General Relationship DiscussionAlthough anyone can post anywhere on Talk About Marriage, this section is for people interested in general relationship and marriage advice.
But a man shouldn't expect a woman to pay for any date unless the woman asks the man out. If he wants to take her for a long weekend some place, then he pays 100 percent of the cost.
I agree with this. The idea of going Dutch on a date has no appeal to me at all. If a guy asks me out I expect that he will treat me… after all it was his idea. If I ask a guy out I treat him.
One of things that I like about this arrangement is that each person can spend what they can afford to spend. If one party can afford to pay for dinner in an expensive restaurant then that’s fine. If the other party cannot afford the expensive restaurant than they can invite the other to a less expensive date… say a picnic and a hike.
I have heard of horror stories of dutch dating.. say a guy takes a woman to an expensive restaurant. He buys something very expensive because he can afford it. She can only afford a salad so that’s all she has. I know a woman this happened to. It was the last time she want out with the guy. For him to sit there and eat lobster while she could hardly afford anything was a very bad statement about who he was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Dean*
If the girl asks him to go to Vegas with her, then she needs to pay her fair share.
It's all based on who is doing the asking. When a man asks, then he should pay.
I have zero respect for any man that asks a woman out and then expects her to pay. What kind of man does that?
The kind of man who does that is not one I would go out with.
However I can see them both talking about going to Las Vegas and each one volunteering to pay for part of it. That’s different than one asking the other to pay their 50%.
I grew up in a very traditional family where the men took care of the finances and are absolute gentlemen. That was how my parents raised my 3 brothers too. My brothers treat their wives like princesses! The wives all work, but they get to keep all their pay for themselves, my brothers took care of all the bills (and they work hard like real men, never took a cent of their wives' money or ask the women to chip in). 2 brothers even hire part time housecleaners for their working wives. I was a housewife throughout my marriage, and my brothers would take me out shopping or buy me dinners or gifts, knowing I have no income. And my mum gets a monthly allowance from all sons. I am so proud of all the males in my family, and how they really take care of their women, be it their wives, sisters, mother etc. My dad of course set the example for the family.
But I was in for a rude shock when I went into the dating world and how some men would complain about women not chipping in financially. I still recall how one guy actually made me cry in a restaurant because he chided me for not paying my part, and we had only dated for 1 month! I was a student then living on loans and bursaries, and he was pretty much almost a millionaire in his construction business, yet he made a fuss over me not paying my part. He often dropped over at my place, yet I never complained about the groceries I had to spend cooking for him. He also mentioned about how he dated a divorced housewife with 3 kids, and if she could pay her part, then why couldn't I. I couldn't believe the cheapness of some men! Its especially hard for me, as I was raised in a family where all the men are gentlemen and having to deal with the reality that many men out there are not raised like that anymore. It is partly their parents' fault for not raising their sons well.
Anyway, I do offer to pay my part now every time I go on a date. But at the back of my mind, I don't really respect the guys who agree to split the bill. I expect them to refuse me paying my part, even though I would offer. If he is financially broke, then he shouldn't be dating, or at least be honest about it and try to come up with alternatives where we won't need to spend much money.
Close up your wallet and find someone who isn't just in it for the money.
This should be dating rule #1. People can call me cheap all they want, but that doesn't change the fact that I've never been taken advantage of. The women I've dated were strong, independent women who didn't need to rely on a man. They can pay their own way, and they don't complain about it. If I wanted to pay money for sex, I would call an escort.
Just paying for yourself is a good way to tell who likes you. The people who like spending time with you will do it for free. Prostitutes and lawyers only do it if you pay them.
I hope that "traditional" women also enjoy "traditional" things like not voting, earning significantly less on the dollar for the same work as a man, being barred from certain careers, having fewer legal recourses in many areas, etc.
I'm kidding, obviously, but it's clear that "traditional" usually only means "old things that work in MY favor." It's usually an invented or heavily modified history.
Many women often don't realize that the "traditional" role of the man buying everything on dates was a result of certain economic conditions, rather than anything inherent in human nature; men had a much bigger slice of the total economic pie than women. Before women worked in huge numbers, and before salaries began evening out (still in that process, of course, but it's much better), your average adult female just had less money than your average adult male. The exchange made sense and a dating culture grew out of it.
Now that women earn about what men do, the old norms don't make sense in the new context.
Over time, it will even out. I saw that in college (4 years ago) - women being more involved in purchasing things for "dates" or what passed for them, etc.
The "traditions" were based on economic conditions that resulted from women being treated as less than a man. If women really do want a return to these "traditions" - cool. Unregister to vote, demand lower wages at your jobs, renounce the ability to complain of marital rape, and so forth.
Anyway, I do offer to pay my part now every time I go on a date. But at the back of my mind, I don't really respect the guys who agree to split the bill. I expect them to refuse me paying my part, even though I would offer. If he is financially broke, then he shouldn't be dating, or at least be honest about it and try to come up with alternatives where we won't need to spend much money.
Anyway, I do offer to pay my part now every time I go on a date. But at the back of my mind, I don't really respect the guys who agree to split the bill. I expect them to refuse me paying my part, even though I would offer. If he is financially broke, then he shouldn't be dating, or at least be honest about it and try to come up with alternatives where we won't need to spend much money.
