To think it's a bit weird to expect a guy to make the first move and pay for dinner

[Skustew]

If you post memes on bookface talking about treating both genders equally?

I understand some people are a bit old school and their idea of how men should treat a woman comes from the 50s. But why can't some people see the double standards they have?

Some? Maybe things are like that for people that play the poor little woman from the start of the relationship.

When it comes to dating, of course the man pays. The man should pay, the woman has control over whether the date takes place and whether it leads on to anything. This is exactly what feminism means - the woman has power and control, the man does not

I don't even know where to start with that. It's that ludicrous. On simply too many levels. 😱

ps as for the guy taking four women out for dinner in one week I'd say that he's giving all four the impression that his interest is more focused than it could really be so if that guy is broke, I have not got much sympathy.

And if you don't believe me Stuskew, I'm not reinforcing outdated views but stating facts:

www.independent.co.uk/life-style/women-household-chores-men-do-more-gender-inequality-home-study-a7969306.html

I think preferring a man to ask you out is perhaps to be expected, along engendered stereotype lines. But to expect a man to ask you - I find that attitude a little pathetic if I'm honest.

It is usually peddled by the same women who spout bullshit like 'if he's that interested he will ask you' which is basically just a way of diminishing confident women.

I see nothing wrong with either sex doing the asking. It's no more a mans duty than a woman's.

As for paying, I think unless one person is significantly more wealthy, costs should be split. When I was involved many years ago with someone earning 6x my salary, he paid for most things. Given our relative financial positions I felt that was fair. But it was pure economics, nothing to do with him being a man.

It's women who expect men to conform to gender stereotypes like paying for meals who then get surprised when those same men expect them to carry all the mental load and unequal share of work at home

Not in my experience at all (which is not a universal truth obviously!)

Men as a group have greater wealth at the expense of women

Aren't women under 35 richer than men as a group due to increased education?

Just because something is happening it doesn't mean it's not an outdated practice! Of course if so many women are insisting on a man paying the inequality is likley to persist.

BriilantMistake - I see your point, but if you didn't have much money, then fine. Just suggest a coffee or go for a walk. It's the taking initiative and the behaviour that count for far more than anything else.

My DH never expected me to pay for anything which certain people on here may find chauvinistic. However, what I would say in retrospect, (now at the age of 40 and 4 kids later), is that attitude also translated into him not expecting me to have the responsibility of working between or around the DC either. My life would have been a lot more difficult and stressful if I'd been expected to work on top of 4 DC. Four nine month pregnancies and I bf them all for nine months - that's six years out my life before you even start on anything else!! Actually it was more like 10 years because they had two-year gaps between them. How's that "equal" exactly?

So many women end up having to rush back to work before they're ready - "doing it all" and think this is equality! So many women on here with separate bank accounts and this kind of thing - for "independence". Sorry, I just don't buy it. It's allowing men to have their cake and eat it, imo.

I agree with you Dakotawest. The men I've met who were happy to pay for a dinner considered it no big deal, a cheap at the price for the pleasure of good company. I think if I get any sense that a man is fake-generous, ie, he'll pay but he'll be quick enough to complain about the man being expected to pay (even though he offered) then I slap down my card and insist on paying half. I get a sense.

people that play the poor little woman from the start of the relationship

I find this offensive. Allowing yourself to be treated once by a man, friend, parent, anyone(!) does not mean you are playing "poor little woman" and I think it's actually quite sad that you can't accept generosity without it making you feel inferior.

I abhor the idea that men should pay for everything, always and can't understand that mentality in a woman. But him treating you once, come on! As someone said earlier, going Dutch on a first date isn't going to suddenly mean that men and women are equal!

Sorry, I just don't buy it. It's allowing men to have their cake and eat it, imo

In what way? I've my own account, I earn substantially more than my husband. I went back to work because I wished to, I could have given up and lived quite comfortably. Surely you chose to have four children, you chose to breastfeed them all. It was not his sole decision to keep you bare foot and pregnant in the kitchen?

When it comes to dating, of course the man pays. The man should pay, the woman has control over whether the date takes place and whether it leads on to anything. This is exactly what feminism means - the woman has power and control, the man does not.

This is such a twisting of what feminism is.

What’s your justification for “of course men should pay”?

gl1terati that is good team work if the husband isemotionally intelligent enough to understand the value of your role within the well functioning team. the problem arises when successful men are too obtuse to acknowledge they are fathers without it having impacted upon their career and yet also being blind to the obstacles women face with motherhood and career and earning less and sexism in the workplace.

