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?

I know I'm late to the party but:

All this 'women want equality so they should pay' is rot a lot of the time - women still get paid a third less than men. Still think they should pay half? Agreeing to that makes you as much a misogynist as the next chauvinist. Give me equal pay and then I'll sort the bill, thanks very much.

On average, women may earn a third less, but no woman is entirely average. We all sit somewhere along the distribution bell curve. Women's bell curves may be shifted in relation to men's bell curves, but when we are dealing with specific people, that is irrelevant. I am a specific woman who earns significantly more than the average man.

If I went on a date and the man said that he should pay because I'm a woman and therefore probably earn less than him, do you really think that you would see that as a positive recognition of the inequality in our society? I'd see it as a positive recognition of a patronising, sexist twat.

Of course we should pay half. Anything else is condoning behaviours that treat women as someone who should be protected and needs looking after. Someone who needs to be protected and looked after isn't going to be trusted with hard-nosed business decisions. If you want equal pay and general equality than every aspect of sexism - whether it benefits us or not - must be challenged.

.

Tight would have been if he had laid £22.50 on the table.

Your having to fork out for sitters isn't his problem.

CorygalWed
OP - regardless of the sexual politics, I think men who don't pay for anyone except themselves are mean: I would think that of anyone, male or female. I don't like mean people much, and I suspect you don't.

So if the man HAD paid the full cost of the meal, would the OP have been mean, because she didn't pay for anyone at all, not even herself?

Such bizarre views on this thread. I agree with previous poster that says if women expect to be paid for on dats they should make this clear when accepting the date.

Personally, I like to pay my own way with everything - this has included paying my own way in uni, refusing parental help with wedding/buying a house etc. The way I see it, once you start letting people pay for you, you "owe" them, and whether that is as simple a thing as pretending to have a nice time when you're not it's still uncomfortable for me.

I would prefer and I'm AMAZED other people wouldn't to have the complete autonomy at any point to say "oh look at the time, must dash, here's my share of the bill" at any point, but when you're expecting someone to pay for your meal, basic manners wouldn't permit this.

Oh and I don't think tight is going halves. Tight would be going through the bill and saying "well you had the garlic bread so you need to pay an extra 2.50".

@Minnie

Can’t he try to impress her with his personality, his wit, his consideration, his intelligence, his achievements and whole raft of other potentially positive character traits, you know the kind of things that sow the seeds for a successful long term relationship, or does impressing you first and foremost amount to his ability to flex his financial muscle? In your eyes does romance = hand in pocket. What if he is on a low income or for whatever reason can’t afford to pay for the whole evening, or suggests that you go on a cheap and cheerful picnic down the park, would you turn on your heels because he is ‘tight’ or should he not even bother dating until his finances can allow it?

Thankfully when I was dating most of the women did not subscribe to these Victorian values, they would have been aghast at not paying their way, no games, not running off to the bathroom to hide while the bill magically disappears, no feigning offers to pay while fully expecting to pay nothing, no moaning about the cost of a visit to the hairdressers or citing national pay averages across the gender divide, equating going Dutch with being stingy or tight. There were a few women I dated who refused to buy even a drink, fine, but it speaks volumes about their sense of entitlement and the rather nauseating ‘because I am worth it’ attitude.

Its rather depressing in this day and age that there are still women who are financially independent still expecting a free ride. Equality eh, great until it gets a little bit inconvenient.

YABVU.

I always paid my way when I was dating, even after three years dp and I usually split, although sometimes he treats me as he earns more than I do.

One of the reasons I always split the bill when dating was that I didn't want them to think that I 'owed' them anything at the end of the evening, and the other reason was that I wasn't always sure if it would turn into a regular thing, so I would've felt embarrassed at letting them pay, knowing full well that I wasn't 100% sure I'd see them again and be able to pick up the next bill in return.

If you're strapped for cash invite him on a cheaper date, go to a gallery or make a picnic.

