pay."

[spokes]

i guess i'd expect to pay a disproportionate amount in the early going, hoefully over time it will even out.

i used to be up for going out for dinner more, now i am more apt to invite ehr over to my place and make an attept to cook somethng myself.

of course my dream girl will make more than i would, so me paying for our dates would be a non-issue.

[spokes]

occassionally she has to pay because I go to the bathroom and never come back. hope she brought some cash.


that is too funny.

[Bman120]

I pay for all dates. I like it when a girl offers but the answer is always no.

I've had a bunch of women try to argue about it but when the check comes, I just grab it and pay. If she really insists, i'll let her do the tip or the drinks if the date went well because I'd rather do that than have a great date go wrong over that.

[stonemonkey]

For me, it has to do with not wanting to open myself up to a situation where it can be flung angrily back at me that I leeched off somebody for free stuff if it turns out that things don't pan out. And, yes, that has happened.


Well, I hope we don't get to the point where we have to sign "pre-nuptial" agreements before each date.

[ScottyTheBody]

Yeah...I officially won't be dating anyone anytime soon because I'm officially broke from it. You can say "you can do cheap dates" but I can't even afford those anymore and I can't STAND coffee (because a long time ago I used to work at Tim Hortons), so a coffee date is out.

Whatever, to be honest, I'm sick of paying for a girl's free meals or movie tickets or bowling games or whatever only to not hear from them again (or worse continue to get free nights out and assume now were "just friends"). Also, my night seems to be so much more fun when I'm just with some buddies out somewhere or just sitting around throwing the shit. They don't play this stupid games and they don't throw all these tests at you, to see if your "good enough". They don't offer to pay for all of it, unless they really want to pay for all of it and they don't have this "entitlement" attitude which makes me just want to puke.

So at the ripe old age of 21, I think I'm just going to throw in the towel, because I'm sick and tired of the constant doubting after the "no return call", the wondering "did I do this right?", "maybe I shouldn't have said that.", "I came on too strong", "I didn't show enough interest", "I was too nice", "I should have made a move", "I should have known that was a test", and most of all I'm sick of "well there's always next time".

Also, I like who I am. I like staying in or going to a quiet bar or a fancy restaurant or a trashy bowling alley. I like Family Guy, The Simpsons and Futurama and will do my best to quote one of these in a joke on a daily basis (by the way I will get every single reference that you make from it). I like talking about deep philosophical things, religion, psychology, mathematics, computers, quantum physics, relativity, politics, sociology and anything really interesting and deep. I can't stand gossip, games, small talk, superficial people, beating around the bush and anything at all related to hollywood fluff. Also, for quite a while now, I am completely okay with being alone. To be honest, I have been sort of afraid of the fact that I am completely okay with being alone.

I keep getting told to just keep looking but you know what, I'm tired of being the one that has to keep looking. Why can't the one I'm looking for be looking for me? Why do I have to waste so much time looking for that special someone while I could just as well be doing what I want, when I want and how I want, especially if it doesn't even pay off anyways and I find no one. What then? What will I say then? Well I did my best. Sure sounds like a waste to me. I'm starting to wonder if the risk is worth the reward. Rant over.

[vivo]

wow you're only 21! On the bright side there are people on this board w/problems that are a bit older than u.

[stonemonkey]

Hey, I started posting when I was 21. I'm 23 now, and like to think that I've learned a few things since then. And I don't mind the odd discussion on quantum physics. So Scotty, you remind me of myself in some ways, and that's scary.

[wordsmith]

Well, I hope we don't get to the point where we have to sign "pre-nuptial" agreements before each date.

I personally think it's pretty obscene that rather than being social and treating somebody if you asked them out to dinner, it's seen as a downpayment on something you'd damned well better receive or you'll be pissed. But that's just me. THAT'S why I pay for myself.

[stonemonkey]

I personally think it's pretty obscene that rather than being social and treating somebody if you asked them out to dinner, it's seen as a downpayment on something you'd damned well better receive or you'll be pissed. But that's just me. THAT'S why I pay for myself.

That is obscene, but how many guys actually think like that? I sure as hell don't.

[wordsmith]

I'm not talking about sex, stoney.

One of the most recent guys I dated WOULD NOT let me pay for anything, despite my repeated offers. I wasn't sold on him on date one, but we had nice conversation, and I thought, give it a chance...so we went out a couple more times. Eh, nice enough guy (or so I thought), but there wasn't anything there after giving it a few dates to develop...he went to kiss me at the end of maybe the third date, eh, nothing...I mean NOTHING...there. Plus, he was starting to say things like, "When you meet my mom...she's really gonna like you, and I don't introduce just anybody to my mom..." and I knew that I had to let him know that he was seeing things more promisingly than I was. So, we talked about it, and at first he was like, "Yeah, you're right, we're better off as friends..." Okay, fine...but then by the end of the convo, he'd gotten annoyed and wasn't saving face anymore, but was telling me "he can't believe how he dropped all this $$$ on me."

That's what I'm talking about, and a good example of why I pay for myself. I don't want some guy jumping the gun and thinking that if he buys me a couple of meals and movie tickets (which I offered to pay for in the first place and wasn't allowed), I OWE it to him to be his GF if there's just nothin' there.

[stonemonkey]

OK, well that guy was a dick, but not all guys are like that. I can still accept that even if one girl reacts badly to me paying, it doesn't mean all girls are like that. I just have my routine, where I offer to pay, but don't insist on it to the point where it becomes a big deal.

Paying for a meal doesn't mean you're paying for whatever else. Still, I can't help but feel that if a girl refuses to let me pay, what she's really doing is firmly establishing that our relationship will only be platonic. Which is fine, it just means I have to move on from her.

[wordsmith]

All it really means is that she's more comfortable paying that particular time.

[stonemonkey]

So you would still offer to pay even if you wanted it to be more than platonic? I've always assumed that when she pays, she just wants to be friends.

[wordsmith]

I ALWAYS offer to pay. It's polite.

[KCboy]

I ALWAYS offer to pay. It's polite.

yeah, but I don't believe for one second that the woman actually WANTS to pay.

if I hear that, I think she is just being polite, but if I accept, I'm a cheap bastard

[meatwad]

Sometimes you invest a lot of money into a pot only to end up with a busted flush. (Sorry. I played cards last night.)

