# Should he pay for everything?



## Hans (May 7, 2012)

Have been with this girl for 9 weeks now - getting along great. We're both serious about this for long term, met the parents, friends, kids (mostly staying at ex); have the key, staying there 6 days a week.
We both have good jobs. We don't cook much, we go out doing stuff and eat out quite a bit. Her point is she wants to feel special; the guy should always pay - food, drink, tickets; and always pick her up - I work and live central; she's 15 miles out of town - a 30 mile detour.
I had a scooter which she hated - so I bought a motor bike. I had an old truck mostly for offroading - broke down, and I bought a fuel-efficient new car. All good.

However, I'm all out of cash now. The melt-down happened in a restaurant, where I paid $50 for our dinners and don't remember a thank you for it. She had just paid $25 gas money for a trip we took, and pointed out she needs that cash back. We were talking about taking a trip to Vegas. I offered I can drive and book the hotel. I expect I'd be paying for food and expenses there as well, and asked if she could help by buying the tickets for the show we were interested in seeing. She said "we shouldn't go then. I should pay everything, as otherwise she wouldn't feel special. Why would I even suggest this knowing that she would not like this? It's not about money as she can very well pay for herself but doesn't want to." She pointed out all her girl-friends and former dates who agree with her. I told her she makes me feel like I'm buying myself a girl.

Any comments? How reasonable is it still to take him paying for everything all the time for granted?


----------



## A Bit Much (Sep 14, 2011)

> I told her she makes me feel like I'm buying myself a girl.


So how long do you intend to go on with this? She thinks one way, and you think another. It doesn't sound to me like she's doing any bending with her beliefs no matter how you try convincing her.


----------



## Hope1964 (Sep 26, 2011)

Close up your wallet and find someone who isn't just in it for the money.


----------



## CH (May 18, 2010)

No, she's already made it clear. The man has to pay for everything. In other words, her money is for her to use any way she wants, but you're the guy to talk to when the bills come due.

Ditch her and run. Make her feel special, you could probably get a high priced *cough* escort *cough* for cheaper and she'll make you feel special.

My wife (gf back then) would always offer to pay for 1/2 the bill whenever we went out. I always refused it but she offered.


----------



## Dollystanford (Mar 14, 2012)

run a mile - she's a leech
'wants to feel special'? wants to suck you dry more like
ugh


----------



## Enginerd (May 24, 2011)

WTF?

Is she a prosititute who is charging you for her company?

Does she believe in equal rights for women?

She feels entitled to your money for some reason. Her attitude is wrong on so many levels and you need figure out why see thinks this way. Your spouse is suppose to be an equal partner who contributes when they're able. It's ok to treat someone occasionally and sometimes one partner pays more then the other due to income inequality, but always expecting the man to pay is not acceptable in today's world. If she were your wife and was the primary child care giver then I would understand, but someone who expects this while dating is either using you or has a inflated sense of her personal worth. 

Are you two exclusive?

Peace


----------



## frustr8dhubby (Dec 23, 2010)

Wait, what, LadyFrog got banned???


----------



## Gaia (Apr 27, 2012)

Sounds like my mother.... who always told me and my sisters to... "Marry a rich guy"


----------



## Gaia (Apr 27, 2012)

frustr8dhubby said:


> Wait, what, LadyFrog got banned???


:lol::lol::lol: A bit slow?  I think she is unbanned now?


----------



## Peachy Cat (Apr 15, 2012)

I had a friend that got the biggest kick out of telling us (her girl friends) how much *he* spent on her. It was compulsive almost, she knew exact amounts- including change and tips! She was quite a shopper-always the latest styles, nails and hair. She had a really good paying job and wealthy parents giving her handouts. She could easily have helped pay or picked up the tab once in a while. Yet she would constantly keep track of what he spent on her out of "his" money.

Be careful... my friend was a serial cheater/user. 9 weeks, practically living with you, is not really "dating" anymore, is it?


----------



## mommyofthree (Jan 7, 2012)

She expects too much.
SHe should offer to pay as well.


----------



## YinPrincess (Jul 31, 2011)

frustr8dhubby said:


> Wait, what, LadyFrog got banned???


Outrageous!! Wonder what happened? :/

OP - your girl needs to understand how HER contributions can help, and are perhaps needed from time to time.

I LOVE that my husband pays for everything BUT I know what a burden this is to him, so I always offer my $$ at every opportunity I have to do so. It's MY way of showing him thanks and appreciation. It's never really a significant amount, either.

$25? Seriously? Seems so petty for her to even ask for that back when you pay for everything else!

I would suggest you sit down and have a heart to heart with her about that... If she is unwilling to compromise, then she may not be the girl for you. I may have missed it, if you mentioned her age - but the description leads me to believe she's young and perhaps immature??

She needn't base her feelings of worth or "specialness" on you paying for everything... I sense bigger issues hiding under the surface here...

Best of luck! 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Gaia (Apr 27, 2012)

Love between spouses isn't about how much money you spend.. but how much time you spend together imo. Traditional my arse... if she was so traditional.. she wouldn't be asking about your money, expecting you to GIVE her money and PAY for everything... she wouldn't be going out and she would be cooking, cleaning, massaging your feet, ect ect... My GIL is very traditional so yeah... don't let her fool you with that line.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

dump her, she's too expensive. Maybe she has some good qualities, but you can probably find most of those same qualities at a better value somewhere else.


----------



## Sanity (Mar 7, 2011)

Drop the parasite. She brings nothing to the table. My God DO NOT get her pregnant! Move out now.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SlowlyGettingWiser (Apr 7, 2012)

> Have been with this girl for 9 weeks now - getting along great. We're both serious about this for long term, met the parents, friends, kids (mostly staying at ex); have the key, staying there 6 days a week. We both have good jobs. We don't cook much


SO, in NINE WEEKS you've moved from 'just met' to 'living with each other and planning marriage.' 

AND, now that you're living together, she wants you to show her how 'special' she is by taking her out to dinner and entertainment most evenings. How often does SHE show YOU how 'special' YOU are by making home-cooked meals?

Only a fool goes in to marriage expecting to CHANGE somebody. It will NEVER happen. The only person YOU can change is YOU. The only person your self-centered GF can change is HERSELF. And ONLY if she WANTS to.

She's showing you NOW who she really is. She is self-centered, unrealistic about finances, and depending on YOU to be a big fat wallet! Everything you do should be about showing HER how 'special' she is. You DO KNOW that soon she will be thinking that you should show her how 'special' she is with a bigger, newer house; a better car; trips/vacations. *SHE is living beyond YOUR means...and you're letting her*!!!!

Don't delude yourself into thinking she will change after marriage. She won't. The demands will just get BIGGER than dinner and entertainment. So will her complaints.

I won't even get into the 'kids.' One of both of you have them and yet you eat out constantly and spend your money needlessly on entertaining yourselves. Where is the long-range planning for yourselves and the KIDS?????

You have VERY little invested in this relationship at this point. I'd advise you to get out of it and get involved with an ADULT who can think about more than impressing her girlfriends with how much she can get/how much she's ENTITLED to. If you don't, you'll learn a very long, hard, expensive lesson.

[Deep down you must KNOW this since you came to this site already concerned about this situation. Believe me, the sex can't possibly be THAT good!]


----------



## cory275 (Aug 11, 2011)

she must have just seen "think like a man"... 

that's just crazy to me. when we were dating my hubs paid MOST of the time.. but i'd pay like every 3rd or 4th date JUST SO he would know i wasnt with him or spending time with him for a free meal. it would NEVER be a requirement for me. 2 years later making me feel special would include taking out the trash or helping with dishes or helping to cook a meal. 

personally.. that's a lot to keep up with. if she's able to pay then she should at least offer! taking a trip to one of the most expensive cities in the US with someone who is too cheap to help out would strip all the fun out of that trip (get it?? haha). i'd go to vegas alone and whatever you would have spent on the little princess i'd spend on myself!!


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

You haven't talked about previous relationships with this woman, I trust. I have experienced that when the guy expresses bravado over the dates he paid for or the gifts he gave _to other women._ I learned to make the baseline for what I could expect. What else can you do? 

Especially when the guy pulls back and says, oh but she was just a friend. Well,if you can treat friends that well, then that's what I want to be.

OP, you don't tell us what your financial situation is. for example, how much you take home and whether you have any dependants before you even think about showing your lady friend a nice time. I agree that those factors come into play when considering who should pay which costs for dating.


----------



## Sanity (Mar 7, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I'm going to get blasted for saying this but I'm old fashion and believe the guy should always pay.
> If the guy can't afford it, then he needs to scale back his dating life style.
> 
> I raised my two daughters like that too.
> ...



So you raised two individuals that will leech off another using their bodies as currency? Great job.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Sanity (Mar 7, 2011)

Folks this is how princesses are made. Take notes.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alphaomega (Nov 7, 2010)

Well, call me different then.
I'm raising my daughter to use her bright mind to access HER potential.

You know....stuff like being independent, self reliant, top marks, ...... Stuff like that.

I guess I'm just unconventional.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> Raised my daughters to use their bright mind to access a man's potential.
> 
> I'm very proud of that. Every woman needs to learn that skill.
> 
> ...


Well, help me out then Dean. I have been branded as a gold digger.

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/mens-clubhouse/43547-men-money-help-me-understand.html


----------



## I'mInLoveWithMyHubby (Nov 7, 2011)

My husband always paid for everything while dating. We had some really nice dates. I did offer to pay at times, but he always refused to let me.

However, we did a lot of free activities like hiking, rock climbing, and cookout at the beach. I hate going out to eat, so we'd cook together at his house and played card or board games.

My husband also sent me flowers every Friday at work, later I found out he paid by the month. Hahaha... I no longer get any flowers. 

In return, I'd buy him really nice gifts. Especially for his bday and christmas. He always opens doors for me when we are out. Still to this day my door is always opened first. 

Now, he still pays for everything. I haven't worked in 11-12 years and stay home to take care of the house and kids.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

I'mInLoveWithMyHubby said:


> My husband always paid for everything while dating. We had some really nice dates. I did offer to pay at times, but he always refused to let me.
> 
> *However, we did a lot of free activities like hiking, rock climbing, and cookout at the beach. I hate going out to eat, so we'd cook together at his house and played card or board games.*
> 
> ...


