Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So you still didn't feel the desire to pay, you just did it because you felt like it was expected of you? Do you wish you hadn't paid?
Yes on the first question. Not necessarily by her (she went for her wallet), but more or less driven by conscience (which in turn, is driven by societal pressures). And I felt that this date was worth me paying. We had a great time together and plan on meeting again. If I hadn't got that vibe early on, I would have been more reluctant. It was five hours well spent IMO.
Yes on the first question. Not necessarily by her (she went for her wallet), but more or less driven by conscience (which in turn, is driven by societal pressures). And I felt that this date was worth me paying. We had a great time together and plan on meeting again. If I hadn't got that vibe early on, I would have been more reluctant. It was five hours well spent IMO.
Thank you!
So, if you take away what you feel are societal pressures and your feelings that it is wrong for men to pay - deep down, did you want to pay for her because you wanted to show her that she was worth it and you were having a good time - or deep down did you wish that she would have paid?
I'm not trying to be obnoxious - I'm asking because in my experiences, it seems like most men want to pay when they are genuinely interested in someone in the same way that they want to protect a woman in dangerous situations and such. That's just been my experience though - and obviously not every man is the same.
Ok you have clarified you position and I agree but being a person who doesn't do online dating, do the majority of women online expect a first meet to consist of a guy picking up the tab for a dinner date? I would think the norm for this type of "dating" would be a "hey, lets get together for coffee, drinks, ice cream, whatever and get to know each other a little better". That would be inexpensive and to me suggest dutch. I am still failing to see the problem.
I never did OLD but my husband used to and I asked him about it. He said a majority of women expected dinner and a movie for a first date, whereas he always suggested coffee or a drink. His budget for a first meeting was around $20, not $100 and he was not paying that kind of money for a first date every time he met a woman in person from OLD.
So, if you take away what you feel are societal pressures and your feelings that it is wrong for men to pay - deep down, did you want to pay for her because you wanted to show her that she was worth it and you were having a good time - or deep down did you wish that she would have paid?
I'm not trying to be obnoxious - I'm asking because in my experiences, it seems like most men want to pay when they are genuinely interested in someone in the same way that they want to protect a woman in dangerous situations and such. That's just been my experience though - and obviously not every man is the same.
Let's put it this way. After about an hour in, I realized that it was progressing quite well. Therefore, when they came to collect our tab a few hours later, I didn't feel used or taken advantage of as I have in the past. Despite not embracing the idea that the entire burden should be placed on the guy for a OLD first date (ultimately a blind date), this decision was less difficult to make when it came time. Granted, we were already three or four hours in when the check came. It was pretty clear how it was going.
I've been on dates recently where the girl just seemed not interested at all (almost from the start), or was extremely shy and socially awkward. There were instances where, after about an hour, they decided that it was time to part ways (completely their decision, not mine; I'd have been willing to give it a little more time). I struggled with the idea of paying for them, but I did anyway. A couple of them didn't even offer, which made it that more frustrating. There was a date that I didn't think was going anywhere and the girl did offer to pay her way. I took her up on the offer and that date ended pretty quickly after. Who's to say that me accepting her offer to pay wasn't the determining factor for her.
Ok you have clarified you position and I agree but being a person who doesn't do online dating, do the majority of women online expect a first meet to consist of a guy picking up the tab for a dinner date? I would think the norm for this type of "dating" would be a "hey, lets get together for coffee, drinks, ice cream, whatever and get to know each other a little better". That would be inexpensive and to me suggest dutch. I am still failing to see the problem.
I am basically old school and believe who asks pays but I see that online dating is a horse of a different color and if I did do this I would not expect a guy to pay for dinner. I would suggest something cheap and simple just to meet face to face and pay for my own. I would think that would be the norm.
I don't really believe in dinner dates for first meet. I go for coffee or drinks! It seems like everyone always wants me to pick the place, so I just pick a nice coffee shop (i.e. non-chain typically) that has tasty coffee. So at least I get tasty coffee out of the deal. It might be 25 cents more than Starbucks, but the atmosphere is nicer, they usually have better treats and better people watching. You can always pick on the hipster barristers or comment on the local art on the walls.
