Dating and finances
 

I was on an show last night that discussed this and thought I would put this age old question out to the group:


In these economical times, how feasible is it to cling to the age old belief that the 'man should pay for everything' on the first (or any) date?

Should anyone have to 'pay for everything' on a date?

When and why?

When is a good time to decide on finances when dating someone?

I thought this was posted already.

Well, I'll bite anyway.
I just think it should work both ways.

It probably was...o well this is what happens at 6am.

This came up because the program I was on, the hosts wanted to 'redefine' dating and does it mean more than just who can spend what on the first dates.

I think the perspective we wanted to show was during the times we were living in now with economics being what it is, should people adjust their ideas and beliefs on who should do what in the initial courting (dating) stages?

Discussion ensues...




(Sidebar: I hate you people....the other day, at her suggestion, s/o and I snuck cold cuts in to The Wolfman movie! GC is a bad influence!!!!)

Whoever asks should pay. The person who was asked should offer to pay half. The person who asked should not accept because they made the offer in the first place.

Bottom line: only invite people to something you can afford. That could mean the first date is a walk in the park and stopping for an ice cream. Dating doesn't have to be pricey. It can be a free concert outdoors in the summer. Live within your means, don't try to impress by taking somebody to a place you can't afford. Period.

Exactly...dating should be more about getting to know someone and making sure your likes and dislikes are compatible are rather than trying to impress with the wallet.

I hadn't ever really though about it...
 

For me, the guy generally pays for the first date and, usually, several subsequent ones, and this economy hasn't changed that. Of course, he is also the one that is usually doing the inviting in the early stages. Also, to be honest, I probably would nix a guy in the early stages, if he invited me out and then expected me to pay for any portion of the date. If I offer, that is one thing, but for him to expect it is another.

It is not really a set-in-stone policy that I have, because I don't really mind reciprocity (and I generally do reciprocate as things move along). I guess I just tend to attract men (with some few exceptions) that are old-school (meaning they insist on paying) in this and other regards--which is good because I am kind of old-school myself--so that's how things generally go.

So are men setting bad examples or bad expectations if they 'pay for everything'?

To me, it is one of the many acts--to be clear, not the only; because he could pay for dinner and still be a complete ass--that signal that he has gentlemanly qualities, which I value. I don't think that is a bad expectation or bad example.

Cool, ok Little32, how do you define 'dating'? Not the one time act like going to a movie but the entire concept? Also what has changed for you since you started through now?

A MAN SHOULD PAY FOR EVERYTHING ON THE FIRST DATE. AND PROBABLY SECOND. THIRD IS UP FOR GRABS. IF THE RECESSION IS HITTING YOU THAT BAD, DON'T DATE.

Uh...hunh...why so personal...lol.

Dating is the getting to know him/and, perhaps, deciding if you want it to be more serious process; (though it could just be for fun too). Dating =/= relationship to me; dating is what you do to determine whether there is relationship potential (or, again, just for fun) and can go on for as long or as short as both folks need it too. For me, I tend to date for a long time before I decide that I want the relationship; and I may or may not be seeing other people at any stage in that process.

What has changed for me? I am enjoying much more the "dating for fun" stuff these days.

LOL :D

I agree with Dee, whoever asks should pay, and guys, don't think you have to take her to Ruth's Chris plus a theater production afterwards. There are some girls out there dating just to see what they can scam from guys, which is exactly why the first date should be fairly low key.

Sidebar: I realize that guys want to be "safe" on the first date, but for the love of all that's holy, if you have other choices available, stay away from boring chain restaurants. It just smacks of having zero imagination or personality. A guy took me to Bar Louie for the first date and if the Yankees hat he was wearing wasn't bad enough, this just added to it. I'd rather go to a place you truly dig.

When my s/o and I started dating, he was working full time in a sweet managerial position. He asked me to a movie and afterward, we ended up at Denny's talking for 3 hours about everything. I agree a first date should be low-key. It should involve an activity that encourages lots of talking and I don't know of an expensive date that will really allow for that.

S/o and I have been going dutch since August. We're both full time students on a very limited income. It's not really fair for one person to pay all the time.