So you never stopped anywhere to have a drink or a snack before you made the long trek home?

And gas.....what exactly did you use to make the car go......

the reason why I put it this way is because I was in an incident in college, three couples decided to meet at the beach which was about a 3 hour drive. I agreed to drive between me and my date. and my frugal ways encouraged me to fill up the day before when I was in the burbs. My date informed just as we were arriving at the beach that he "forgot" his wallet. Hookay, I can give him 20 dollars for the day (something like that, remember it was the early 80s) and then you can pay me that back plus half the gas later on this week,I told him.

Gas, he said, what gas? I said the gas that made this car go and arrive her today. I shake my head every time I think of this moment. And mind you, he was a med student, so supposedly not just some idiot off the street.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

Hans said:


> Have been with this girl for 9 weeks now - getting along great. We're both serious about this for long term, met the parents, friends, kids (mostly staying at ex); have the key, staying there 6 days a week.
> We both have good jobs. We don't cook much, we go out doing stuff and eat out quite a bit. Her point is she wants to feel special; the guy should always pay - food, drink, tickets; and always pick her up - I work and live central; she's 15 miles out of town - a 30 mile detour.
> I had a scooter which she hated - so I bought a motor bike. I had an old truck mostly for offroading - broke down, and I bought a fuel-efficient new car. All good.
> 
> ...


So I guess her "love language" is gifts then?

It bothered me that she didn't thank you for the meal. Hubs and I thank each other when one of us pays for whatever it is - even though our money is all shared. It's just nice to have manners.

As for whether you should pay for everything or not, I guess that's for you to decide. It sounds like a smidgen of resentment is already building for you to mention the lack of thanks, the $25 she needs back, the transport scenario .....sounds to me like you need to figure out what you're comfortable with and sort this out asap, with boundaries if needed. She has money, so it's not about that. You're only 9 weeks in. Figure out what it is you want and work it out with her. It might be fine and dandy that she wants to feel "special" by you footing the bill all the time, but if you build resentment and are ending up broke, there's not going to be a whole lot of motivation (or money) left to help her feel "special".


----------



## COGypsy (Aug 12, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> I'm going to get blasted for saying this but I'm old fashion and believe the guy should always pay.
> If the guy can't afford it, then he needs to scale back his dating life style.
> 
> I raised my two daughters like that too.
> ...


I'm an old-fashioned girl and to an extent I agree with you, Dean. I think especially early on, the guy should pay. 

What strikes me as a red flag for this guy is the pressure to buy a new motorcycle and a new car that she likes better to drive her around in. After less than a grand total to TWO months together. And asking him to pay her back for something she happened to spend once when they were together is just tacky. 

That not 'making her feel special', that's pushing to see how much you can make someone do for you.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I'm going to get blasted for saying this but I'm old fashion and believe the guy should always pay.
> If the guy can't afford it, then he needs to scale back his dating life style.
> 
> I raised my two daughters like that too.
> ...


I will save most of the blast and just note that I think this is dead wrong. While I have no problem with the guy paying most of the time, the idea that a woman should expect it is simply unreasonable at best and self-absorbed at worst. It is teaching your daughters that men are money banks - his money is their money while her money is her money. 

Under your sage advice, my wife and I never marry. I worked to support myself for my degree. Not a lot of money left over, so it was tough to date my wife. Yet she stepped up and paid from time to time. Fortunately, she wanted to be with me because of who I was, not because of what I could buy her. I am fortunate that I get to pass on that lesson to my son and two daughters - spending lots of money does not equal making someone feel special.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I'm just saying that a young lady needs to use every skills she has to determine what type of
> man she is going out with. Does he measure up?
> Measure up in everything she wants out of life.
> Nothing wrong with a girl being picky and having high expectations.


This I can agree with, but it is quite different than telling them to drop the guy that can't afford to date them in a way that makes them feel special. 

One is about being smart, the other is about using the guy as an ATM.


----------



## alphaomega (Nov 7, 2010)

Ok. That last post is much more descriptive.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## lamaga (May 8, 2012)

She's nuts -- and not very bright.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Enginerd said:


> She feels entitled to your money for some reason. Her attitude is wrong on so many levels and you need figure out why see thinks this way. Your spouse is suppose to be an equal partner who contributes when they're able. It's ok to treat someone occasionally and sometimes one partner pays more then the other due to income inequality, but always expecting the man to pay is not acceptable in today's world. If she were your wife and was the primary child care giver then I would understand, but someone who expects this while dating is either using you or has a inflated sense of her personal worth.


:iagree:

IMO the basis for a successful relationship (not casual dating) is a sense of unity - that you are pulling in the same direction. This means actually working for the common good at the same intensity.

This is not so much a relationship as you meeting a want or need of hers. The difference is in how much she is willing to give back. She might not have your resources, but she should be willing to push just as hard as you are. Cut back significantly and see what happens.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> Also raised my daughters to be independent as well.
> 
> But more important..........young ladies have Dreams too!
> 
> ...


I agree that it's okay to be picky and have high standards, but:

1) Having high standards does not mean using someone. There is a big difference between someone who gives back (house is clean, she fills the fridge or buys him a gift) and a "taker".

To your example, it's fine to have high expectations. But, a guy who gives much will expect much back. Notice how successful, go-getter men generally are with hard working, ambitious women? Free rides and trophy wives are rare. If you bring a lady up that she has to do little or nothing, she is going to have a hard time finding someone (at least someone who treats her as an equal).

2) At a certain point you can have too much of a good thing. How far does this go before the lady does not respect the dude, does not feel invested in the relationship, or loses touch with how hard it is to provide those resources?

How long before he is being used? What if the guy were to take the counterpart position of "I have high hopes for my sex life. You need to come with a sammich and a blowjob and put me first in bed." When you dig into it, is really just the same level of selfishness applied to a different facet of married life. The only way you could argue otherwise is by alleging that sex is less important than financial comfort et al.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> Raised my daughters to use their bright mind to access a man's potential.
> 
> I'm very proud of that. Every woman needs to learn that skill.
> 
> That is just one of many critical things a young woman should be looking at before feelings start getting involved.


Okay Dad:

1) so when your daughters come back and complain that their husband has a heavy patriarchal mindset and insists on making all the decisions because he provides all the resources, how will you advise them?

2) how much of a dowry have you set aside?


----------



## lamaga (May 8, 2012)

Well said, DTO! You were kinder than I would have been


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

I'm kind of traditional and I agree that men should pay but that doesn't mean women should profit and take advantage of that.

By this I mean, a smart woman knows when it's appropriate for her to offer to pay or when it's better to let her man pay.
I think it depends on the circumstances and there's no black&white answer.
But I don't agree with women who expect their man to pay all the time, especially when her man doesn't have a stable job/is studying/is jobless/ is going through a difficult financial period.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

NextTimeAround said:


> Gas, he said, what gas? I said the gas that made this car go and arrive her today. I shake my head every time I think of this moment. And mind you, he was a med student, so supposedly not just some idiot off the street.


Hah, the old "you were going anyways" routine. 

Brings me back to the subject of the Vegas run. $25 is an absolute pittance. Gas is only half the expense of running a car (the other big one being, of course, the wear on the car itself). I live fairly close (3.5 hours driving) and it costs probably $150 - $200 to drive there, tool around in town, and drive back.

If someone actually complained about $25 (who got to chill in the shotgun seat and not have to grind out the drive) I would just cut her loose.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I normally agree with what you write but not this time.
> 
> It's only been 9 weeks. Very early in the relationship. He still should be paying for every date, etc
> 
> ...


So if the man asks he pays 100%, and if the lady asks they go Dutch?


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

I agree with Dean.

I don't think I'm shallow or money hungry at all, but I like that my boyfriend pays for nearly everything. I often pay for groceries or lunch but he never asks me to. If we go out to dinner or the movies etc he always pays. He also does all the driving and picks me up and so forth.

My most ex was weird with money, and he didn't earn much, but I always felt uncomfortable with him, like he couldn't take care of me. I think it was his strange attitude more then anything.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> Never said I believe that everything is equal.
> 
> I have zero respect for any man that would accept an offer to go on a trip with a lady and not pay his fair share. If he can't afford it, then he shouldn't accept.
> 
> ...


I agree that not everything is 100% equal. But, I tend to feel that such instances should be limited. For instance, I would fix a sink or or install a switch at home simply because I have mor mechanical aptitude, not because it is "man's work". But, if my ex was out of Kotex I would go to the store even though that is most definitely "woman's work" by your traditional notions. I don't adhere to traditional gender roles just for their own sake.

Also, I strongly feel that, over time, the total effort the man and the woman bring to the marriage should be equal, even if the man and the woman exert themselves in different areas and maybe at different times. Having a persistent state of one person doing more than the other is a recipe for the more heavily burdened being resentful and the less heavily burdened being unappreciate and aloof. In your scenario where a "real man" pays, what is the give back? Where does the lady step in and do over 50% to maintain this balance. 

Or, there are stories going around on TAM where women feel, as a matter of principle, that the man should work harder and the woman should be able to "coast" a bit. Do you feel this is appropriate?


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

*Dean* said:


> I have zero respect for any man that asks a woman out and then expects her to pay. What kind of man does that?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Unfortunately I agree. 
Poor man though!