In these modern times, offering to pay shows that he's desperate. It's the dating equivalent of that rich kid who said "please come over and play with me! I have a trampoline!"
The cool kids didn't need a trampoline to attract friends.
Well, if some men would only go for "strong, independent" women who don't mind paying half her share of everything, then good luck to them. I actually do not know of any woman in the US or Canada who would be happy and thrilled to pay her half share of everything and still be very happy and feeling fortunate and blessed to be with the guy over the long-term. But if you do find such a woman for yourself, then congratulations, consider yourself a lucky man. I also did not know that traditions mean I have to unregister to vote and demand lower wages and can't complain of marital rape. Wow. Just Wow. Actually, men taking care of women did not stem from economics. You might want to read a little about the origins of hunters gatherers where your ancestors came from since time immemorial, and understand about the origins of gender roles since thousands, if not millions of years. Women instinctively want and love to be taken care of, no matter how independent we are. It is how most of us validate a man , that maternal instinct to know if he could be the right father to provide for our unborn children and the family. Yes, of course sometimes for some reason or another we still date the losers who can't or won't provide. But deep in our heart, we admire most the "providers". And thats got nothing to do with being a parasite, its nature's way how women are made. If you don't believe me, go spend some time googling for scientific articles that can vouch for this.
Yes, of course sometimes for some reason or another we still date the losers who can't or won't provide..
Well..someone who can't afford to always pay for the dates should not be considered as a loser because he might be great at providing other things such as : love, security, stability, taking care of his woman?kids, trying to make his woman happy and go out of this way for that ... and so on.
But obviously, a man who pays for dinner and such is always attractive in a woman's eyes.
Well, if some men would only go for "strong, independent" women who don't mind paying half her share of everything, then good luck to them. I actually do not know of any woman in the US or Canada who would be happy and thrilled to pay her half share of everything and still be very happy and feeling fortunate and blessed to be with the guy over the long-term.
You know, I tend to believe this. My ex certainly wasted no time getting out once I got laid off.
But, the flip side to this is guys want to make sure we are not being used. The trick to make both happy is that the guy has to get some sort of signal that she really appreciates him and not just his earning potential.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suemolly
I also did not know that traditions mean I have to unregister to vote and demand lower wages and can't complain of marital rape. Wow. Just Wow... Women instinctively want and love to be taken care of, no matter how independent we are. It is how most of us validate a man , that maternal instinct to know if he could be the right father to provide for our unborn children and the family.
That guy was being facetious but he made a good point nonetheless. Women seem to want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be the old-fashioned lady when it suits them best and morph into the modern independent women when it suits them best.
I get that women are hard wired to be cared for, ensure their own survival and that of their kids, and thus build up their own material wealth. But, women are hard wired to nurture and maintain a home too by the same token - does that get done or is that ditched in today's modern times?
Or, let's look at it this way: guys are hard-wired to notice if not screw as many different women as possible. But, the wives and girlfriends expect their men to overcome that urge, be faithful, and cheerfully sacrifice in the interest of being a good partner. Is it really so offensive that us guys want the same from the women?
At what point is it reasonable to expect a woman to forego her instinct and simply realize "this is not fair to him and I need to change"?
You know, I tend to believe this. My ex certainly wasted no time getting out once I got laid off.
But, the flip side to this is guys want to make sure we are not being used. The trick to make both happy is that the guy has to get some sort of signal that she really appreciates him and not just his earning potential.
There are a lot of ways for a woman to show and give signals to her man that she cares about him.
Just because a woman expects the guy to always pay, doesn't mean she doesn't appreciate him. She can show him affection in other ways to show she's thankful. Offering to pay is not the only way that a guy should expect a woman to do.
Well..someone who can't afford to always pay for the dates should not be considered as a loser because he might be great at providing other things such as : love, security, stability, taking care of his woman?kids, trying to make his woman happy and go out of this way for that ... and so on.
But obviously, a man who pays for dinner and such is always attractive in a woman's eyes.
A man who can COOK is particularly attractive in my eyes
Really though, each to their own on this. The OP needs to decide whether it's acceptable to him or not. And depending on that answer, how he continues from there.
My husband has taken me to nice restaurants ....which is nice to do but really, a cup of tea just sitting with him engrossed in conversation is what I love most of all.
Plus I love to taste the LOVE in food. And while, kudos and props to the amazing chefs out there, it just can't beat home cooking to me. I love my husband's cooking. For my birthday he wanted to take me out to dinner and I asked if he wouldn't mind instead, cooking at home for us. He said "Are you sure? You don't want to go out?" And I told him nothing comes close to his cooking.
My husband has taken me to nice restaurants ....which is nice to do but really, a cup of tea just sitting with him engrossed in conversation is what I love most of all.
Plus I love to taste the LOVE in food. And while, kudos and props to the amazing chefs out there, it just can't beat home cooking to me. I love my husband's cooking. For my birthday he wanted to take me out to dinner and I asked if he wouldn't mind instead, cooking at home for us. He said "Are you sure? You don't want to go out?" And I told him nothing comes close to his cooking.
He looked like this > .....and after his cooking
I looked like this >
So romantic!!!!!
I LOVE men who cook for their woman!
95Likes
Re: Should he pay for everything? 