I have found an ingenious plan though that helps in the dating department! It's not really a big secret, I was just too stupid to think of it before last week. DAYTIME DATES!!! I did the same old dinner and a date, but because it was at 1:00, we got lunch time rates and matinee tickets! I'm not really a cheap person, but we got all the same stuff for about 2/3 the price. :huge:

[ScottyTheBody]

yeah, but I don't believe for one second that the woman actually WANTS to pay.

if I hear that, I think she is just being polite, but if I accept, I'm a cheap bastard

True enough. I mean look at the other thread on this matter. Look at how many women said they would offer to pay but if they had to pay for their share, there wouldn't be a second date. I have to assume she's lieing and she doesn't really want to pay (though words clearly said she isn't like this, the majority of women are), another little test to see if I'm a gentleman and I have to pay. Again, I really don't mind paying, in fact I pay for all of it anyways and I enjoy paying for all of it, but its this entitlement thing that I can't stand, the "he has to pay for me otherwise he's not a gentleman" type of thing that I don't like.

[dengeist]

I don't know if I posted this info before, but I'm certain they have this for people that live in NYC. It's called "The Cheap Bastard's Guide to New York City", well worth the money at your local bookstore. Also dropping this into a search engine doesn't hurt: "FREE EVENTS (INSERT YOUR CITY HERE)"

Honestly, I've only done one "coffee date" because that's not what I'm into. I'm more into activity based dates or things I like doing, because that way, I can't say the night was a total bust if it doesn't work out.

This was my motto waaaay before the song: "You must not know ‘bout me, you must not know ‘bout me
I can have another you by tomorrow
So don’t you ever for a second get to thinking you’re irreplaceable"

[cheshrcarol]

I'd say a good rule for guys is to expect to pay on the first date, if the girl offers to contribute turn her down. If she insists, accept. And if you can't tell the difference between offering and insisting, you might want to considering strengthening your social skills before continuing to date.

[LakeJay]

I always try to pay regardless of what number date it is. Even if it means passing my credit card to the waiter while my dinner partner is in the bathroom. Every now and then I'll give in and let the girl pay if she's very persistent. Oddly I don't recall ever going dutch on a bill. It's usually all or nothing.

With that said, I didn't pick an option. I think it's your call. Can't say one way is better than all the others.

[wordsmith]

Honestly, I've only done one "coffee date" because that's not what I'm into. I'm more into activity based dates or things I like doing, because that way, I can't say the night was a total bust if it doesn't work out.

In the beginning stages, I really prefer "coffee" dates (whether you drink coffee or not, the type of date where conversation is the actual agenda, as opposed to the activity). "Activity" dates are fine once you've already established that this is a person you'd like to pursue something with, but when you're in the getting to know you stages, still, a lot of them can kind of hinder that process. I'm okay with activity dates where you still get to spend a lot of time talking and getting to know one another. That's hard to do at, like, a game, concert...movies are the worst for early on dates, too. Nothing like sitting in the dark for a couple of hours not talking to feel like you're getting some real insight into somebody. Movies are permissable if you follow them up with something like drinks or dessert or something before going home.

[dengeist]

In the beginning stages, I really prefer "coffee" dates (whether you drink coffee or not, the type of date where conversation is the actual agenda, as opposed to the activity). "Activity" dates are fine once you've already established that this is a person you'd like to pursue something with, but when you're in the getting to know you stages, still, a lot of them can kind of hinder that process. I'm okay with activity dates where you still get to spend a lot of time talking and getting to know one another. That's hard to do at, like, a game, concert...movies are the worst for early on dates, too. Nothing like sitting in the dark for a couple of hours not talking to feel like you're getting some real insight into somebody. Movies are permissable if you follow them up with something like drinks or dessert or something before going home.

That's cool, if that works for you. Movies and concerts aren't my idea of "activity" dates though. My idea of an activity date is going to a ren faire (yes I know it's dorky), a comedy club (yes there are some free ones), bowling, etc. All of which has plenty of space for conversation and enough going on for new conversation, which is a good thing IMO.

My point was if you're taking someone out, you should do things YOU enjoy or would be interested in. A coffee date puts me in the mood for reading a book with my glasses on, not chatting a woman up. It doesn't work for me. Some people mentioned how they didn't want to have a guy throw, "I paid X amount to go out on a date with you!" out there. There's no need for that. Some guys said how they're frustrated with paying X amount of dollars on a date to nowhere (which can add up if you're paying). There's no need for that either.

[wordsmith]

That's cool, if that works for you. Movies and concerts aren't my idea of "activity" dates though. My idea of an activity date is going to a ren faire (yes I know it's dorky), a comedy club (yes there are some free ones), bowling, etc. All of which has plenty of space for conversation and enough going on for new conversation, which is a good thing IMO.

Those are fine, because they DO allow for you to actually get to know somebody. And I like dorky ren faires, too.

[WorkInProgress]

True enough. I mean look at the other thread on this matter. Look at how many women said they would offer to pay but if they had to pay for their share, there wouldn't be a second date. I have to assume she's lieing and she doesn't really want to pay (though words clearly said she isn't like this, the majority of women are), another little test to see if I'm a gentleman and I have to pay. Again, I really don't mind paying, in fact I pay for all of it anyways and I enjoy paying for all of it, but its this entitlement thing that I can't stand, the "he has to pay for me otherwise he's not a gentleman" type of thing that I don't like.

I read the other thread, and that's not what I took away from it at all. It seemed to me that most posters there were of the opinion that a girl should sincerely offer to pay on any date, and not be horrified if the guy takes her up on it. Having a guy just say, "and this is what you owe" is not the same thing and rubs people the wrong way, since, on dates, unless it is previously agreed as a 50/50 split, it is conventional that somebody (either the man, or whoever asks) does the paying (partly as an indication that it is, in fact, a date--if you want to see that this is true, start a conversation about the sneak date).

And it does seem to be a little bit different when everyone involved is a "poor college student" or something like that.

[WorkInProgress]

Those are fine, because they DO allow for you to actually get to know somebody. And I like dorky ren faires, too.

Me too. But I've found that they're easily more expensive than a lot of other activities.

[wordsmith]

Me too. But I've found that they're easily more expensive than a lot of other activities.

Definitely. The couple of semi-local ones we have here (which are still a several hour drive, so factor in gas $$$) are in a gate price range on par with amusement parks, and food and drink are also as inflated in cost as they are amusement parks.

The food and drink is AWESOME, but it's spendy, in my experience.

[wordsmith]

I read the other thread, and that's not what I took away from it at all. It seemed to me that most posters there were of the opinion that a girl should sincerely offer to pay on any date, and not be horrified if the guy takes her up on it. Having a guy just say, "and this is what you owe" is not the same thing and rubs people the wrong way, since, on dates, unless it is previously agreed as a 50/50 split, it is conventional that somebody (either the man, or whoever asks) does the paying (partly as an indication that it is, in fact, a date--if you want to see that this is true, start a conversation about the sneak date).