----------



## Homemaker_Numero_Uno (Jan 18, 2011)

I don't think you can afford to marry this girl. 
Monetarily or emotionally.
9 weeks.
Dating is so you can discover things about people, not so that you can get used to them when they're troubling. 
Sorry you are broke. 
There are women who don't care about that and will understand that you lost your money but not your freedom to move on and find someone who sees you as more than just your wallet.
Moving in too soon and setting up housekeeping was probably not the best thing. On the other hand, the relationship moved ahead fast and you discovered this about her in 9 weeks rather than a whole year. That's to be commended. I would be leery about making so many changes to your life for someone so quickly. It sounds like you are a little bit codependent and you might want to look into that and make sure you take care of yourself and your important boundaries in future relationships.
Who knows, if you establish firm boundaries with this woman maybe she will come around. The way she is going she is heading for a huge self-esteem problem. It might not seem like it, because she seems to think she is worth you paying for everything, but in the long run everyone needs to know they can make it on their own and take care of themselves. She is cheating herself out of that and you would be doing her a favor by not letting her. 
Only go on dates that you can afford if she wants you to pay. Things like free movies at the library or community center, ice cream dates, small cafe dinners at places where there is counter service, cooking at home after going to the grocery store, and dining by candlelight to save on the electric bill. If she can't stomach that, how is she going to hold up after you are married? I hope she doesn't expect a ring after she has drained your bank account.
I guess what concerns me is that she doesn't seem to have much insight into your money situation, and if she does she doesn't seem to care. I would never suggest a vacation trip if I had any inkling that it was unaffordable. I liked being treated, if it means a $4 taco dinner it's the company that counts.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*LittleDeer* said:


> I agree with Dean.
> 
> I don't think I'm shallow or money hungry at all, but I like that my boyfriend pays for nearly everything. I often pay for groceries or lunch but he never asks me to. If we go out to dinner or the movies etc he always pays. He also does all the driving and picks me up and so forth.
> 
> My most ex was weird with money, and he didn't earn much, but I always felt uncomfortable with him, like he couldn't take care of me. I think it was his strange attitude more then anything.


Well, you being a lady gives me an opportunity to ask your thoughts on relationship balance.

You do pay for groceries or lunch, which is great. But is your underlying attitude that you two are partners and he deserves this help, or do you see it as nice but non-essential. Do you feel that you should work just as hard as he does in some way or other, and if so what do you do for him as a matter of habit? Or do you feel that the man should work more / harder / longer?

I ask because there seems to be some genuine disagreement on this matter. My ex was only one of several ladies I've known who openly admit a sense that women are privileged relative to men and should not have to do as much - period (different than adhering to gender roles but still working as a full partner).

I can tell you that for me (and many other guys) are put off by this sense. A woman I am with does not have to make as much as I do (for instance), but if I'm working 12 hour days then she should be lightening my load at home or planning on giving me the weekend off while she handles the home.

Why? I truly feel that any woman I am with is just as lucky to have me as I am to have her. I am just as much the prize as she is. I believe that women should not be put up on a pedestal because it conveys weakness and results in contempt. If I pay for everything, always drive, always whatever, a lady is less likely to think "wow, what a great guy - I'm really lucky" rather than "well, he's just an ordinary guy and I'm a quality lady" or "he's the man - he's supposed to do that for me".

BTW, I am not a misogynist and usually pay on dates - happily. It is the entitlement mindset to which I object, not the expense per se.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> DTO I share your view in a marriage. My points were for the dating stage and the early part of the dating stage where the woman sizes up the man.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Understood. That is a key difference. I would cap the dude footing the entire bill to the first few dates. At that point the lady is not ready for marriage, but she does know if she likes him enough to want to know more about him or if she is going to reject him as a romantic interest.

I further would argue that your view applies only to courtship leading to a marriage or other LTR. If the woman just wants to have some fun and hang out casually on an ongoing basis there should be a more even allocation of effort.


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

DTO said:


> Well, you being a lady gives me an opportunity to ask your thoughts on relationship balance.
> 
> You do pay for groceries or lunch, which is great. But is your underlying attitude that you two are partners and he deserves this help, or do you see it as nice but non-essential. Do you feel that you should work just as hard as he does in some way or other, and if so what do you do for him as a matter of habit? Or do you feel that the man should work more / harder / longer?


I do it because I know going out can be expensive, and I think it's nice to help out where I can. I earn about 1/7th what he does. I don't work full time, I do work just as hard when I do work, my job is very physical and demanding. However we agree that when we move in together and get married, that I will stay home and take care of the children, and he will work.


> I ask because there seems to be some genuine disagreement on this matter. My ex was only one of several ladies I've known who openly admit a sense that women are privileged relative to men and should not have to do as much - period (different than adhering to gender roles but still working as a full partner).


I think if you both work full time, you split the work in the home, because that is reasonable. If however someone stays at home, depending on the circumstance, they should be able to do most of the household duties. I would never be comfortable staying at home and not taking care of the majority of household tasks.
Of course a reasonable man would step up during illness, or other such circumstances.



> I can tell you that for me (and many other guys) are put off by this sense. A woman I am with does not have to make as much as I do (for instance), but if I'm working 12 hour days then she should be lightening my load at home or planning on giving me the weekend off while she handles the home


.
I think it is all relative, if she works an 8 hour day and you a 12 then she should e able to do much more in the home, however no one should just rest up a whole weekend while the other does all the work. Especially if there are children involved.




> Why? I truly feel that any woman I am with is just as lucky to have me as I am to have her. I am just as much the prize as she is. I believe that women should not be put up on a pedestal because it conveys weakness and results in contempt. If I pay for everything, always drive, always whatever, a lady is less likely to think "wow, what a great guy - I'm really lucky" rather than "well, he's just an ordinary guy and I'm a quality lady" or "he's the man - he's supposed to do that for me".


I think it's up to the individual couple, I however prefer traditional roles where possible, and yes sometimes there will be cross over. I would be happy to help paint the house for example, as long as when we are very busy he is considerate of my needs and for example does some washing if the need arises or whatever as an adult male, he sees needs to be done.

I also want to be put on a pedastal, I know most people here don't agree with this type of thinking, but I will put him on one too, we should both worship and adore each other. If he treats me well, is not a push over, is manly and treats me with utmost respect, but demands the same, we will both feel very lucky to have one another.



> BTW, I am not a misogynist and usually pay on dates - happily. It is the entitlement mindset to which I object, not the expense per se.


I don't think I'm entitled to anything, however the kind of relationship I am seeking (and have) is one where the man takes care of me, and I reciprocate, however it is a very gendered one, and wouldn't suit everyone.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

*LittleDeer* said:


> I do it because I know going out can be expensive, and I think it's nice to help out where I can. I earn about 1/7th what he does. I don't work full time, I do work just as hard when I do work, my job is very physical and demanding. However we agree that when we move in together and get married, that I will stay home and take care of the children, and he will work.
> 
> I think if you both work full time, you split the work in the home, because that is reasonable. If however someone stays at home, depending on the circumstance, they should be able to do most of the household duties. I would never be comfortable staying at home and not taking care of the majority of household tasks.
> Of course a reasonable man would step up during illness, or other such circumstances.
> ...


I don't see a problem; sounds like you are willing to give as much as you get. :smthumbup::smthumbup:


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> 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.



*Dean* said:


> 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%.


----------



## Suemolly (Jun 19, 2011)

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.


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

Hope1964 said:


> 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.


----------



## SoWhat (Jan 7, 2012)

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.


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

Suemolly said:


> 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.


Couldn't agree more!!!!

That's how I see it.


----------



## Davi (Apr 20, 2012)

Is she behaving like this from the start of your relationship? If yes, then i think, she is in relationship just because of your money.


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

Suemolly said:


> 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.


----------



## Suemolly (Jun 19, 2011)

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.


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

Suemolly said:


> 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.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Suemolly said:


> 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.



Suemolly said:


> 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"?


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

DTO said:


> 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.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

lovelygirl said:


> 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.


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

heartsbeating said:


> A man who can COOK is particularly attractive in my eyes


Ooo Yes!!! It turns me on!


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

lovelygirl said:


> Ooo Yes!!! It turns me on!


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 >  :smthumbup:


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

heartsbeating said:


> 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.
> 
> ...


So romantic!!!!! :smthumbup:
I LOVE men who cook for their woman!


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

Suemolly said:


> 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.


Out of curiosity, what do the wives contribute to the marriage? They work full time, yet keep all the money so they don't pay bills even presumably for their children, and they have housekeepers so they don't do the chores. What exactly do they do for the family?


----------



## JJG (Mar 9, 2011)

Some of the responses in this thread have genuinely shocked me!

What year is this 1950?! Come on girls step up, surely we want to be *equal* not keep all the parts of ‘traditional’ life that benefit us and just leave the bad parts!


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

Tall Average Guy said:


> Out of curiosity, what do the wives contribute to the marriage? They work full time, yet keep all the money so they don't pay bills even presumably for their children, and they have housekeepers so they don't do the chores. What exactly do they do for the family?


Not all wives have housekeepers.
Some of them pay the bills, cook/take care of the children, work, do the chores.
My mom is one of them while my dad is a lazy a$$ and does nothing.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

DTO said:


> Or, there are stories going around on TAM where women feel, as a matter of principle, that the man should work harder and the woman should be able to "coast" a bit. Do you feel this is appropriate?


I don't see this attitude here on TAM. Can you give some examples of where you see this on TAM?


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

DTO said:


> You know, I tend to believe this. My ex certainly wasted no time getting out once I got laid off.


Maybe she never really cared about you. I had a gf like that. I really liked her and we always had fun together, but she was gone as soon as my season job ended and I had to focus on school again. 
My current gf is top quality when it comes to standing strong. She's getting a masters degree in public health with no help from her parents and she has a fairly good job on the side. I have a good job too, but it wasn't always this way. I was working at a fast food restaurant when we met, and she had more money than me.




> 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?


It's not a simple exchange where men provide money and women provide everything else. For example, I can cook better than my gf can. I did all of the computer networking, I do all maintenance, I did all of our lighting and electrical stuff, and I handle random things like insulating the windows. That's in addition to my paying half the rent, all of the food, the insurance on both cars, and most of the utilities. 
If you expect me to pay for everything, then I expect you to do everything above. You fix the appliances, you build the bridged wireless network, you insulate the windows, fix the door frame, maintain the cars, and do all of the dishes and laundry.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

DTO said:


> Well, you being a lady gives me an opportunity to ask your thoughts on relationship balance.
> 
> You do pay for groceries or lunch, which is great. But is your underlying attitude that you two are partners and he deserves this help, or do you see it as nice but non-essential. Do you feel that you should work just as hard as he does in some way or other, and if so what do you do for him as a matter of habit? Or do you feel that the man should work more / harder / longer?
> 
> ...


I a agree with your view of marriage. Both spouses should work equally. They may not earn the same but the effort is what counts.

In my previous marriage my husband did not work for 10 years and he did next to nothing around the house/yard. He just played computer games, goofed off, etc. 

It's not just women who have an entitlement attitude.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

lovelygirl said:


> Not all wives have housekeepers.
> Some of them pay the bills, cook/take care of the children, work, do the chores.
> My mom is one of them while my dad is a lazy a$$ and does nothing.