That's my philosophy.

The only times I've ever paid everything for a date were:
*When I took a guy out on his birthday. I planned the whole thing as a gift to him.
*I went to the movies with a guy and he was late, so I bought the tickets (didn't want them to sell out). He bought me snacks.
*I was on a date where we randomly stopped for coffee and I paid that time--it was the 5th date and he'd paid for the first 4 dates. At that point, he had been so good to me that I wanted to do something for him, even if it was just coffee.

Honestly, up until a couple months ago I've always been a student on a student's budget. I'm always up for free stuff (a walk in the park, hanging out at a bookstore, etc). If we go somewhere that requires money, it's almost never my idea. If he wants to go there, he can pay.

Live-in and I tend to split things and/or switch on and off. It helps both of us to stay on budget while still going out on "dates."

I honestly don't remember if he paid/I paid during our first few dates - but we did some group hangout time that kindof took the pressure off of dating period.

Yes.

And women are setting bad examples and expectations when they expect/allow/request that men 'pay for everything.'

It's one of many gendered behaviors that perpetuate the gender structure even when done in moderation.

Yup...that's why I had to learn to change my habits while I was dating because the last thing I wanted to do was wake up the next day feeling like I wasted money on someone that didn't appreciate the effort....

No...not that :D

I learned that I had to find other constructive ways to have a quality date without setting the example like I had "deep pockets' or that I was going to be the one to pay for everything every time we went out.

It's nothing wrong with doing all in combinations while dating...we all work, we all have bills.

The whole purpose in going out on a date is to get to know someone.

lol
I just got back from seeing a movie, and there was a couple there that brought in Subway. I knew it was Subway because I could smell it when they walked right by where we were sitting. I saw this post earlier and I thought about GC so I just had to post it.

RE: Man always paying for the first date.
I have had more than one man tell me that he paid for dinner, therefore I owed him sex. I've told each that there are names for women who feel that way, and that if I was a hooker, he wouldn't be able to afford me.

I think it depends on the situation, and also one's dating history. I always want to pay for something, just so the above scenario doesn't happen yet again. I've also had male friends tell me that, if the woman doesn't at least offer to pay for the tip or whatever, they consider her a user.

A similar situation is men not knowing whether or not to open doors for a woman. They're always surprised to learn that a woman may want to have the car door opened for them (especially in the rain!), but have to find something to do other than look bored and privledged (sp?) while waiting for him to get to the woman's side.

Everyone has their own opinions on who pays or what works for them and their date and/or s/o. We all come from different backgrounds, have different views etc etc on the dating/relationship thing. I'm only speaking for myself. I was raised to pay. Period. I guess I'm just old fashioned. Paying, opening doors/car door, when eating out, pulling out the chair, helping her with her coat, etc.. kinda thing is all I've ever seen my dad do for my mom, so that's what I have been raised to do for her. But at the same time, I'm not going to break myself by taking her to fancy, expensive places to eat, at least not while we're in the dating stage. In an actual long-term monogamous relationship, then we help each other out by treating each other.

So, whatever works for you and your s/o when the economy is bad or good, then continue to do it.

To the first, that is something that I have heard about and was warned about by older women that I know, but I have never had a guy explicitly say that to me or even really intimate it. And honestly, he's lucky if he gets more than a warm handshake. :)

On the other hand, I have had guys that thought they would get sex just for calling me. Like, "Hey, how are you doing, want me to come over?" :neutral: These are probably the guys who would just know they were getting lucky if they went so far as to treat me to dinner. That's why with them there are no first dates.

To the second, I was talking to a friend of mine about this last night. He was saying that the guys he knows definitely look for a woman to reciprocate in some way as things progress (though not necessarily in the first few dates), because if she doesn't they start to think that maybe she is selfish/inconsiderate, and that makes sense to me too.

Were those guys around HERE??? (Here is Pittsburgh for those who don't know) If anything, I've found most of the guys around here that I dated even in the most casual of manners insist on paying for the first date and get borderline offended if I offer to pay for anything. I'm convinced that part of the reason this one guy I went out with didn't ask me out again is because I paid for the movie tickets - issue with parking and ticket sellout - I didn't do it to emasculate him, which it seems he felt I did.