And it does seem to be a little bit different when everyone involved is a "poor college student" or something like that.

Exactly the way I read it as well.

Also, when I was a poor college student, we didn't really "date," as in, traditional couple-y dates were practically nonexistent. Everything was done in big groups, or it was parties, or people hanging around in the dorms or in apartments...but not traditional one-on-one dates. And, everybody pretty much paid their own way when we did go out. But this may have just been my college, which has always and forever ranked very, very low for its traditional dating scene. People hung out, hooked up, often became exclusive couples during this process...but nobody really went on dates. Just not the atmosphere.

[WorkInProgress]

Also, when I was a poor college student, we didn't really "date," as in, traditional couple-y dates were practically nonexistent. Everything was done in big groups, or it was parties, or people hanging around in the dorms or in apartments...but not traditional one-on-one dates. And, everybody pretty much paid their own way when we did go out. But this may have just been my college, which has always and forever ranked very, very low for its traditional dating scene. People hung out, hooked up, often became exclusive couples during this process...but nobody really went on dates. Just not the atmosphere.

That's kinda more or less how it was at my (different) school. I mean, real dates did happen, but far less often than the hanging out stuff described above.

[wordsmith]

My school was kinda famous for it. We'd host prospectives, high school seniors, and they'd be like, "We heard nobody dates here, is that true?"

Well, yeah, but that was far from meaning nobody was getting busy.

[WorkInProgress]

My school was kinda famous for it. We'd host prospectives, high school seniors, and they'd be like, "We heard nobody dates here, is that true?"

Well, yeah, but that was far from meaning nobody was getting busy.

Huh. And it depended on the people involved. Some people went out more than others.

With one guy I was seeing, the only "real" date we went on was to a formal, and that was more of a group date. Other times, since we were both poor college students, we'd go an have a meal together at the dining facilities, or hang out and watch a video or something else more or less "free." Maybe it was ghetto, but we were poor. With another guy, we usually went on more "regular" dates. All depends on the people involved.

[wordsmith]

I should also point out that I went to school in a town of about 9,000 (on a campus of about 2,000). Ten miles away was a small city with your usual mall parking lot chain restaurants, a hipster coffeehouse, and a cineplex, and the closest urban area with actual nightlife stuff was about an hour and a half away.

So there was nowhere really to go for "dates," unless your idea of a date was walking down the hill to the townie bar together and stopping at Subway afterbar.

[ScottyTheBody]

I read the other thread, and that's not what I took away from it at all. It seemed to me that most posters there were of the opinion that a girl should sincerely offer to pay on any date, and not be horrified if the guy takes her up on it. Having a guy just say, "and this is what you owe" is not the same thing and rubs people the wrong way, since, on dates, unless it is previously agreed as a 50/50 split, it is conventional that somebody (either the man, or whoever asks) does the paying (partly as an indication that it is, in fact, a date--if you want to see that this is true, start a conversation about the sneak date).

And it does seem to be a little bit different when everyone involved is a "poor college student" or something like that.

"I have to admit I'd be a little turned off if he just assumed we'd split it, and I'd assume we were just out as friends." --cheshrcarol

"If it's an official date, I'll offer, but I'd rather not pay." --MetFanL

"I would be really turned off by this. If a guy asks you out to dinner, as a date, and expects you to pay I wouldn't see him again most likely. I usually offer to pay, but I think on a first date its the gentleman thing to do, to pay." --Empressallie

"I will offer to pay my part as a nice gesture, but I think the guy should pay. I don't mind paying my part, but he is not going to win me over on a first date."--MollyMe

"I don't care if I get shit for this, but I expect a dude to pay on the first date." --Kitty

"All I know, is if I put time and effort into going out with a guy (assuming they asked ME out), I would expect them to at least offer to pay."--sparky88

"I very much agree with this and WIP's opionion. For him to do that on the first date I was offended. I was like "Ok, did something go wrong here?" Sometimes guys do this to test girls. The only other guy who did this to me I never answered his calls again but thats also because we'd been talking for less time and I wasn't as much into him as I am this guy. Even at the beginning of the date he was complimenting me on my smile, how beautiful I was, and before meeting (this started through the internet) we'd been on im all day at work and on the phone at night. So rather than just dump him for being such a jerk, should I casually bring it up to him and see what he says?"--Politica2020

"Well, he won't hear from me again! I'd happily pay and thank him for a wonderful evening but leave it up to him to deduce just why I don't return his calls."--veniqe

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting it though...again I don't mind paying, in fact I feel good when I do, when its appreciated, but when its expectated, that rubs against me the wrong way. It no longer becomes something nice that I want to do for her, but rather something that I HAVE to do (at least in order to see her again). This probably doesn't make any sense.

[ma1939]

I think it's hypocritical of most American women that they demand men give them equal treatment, but they still expect men to ask for and pay for dates.

[wordsmith]

I think it's shitty of ANYbody to go into a date with ironclad expectations about what's owed, monetarily or otherwise.

Being treated is just that, a treat. Don't ever expect it.

[Winter Storm]

"I have to admit I'd be a little turned off if he just assumed we'd split it, and I'd assume we were just out as friends." --cheshrcarol

"If it's an official date, I'll offer, but I'd rather not pay." --MetFanL

"I would be really turned off by this. If a guy asks you out to dinner, as a date, and expects you to pay I wouldn't see him again most likely. I usually offer to pay, but I think on a first date its the gentleman thing to do, to pay." --Empressallie

"I will offer to pay my part as a nice gesture, but I think the guy should pay. I don't mind paying my part, but he is not going to win me over on a first date."--MollyMe

"I don't care if I get shit for this, but I expect a dude to pay on the first date." --Kitty

"All I know, is if I put time and effort into going out with a guy (assuming they asked ME out), I would expect them to at least offer to pay."--sparky88

"I very much agree with this and WIP's opionion. For him to do that on the first date I was offended. I was like "Ok, did something go wrong here?" Sometimes guys do this to test girls. The only other guy who did this to me I never answered his calls again but thats also because we'd been talking for less time and I wasn't as much into him as I am this guy. Even at the beginning of the date he was complimenting me on my smile, how beautiful I was, and before meeting (this started through the internet) we'd been on im all day at work and on the phone at night. So rather than just dump him for being such a jerk, should I casually bring it up to him and see what he says?"--Politica2020

"Well, he won't hear from me again! I'd happily pay and thank him for a wonderful evening but leave it up to him to deduce just why I don't return his calls."--veniqe

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting it though...again I don't mind paying, in fact I feel good when I do, when its appreciated, but when its expectated, that rubs against me the wrong way.

