To expect him to pay?

[AtSea1979]

This is going to sound terrible I know but for some reason I feel it.
Went on first date with a guy last week, paid £20 babysitter, and met him for drinks, we both bought a round.
He told me he had a lovely time and would I like to go out for dinner next week, I said yes.
Tonight, I paid babysitter another £20, and went out for meal, when bill came I got my purse out to pay (total £55) my half but then he put £30 down and I was surprised he didn't tell me to put my purse away. Even though I would have said no and paid half I still feel like he should have paid the full.
I know they are my kids and my responsibility but I still wonder whether I want to date someone again who is so tight.
AIB completely U? (and date I say, sexist?) Or would others feel similar?

Tightness,is not paying fair share.avoiding paying.if woman expects man to pay she's tight
Relying on outmoded notion of etiquette,and a belief if man doesn't pay he wont get 2nd date
Well its just putting a price on yourself,and hoping man pay.selling yourself for a dinner

BoneyBackJefferson I'm not trying to prevent discussion - if only I had that power.

I'm asking one particular poster what their fascination with me is, because there seems to be one and I'd love to know.

Sorry if you've blundered into it. I've done it too. Confusing, isn't it?

Rest assured, my argument is not weak.

Limited

IMO "if he wants to be with me" is a weak argument.

To those saying "Whoever asked the other out should pay"
It seems to me that it is (in the same way that men should pay) expected that the man should ask woman out on the first date.

It also seems to me that the man is expected to ring the woman after several days (but not too long don't want to get red flagged) to express an interest and ask the woman out on a second date. So he therefore should using your rule pay again.

So the question is this when does the woman actually ask the man out?
and When should the woman actually pay?

I'm of the mind that the one asking will hopefully pay on the first date but I don't insist and will always offer to split. Probably because that's my mentality when I do ask. Maybe because I've dated men and women in the past, it's never really been an issue. I've asked both out, though more women in fairness and the men in question turned me down. DP paid on our first date, which was a lovely surprise, my paying on our second was a lovely surprise for him since the women he dated had all been of the mind that they were princesses who'd never pay for anything on dates -even the second, third and fourth.

I think going in with an intention to split is best, you may be pleasantly surprised if you feel the asked should but you are prepared for fairness otherwise. Wasn't there a woman who never intended to pay anything for ant of her dates and got the shock of her life when the guy she was with took her phone as payment? He was a twat, for sure, and I hope he got done for theft but I also thought she was a leech and a user and I hope she was named and shamed to warn others.

And whomever didn't pay on the first date (if not split) should 100% pay on the second-regardless of who asks. Of course, it should be within budget for both as mentioned before my friend used to get shafted by one of her partners who insisted on expensive on her dates and inexpensive/nothing on his.

kim and boney I cba beyond saying men I dated paid for the pleasure of my company.

Maybe I'm a very fascinating creature. Why does it bother you so much?

I've always adopted a pattern of taking it in turns to pay for stuff rather than rigidly splitting things 50/50.

I appreciate that on a first date you might not get a chance to reciprocate or get them to, but that's why it's a good idea to go for coffee or drinks, rather than a sit-down meal, because you can take it in turn to get the drinks (and escape more quickly if you need to).

While the issue of fairness is important to me, I wouldn't expect my date to be factoring in the cost of my babysitter.

Sounds more like you are being an escort than a date.

That's quite an unpleasant thing to say, isn't it kim147? But I forgive you, because I have no idea what kind of difficult place you might be in that might be driving you to say horrible things to people.

This is why bullshit such as The Rules and Men Are From Mars should be binned. They make everything so combative and fraught with double meaning.

Mean what you say and say what you mean. It sometimes raises eyebrows but means that when someone does like you, they like you, not the image you're presenting. It is also more likely to result in them being honest about themselves or slinking away (either is a win-win).

Men Paid for the pleasure of your company?did you charge by the hour or was it rounded up to be all inclusive

limited

It doesn't bother me at all. I asked in the context of the thread, if it offends I apologise.
But as someone who has paid thousands (literally) for "the pleasure of a woman's company." I was just curious to see if there were any answers beyond "because I'm worth it" and "because its expected/tradition".

And TBH if I had just wanted sex there are many cheaper, quicker, alternatives out there.

PoundingTheStreets
"I've always adopted a pattern of taking it in turns to pay for stuff rather than rigidly splitting things 50/50.

I appreciate that on a first date you might not get a chance to reciprocate or get them to, but that's why it's a good idea to go for coffee or drinks, rather than a sit-down meal, because you can take it in turn to get the drinks (and escape more quickly if you need to)."

But with going for coffee we are back to being seen as cheap/tight and up pops that damned red flag again.

kim and scottishmummy are you accusing me of prostitution?

2. insist on paying and worse, risk being seen as a feminist (we all know how popular they are!) There is nothing wrong with feminists. However, this is the type of thing that gives feminists a bad name

I wasn't condoning that kind of thinking. I'm just saying I would be wary of wearing my "I heart feminism" badge on the first date because so many men misunderstand what it means.

And of course I would offer to pay.

Not in my book. The last thing I want to do on a first date is go for a full-on meal. What if he's a complete idiot or really boring and I have to sit there inwardly crying because there are another two courses to go?

My first date with current DP was for coffee. Fortunately, we both seem to have similar attitudes to equality and money.

Im not accusing in least,I'm asking how the men pay for you,how transaction works
Do you do mental arithmetic,each hour he pays something fir yiu eg drink,cinema,food
Or do you wait til end if evening to tot up whats he's paid you.all inclusive

PoundingTheStreets
"My first date with current DP was for coffee. Fortunately, we both seem to have similar attitudes to equality and money."

That is the key, I suppose if you ask someone to go for coffee and they accuse you of being tight then at least you know where you stand.

When you said this:

Kim 147
Sounds more like you are being an escort than a date.

Scottishmummy
Men Paid for the pleasure of your company?did you charge by the hour or was it rounded up to be all inclusive

kim147

What's the difference? Men pay for your company.

limitedperiodonly

You said that men paid for your company.

And now you seem surprised that posters have pointed out the obvious.

I know what i posted,i dont need reminded.i queried how the transaction work
Given men pay,i wondered do you have an idea if whats adequate,whats the minimum payment
Or are you flexible about monies spent,so long as he pays?Would nandos be adequate payment