I never said they did. I know many women that work and contribute to the marriage and family by paying part of the bill, helping out around the house and taking care of the kids. That to me is a partnership and how a marriage should work.

But Suemolly's description of her SILs as the ideal makes me question what they contribute to the marriage. Based on her description, the wives are in it for themselves, while the men are there to support them. I am trying to understand what these specific women contribute to the marriage.


----------



## SoWhat (Jan 7, 2012)

Suemolly said:


> 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.


Thanks, I am. 




> 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.


I'm being a little hyperbolic. I'm saying that you're calling for one tradition (men bankrolling a woman's every desire) but not for others (lower wages, lack of voting power, fewer legal rights). 

This selective history is indicative of the likelihood that you're not really calling for "tradition" for tradition's sake, but for whatever best suits you. 




> 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.


"Losers?" 
Your worldview is almost certainly so different from mine that discussion is pretty pointless.
Franz Kafka was broke for much of his life. He must have been a "loser." Jesus and Gautama Buddha were poor... what losers! 

"Take all you have and a give it to the poor" - loser talk!





> If you don't believe me, go spend some time googling for scientific articles that can vouch for this.



."..recent archaeological research done by the anthropologist and archaeologist Steven Kuhn from the University of Arizona suggests that the sexual division of labor did not exist prior to the Upper Paleolithic and developed relatively recently in human history. "

Yeah. Not as ingrained as you seem to think.
Even having a division of labor at all doesn't go very far to prove the proposition that women are supposed to be paid for, etc. 
The "gatherer" of hunter-gatherer (and, again, that division of labor was a relatively late development) had to WORK. There was no sitting at home and being a princess while "the help" cleaned your cave and raised your babies. 



> Actually, men taking care of women did not stem from economics.


I'm saying that the concept of men buying women dinner, drinks, etc., IS an economics thing; it was before there was paper or metal money. 

Men _had_ all(/nearly all) the resources. After the feminist movement, women's lib and suffrage, etc., women were given much greater access to these resources. 
The "traditions" you're thinking of stem from the former economic position, where those with a lot (men) can afford to "give" to those with a little (women). 
This economic position came at the expense of womens' ability to choose certain careers, vote, have full legal rights, etc. 

Now that the economic situation has evened out more, things will continue to evolve. Of course, there will be some anachronisms for a while and some cultural leftovers. But society's changing to keep pace with the overall economics.
Otherwise, men are going to just go flat broke.

It seems you're advocating the "What's yours is ours and what's mine is mine" position. Stop and think about that for a second.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

During the courtship with my exH, we were both just out of grad school, so student debt and new jobs. I thought we should go dutch so I offered and he accepted. 

But then I noticed that when he got around his friends --male or female -- he was perfectly happy to pay for them.

That;s when I decided, **** this.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

EleGirl said:


> I don't see this attitude here on TAM. Can you give some examples of where you see this on TAM?


Will put them up as I find them. TAM is really busy so stuff tends to get buried pretty quickly.


----------



## Suemolly (Jun 19, 2011)

When I mentioned women looking for providers, I am not just referring to money. A man can provide and protect a woman in so many ways. But unfortunately, we live in a materialistic society and much of the idea of "provider" is associated with money now. The extreme of such women are of course the gold diggers, and any man has a right to protect himself from those women, so I totally understand those who said they are just trying to be careful. But you must understand that most women still instinctively look for the male who can provide and protect, and if you are too careful in protecting yourself and your resources, you might just come across as cheap and a loser. I am not saying that a woman should never take out her purse at all. I, for example, buy gifts for the man every now and then, cook him nice meals when he comes over, surprise him with tickets to events etc. I do contribute financially, even though I think a man should step up and be spending much more than I do for him, as he is being mentally validated in his male provider role.

Someone asked about what my SILs do. The housekeepers are only part-timers, so my SILs do the care work at other times. They have children too, so the kids need to be cared for. Meals have to be prepared and other domestic chores done. I studied public policy and one of the things I am happy is that care work is now given a bigger spotlight in academic. Care work, often associated with women, has been terribly devalued. Much of the work is unpaid or underpaid, and many people tend to think women don't bring much to the table if they don't contribute financially. The fact is, care work is actually more laborious and women clock in a lot many hours more than men who work outside the home. Men get paid more too, and many women in domestic care work are not even paid at all. Professions dominated by women such as nursing, teaching etc, are underpaid. There is still gender disparity happening here. Sorry, I hope I don't sound preachy, just trying to raise awareness that women in care work or who don't contribute much financially should not automatically be seen as parasites. 

I don't agree with Kuhn's suggestion about gender roles being a new development in recent history. Without even having to search for papers, logic will tell us that man and woman are built and wired differently, and there has got to be some differences in our roles. My reference to hunter gatherers was to say that women since past times were wired to be the gatherers and did contribute to her role. Men hunted, women gathered and shared. Men provided, women received and spread the resources throughout the family. It is a social conditioning that is almost like a biological stimulus which still rings true today. Women may have paid jobs now, but she still wants the provider and protector. Men can be domesticated now, but he still wants the woman who nurtures and cares. But if I were a man looking for sex or a good time or just intent to date long term with no intention of actually seriously settling down, yes, I as a man would prefer the woman to pay her part too. Why bother providing for her when all I want is to enjoy myself and to have her company for cheap.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

Suemolly said:


> Someone asked about what my SILs do. The housekeepers are only part-timers, so my SILs do the care work at other times. They have children too, so the kids need to be cared for. Meals have to be prepared and other domestic chores done. I studied public policy and one of the things I am happy is that care work is now given a bigger spotlight in academic. Care work, often associated with women, has been terribly devalued. Much of the work is unpaid or underpaid, and many people tend to think women don't bring much to the table if they don't contribute financially. The fact is, care work is actually more laborious and women clock in a lot many hours more than men who work outside the home. Men get paid more too, and many women in domestic care work are not even paid at all. Professions dominated by women such as nursing, teaching etc, are underpaid. There is still gender disparity happening here. Sorry, I hope I don't sound preachy, just trying to raise awareness that women in care work or who don't contribute much financially should not automatically be seen as parasites.


Except that your SILs don't contribute financially at all. They work for themselves, while expecting their husband to pay for everything that supports the family. At least if your SILs were SAHMs, there would be the benefit of all this full time care you mention, but since the SILs work full time, that does not occur and the husbands in fact have to hire someone to do part of the chores. 

I am not interested in some political argument. What I am trying to figure out is how these women, who you trumpet as the ideal for a marriage, contribute. Based on your explanation, their contributions are minimal. They work for themselves, while expecting their husbands to provide everything. In exchange, they hire others (using their husbands money, not theirs) to do at least some of the work of running the family. Your ideal is a woman's money is hers, while the man's money is theirs. That is no partnership I want any part of.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

*Dean* said:


> I'm going to get blasted for saying this but I'm old fashion and believe the guy should always pay.
> If the guy can't afford it, then he needs to scale back his dating life style.
> 
> I raised my two daughters like that too.
> ...


That, or a man could do like me, and marry a woman who doesn't give two healthy damns about this crap.

Seriously, money has rarely been an issue with us, even when one of us was out of work. If I have it, and she doesn't, I pay. If she has it, and I don't, I pay. She adores me, and looks at me every single day with stars in her eyes, 12 years and counting, regardless of what's in the wallet or bank account. While money is a HUGE point of contention in a lot of marriages and relationships, I'm thankful that neither one of us ever really put much stock into it. Of course I want to give her the world, but not because she's demanding it. And that just makes me want to give her the world even more.

I'd recommend any man in his right mind run away from gold diggers who DEMAND they pay for everything. It's one thing if a guy perpetually volunteers. It's another thing if some shallow chick needs to have dollar bills thrown at her in order to feel "special".

Hookers and strippers feel "special" for those same exact reasons. And if that's the case why bother to stop off at a relationship. She'd be better off filling out an application at the local titty bar, or setting up shop at the neighborhood corner.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

BTW ladies, there is no such thing as saying you're "traditional" or "old fashioned", without understanding the context.

Men once always paid because most women didn't generate income. She was taken care of by her father, and then passed off, with dowry in many cultures, to her husband. It wasn't a matter of chivalry; women were expected to work hard running the home, and raising children. Men made ALL financial decisions, without necessary consultation to the wife, and expected to have sex whenever they wanted. Of course all men didn't take advantage, but that was the social expectation. 

So if you're advocating this "traditional" approach, don't forget that it then becomes your obligation to NOT work outside the home, NOT be involved in the major familial decisions, and to relinquish your own sexual freedom and rights.

Good look with that "tradition".



Suemolly said:


> 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.


Not sure what planetary history you're referring to, but here on Earth the hunter-gathering women in almost every society in the world didn't sit around eating bon bons, waiting for the man to "provide".

Those women worked HARD. They, shock of all shocks, actually hunted game. Men tended to hunt the larger, more dangerous game, but the women hunted smaller game. And even then, it wasn't uncommon for women to join in larger hunts when additional help was required, and in some societies the women were expected to do large game hunting regardless. They did the majority (though not all) of the gathering of vegetation, especially the vegetation that was more difficult to acquire. It was hard, grueling work. 

This was all in addition to doing most of the child rearing, and cooking. At the end of the day most women in these societies did MORE work than the men did.


----------



## I'mInLoveWithMyHubby (Nov 7, 2011)

NextTimeAround said:


> So you never stopped anywhere to have a drink or a snack before you made the long trek home?
> 
> And gas.....what exactly did you use to make the car go......
> 
> ...


Your funny. I would drive to his house, which costs much more in gas then where we drove to hike.lol

I spent more time at HIS house then anything. I didn't ask for gas money.


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Seriously, money has rarely been an issue with us, even when one of us was out of work. If I have it, and she doesn't, I pay. If she has it, and I don't, I pay. She adores me, and looks at me every single day with stars in her eyes, 12 years and counting, regardless of what's in the wallet or bank account. While money is a HUGE point of contention in a lot of marriages and relationships, I'm thankful that neither one of us ever really put much stock into it. Of course I want to give her the world, but not because she's demanding it. And that just makes me want to give her the world even more.