I will fully admit that most girls I know fully expect and hope a guy will pay for the first dat eand most dates after but will get turned off if he doesn't pay the first date or takes money for one. I do think it is entitlement and I'm still not sure where it comes from besides, I'm the woman, you should be trying to impress me thinking. I can't say I agree with it at all.

If a guy agrees to pay for a date, I always take it as a bonus. But I guess I've talked to enough guys that have become so frustrated with the dating process and spending money on woman that I empathise with them on this.

[PenforPrez]

One of the few advantages of my career/financial position is that I simply cannot afford to pick up anybody else's tab. I want to, desperately. But honey, the money's not there! So I don't sweat it, and strangely, it has never been an issue. It's pay your own way with me.

Paul

[stonemonkey]

I will fully admit that most girls I know fully expect and hope a guy will pay for the first dat eand most dates after but will get turned off if he doesn't pay the first date or takes money for one. I do think it is entitlement and I'm still not sure where it comes from besides, I'm the woman, you should be trying to impress me thinking. I can't say I agree with it at all.


I always thought it was simply etiquette? We can talk about how things should be if they were rational 'til the cows come home, but in reality, we have to deal with things as they are.

[WorkInProgress]

"I have to admit I'd be a little turned off if he just assumed we'd split it, and I'd assume we were just out as friends." --cheshrcarol.

I think the key here is his (hypothetical) assumption that's she'd just pony up. (The "...and here's what you owe" thing that I previously mentioned.)

"If it's an official date, I'll offer, but I'd rather not pay." --MetFanL.

So she'd rather not. She said she'd offer, and I didn't read anything in this about being horrified. You can ask her, though, if that's what she meant.

"I would be really turned off by this. If a guy asks you out to dinner, as a date, and expects you to pay I wouldn't see him again most likely. I usually offer to pay, but I think on a first date its the gentleman thing to do, to pay." --Empressallie .

As I've already mentioned several times, unless there is an issue, or the pair agrees to go dutch, it comes off as rude for the person who invited expect NOT to pay for it. (And I doubt you'll get many people to disagree that it's the gentlemanly thing to do.)

"I will offer to pay my part as a nice gesture, but I think the guy should pay. I don't mind paying my part, but he is not going to win me over on a first date."--MollyMe.

She's said that she'll offer, and doesn't mind paying for herself. She would prefer it if her date pays, though.

"I don't care if I get shit for this, but I expect a dude to pay on the first date." --Kitty.

So there's one.

"All I know, is if I put time and effort into going out with a guy (assuming they asked ME out), I would expect them to at least offer to pay."--sparky88.

Back to the "he asks, he pays" line of thinking.

"I very much agree with this and WIP's opionion. For him to do that on the first date I was offended. I was like "Ok, did something go wrong here?" Sometimes guys do this to test girls. The only other guy who did this to me I never answered his calls again but thats also because we'd been talking for less time and I wasn't as much into him as I am this guy. Even at the beginning of the date he was complimenting me on my smile, how beautiful I was, and before meeting (this started through the internet) we'd been on im all day at work and on the phone at night. So rather than just dump him for being such a jerk, should I casually bring it up to him and see what he says?"--Politica2020.

So she was offended by the first guy who assumed that she paid for her bit and didn't call him again...because of this and she wasn't that into him.

This guy who just did it rubbed her the wrong way...assuming that he asked her out, and they didn't agree to go dutch beforehand, I think this is a pretty standard response.

And if she's agreeing with my opinion, as I posted, then you've already read it and it does not support your assertion.

"Well, he won't hear from me again! I'd happily pay and thank him for a wonderful evening but leave it up to him to deduce just why I don't return his calls."--veniqe.

And a second to support your assertion.

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting it though...again I don't mind paying, in fact I feel good when I do, when its appreciated, but when its expectated, that rubs against me the wrong way. It no longer becomes something nice that I want to do for her, but rather something that I HAVE to do (at least in order to see her again). This probably doesn't make any sense.

Maybe I'm misinterpreting it.

I think your opinion is the one held by most people, women included, and including some of those that you quoted above.

It makes a lot of sense. Nobody wants to feel used. And there's plenty for anyone to feel used about in the dating conventions.

[ScottyTheBody]

But again, even the "he asks, he pays" sort of mentality, I don't like. If someone asks me if I want to join them somewhere, I always assume that I'll be paying for myself. I would much rather have a girl assume she's paying for herself and then get pleasantly surprised when I pay for all of it, instead of assuming that I'd pay for it and being turned off (or considering it "rude") if I didn't.

[EmberMae]

I think it's hypocritical of most American women that they demand men give them equal treatment, but they still expect men to ask for and pay for dates.
Totally agree. But there's entitlement on both sides, really.

[pisces2473]

I should also point out that I went to school in a town of about 9,000 (on a campus of about 2,000). Ten miles away was a small city with your usual mall parking lot chain restaurants, a hipster coffeehouse, and a cineplex, and the closest urban area with actual nightlife stuff was about an hour and a half away.

So there was nowhere really to go for "dates," unless your idea of a date was walking down the hill to the townie bar together and stopping at Subway afterbar.
No campus shuttle to said small city? :(

[pisces2473]

One of the few advantages of my career/financial position is that I simply cannot afford to pick up anybody else's tab. I want to, desperately. But honey, the money's not there! So I don't sweat it, and strangely, it has never been an issue. It's pay your own way with me.

Paul
Yeah, but how do you bring this up? "Hey wanna go out Saturday night?" "Just so you know, I can't pay for you." That just seems strange.

[and1grad]

But there's entitlement on both sides, really.
Explain please.

[LaFille]

i really never realized that guys would be all that upset about paying. i can see if things get out of hand how it would be annoying, but no one is forcing you to go on expensive dates in the first place... and if they are, why are you hanging out with that person? i still go by whoever invites does the paying, at least in the beginning of the relationship.

i'm pretty sure these gender roles go back to our caveman days when men were expected to go out and provide for women and children. if we women are biologically wired to look for a mate who can provide, is that really so wrong? it's the same reason men are attracted to healthy, fertile looking women.

[PenforPrez]

Yeah, but how do you bring this up? "Hey wanna go out Saturday night?" "Just so you know, I can't pay for you." That just seems strange.

Somehow, it seems to work itself out without any difficulty. I don't know how, honestly.

[stonemonkey]

i'm pretty sure these gender roles go back to our caveman days when men were expected to go out and provide for women and children. if we women are biologically wired to look for a mate who can provide, is that really so wrong? it's the same reason men are attracted to healthy, fertile looking women.