Just because something is happening it doesn't mean it's not an outdated practice!

No, Skustew but stating it as a fact (which I have proved it is) isn't reinforcing outdated views, it's simply stating a reality. By your token, would stating that there are more male politicians than female also be "reinforcing outdated views"?

My father (who for a man born in the 1920s was way ahead of his time in equality terms) brought me up to believe I could be or do anything I wanted. That none of it was dependant on a man. And that I should never rely on a man for financial security, because things change but more importantly because I didn't need to.

It disappoints me greatly to read women writing posts like g1itteratis above and trying to present what they have as being the best possible deal. It might suit you, personally I would be bored shitless at home all day with children, and I value my career and independence more.

so basically not everybody's husband is evolved enough to make that arrangement work. And while working and being a mother may be very hard work, it's not that you're working twice as hard as a sahm for fun it's that you still have the power to make decisions.

And while working and being a mother may be very hard work, it's not that you're working twice as hard as a sahm for fun it's that you still have the power to make decisions

Exactly. I can't get past the poster with four kids comment that he didn't expect her to work on top of four kids. No mention of wishing to work. No mention of her desire to have those kids.

I value an equal relationship. I value the ability to earn my own money, to contribute financially to our family.. I valued sharing childcare and housework and working as a team. I married a man who did not take issue with that equality, who did not expect me to stay home making babies and cleaning house. Others feel differently and that's their call. But in reality it's seldom an equal relationship when this dynamic is at play.

Charisman - yes I agree it's about emotional intelligence.

Bluntness - the point is that I had the choice to not return to work because I could depend on my DH and vice versa. There is nothing wrong with that. Who else should I have been dependent on - the government? Some random childminders in a daycare centre? A nanny? My boss giving me flexible hours? These are the choices women have to make - which one makes you more "equal?"

It disappoints me greatly to read women writing posts like g1itteratis above and trying to present what they have as being the best possible deal. It might suit you, personally I would be bored shitless at home all day with children, and I value my career and independence more

why does it disappoint you? You are able to make different choices, shouldn't we be happy that we are able to do so?
I hate this patronising and smug way of fake-agreeing with SAHM but putting them down at the same time. It's such an outdated view of the 80s. I work by the way, but I find depressing any parent who is proud to be bored "shitless" at the idea of spending all day with their kids.

glitterati

My DH never expected me to pay for anything which certain people on here may find chauvinistic. However, what I would say in retrospect, (now at the age of 40 and 4 kids later), is that attitude also translated into him not expecting me to have the responsibility of working between or around the DC either. My life would have been a lot more difficult and stressful if I'd been expected to work on top of 4 DC. Four nine month pregnancies and I bf them all for nine months - that's six years out my life before you even start on anything else!! Actually it was more like 10 years because they had two-year gaps between them. How's that "equal" exactly?

The flipside of this is that when the man leaves his wife, the woman then has the responsibility of majority of childcare, but also needs to find a job when she has been out of the job market for years and doesn't have a career, and has no work pension. She usually has to sell her home to give ex half the equity as well.

It's the expectation theme again and again.
If we 'expect' specific behaviours of each other based on our genders, then we are reinforcing what a man or woman 'should' be.
If it works for one man to stay home and look after the kids, or for one woman to pay for dinner because it's her gift to a friend, or partner then I can't see any issue.
My issue is with phrases like 'of course a man should...', and 'if he was a gentleman he would...'
If a man said 'of course a woman should stay at home...' then he would be rightly castigated.

Not necessarily though babycino. It's very circumstantial, you really can't generalise.

I guess the important thing is to be honest about what you want out of life and find a partner who has the same mentality.

My issue, Dakota, is with anyone assuming a patronising tone that they're luckier than others because they could depend on their husband to allow them to stay at home.

I don't view that as being a fortunate position. I've always worked. As did my mother, nanna, and great grandmother. I prefer my own situation, I would not have wanted to give up my career under any circumstances.

That might not be for everyone, but I don't think it helps women to present wanting financial independence as wrong, or telling them their relationships clearly aren't great if they are going out to work!

It's women who expect men to conform to gender stereotypes like paying for meals who then get surprised when those same men expect them to carry all the mental load and unequal share of work at home

Absolutely. I have been genuinely surprised to see really bright, switched-on women I know cooing about what an 'old-fashioned gentleman' their new boyfriend is - and then being shocked, just shocked that he turns out to have some other 'old-fashioned' views that they don't find so charming. I've seen it happen over and over again.