:bunny:

So romantic!!!!!!!!


----------



## Suemolly (Jun 19, 2011)

I never said about women not having to do anything, or the females in hunter gatherer societies sitting around contributing little. If anything, I said women had/have to contribute a lot. What she did not contribute in money, she contributed in other ways. Unfortunately, her contributions were often devalued because it could not be quantified such as care work. Some of you guys must have reading problems.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Suemolly said:


> I never said about women not having to do anything, or the females in hunter gatherer societies sitting around contributing little. If anything, I said women had/have to contribute a lot. What she did not contribute in money, she contributed in other ways. Unfortunately, her contributions were often devalued because it could not be quantified such as care work. Some of you guys must have reading problems.


No, I'd suggest maybe you have a comprehension problem. Because already at least two posters have educated you about the facts that your view of the hunter-gather societies is false.

Men didn't contribute "money". The men hunted, as well as the women. He didn't remotely "provide" in the context you continue to perpetuate. Women didn't do only "care work". They gathered, AND hunted, AND did "care work". They were much more akin to the modern, Western woman, who works full time AND pays her portion of the bills, AND cooks, AND takes care of kids. 

So using that model to back up your assertion that men should financially provide for women is literally cutting the throat of your own argument. The type of scenario you're talking about came much later in human history, and with it came a whole host of problems that women are still fighting.

You want your cake, and you want to eat it too.


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

SoWhat said:


> ."..recent archaeological research done by the anthropologist and archaeologist Steven Kuhn from the University of Arizona suggests that the sexual division of labor did not exist prior to


Even then, the idea of women not doing a man's work only applies to urban areas. 2 of my cousins are farm girls and they're both tough as nails. They can shoot a bear or back up a horse trailer just as good as any man. My dad grew up on a farm and he said it was like that even when he was a kid in the 1940s and 1950s. If mom has no work for you to do in the kitchen, you help your dad fix his truck, even if you're a girl. Similarly, if dad has no work, boys are still expected to help their mom with whatever stereotype role she has. There was preference for men or women doing certain work, but there's no turning down work because of lame excuses like "I can't help you put ear tags on the livestock since I'm a girl and girls don't do that"

In the city, it's a little different. You can't go to your husband's work and help him file tax returns. Similarly, the man can't go home mid-day and help with some chores at home. This solidifies gender roles.


----------



## dubbizle (Jan 15, 2012)

Almost same experience years ago and when I finally had enough OF it,it ended very quickly.You are being used so END IT NOW or go get some bank loans.


When she finds a guy that she really likes she will most likely ask him for nothing but we be ready to do everything for him,you are just her sucker.


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

she wants to feel special at someone else expence!

nobody should have to make you feel special.If a person male or female needs someone to make them feel special then their self esteem is in the sh*tter.

or at least she should make him feel special in return!


If it were me I would kick her a$$ to the curb and look for someone who has real values.


----------



## Sanity (Mar 7, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> So Chilly let me ask you a question.
> 
> So you believe that not treating your lady special outside the bedroom
> leads to a better Sex life and a better marriage?


So when the money runs out due to her constant need to feel "special" and the sex dries up and she dumps you, what then?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## I'mInLoveWithMyHubby (Nov 7, 2011)

chillymorn said:


> she wants to feel special at someone else expence!
> 
> nobody should have to make you feel special.If a person male or female needs someone to make them feel special then their self esteem is in the sh*tter.
> 
> ...


I know I don't bring in any income because I physically can not since the day I broke my neck. 

However, I do make it a priority to make my husband feel "special" as you call it. He does the same for me. We both work hard at meeting each others needs the best of our ability. I absolutely adore my husband. He works very hard for us and is VERY family orientated. When we first were married it took hubby a year to convince me to quit my job and college to stay home and raise the children. He knew once I did this, I most likely would not return to work. Both he and I were raised with stay at home mothers.

The nice thing that works for our relationship is neither of us have expectations of one another. We never fight and we are each others biggest supporters. 

Life isn't about how much money you have in the bank. Who cares. It's about how you treat others and character. 

It does not make me a bad person because I do not work or bring in income. I consider us blessed with the luxuries we do have. Both my husband and I have a level head on our shoulders. We know what our boundaries are and stick with them. I grew up with my father being a gambler and my mother an over spender. I'm neither. 

I will do what it takes to make my husband feel good. I'm in love with him and he's also my best friend. We've been married for 12 wonderful years.

I never expected anything from him while dating. In fact I really wasn't into dating in the first place. I was busy as a single parent going to college and working my a$$ off. I quit both work and college by the request of my husband. Now I focus on home life even though I'm now disabled with a neck injury. I'm still able to iron his work shirts/pants, clean the house, look after the pets(mini farm), and cook homemade food. I'm not tired for intimate time either. In fact, my drive is higher then my husbands.

It works well for us.


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> So Chilly let me ask you a question.
> 
> So you believe that not treating your lady special outside the bedroom
> leads to a better Sex life and a better marriage?


your question dose not make sence to me.


I belive that being treated special should be a two way street.

alway having to treat someone special seem unrealistic.


----------



## Halien (Feb 20, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I'm going to get blasted for saying this but I'm old fashion and believe the guy should always pay.
> If the guy can't afford it, then he needs to scale back his dating life style.
> 
> I raised my two daughters like that too.
> ...


While I think that in the OP's case, the new girlfriend is going way too far, I do agree with you, Dean. Its just my personal opinion, and no more.

These discussions have become pretty theoretical. When this happens, I wonder if we have to come back down to Earth, and how things typically work. Yes, I paid everything in the early months of dating my wife. However, she would never want something that I couldn't afford, and she worked hard to come up with things that we could do without spending money, because I was a poor college grad. She never took it for granted. I taught my 20 year old daughter the same thing. But this is where reality sets in. She's an attractive, dedicated student who has a firm grasp of what she wants to do with her life. For every guy who wants to date her, and finds it offensive to have to pay for a date in the early dates, there are a half a dozen more who are willing to distinguish themself by trying to show that they have more to offer. If they are broke, the pursuit might be non-financial. The guys are 100% the pursuers, and the real life fact is that if any one of them waits for her or a woman like her to pursue them with offers of paying, the field is pretty limited. Because of this, I tried to teach her to respect what these guys are going through. To try to make it easy for them, and look beyond the financial reality that they currently face to the man that they might be in twenty years, if he is potential marriage material.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

Suemolly said:


> I never said about women not having to do anything, or the females in hunter gatherer societies sitting around contributing little. If anything, I said women had/have to contribute a lot. What she did not contribute in money, she contributed in other ways. Unfortunately, her contributions were often devalued because it could not be quantified such as care work. Some of you guys must have reading problems.


Actually, my reading comprehension is just fine. Unfortunately, you seem to like to ignore questions you don't want to answer. I will ask a final time - what exactly do your SILs, who seem to have the perfect marriage, actually contribute to their family and marriage?


----------



## GTdad (Aug 15, 2011)

Halien said:


> While I think that in the OP's case, the new girlfriend is going way too far, I do agree with you, Dean. Its just my personal opinion, and no more.
> 
> These discussions have become pretty theoretical. When this happens, I wonder if we have to come back down to Earth, and how things typically work. Yes, I paid everything in the early months of dating my wife. However, she would never want something that I couldn't afford, and she worked hard to come up with things that we could do without spending money, because I was a poor college grad. She never took it for granted. I taught my 20 year old daughter the same thing. But this is where reality sets in. She's an attractive, dedicated student who has a firm grasp of what she wants to do with her life. For every guy who wants to date her, and finds it offensive to have to pay for a date in the early dates, there are a half a dozen more who are willing to distinguish themself by trying to show that they have more to offer. If they are broke, the pursuit might be non-financial. The guys are 100% the pursuers, and the real life fact is that if any one of them waits for her or a woman like her to pursue them with offers of paying, the field is pretty limited. Because of this, I tried to teach her to respect what these guys are going through. To try to make it easy for them, and look beyond the financial reality that they currently face to the man that they might be in twenty years, if he is potential marriage material.


This is where I'm at as well. I gather that Dean and I are of a similar age, raised in the same or similar culture. In that time and in that culture, the man pays. If heaven forbid I'm cast back into the dating scene, I'll pay. But Halien's point is well-taken. At some point, and it's probably different for everyone, even us "traditional" guys, you begin to feel taken advantage of. If the OP has hit that point, his feelings are very valid and he either needs to renegotiate the relationship or break it off.

There's a line between the obligation you impose on yourself to pay, and the obligation imposed by your date to pay. The latter may get to the point where it rankles a bit.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

I wonder if anyone thinks it's coincidental that heteronomous definitions for the word, 'husband' include:

"A prudent or frugal manager"
"One who manages resources"
"To use frugally: conserve"​
-Or that synonyms in Old English included:

"Master"
"Steward"
"Manager"​
I don't have a problem with the man being expected to pay in the early stages of a relationship, but I think it's amusing if over the long term, a woman wants to enjoy the vestiges of a time when men exercised near total control over money and property while simultaneously enjoying the privileges of a more enlightened era where we've attempted to minimize those gender inequalities.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

ocotillo said:


> I wonder if anyone thinks it's coincidental that heteronomous definitions for the word, 'husband' include:
> 
> "A prudent or frugal manager"
> "One who manages resources"
> ...



Yes and no. but the reality is that women have harder times to find a job during their child bearing years, particularly in europe where there are generous maternity benefits. This applies to women whether they want or don't want children since it's illegal to ask that question in a job interview.

when she does stay home with the kids, her career prospects get stunted compared to someone who stays in the job market.

I do agree that there are some things in life inherently unfair to men (ie, you can't make a woman get an abortion or make her not get want even when it's your child).

And women do take up the slack more often than men do in taking care of elderly relatives. Even though my grandmother preferred her son over my mother, my mother took over caring for her the last 10 years of her life.

But everyone figures out a way to get by while being hemmed by the rules of the game.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

NextTimeAround said:


> Yes and no. but the reality is that women have harder times to find a job during their child bearing years....


If by this you mean that although we've made strides forward from the days when a woman could not inherit property; we're still not quite 'there' yet, I would agree with you.

In response though, I would refer back to the thread title and the OP.

The question was not, "Should he pay for _most_ things?" or "Should he pay for _big_ things?" or "Should he pay for _luxury_ items/things?" 