If I were going on a first date, I would pay my half - but I would want him to offer. He should be polite, but I wouldn't want to be monetarily indebted to someone I just met. No, it's not like he'll present me with a bill, but there's still the idea that someone has "paid for you" and therefore they kind of have the upper hand in a sense. I wouldn't want that dynamic with someone I'm just getting to know, and I wouldn't want to be one of those people just out for freebies, so I would pay for myself on the first date. BUT, he should offer.
If after that we decide to be "in a relationship", then I fully expect him to pay. If I know it's been a tough month or he's low on cash, I'll offer and would pay if he accepted the offer. By the time you're serious, though, he should be paying, unless there's a significan disparity in income that favors the woman.
The person who asks should chip in if s/he insists on going to a ridiculously pricey restaurant. If she wants a $35 steak, she can pay for it. If he insists on an expensive restaurant just to impress me, then he'd better be able to take care of the bill.
If after that we decide to be "in a relationship", then I fully expect him to pay. If I know it's been a tough month or he's low on cash, I'll offer and would pay if he accepted the offer. By the time you're serious, though, he should be paying, unless there's a significan disparity in income that favors the woman.
So you think that once you're actually in a relationship, everything falls on him? What happened to it being a partnership? Are you looking for someone to take care of you completely? That's the type of girl I don't want to be with. IMO, a relationship is a partnership. Yes, romantic evenings can still be had where one party takes the other party out occasionally and pays for the evening. But once you're more serious, I think that's when it actually entails more of a 50/50 split on things.
Either this is really old-fashioned, or pure, unadulterated entitlement. Some of you need yourselves a sugar daddy it sounds like.
I have found out that when a woman is genuinely interested she will pay and not "pretend" she is offering or suddenly felt an urge to go to the ladies room when it was time to pay. Even girls who were not interested would still pay, take turns, or whatever. Cultural difference I guess.
I just don't like the idea of women feeling entitled to freeload or guys feeling entitled to sex. Seems people like to support sexism in one way or the other.
Why you should pay:
1. because you'll emotionally coerce a woman to have sex with you
2. that's about it, just try to filter out those whom you may expect to be highly unlikely to sleep with you so quickly
Why you shouldn't pay:
1. because if you feel coerced or expected to pay on the fact that you're a guy, you should refuse to participate for your own good, you weren't given the money except if you're a young guy who still depends on his parents' allowance (and that means your parents are paying instead)
2. because adults pay for what they order for themselves and just because you called someone they still came there with their free will, they could have and should have refused otherwise
Take note that some older ladies may try to pull the same trick through the story that "whoever calls, pays". This is basically one and the same as if they told you that they expect you to pay, given that it's generally guys who call women to join them and if she uses this phrase then she's generally unlikely to call a guy anyways.
There are guys who are generally outgoing and they often call their friends to go out together, either on a coffee in before work, bowling after work, some drinks or group meeting for chat in the evening/over the weekend, etc. Nobody thinks that this specific friend should be paying for the expenses of all other guys each time he calls them. He's just taking the initiative in an attempt to go out and have his friends join him. They decide to join by themselves, after all. People may be eager to pay for others once in a while and it often involves someone else to pay the round some other time, but this involves friends that you get to go out together and you'll still be friends after that, meaning that someone will make a call for another friendly gathering some other day. This isn't the case with the woman who joins you on your first date, there could easily be no second date and you'll usually have limited knowledge about her before and after that first date.
CONCLUSION: This "dilemma" about paying is very similar to a "dilemma" whether a woman should sleep with a guy because guys expect her to "put up" on first/third date. She'd be much better off if she just reasoned that the guy in question isn't compatible with her anyways. Same is with you - if you reason that a woman wouldn't want to join you on a second date because you didn't pay for the first date, then you should simply reason that you two are incompatible. Just avoid being crude or making it into a philosophical discussion, it'll make you into a weirdo, it's much better to make a joke out if it for her perception that you should have paid for her as well, she'll adapt to it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It might be 25 cents more than Starbucks, but the atmosphere is nicer, they usually have better treats and better people watching. You can always pick on the hipster barristers or comment on the local art on the walls. 