There's nothing wrong with it, it's only when women don't want the guy to pay that I get confused. Whether it's because they get offended or because they don't want to owe him anything.

[dengeist]

There's nothing wrong with it, it's only when women don't want the guy to pay that I get confused. Whether it's because they get offended or because they don't want to owe him anything.

This has happend to me too. It's like:

Me: I'm hitting up X, wanna roll?

Random Woman: I would, but I don't have any money.

Me: That's cool, my treat.

Random Woman: I don't have any money.

Me: It's my....ok cool, talk to you later.

Random Woman: No, I just don't want to feel like....

Me: It's cool, I'm going to get going, talk to you later.

[stonemonkey]

Yeah, it's like you need to have a disclaimer saying that your paying for them in no way implies that you expect something in return, nor is it any reflection on their perceived earning capacity.

[CTGirl]

Ugh, this thread makes me not want to date ever again, lol, people and their silly rules and assumptions :googly:

[sandman1981]

It's one of those things. If I have enough money I don't mind paying for every date. However if I'm kinda running low it would be nice for her to offer to pay.

[WorkInProgress]

But again, even the "he asks, he pays" sort of mentality, I don't like. If someone asks me if I want to join them somewhere, I always assume that I'll be paying for myself. I would much rather have a girl assume she's paying for herself and then get pleasantly surprised when I pay for all of it, instead of assuming that I'd pay for it and being turned off (or considering it "rude") if I didn't.

And that's fine, you're allowed to feel that way. What you wish requires a major paradigm shift.

[ScottyTheBody]

And that's fine, you're allowed to feel that way. What you wish requires a major paradigm shift.

You're right it does.

You know, I see the same sort of occurances with women too. Like with my grandfather, if he comes home and dinner isn't ready yet, he becomes angry with my grandmother. He just assumes and expects her to clean up after him, feed him and look after him. He doesn't say thank you or anything really kind after she does these things for him. If dinner isn't ready, or say the house becomes "untidy" he will become angry with her (or if there are visitors, they will automatically look at her when its "untidy").

Rather than being pleasantly surprised when she cooks dinner or cleans up for him or does something nice for him, he becomes angry if it isn't done.

[ScottyTheBody]

i really never realized that guys would be all that upset about paying. i can see if things get out of hand how it would be annoying, but no one is forcing you to go on expensive dates in the first place... and if they are, why are you hanging out with that person? i still go by whoever invites does the paying, at least in the beginning of the relationship.

i'm pretty sure these gender roles go back to our caveman days when men were expected to go out and provide for women and children. if we women are biologically wired to look for a mate who can provide, is that really so wrong? it's the same reason men are attracted to healthy, fertile looking women.

You really aren't getting what I'm talking about. I'm not that bent out of shape about the money. I couldn't care less about the money (and honestly I really hope the woman I'm dating feels the same). I'm getting frustrated about the attitude that is being put towards the money. The expectation that I'll pay because I'm the guy and she's a woman who deserves to be treated like a "princess" sort of attitude. Why does whether I pay for her meal or not determine whether there will be a second date? Is the money really that much more important than the person? Do I really want to be around someone who only wants to be around me if I'm covering their tab? Why should it matter who pays or who doesn't, who invites or who was invited?

And please, don't even start with "gender roles". Why is it if a guy brings up "gender roles", about what a woman "has to do because she's a woman" he's being sexist, but if a girl says something a guy "has to do because he's a man" its completely okay and he just has to "man" up and do it. By the way, you're basically saying that each woman is "biologically" wired to be a gold-digger (in not as few words). Which of course, I don't agree with.

[wordsmith]

One thing to remember before all the stress and anxiety of "What's up with paying?" gets out of control...if somebody really likes you, a gaffe about paying isn't gonna matter. If it's a determining factor, it wasn't likely to work out anyway.

[wordsmith]

By the way, you're basically saying that each woman is "biologically" wired to be a gold-digger (in not as few words). Which of course, I don't agree with.

I would say more "conditioned to be 'taken care of.'" A paradigm that I believe IS shifting.

Fifty years ago (leading up to far more recently, depending on where you are, but fifty years ago for sure), we wouldn't even be HAVING the conversation of "Who Pays and what are the social ramifications of that," period. It wouldn't even be an issue, there would be no confusion, the guy would always pay. The fact that there's a question at all shows the shift in paradigm.

[pisces2473]

I would say more "conditioned to be 'taken care of.'" A paradigm that I believe IS shifting.

Fifty years ago (leading up to far more recently, depending on where you are, but fifty years ago for sure), we wouldn't even be HAVING the conversation of "Who Pays and what are the social ramifications of that," period. It wouldn't even be an issue, there would be no confusion, the guy would always pay. The fact that there's a question at all shows the shift in paradigm.
Yes, I agree with Words.

Scotty--remember, evolution takes time ;)

[meatwad]

I don't mind some of these gender roles though. I'm perfectly willing to pay for a date and I'm fine if the woman expects it (although it's nice when they offer.) But I have my own feelings about things too. I've already mentioned before that it's a big deal to me that the woman I marry takes my last name. I'll play my part in certain situations if she will too. :)

[LaFille]

You really aren't getting what I'm talking about. I'm not that bent out of shape about the money. I couldn't care less about the money (and honestly I really hope the woman I'm dating feels the same). I'm getting frustrated about the attitude that is being put towards the money. The expectation that I'll pay because I'm the guy and she's a woman who deserves to be treated like a "princess" sort of attitude. Why does whether I pay for her meal or not determine whether there will be a second date? Is the money really that much more important than the person? Do I really want to be around someone who only wants to be around me if I'm covering their tab? Why should it matter who pays or who doesn't, who invites or who was invited?

And please, don't even start with "gender roles". Why is it if a guy brings up "gender roles", about what a woman "has to do because she's a woman" he's being sexist, but if a girl says something a guy "has to do because he's a man" its completely okay and he just has to "man" up and do it. By the way, you're basically saying that each woman is "biologically" wired to be a gold-digger (in not as few words). Which of course, I don't agree with.

there's a difference between what i said about gender conditioning and being a 'gold-digger' who wants to be treated like a princess. i'm a gold-digger because i like it when my date pays for my $6.95 sandwich? no, i'm a cavewoman because i feel the need to be provided for and protected! obvi!

i'm clearly exagerrating about the cavewoman thing, but there is something old-fashioned, charming and romantic about a guy picking up the tab. sorry! but a lot of girls (NOT ALL) feel that way and like it. and maybe we are subconsciously looking for someone who will be a good 'provider.' i'm not so sure we've evolved past that yet. after all women still carry a child and give birth the same way they have since the beginning of mankind. but i think i digress...