The question was "Should he pay for everything?"

"Everything" is a pretty inclusive term. When it's expected in a relationship, clear down to reimbursement for a little bit of gas money, it leads straight to the dichotomy I mentioned. Women are not chattel and men are not their patrons. --Not anymore.


----------



## chillymorn (Aug 11, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> 100% agree about being treated special should be a two way street.
> 
> The key is trying to ensure it doesn't become routine.
> If it becomes routine, then the other no longer feels special
> ...


we think more alike than we thought.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

What I find particularly hilarious are the women who flat out say that if a man doesn't have the resources to carry their behinds during the dating phase, they simply should not date at all.

Hil. A. Rious. Considering that the majority of the world is at, or below, the poverty line, they'd seriously be suggesting that most of humanity not find love, and/or marriage, because what's in the wallet is apparently the main determining factor behind whether two people should share their lives together.


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

jaquen said:


> What I find particularly hilarious are the women who flat out say that if a man doesn't have the resources to carry their behinds during the dating phase, they simply should not date at all.
> 
> Hil. A. Rious. Considering that the majority of the world is at, or below, the poverty line, they'd seriously be suggesting that most of humanity not find love, and/or marriage, because what's in the wallet is apparently the main determining factor behind whether two people should share their lives together.


I agree. Total nonsense. Just because somoene is poor doesn't mean they should not date. What a stupid mentality.


----------



## donewithit (Apr 7, 2010)

I do not think the OP has been back..but I am going to give my two cents anyway.

when I started dating my husband 10 years ago..(second marriage for both) he had a good job..but was BROKE. He was honest with me that although he made decent money..he now had custody of his boys but thru court ordered direction was paying almost half his paycheck to his ex for child support. He told me that he had a lawyer working on it to fix it but would probably never recover the money from her.

Our first dates were..pool and a couple of coolers (he paid the pool..we took turns on the drinks) second...mini golf..he paid..then afterwards I bought us icecream at dairy queen..then dates became movie nights with a bottle of wine..

he had VERY little money as a single dad..and as a single mom I had even LESS..however we worked together. Today ..his income has doubled from those days...his exwife gets NO money anymore...even though she did collect for a few years until last year..we both drive newer vehicles and we get a min of three vacations per year..yep on HIS paycheck..mine pays for groceries and gas for BOTH vehicles and spending cash for BOTH of us.

sorry...i do not belive it has to be JUST on the man..it is a PARTNERSHIP

Lynn


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

ocotillo said:


> If by this you mean that although we've made strides forward from the days when a woman could not inherit property; we're still not quite 'there' yet, I would agree with you.
> 
> In response though, I would refer back to the thread title and the OP.
> 
> ...


Exactly!!

Let me put it this way: how would a lady feel if I set forth Dave Chappelle's four rules for making your man happy as the rules of the game:

1) suck his d**k
2) play with his [email protected] a little
3) make him a sandwich
4) don't talk so much

That is right about how most guys would feel if they were expected to pay just because they are men.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Suemolly (Jun 19, 2011)

Tall Average Guy said:


> Actually, my reading comprehension is just fine. Unfortunately, you seem to like to ignore questions you don't want to answer. I will ask a final time - what exactly do your SILs, who seem to have the perfect marriage, actually contribute to their family and marriage?


Since you are obsessed with wanting to know about my SILs, I will tell you, even though I don't really talk about my family much to people. MY SILs don't need to share the bills. Why should they? My 1st brother is very wealthy. Their eldest child is a successful doctor. My SIL chooses to work because she complains about being bored at home and that she loves teaching (her job). So she works and keeps all her income because her husband earns enough for the entire family to live very well. The 2nd brother isn't as wealthy, but he is a well-paid professional in one of the top banks. He too could afford to take care of his family and does not need his wife's financial contribution, she is an activist and enjoys her work. Why is it so wrong that there are some women who are lucky to marry men who work hard and earn enough to afford to pay for them? What my SILs do or do not do in their marriage is none of my business, but I am close to my brothers and I know they are all happy and content. One of my parents is asian, and perhaps that creates a different family value from others.

I am not a gold digger or anything. I really don't care. I am dating a fireman now, and he's often broke so we do simple affordable things and eat out in cheap places a lot, and I always offer to pay my part (but he will refuse it except for the occasional drinks). I am poor too, my broken marriage left me almost penniless, but I am working hard to put my life together again and my family helps me out when I am desperate. I understand how money issues can be a ***** as I don't have much myself. But like a poster said, its all the rules of the game. A man can complain and protest its unfair, but if you can't please a woman, she will just move on to someone who plays the game better than you. You may want to wait out for the woman who is all about 50-50, but be realistic how many of them are there out there and when you've really found her, does she fit your other criteria? Equality is just an ideal, in reality a lot of things are unfair. Women are subjected to this game too, such as she is often judged for her physical appearance etc. We don't like it mais c'est la vie.


----------



## Devastated and Depressed (May 9, 2012)

I am sorry but she is using you. I don't understand how you don't see that. You should get out as fast as you can.


----------



## Suemolly (Jun 19, 2011)

GTdad said:


> This is where I'm at as well. I gather that Dean and I are of a similar age, raised in the same or similar culture. In that time and in that culture, the man pays. If heaven forbid I'm cast back into the dating scene, I'll pay.....


Omg that's it! Its the age thing. That must be the reason why the posters here are so divided on this topic. I only date men above 40 and none of them would even think of expecting me to pay my part. Its got to be the younger blokes who have issues with this.


----------



## The Lurker (May 11, 2012)

All I have to say is... get away from her as fast as you can, she sounds like trouble.


----------



## swedish (Mar 6, 2008)

I don't think who pays what should be set in stone but some up front communication would probably avoid a lot of this conflict. "Hey, let's go to Vegas for the weekend and see a show!" ... "That sounds fun, but I just swapped out 2 vehicles and am tight right now...let's talk about doing that down the road...unless of course you want to foot the bill and go now "


----------



## Trojan John (Sep 30, 2011)

I have a friend who expects the man to pay for her on every date and has managed to get a new sucker every six months. The best parts are that she does it without sleeping with them and she makes about 200'000 USD annually. She's not even that attractive but these well off losers keep falling into her trap. My wife greatly dislikes her after seeing how she treated her last boyfriend and has taken to calling her 'princess Anne'.

This is not very common here. Women are treated nicely, but there is definitely not that sense of entitlement.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Trojan John said:


> I have a friend who expects the man to pay for her on every date and has managed to get a new sucker every six months. The best parts are that she does it without sleeping with them and she makes about 200'000 USD annually. She's not even that attractive but these well off losers keep falling into her trap. *My wife greatly dislikes her after seeing how she treated her last boyfriend and has taken to calling her 'princess Anne'.*
> 
> This is not very common here. Women are treated nicely, but there is definitely not that sense of entitlement.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


So what does that say about some men?


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

NextTimeAround said:


> So what does that say about some men?


They have low self esteem?


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

I'd appreciate it if the guy cooked for me and put effort in it rather than take me out to a restaurant.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> Some men are stupid and don't know how to access a woman,
> read a woman, etc.
> It shouldn't take more than a few dates for a man to determine
> what type of woman he is dealing with.
> ...


Can you give some examples of what a man should look for?


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> I also want to say that just because there are a few bad apples out there
> doesn't mean a man shouldn't be a Gentleman and pay for his dates.
> 
> For those young men that disagree, remember that the business
> ...


Speaking as someone who's 41....

If you asked me about any of my dating habits during a job interview, included, but not limited to, if I pay for everything, I'd stand up and walk out the door. Because it's neither relevant to whether or not I'll do a good job, nor is it, quite frankly, any of your business.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## that_girl (Jul 6, 2011)

9 weeks and you're serious about each other to the point of spending all your money??

I think you just got suckered.


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

NextTimeAround said:


> Can you give some examples of what a man should look for?


01) How educated is she?
02) What is her job?
03) Does her job match or exceed her education?

04) What is her income?
05) How well does she live?
06) Does her income match her lifestyle?
07) When she buys things, what payment does she use?
08) If using credit card every time, does she carry a balance between months?

09) What type of car does she drive?
10) What is her driving style?
11) Does she smoke?
12) Does she drink?
13) Does she do other drugs?
14) What is her opinion of her parents?
15) Where does she see herself in 10 years?

16) How does she treat waiters and waitresses?
17) How does she talk about her friends?
18) Do animals like her?
19) How well does she interact with animals?

Everybody should try to find the answers to these questions. A lot of them are subjective. I think they fit into 4 general categories as indicated by the spaces.

Career and Motivation
One of my friends has a fine arts degree in drama and her job is some kind of coordination thing for Big Brothers and Big Sisters. IMO, that job exceeds her education even though it's not related to her education. I think she is moving up in life, and that's a good sign. 
I also know someone who has a degree in chemistry and he works a crap job in a paint store. I see that as extremely negative because he's not moving forward in life (yet). 

Living in Reality
Money and lifestyle give a good sense of how realistic a person is. It's fine if a doctor drives a BMW. It might be a bit of a problem if a secretary drives a new BMW. Of course someone could just have that 1 nice thing and cheap out on everything else, so look at the whole package. Drives a BMW, has a new iPhone, wears brand name clothing, makes only $30,000 per year. This doesn't add up. Are they one of those people who thinks borrowed money is free money? 
People who love saving and making money tend to think about money rather than thinking about the things money buys, so try asking a question about money. "Should I use extra money to pay my mortgage or should I use that for my 401k?" Even though I personally think one of those answers is stupid, either answer is acceptable. Answers like "I try not to think about that stuff" are huge red flags. They're on a sinking ship and they will pull you down with them.

Mental Problem
It's possible to do the right things for the wrong reasons, so always ask why a person does things. Why did you buy a BMW? Some people buy them because they genuinely like the car. They like the look of the car, they like the sound of the car, and they like driving the car. Those are good reasons to buy one because they are internally motivated - the person is doing something because they want to. If they bought it to show that they have money, then that's a huge red flag that they have low self esteem. 
Other red flags are things like refusing to eat at McDonalds just because it's McDonalds or refusing to shop at Walmart because only poor people shop there. I don't shop at Walmart either, but I avoid it because I hate standing in line for an hour every time. That's a legit reason to not go there.
Smoking, drinking, and other drugs are generally used to mask existing mental problems. It's no secret that about 90% of schizophrenic people smoke and about 80% of bipolar people smoke. Alcohol is often used to mask anxiety and panic disorders. A person's problem will usually be the opposite of what the drug does. Alcohol makes people relax, so a person who loves alcohol a lot probably has an anxiety problem. A person who loves amphetamine is probably very depressed and unmotivated.