YANBU this had nothing to do with gender equality but just basic good manners. This was not a first date but a second and not a mutual decision to get together but a very specific invitation from one party to another party to go out for dinner. If OP had done the inviting then she should have been prepared to pay and if unable to afford it, I would assume she wouldn't make the original invite but instead choose an activity more appropriate to her budget. This works both ways and is not a gender issue and doesn't just apply to dates but to any invitation from one to another. When the discussion is a general 'what shall we do...and the decision to eat /drink/night club made after both parties have made a mutual agreement to enjoy that activity together, then there is no invitee and thus each pays there own. To be INVITED and then expected to pay is worse than tight its really appalling manners ! It goes without saying that it is equally important for the invitee to offer payment and equally good manners for 'inviter' to refuse.

The Ladies who are arguing that the OP should go strictly half half are clearly not into romantic gestures or basic decorum. If the OP and her date meet more than once, at which point are they going to start treating each other with a bit of generosity, or should they go half every single time they meet? Claims of that women should behave like absolute equals are complete BS at this moment in time. Take a look at our so called equality in the workplace, pay levels, promotions, pressure on conforming to body stereotypes, Hollywood, and so on. Once we have smashed our way through those ceilings, we can look at stripping away any romantic or generous gestures from the dating scene. I get paid way less than my DH and probably spend way more on so called women 'essentials' (basic hair cuts are at least twice the cost my DH is expected to pay). We have never gone Dutch with each other, yet we have always been generous and attentionate to each other within our means. Seriously...

he asks you out he pays end of. especially on a 2nd date.

stuff all this mean-ness etc it's about basic manners.

He wantd to arrange the next date tonight so I'm pretty sure there will be one, in fact he's already text.

So he's already making moves to ask her again. Does that mean all you lot who think however asks should pay believe this bloke should continue to pay. She's onto a good think and can just sit back and continually wait to be invited out on that basis.

Wouldn't surprise me if blokes have their own expectations if self worth and if they see somebody else expecting to be paid for, it doesn't progress any further, quite rightly so. I'd do the some if somebody expect me to pay.

Either we we men are equal or we are not?

*either we are equal to men or we are not. Selective feminism is doing our sex a disservice.

I think some ladies are under the impression that the OP is looking to freeload every single time. She is only asking if it is unreasonable that he should offer to treat her on one occasion.
OP, if I were you, I would suggest that you do something a bit cheaper like a coffee or gallery and let it take its course. In future it is often better to meet on a 1st or 2nd date for coffee. This way, you can figure each other out without incurring too many costs and do restaurants later on.
I stand by my comments that Dutch style on 2nd or 3rd dates are very offputting.

No, sorry, saying that generally women get paid less so shouldn't have to pay halves on dates is a cop out.

If you genuionely can't afford to go halves on a date say so!

He says "you fancy going out for dinner"
You say "I would, but I am stuck in a low paid job cos of the patriarchy and all that so can't afford it"
He says "on me"

If you can afford to go halves on a date then just go halves and have a bit of self respect

What's the problem?

I would have felt awkward if a date had tried to pay. Like he wanted me to be the little women or something. I have a job and I am more than capable of paying for my own meal

YABU

Ardiente
I stand by my comments that Dutch style on 2nd or 3rd dates are very offputting.

I imagine the reverse is also offputting to many men too.

SuperFlyHigh does that mean if a friend asked you if you fancied a meal out, you'd except them to pay for you?

What an odd outlook.

Im sorry but just to plonk 30 quid on the table and not even have the manners to say "sorry do you mind if we split bill im a bit strapped for cash at the moment" I think is very rude! My god what happened to a bit of romance! That doesn't make a woman a "freeloader", the majority of women certainly don't expect to be paid for all the time, but its a first date, and its just a romantic gesture. (and good manners).
This isn't about women expecting to be paid for all the time..its about the op feeling a little dejected because this has happened. If it was me I would be put off, especially as he put the money down and didn't say anything.

Susyb30

Im sorry but just to plonk 30 quid on the table and not even have the manners to say "sorry do you mind if we split bill im a bit strapped for cash at the moment" I think is very rude! My god what happened to a bit of romance!

So does romance only work one way? The man might have found it romantic if the OP had said "no, put your money away, I'll get this".

Also, why should he say he is strapped for cash rather than he just didn't want to pay the whole bill? A lie would be preferable than a reasonable expectation that they'd make the same contribution?

Maybe it's generational? I'm in my late twenties and would never expect a man to pay. In fact I think those of you suggesting he should- or worse, coming up with ways to disappear when the bill arrives- are pretty entitled. Maybe someone of my mothers generation would feel differently?