[Winter Storm]

...but there is something old-fashioned, charming and romantic about a guy picking up the tab. sorry! but a lot of girls (NOT ALL) feel that way and like it. and maybe we are subconsciously looking for someone who will be a good 'provider....

I think it has more to do with old fashioned chivalry. Decades ago, men were expected to woo women to gain her affections. Shower her with gifts and attention in order to become the lucky chosen one. Back then, a woman was never expected to go after a man; they were always expected to initiate and chase.

[wordsmith]

there's a difference between what i said about gender conditioning and being a 'gold-digger' who wants to be treated like a princess. i'm a gold-digger because i like it when my date pays for my $6.95 sandwich? no, i'm a cavewoman because i feel the need to be provided for and protected! obvi!

i'm clearly exagerrating about the cavewoman thing, but there is something old-fashioned, charming and romantic about a guy picking up the tab. sorry! but a lot of girls (NOT ALL) feel that way and like it. and maybe we are subconsciously looking for someone who will be a good 'provider.' i'm not so sure we've evolved past that yet. after all women still carry a child and give birth the same way they have since the beginning of mankind. but i think i digress...

Yes, but women are inccreasingly capable of providing for offspring if there is no father, and that also contributes to the gradual paradigm shift, IMO. Is it easier to raise young without a male "provider?" Doubtful, most of the time. But it's not the near-impossibility it once was, when fewer provider-type opportunities were open to women.

[wordsmith]

I think it has more to do with old fashioned chivalry. Decades ago, men were expected to woo women to gain her affections. Shower her with gifts and attention in order to become the lucky chosen one. Back then, a woman was never expected to go after a man; they were always expected to initiate and chase.

I agree. I personally think it's far more a question of wanting to feel flattered and treated specially than it is a subconscious desire for a provider/protector.

[EmberMae]

Explain please.
Just as women feel entitled to free entertainment from men just because they are women, men feel entitled to certain behaviors/advantages just because they are men.

Here is one example:
You know, I see the same sort of occurances with women too. Like with my grandfather, if he comes home and dinner isn't ready yet, he becomes angry with my grandmother. He just assumes and expects her to clean up after him, feed him and look after him. He doesn't say thank you or anything really kind after she does these things for him. If dinner isn't ready, or say the house becomes "untidy" he will become angry with her (or if there are visitors, they will automatically look at her when its "untidy").

Rather than being pleasantly surprised when she cooks dinner or cleans up for him or does something nice for him, he becomes angry if it isn't done.
I assure you he is not the only man out there who feels entitled to have his partner do the lion's share of the housework/childcare simply because she is female.

Here is another example:
I don't mind some of these gender roles though. I'm perfectly willing to pay for a date and I'm fine if the woman expects it (although it's nice when they offer.) But I have my own feelings about things too. I've already mentioned before that it's a big deal to me that the woman I marry takes my last name. I'll play my part in certain situations if she will too.
The majority of men out there feel entitled to have their name passed on, and automatically think their name/heritage is more important than their wife's simply because they are male. There are many more examples, but I won't hijack the thread further.

It's cultural conditioning, and it's the most powerful force in the universe, because most people do not critically evaluate cultural norms no matter how little logical sense they make in our modern context, ESPECIALLY when those norms give them an advantage.

[WorkInProgress]

It's cultural conditioning, and it's the most powerful force in the universe, because most people do not critically evaluate cultural norms no matter how little logical sense they make in our modern context, ESPECIALLY when those norms give them an advantage.

And sometimes they just don't care enough to fight the (perceived or real) inequalities. Or, alternatively, they're ok with the status quo, or with certain tradeoffs. Doesn't mean all are or should be.

[meatwad]

I just don't see anything wrong with doing it that way. I'm all for equality, but that doesn't mean all masculine and feminine traits have to be erased. Chivalry doesn't have to die off completely.

[weary]

I just don't see anything wrong with doing it that way. I'm all for equality, but that doesn't mean all masculine and feminine traits have to be erased. Chivalry doesn't have to die off completely.

hand-clap for the MEAT! :huge:

[meatwad]

hand-clap for the MEAT! :huge:

Holy Crap! You can get VD from that? :eek:

[WorkInProgress]

Holy Crap! You can get VD from that? :eek:

Only if you're lucky.

[meatwad]

Only if you're lucky.

How is that lucky? No more Swedish massages for this meatball.

[weary]

How is that lucky? No more Swedish massages for this meatball.

LMAO!

i'll massage you but it's going to cost! ha ha ha...

[and1grad]

Just as women feel entitled to free entertainment from men just because they are women, men feel entitled to certain behaviors/advantages just because they are men.

Here is one example:

I assure you he is not the only man out there who feels entitled to have his partner do the lion's share of the housework/childcare simply because she is female.

Here is another example:

The majority of men out there feel entitled to have their name passed on, and automatically think their name/heritage is more important than their wife's simply because they are male. There are many more examples, but I won't hijack the thread further.

It's cultural conditioning, and it's the most powerful force in the universe, because most people do not critically evaluate cultural norms no matter how little logical sense they make in our modern context, ESPECIALLY when those norms give them an advantage.
So you're not speaking to dating per se, but relationships in general.

[Winter Storm]

Get a room!

Take it out my thread!



Thanks,
Management

[WorkInProgress]

Take it out my thread!

NP. Didn't realize it was bothering anyone.

[meatwad]

Get a room!

Take it out my thread!



Thanks,
Management

Give me a sec. I need to find out if I'm getting a happy ending or not.

[weary]

okay....

winter - the board 'W' women are supposed to present a united front! you are messing w/ the program! :p

meat - happy ending for you...but only if you buy me a nice drink w/ dinner. i'm partial to pinot grigio. ;)

BACK ON TOPIC:

i want a guy to treat the first time, assuming he asked me out. i'm most likely not offering, but i always have enough $$ in case. if i asked (unusual, but can happen), i'll pay. i like for a dude to pay for dates. and i like doing the girlie stuff for my man that some consider out-dated/women's work. and i will/do pay for dates, but not at first usually. but when it really comes down to it, i just want to take care of my man and vice versa. period. it's not a money thing. it's a love and respect and give/take thing...and it all evens out when it's right.

[stonemonkey]

you're basically saying that each woman is "biologically" wired to be a gold-digger (in not as few words).

You can only take the "biological wiring" argument so far. Taken to it's extremes, one could argue that men are "biologically wired" to be rapists and murderers of their competitors' offspring.

[stonemonkey]

I'm all for equality, but that doesn't mean all masculine and feminine traits have to be erased. Chivalry doesn't have to die off completely.