Social Skills and Parenting
People will act nice if they want something from you. The people who are genuinely nice are also nice when it does not benefit them. This can be seen by looking at how a person treats waiters and waitresses. 
Listening to a person talk about their friends or pets will give you an idea of why they spend time with others. If they mostly have positive things to say, then that's probably a good sign. What does it tell you when a person has mostly negative things to say about their friends? Why do they spend time with people they don't like? Are they starved for attention? Draw your own conclusions.
I think it's important to watch how someone interacts with animals. Animals can't clearly express what they are thinking, so a person's behavior strongly depends on empathy and intuition. Some people have really good intuition and motherly instincts; they will put fresh water in the dog's bowl even though the dog will gladly drink the old water. I would prefer fresh water if I were a dog --> the dog might prefer fresh water. You can also get a sense of _how_ a person tries to control others by watching the way they control a dog. Some people will use Operant Conditioning - reward good behavior and punish bad behavior. Some people will approach the animal as a friend - come inside the house and hang out with me. Some people have absolutely no social skills - yell at the dog to get in the house then threaten the dog. Some people don't have any control at all - the dog doesn't want to come inside with you, nor is the dog scared of the consequences of ignoring you. What kind of parent do you think that person would be? They would be the parent of the kid who screams in Walmart and knocks things off the shelf without a care in the world.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> For those young men that disagree, remember that the business
> world is made of many older Gentlemen like me and when we are
> asking open ended questions to determine your character.


I don't think I'd ask the question, but speaking as another old guy/employer, I wonder what it would say about the character of a female job applicant to expect her way to be paid as the natural order of things? 

Compete with males in the job market by day - Expect these males to pay your way by night?


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> You know that no one would ask the question during an interview but you
> can learn a lot about someone's character asking open ended questions.
> Another strategy is team interviewing, at all levels (including VP's) along
> with one on one interviews. If your a young man getting promoted from
> ...


Because we have learned that a man does not fall in love with us or even prefer us over other women who don't pay their own way. what we have learned is that when a man is really hot on a woman he will everything he can to keep her around and to impress her.

I have to admit I would feel like a fool if I went halfies with a guy for 6 months or so only to find out that he left for a woman that he is happy to underwrite everything that they do.

If whether a woman paid 50/50 or whatever ratio actually got figured into the reasons to stay with a woman, we might actually start doing it.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I asked a few young professional ladies at work and they confirmed this expectation.
> Just because they want to get ahead doesn't mean they don't
> want a man to treat them like a lady outside the work place.


Well, character judgements aside, these ladies either have not read or do not agree with modern (and even some not-so-modern) works of etiquette and manners. This even includes Emily Post's latest iteration.

I think the bottom line for me would be who approached whom. We live in a world where it's not uncommon at all for a lady to ask a man out.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> You know that no one would ask the question during an interview but you
> can learn a lot about someone's character asking open ended questions.
> Another strategy is team interviewing, at all levels (including VP's) along
> with one on one interviews.
> ...


So, to summarize:

In a dating relationship, woman=treated "like a lady," man=treated like a bottomless wallet.

Let's say we're looking at a 9 week old relationship like the OP's. The "lady" says, "Let's go see the latest generic chick-flick named after a pop song lyric. We can get some dinner while we're out."

Who pays?

(We can throw a whole bunch of variables into the mix, like the OP taking on the financial burden of a new vehicle at the "lady's" insistence, but let's leave it basic, at least for now.)
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> Grayson I think what I'm saying is nothing has changed.
> 
> It's always been the case and expectation that the man pays.
> It's been like that for ages, thru history.
> ...


So, the answer to my question is...?

ETA: So, you bolded part of your reply. Which still doesn't answer my simple, two word question.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

well, the experience that brought me here is illustrative. My bf reconnected with someone he used to date or more like tried to date.

She kept texting him and he told her that he was dating me. This apparently got her interested and going.

What I noticed was that he was less and less available. And not only was he trying to get me to pay for him (he makes 6 figures and has not dependants) but also even at the end of the date, he couldn't be bothered to wait for the bus (while I'm paying for my bus ticket). However, I saw that he had paid taxi fare for her.

He then had an epiphany with this woman. I know now from getting him to talk about this "just a friend" and from seeing receipts and credit card statements lying about his place that among other dates that he took her on and paid for, in the span of 2 weeks he had paid the bar tab for her and her friends. The first time GBP75 and the second time GBP127.

I asked him what is this pity kiss that she referred to in her e-mail to you. He admitted that that evening when he closed the bar tab, he initiated a kiss to her and she rejected him. Given the messages between them after that and how more attentive was to me --and more generous-- I would guess that he had come to the acceptance that she was always going to friendzone him.

For many months after that, he still called her a friend until I told him to put an end to it or I'll go out find someone else while he could continue engaging in a pretend friendship.

So now tell me, do you think my boyfriend would never have fallen prey to that EA had I been paying for our dates more often?

I don't think so.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> 9 week relationship is still in the early stages of dating.
> It should be the man. He is trying to "Win The Heart" of the girl. Isn't he?
> 
> But he should also be honest. If it's going to break his bank
> ...


So, to again summarize:

A "lady" is entitled to invite a man on a date, yet expect him to pay.

Is this a correct interpretation of your answer?

ETA: Woukd you also expect the honesty you mention to go both ways...for the "lady" to say up front, "Just so you know, my decision as to whether or not you are worthy of my continued attention will be based primarily on your ability to spend money on my every whim, rather than personality, compatibility, my simple enjoyment of your company, etc."?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## SoWhat (Jan 7, 2012)

All I can say is that women who *obviously* have the Princess Attitude are great for me - it's an easy way to weed them out of "potential girlfriend/potential spouse" territory. 

When I was in college, I worked on a farm for just over minimum wage in the morning, nights, and weekends... so I could pay tuition. I was broke all the time.

No way could I afford to pay for *everything.*

I just got a job offer two weeks ago. The salary is going to be very good. 

Why would I want to share those rewards with someone who *certainly* would not be with me when I was struggling? Why would I want someone who would only have me when times were good? 

Why would I want to be with someone who sees her money as her money and my money as our money? 

Why would I want someone whose values in life are so different from mine?

I think it's great that some women are so vocal about it. They let me know who to avoid.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

I will say this. A man who hasn't know the love, and acceptance, of a woman who doesn't give a damn what nickles and dimes he has in his pocket, is a man who's never known true acceptance, has never been truly loved, for exactly who he is.

If you can find a woman who loves you for you, just you, and no additions, the kind of woman who will love you sleeping in a tent as much as she does a mansion, and you in turn recognize how special and rare that is, you'll WANT to give her the sun, stars, and everything in between. She won't have to expect, demand, or even desire it. It will be your natural inclination. 

The rest of the gold diggers, the ones who are selfish, entitled, the ones who are expecting to have their affections bought and paid for at the highest bid, if you end up with one of those? God have mercy on you.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

*Dean* said:


> \
> 
> A long term relationship or marriage is different. But 9 weeks isn't a long term relationship.
> I may be in the minority on TAM but I believe a man should always pay for his date
> and I have very little respect for a man that thinks otherwise.



You do realize that this is the kind of haughty, entitled mentality that only exists in very few places, mostly fat, wealthy, Western nations, no? That the vast majority of the men in the world looking for a wife can't even fathom this kind of spending. 

That's the problem here. The way you, and a few others, are talking about dating applies only to a small percentage of humans on planet Earth. Meanwhile the rest of the world has different courtship rituals that don't involve a man needing to spend money he does not have, to date a woman he likely will never marry.

This thought process is incredibly out of touch with the reality of most people in the world, and is the kind of blind, unrealistic nonsense the West catches so much flack for. Because apparently you have "very little respect" for the majority of men in the world who simply could never afford to be as lavish, and wasteful, in their spending as we are accustomed to in parts of the US, and a few other nations.


----------



## DanglingDaisy (Mar 26, 2012)

I came from two up bringings both traditional and non traditional.

From my experiences early in life(small town),boys became men and started working early in their teens. They usually already had a house,truck and good jobs by the time they settled in their early 20's. Women were as Dean stated, allowed to work,but even when dating,were treated special. At the same,the traditional roles were typical-women didn't work,took care of the family and home.

The exception changed when my father ran away with the babysitter My mother was thrown into raising three kids in the city-and what I was taught later in life...

a)Never let a man pay your way-it sets him up to think he owns you in some way,or that you'll owe him services-go dutch or go home girl. 

b)You need to financially take care of yourself-get an education,if anything happens to your man later in life you already have your career set up-you can weather the storm if he loses his job,or things go bad health wise for either of you.

The lesson I've learned-I thought picking an intellectual type over the traditional or quasi traditional type of guys would be great. My thoughts have changed since meeting my husband. He was cheap when we met-I NOW see those early signs as I sit here with a man who complains more than finding solutions. Will sit and expect me to do all things in and out of the house,child rearing,bringing home the bacon regularily-it's quite sad really. 

I've learned by my being independant, I somehow missed finding a man who is HARD WORKING and values my contributions
inside and outside the home 

I'm sorry, but for the majority of men here who disagree with Dean, I would honestly believe you're similar to my husband in one or more ways. He believes he's entitled to things-and DOESN'T work 50/50 in the relationship and NEVER did. He's shown his true colours. You can treat a woman without pouring out tons of cash-for a guy to ask a woman out and expect her to pay when HE suggested a restaurant-is a cheap bast*rd. You could suggest a beautifully cooked dinner at home,or something romantic.  

This is why if I could do it all over again, I would go for the guy who is ambitious and successful already-who is successful in knowing his limits,but is generous to the one he cares about!

As far as the OP, this is a wreck in the making-she obviously's using you.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

DanglingDaisy said:


> I'm sorry, but for the majority of men here who disagree with Dean, I would honestly believe you're similar to my husband in one or more ways.