:D Im a hypocrite now....LOL

But, if a man opens my door, I also always reach across and open his for him while he's walking back to his side. That's just thoughtfulness and consideration.

who knew etiquette and manners were bad examples?

This thread makes dating sound confusing! I was always raised that a man should pay. However, out of courtesy once we're officially dating then I always offer to chip in once in a while unless it is very clear that he is paying. The fews guys I have dated always wanted to pay if they could so I am used to it. It may be old-fashioned, but I like what I like. I like a true gentleman. But then again, I also don't need fine dining. I'd just as gladly split a salad and and ice cream at Chick-Fil-A or something.

Indeed, they were, but must not have been raised right. Of course, it could have been because I was so young and they thought I'd be naive enough to fall for it. Older men know better than to imply it.

Of course! But with the lavalier opener, it's already open, so I'm sure to give a big Thank You! and pat the seat.

Very sad, very true. Heartbreaking, really.

Daemon, if you don't mind me asking, what kind of program is it?

Yep. I do that too.:)

I don't think it matters who pays. You work that out before you go out on the date.

This isn't about etiquette and manners. This is about perpetuating gendered social norms.

If the topic was about people negotiating etiquette and manners based on personality type and choice, rather than gendered obligation, this wouldn't be an issue or even a topic of discussion. Instead the topic is "should men pay (open doors, etc.)."

Ever wonder what happens when women defy gender norms and want to pay for the first few dates, open doors for men (not just to reciprocate), etc? :) It often confuses things, often angers most men (you'll be surprised what men conclude about the women), and challenges traditional notions of masculinity and femininity. We don't have to think about this stuff and challenge this stuff all the time, but there's nothing wrong with using your brain instead of constantly relying on "how things have always been."

I guess several other folks have made this point too. You don't always have to do something extravagant on a date. There are plenty of fun things to do while dating that won't break (or even tap) the bank.

I agree with Pretty Boy too. I think that folks will find a way to do what they prefer when it comes to dating regardless of the economic situation. If a man prefers to always pay and he is dating a woman that wants to let him, then he will probably continue to pay even if it means going to Ruth Chris's twice a month instead of once a week (and I am certain that there will always men like this who will always be able to find women who love that). As long as it continues to work for them, they will make it work.

it's supposed to challenge tradition notions because it goes against traditional etiquette and manners. etiquette and manners are learned. who do they learn it from? society. is it wrong for society to teach etiquette and manners?

What DrPhil is trying to say is the same things should apply for everyone. I'm sure there are still women out there who will literally stand next to a car and wait for the guy to open the door, even if he's carrying a small child, a case of beer and his golf clubs. That's dumb. Her point (well, part of it) is that there are people out there who substitute etiquette and "manners" for common sense.

Or if there were two sets of doors and he was holding the first one open for you. To stand there, make him move around you so that he can hold the door for you again is silly. He opened and held the first one, you can open and hold the second one. Courtesy, thoughtfulness.

a woman shouldn't be opening doors for a man, nor should a woman be carrying the majority of the bags. of course there should be common sense and moderation, but to say that everything a man is supposed to do, a woman is as well is silly. gender roles or duties exist. it's life.

Your post doesn't make sense. I said if a man is carrying tons of bags (because he's probably stronger than the woman, which is a biological thing), it's asinine for the woman to stand there like a lump and wait for him to open the door FOR HER. Unless it's a 250 pound door.

Dee - one of the things that used to drive me crackers was in the elevator, how men would stand to the side to let women out. Problem was, sometimes they ended up squishing you into the side and/or making you walk awkwardly around them. Seriously dumbass, just GET OUT OF THE FREAKING VATOR.

Our elevators at work close REALLY fast so when people do that kind of stuff, the doors will close and nobody got to get out. It's so silly. I think men do it to make us brush up against them, honestly!

how does it not make sense? i said

your statement falls under "common sense and moderation." what is hard to understand about that?

Because I said nothing about a woman carrying the majority of the bags.

and? i did. your statement didn't apply to my statement. do you disagree with my statement?