I agree with this. Gender equality is not the same as gender equivalence, where everything's got to be exactly the same for both sexes. It's more of a 'yin and yang' complementary thing.

[CTGirl]

BACK ON TOPIC:

i want a guy to treat the first time, assuming he asked me out. i'm most likely not offering, but i always have enough $$ in case. if i asked (unusual, but can happen), i'll pay. i like for a dude to pay for dates. and i like doing the girlie stuff for my man that some consider out-dated/women's work. and i will/do pay for dates, but not at first usually. but when it really comes down to it, i just want to take care of my man and vice versa. period. it's not a money thing. it's a love and respect and give/take thing...and it all evens out when it's right.

Well said my dear!

For the most part, it all evens out, just like with friends, we all put in more than someone else at some point, but when you've got something going, it doesnt really matter and everything evens out in the end - and if it's not, then you are in the wrong relationship, lol.

[ScottyTheBody]

I just don't see anything wrong with doing it that way. I'm all for equality, but that doesn't mean all masculine and feminine traits have to be erased. Chivalry doesn't have to die off completely.

You're probably surprised but I agree with most of this. Chivalry shouldn't die off and masculine and feminine traits shouldn't be erased. Men and women are different and their differences should be embraced (though I become annoyed when differences that we can change, though they take considerble effort, such as societal differences, are passed off as "biological").

By the way, chivalry is so much better and much more effective when its unexpected. Paying for a date with a woman who just expects me to take up her tab because she's a woman and deserves to be treated that way, isn't chivalry (at least I wouldn't consider it chivalry).

Whenever I do something "nice" or considerate or helpful or whatever for someone, I'll only feel good about doing it if I wanted to do it. I'll feel good if it was my choice. I will feel nothing if its something that I have to do, even if its a good thing. To me, there's a big difference between doing something "good" because you want to and doing something "good" because you have to. To some people, in fact most people I know, there is no real difference between these things. If she expects that I pay for the date, its like I HAVE to pay for the date, while if she doesn't expect me to pay, and doesn't hold it against me if I don't (though I will still probably pay for all of it), I have a choice.

[and1grad]

Scotty, do you expect to pay for the first date?

If you do, why do you care so much whether or not your date expected you to also?

[LaFille]

Men and women are different and their differences should be embraced (though I become annoyed when differences that we can change, though they take considerble effort, such as societal differences, are passed off as "biological").
like what?

[WorkInProgress]

I think his prime example would be...the convention of guys generally paying for (first) dates. It's irrational, unfair, unecessary, etc., etc.

[LaFille]

I think his prime example would be...the convention of guys generally paying for (first) dates. It's irrational, unfair, unecessary, etc., etc.
ha ha ah, ok, so he's referring to what i said as being stupid. oh well, i still think there are all sort of biological, hormonal reasons we do what we do :heehee:

[hellboy]

Guy should pay for the first date. After that, it depends on financial situation of both parties involved. I once had this social worker who was adamant that she pays half the bill :) . I had to back out or she would have created a big scene. Too bad she thought i was trying to make her feel 'obliged'.

[EmberMae]

I agree with this. Gender equality is not the same as gender equivalence, where everything's got to be exactly the same for both sexes. It's more of a 'yin and yang' complementary thing.
The problem is when societally constructed gender roles get in the way of equality. I really do not understand the purpose or benefit of trying to shove people in a certain box or force them to be a certain way because of their biological sex. I do not understand why we should have double standards for what constitutes acceptable behavior simply based on one's reproductive organs. All of our social conditioning on what is "masculinity" and what is "femininity" has its roots in unequal societies where women and anything associated with them are of lower status.

People are different from each other. We are never going to be all the same. But I look at the people I know intimately and I see a mixture of traits, not some black-and-white differences between the sexes. "Masculine" and "feminine" traits are never going to die off because ultimately they are human traits. What should die off is the notion that these traits are only acceptable for their respective genders, that there is something wrong with you or you should be some kind of social leper if you don't fit the mold.

I know so many people are thinking, look at these stick-in-the-mud feminists who don't want men to be nice to them--what the hell is their problem? I don't have a problem with men being nice. I don't have a problem with being taken out or having the door held open for me. I have a problem with men being expected to exhibit these behaviors simply because they are men, and not because it's a nice thing to do. I have a problem with that because it's non-reciprocal, unfair, and unjustified in modern society, and an easy target for anyone wanting to say....well we don't really want equality, do we?

[weary]

alright, i am donning my flame gear, but here goes...

i am raising a son. alone. while i don't know what a man would choose to do if he were a part of our household, but this is what i am doing:

my son is being taught first and foremost to be a respectful, kind, independent, open-minded HUMAN BEING and contributing member of society. however, after all that, i AM raising him to be [what i consider] a gentleman. this includes:

opening doors
offering his hand to a woman getting up
standing when a woman rises from the table (when out at a nice restaurant or formal function)
removing his hat indoors
offering his coat
walking on the outside
pulling out chairs

and, *gasp* paying for the first date! :eek:

okay, blast away now! i've got my gear on, buckled tight.

[WorkInProgress]

weary, it sounds like you're setting your son up to get really lucky with the ladies. Especially if he uses his powers for good. I have every intention of doing the same, when/if I have boys.

[weary]

weary, it sounds like you're setting your son up to get really lucky with the ladies. Especially if he uses his powers for good. I have every intention of doing the same, when/if I have boys.
"uses his powers for good" LOL.

right now he's pretty laid back about the ladies, but they are certainly on it. they call all effing weekend! :eek: (no/very limited phone time allowed school nights.)

[wordsmith]

I don't think there's anything wrong with raising a boy (or girl) to be courteous and respectful and gracious, which is what it sounds like you're doing. By the same token, I bet when he's 20 and taking a girl out to dinner, and the check comes, he'll be equally gracious if she lets him go ahead and pay the bill in full, or if she says, "Oh, let me chip in."

[stonemonkey]

I don't have a problem with men being nice. I don't have a problem with being taken out or having the door held open for me. I have a problem with men being expected to exhibit these behaviors simply because they are men, and not because it's a nice thing to do. I have a problem with that because it's non-reciprocal, unfair, and unjustified in modern society, and an easy target for anyone wanting to say....well we don't really want equality, do we?

I'm really confused now, because when a guy opens a door for a lady, it is because of their respective genders. I don't open doors for my guy friends, even if it would be a 'nice' thing to do. It'd be weird. When we go out, we split the bill, or if one person pays, we find some way to repay them pretty soon. If I treated girls in exactly the same way as I treated my guy friends, it wouldn't be called dating anymore.