So let me get this straight.

You decided to ignore all the signs, and picked a sorry ass husband, but somehow the rest of us are like said sorry ass husband, simply because we disagree with Dean, who believes that a woman, by the sheer virtue of being born with a vagina, is entitled to have cash thrown at her?

Is this the gist?

No, it sounds like you got the bum wrap, because you chose wrong, wish you had a "Dean", and instead of dealing with your own crap the rest of us are, by bitter default, just like your husband.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Post, Elizabeth L., _Emily Post On Etiquette_, Revised Edition. p. 6

"As to who pays, the guidelines are the same as they would be for two friends of the same gender."​


Tuckerman, Nancy and Dunnan, Nancy, _The Amy Vanderbilt Complete Book of Etiquette: 50th Anniversary Edition_. p. 69

"The custom of a man always paying for a woman's meal is no longer the case. While much depends on the particular circumstance, certainly on the first date the person who does the inviting pays the restaurant bill."​


Steward, Marjabelle, _The New Etiquette: Real Manners For Real People In Real Situations_. p. 412

"As a rule, whoever does the asking pays for the first date. If a girl asks a boy out for a casual date, and she does not have much money, he may offer to pay."​


Dunham, Alison, _Everything Dating Book_. p. 127

"The new rules are that the person who does the asking also does the paying"​ 


Fox, Sue, _Etiquette For Dummies_. p.80

"The traditional rule that the man always pays has been replaced by greater equality....In general, however, when it comes to a first date, the person who issues the invitation picks up the tab."​


Ingram, Leah, _ The Everything Etiquette Book_. p. 96

"It's unfair for one person in the relationship to be constantly picking up the tab, but it may also feel weird for the two of you to split the bill."​


Cullen, Ruth and Barbas, Kerren, _The Little Pink Book of Etiquette. _p. 47

"The foremost rule of dating concerns cold, hard cash. As a general rule, the person who asks for the date, pays for the date."​


Morgan, John, _Debrett's New Guide to Etiquette and Modern Manners: The Indispensable Handbook._ p. 191

"The person who instigates the date should expect to pay. The other party should accept gracefully and with thanks, except in situations where she or he has conceded to the invitation only out of politeness..."​


Post, Peter, _Essential Manners for Men: What to Do, When to Do It, and Why._ p. 88

"When it comes to paying the bill at a restaurant, there is a simple rule of thumb; the person who does the inviting pays for the meal."​


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I think the OP couldn't afford his internet anymore ... girlfriend bled him dry.

Just the one post.

In that case? Too deep, too fast. The signs aren't good.

As for the whole 'pay for the privilege of my company' thing in dating a woman? My position is simple ... for as long as you assure the privilege of your company yields privilege, then I have no issues in picking up the tab.

The dates that really matter, the ones where I think you truly connect and bond? Are usually on the cheap if not free.

You can build a sense of security, and to some degree attraction, with a fat wallet, but money doesn't build those moments that I have seen several people on this thread point out. The moments that don't have a price-tag.

And for the record, woman I am currently seeing, snatched the bill from our first date out my hand ... with a big grin. Most of my dates have either offered to split, or have insisted to pay for one or more dates.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*Dean* said:


> No it isn't a correct interpretation of my answer.
> 
> *If the female asks a male out then she should expect to pay.*
> 
> ...


Thank you. Now, some follow up questions:

If, as you say, the woman sets the date, she should expect to pay, would you further agree that, under those circumstances, a "lady" should not take umbrage at the expectation that she should pay?

Would you still consider a woman who does take exception to having to pay under such circumstances can truly be called a "lady" in the manner you appear to have used the term in this thread?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Enginerd (May 24, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> I also want to say that just because there are a few bad apples out there
> doesn't mean a man shouldn't be a Gentleman and pay for his dates.
> 
> For those young men that disagree, remember that the business
> ...



I respectfully disagree with your business analogy.

Honor in business is a thing of the past. You must be near retirement because today's executives are not rewarded for their character or hiring of people with character. Its all about skirting US tax laws, screwing suppliers, converting permanent postions into contractors, completely outsourcing jobs, cutting back on benefits or suing your competition in order to meet quarterly profit expectations. I hate what its become, but its the new reality. 

The model of putting your women on a pedastel was logically nullified by the womens rights movement. I don't see how one can be in favor of equal rights and then rationally expect an "equal" to pay for everything. This expectation implies that the women is the weaker of the sexes and we all know that isn't true. Don't we?

Peace


----------



## lovelygirl (Apr 15, 2012)

*Dean* said:


> I always pay no matter what.
> Doesn't matter if we invite someone skiing, going on vacation, lunch,
> dinner or if we get invited by someone else ........I always try and pay.
> That is just me.


Very romantic and very gentlemanish!!


----------



## ShawnD (Apr 2, 2012)

*Dean* said:


> It should be the man. He is trying to "Win The Heart" of the girl. Isn't he?


If she doesn't want to sleep with him within the first hour, then that relationship is a total write off. "Winning someone over" means they initially don't like you.


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

*Dean* said:


> 9 week relationship is still in the early stages of dating.
> It should be the man. He is trying to "Win The Heart" of the girl. Isn't he?
> 
> But he should also be honest. If it's going to break his bank
> ...


When my friend was dating her (now husband), he wooed her by taking her out to dinner a few times a week, tickets to concerts, drinks after work... she was having a grand old time! When they moved in together she discovered he was up to his eyeballs in debt. Owed $50k in credit card debt alone. This wasn't just from taking her out, it was a lifestyle he'd formed for himself over the years. He was on a reasonably high salary at a corporate job but knew nothing about how to _manage_ money. 

Anyway, she vowed to help work through the debt with him but she vented to me one day with anger. They are fine together, they are both really lovely people but just because someone is splashing out the money, doesn't necessarily mean they actually have any. There is a different between "rich" and "wealthy". Wealthy being long term sustainable. 

So, I guess I'm agreeing with you there Dean - that a man who lives and pays within his means and is honest, could be the way to go. If the woman doesn't respect this, they likely aren't a good match anyway.

As far as financials go, there's also a lot to be said about attitude and potential. And it has to be considered how one would deal with things if low financial times did hit as a couple. Does she up and leave because she no longer feels "special"?


----------



## heartsbeating (May 2, 2011)

Enginerd said:


> I respectfully disagree with your business analogy.
> 
> Honor in business is a thing of the past. You must be near retirement because today's executives are not rewarded for their character or hiring of people with character. Its all about skirting US tax laws, screwing suppliers, converting permanent postions into contractors, completely outsourcing jobs, cutting back on benefits or suing your competition in order to meet quarterly profit expectations. I hate what its become, but its the new reality.
> 
> ...


My husband was asked at his interview what motivates him to achieve. He replied "My wife and providing for my family." 

They are of a more old school mentality and this answer fit with their culture. He didn't answer with this in mind, he had no idea how they would take it, he was just being himself.

Around the same time he was interviewing with them, he had another more progressive/start up company flirting with him too. That company would no doubt want to hear something about achieving targets etc. The money was slightly more with this company but he knew it would mean working more after hours and potential burn out. With the company he accepted, it's more a work/life balance and better for long term (all being well).

Cultural fits go both ways. It has to be right for the interviewee as much as the interviewer.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Enginerd said:


> The model of putting your women on a pedastel was logically nullified by the womens rights movement. I don't see how one can be in favor of equal rights and then rationally expect an "equal" to pay for everything. This expectation implies that the women is the weaker of the sexes and we all know that isn't true. Don't we?
> 
> Peace


It appears to be a matter of equal...when convenient.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

jaquen said:


> So let me get this straight.
> 
> You decided to ignore all the signs, and picked a sorry ass husband, but somehow the rest of us are like said sorry ass husband, simply because we disagree with Dean, who believes that a woman, by the sheer virtue of being born with a vagina, is entitled to have cash thrown at her?
> 
> ...


You have apparently missed a lot of Dean's point of view. He also says that when a woman invites a man out, she should pay for the date.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

EleGirl said:


> You have apparently missed a lot of Dean's point of view. He also says that when a woman invites a man out, she should pay for the date.



Thanks, but I read and comprehending his view just fine. And if you seriously think his that little amendment represents his core views, I'd suggest that someone else in this conversation missed the point.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

jaquen said:


> Thanks, but I read and comprehending his view just fine. And if you seriously think his that little amendment represents his core views, I'd suggest that someone else in this conversation missed the point.


Indeed, while some may see it as splitting hairs, I think it's worth noting that Dean didn't say the woman should pay for the date, but that she should expect to pay for the date. Dean strikes me as someone who's very careful in choosing his precise words. So, that phrasing, coupled with Dean's previous posts led me to the inference that if a woman sets the date, she should be prepared to pay, but that the man is still expected to step in and pick up the expense. After all, Dean did also say:



*Dean* said:


> I may be in the minority on TAM but I believe a man should *always *pay for his date
> and I have very little respect for a man that thinks otherwise.


(Emphasis mine, but the words are Dean's.)

So, the idea of the woman paying for the date if she's the one who sets it would appear to be contradictory with the notion that a man worth respect always pays for his date. Until you look at the phrasing of the statements. Which leads to the conclusion that the woman should never pay, regardless of circumstances.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

I'm going to put up my own anecdotes and observations as I think of them:

1. When I was living with my bf in NYC, his brother came for T-giving with his "new" gf. I remember his mother later complaining that he had paid for her flight (from San Francisco) even though he was at that time unemployed. I can't remember how long that relationship lasted.

2. I can think of two ex's in my 20s who bragged to me about the expensive dinners and jewellery that they bought their ex's. I have heard from other women how their current bf's do that as well.

Perhaps some men can explain to me why a guy would be so proud of the money that he spent on an ex when that relationship no longer exists.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

NextTimeAround said:


> I'm going to put up my own anecdotes and observations as I think of them:
> 
> 1. When I was living with my bf in NYC, his brother came for T-giving with his "new" gf. I remember his mother later complaining that he had paid for her flight (from San Francisco) even though he was at that time unemployed. I can't remember how long that relationship lasted.
> 
> ...


Bragging, I don't get. Although I can see complaining about significant time and money spent on what was ultimately a failure of a relationship.


----------