[WorkInProgress]

Heh. I (a female) open doors fairly often for people of both genders. Especially in places with double doors. (On a date, BOTH of us get to open the door. ;) It works out.)

[wordsmith]

I also open doors for people all the time.

[wordsmith]

If I treated girls in exactly the same way as I treated my guy friends, it wouldn't be called dating anymore.

As long as you're not romantically attracted to your guy friends, and you are the girls you date, I think you're safe on there still being an important distinction.

[cache]

standing when a woman rises from the table (when out at a nice restaurant or formal function)

Whenever I do this, a date or someone else at the table will always say "oh, do you have to go to the bathroom, too?" or some comment like that...

[stonemonkey]

ok, the doors thing is a side issue. My main point is that chivalry, as I understand it (and this may be completely off), implies that the way a guy acts around a 'lady' is different to the way he acts around his male buddies. That is a distinction based purely on gender and technically speaking, it's sexist.

[WorkInProgress]

ok, the doors thing is a side issue. My main point is that chivalry, as I understand it (and this may be completely off), implies that the way a guy acts around a 'lady' is different to the way he acts around his male buddies. That is a distinction based purely on gender and technically speaking, it's sexist.

Yep, sure is. But I know for a fact that it happens. I work in an office of (primarily) men. My last group of coworkers were mostly men, as well. And on business trips, it's generally me and a bunch of men. Heh. 40ish married ones. And I know they act differently when I am present. Some also apologize for using some explitives (which I find kinda funny and a little cute, since I know worse things come out of my mouth). And, honestly, I don't really have a problem with this state of affairs. I don't really care one way or the other about it unless it keeps me from being able to do my job effectively. Thus far, no problem.

EDIT: It also happened at the summer camp where I was one of the few females present. So it's not just older men.

And, just for the sake of argument, I've observed women behaving differently when it's just the girls rather than mixed company.

[wordsmith]

I don't think it is sexist, I think it's basic courtesy. The distinction, I have to assume, is only there b/c many guys AREN'T courteous to their buddies...so when they are courteous to somebody, it's sexist? Huh?

[stonemonkey]

But how do you define sexism? If decisions are made purely on the basis of sex, isn't that 'sexist'?

Guys have a whole different code of 'niceness' going on. The way a guy goes about winning points with another guy is different to how he wins points with a girl. It doesn't involve opening doors for them, for a start.

[weary]

But how do you define sexism? If decisions are made purely on the basis of sex, isn't that 'sexist'?
Guys have a whole different code of 'niceness' going on. The way a guy goes about winning points with another guy is different to how he wins points with a girl. It doesn't involve opening doors for them, for a start.

well, if i invite a guy in after a date b/c he's a guy and i dig him and i want to have sex, then that'd make me sexist....

:p

[stonemonkey]

Technically, yeah it is.

[wordsmith]

But how do you define sexism? If decisions are made purely on the basis of sex, isn't that 'sexist'?

Heh...I only kiss guys...a decision made on the basis of sex. Guess I'm sexist.



Guys have a whole different code of 'niceness' going on. The way a guy goes about winning points with another guy is different to how he wins points with a girl. It doesn't involve opening doors for them, for a start.

All I'm saying is if you behave in a way that casts you in a more favorable light around women than you do men, that says many things, but I'm not really buying one of them is "I'm sexist because I'm not making crude jokes with this chick like I am with the guys."

[stonemonkey]

All I'm saying is that you don't treat guys and girls in exactly the same way, because then, yeah, I'd have to start kissing guys as well. I'm really just responding to EmberMae's comment that we do these things not because we're nice, but because of gender. My point is that we do do these things because of gender, that's just how it is.

[weary]

All I'm saying is that you don't treat guys and girls in exactly the same way, because then, yeah, I'd have to start kissing guys as well. I'm really just responding to EmberMae's comment that we do these things not because we're nice, but because of gender. My point is that we do do these things because of gender, that's just how it is.

i'll agree for the most part. but, i think w/ girls we do treat eachother a lot more similarly to the way we treat our guy friends. i hug & kiss my GF's good-bye/hello and we occasionally even hold hands when walking (and no i'm not BS or lesbian). i am very affectionate w/ both male and female friends that i am close to, extend myself to them for support, etc.

[stonemonkey]

Right, I'm just saying that chivalrous actions are done mainly because of the genders of the people involved. If they were purely nice things to do for someone, and gender was not an issue, then everyone would do them for everyone else. That would be true 'equality', and it just doesn't happen in reality.

[wordsmith]

No, some people really are all around polite and courteous. They don't just turn it on for show.

[stonemonkey]

Sure, some people do, but not everyone always offers to pick up the check without expecting anything in return.

[and1grad]

i hug & kiss my GF's good-bye/hello and we occasionally even hold hands when walking (and no i'm not BS or lesbian). i am very affectionate w/ both male and female friends that i am close to, extend myself to them for support, etc.
If you're kissing on the lips and then holding hands, that does kinda make you a lesbian. Not that there's anything wrong with that. :)

[wordsmith]

Sure, some people do, but not everyone always offers to pick up the check without expecting anything in return.

Exactly. Most people do NOT offer to pick up the check. Most people just pay for themselves. Which is exactly why that's easiest on dates. :)

[stonemonkey]

It is the easiest option, it's just not easy convincing it to a girl who expects a guy to pay.

[CTGirl]

Here's a novel idea, how bout we just stop going to dates a restaurants!

I for one am somewhat turned off by a guy who just wants to take me to dinner. I'd much rather just chill at a coffee shop (where we either pay for ourselves, or its cheap enough that it does much matter) or someplace else, where money is not an issue. With all the guys I've had actual relationships with, our first "dates" were really not "dates" at all.

[wordsmith]

I'm more a fan of outing type dates (my favorite date ever was a day trip where we went lots of different places), but thing is, that encompasses meals out and spending money.

[Deadend]

In purely theoretical terms, if you ask someone out, it means that you are *asking to take them out*. Sure, done and done.

After that, if you're in a "relationship", that in itself costs money, and generally gets split the best way it can to survive.

Apart for pure theory though, personally speaking, in practicality it's been really rare that I've actually set up a pre-planned romantic date for the sake of being romantic. Usually it's.. you know... one thing leading to another. In which case the whole argument is pretty much irrelavent.

The debate here however seems to be something focussed on gender rolls. You want to define masculinity as the ability to flash your cash around fine albeit - just know that I don't. I'd rather the woman be focussing on my personality and really not caring either way how the bill gets split if she's finding what she wants in that department (unless of course she genuinely can't afford it).

[cache]

The debate here however seems to be something focussed on gender rolls.

Gender rolls are delicious.:D


Sorry, I had to say it.