to prefer a man to pay on the first date?

[partie]

I am a woman. I barely go in first dates. When I do I always offer to split and my offer is genuine, and I become prepared to split but I always prefer they pay for the first date and then I grab the second.

The main reasons for this is that is shows they are not stingy, have a genuine interest in me, and in the future if we became a couple it would signal that they would be willing to help me out should I ever become jobless instead of seeing finances as completely separate. This is security I need from a relationship and it would work both ways.

Do you prefer a man to pay on the first date? I am not asking if men should or are obligated, only what your preference is.

YABU- I prefer to split/ I pay
YANBU - I would prefer the man pays

I do think it's to have that preference. But those excuses are bs.

I think all this evens-stevens first date business is all well and good in very boring theory land.. But let's be real here for a minute. Which man has the more attractive qualities of these two? Man A who approaches you with "Can I take you out for dinner?" or man B whose attitude is more, "see you in the pub - your round."

Honestly, Man B. He seems low pressure, fun, someone who treats me as an equal, as a.human and wants to get to know me. I'd worry that Man A is the kind of dude who really wants me to know that he's in control. Definitely potential icky alpha male bullshit vibes from A. Might be swayed if he seems like a genuinely nice person but would be cautious and would probably ask to go halves.

So, OP, would you be happy with this
exchange?

Him: Can I get this,or would you like to split it?

You: You get this, and I’ll get the next date.

Him: Ah. Then we’ll split it.

fortunately as generations progress fewer and fewer women subscribe to this 1950s and before type view

I wouldn’t be so sure. Look at the success of people like Mrs Hinch. She’s made a fortune from telling women how to clean. I went to my local Tesco’s the other day and they had canvas bags by the tills with “hinch haul” printed on them. I’m not a fan myself but you can’t deny her success.

Look at how many people employ cleaners now and one of the most often given reasons is “it saves arguing over housework” which tells me that no, men aren’t happy to step up and do their part. They’d rather just pay someone else (also usually a woman) to do it for them.

Decent men have always shared household chores etc. My grandad did and he was born in 1915! We shouldn’t need “society” to tell us (or dictate to us) how to be a decent partner. Whether in the 1950’s or in the 2020’s. If you’re in a relationship where you truly feel things are “equal” good for you, I’m glad it’s working for you. I personally prefer to divide things up based on our strengths or weaknesses in those areas. That’s not wrong, it’s just different.

The 1920s have called and asked for you too return.

@Dacadactyl Ignore all the rude and judgemental comments. DH and I are the same.

Some people only believe in a woman’s right to choose how to love as long as she’s making the choice they believe is the right one.

If you’re happy and it works for you, that’s great. You’re not forcing anyone else to live that way.

*live not love

"The 1920s have called and asked for you too return"

Ooh it's the 1920s calling this time, is it? I feel a Charleston coming on....

Isn't it interesting how those who value themselves so highly on the sole basis of their own currency transactions are the ones calling people "thots" "lesser" embarrassments of women" "no pride". Or the tedious and predictable "oh, the 1950's for you eh,eh?"

Whereas those quite happy to feel self worth without the need to define it by how much dinner they pay for, are all saying "hey, it might not be for you, and that's ok".

Interesting. The "I'm so validated, but you're worthless and a sponger" are a delightful crowd. They also haven't seemed to grasp that very few of us NEED this set up. There's pearl clutching at "where's your back up plan?" As if I would be destitute were it not for my white knight DH. Very much not the case.

Like PP said, some people aren't capable of being anything other than abusive, if someone is happily living a way they couldn't.

TwinsAndTiramisu

Yet you considered it OK to be patronising to posters upthread,
Calling us my dear, not having the crayons etc.

Don't try and pretend that you have some sort of moral high ground.

You have been giving as good as you have got.

Er, no.

There's a difference between a poster asking the same repetitive question over and over, for the same information to be explained 6 times, and commenting on that....and "You don't pay for dinner? Thots"

I mean, you can pretend you can't see the difference if you like.

Very much the moral high ground.

You seem very defensive. But you lost credibility when you wrote self worth based on how much dinner we pay for, what a pitiful statement. Our self worth is based on the fact when we go on a first date with a man we act as adult equal partners and don’t sit there hoping we don’t need to put our hands in our pocket to pay for ourselves, and we don’t go on a first date looking at if a man will pay for us in the futur. We aren’t looking for meal tickets.We are capable of providing, and paying for ourselves. And we want to. That financial independence is key

yes a huge amount of the population frown heavily on the view that a man should pay for you just as you’re a woman and he’s a man.

Let them frown on it all they want. I don't mind. And they can think I'm from the 50s too!

But there's plenty of women burning themselves out trying to be all things to all people, all the time. And all in the name of progress and women's rights...I don't get it.

I mean, if I wanted to be off doing a FT job my husband would definitely pick up the slack at home and im sure would have even stayed off work to do what we believe (as a couple) is best for the kids. But it was more important to me that I did it. I don't think he's as bothered, so long as either one of us is present with the kids etc.

Says the most abusive, patronising person in the thread!

For gods sake. Paying for your own dinner on a first date isn’t trying to be all things to all people. It’s being a personally responsible financially ca-able adult/

@Floweryflora

"Our self worth is based on the fact when we go on a first date with a man we act as adult equal partners and don’t sit there hoping we don’t need to put our hands in our pocket to pay for ourselves, and we don’t go on a first date looking at if a man will pay for us in the futur. We aren’t looking for meal tickets.We are capable of providing, and paying for ourselves. And we want to. That financial independence is key"

Couldn't agree more.

I actually cannot picture myself going on a first date and sitting like a mute waiting to be paid for, not even attempting to pay for a few drinks. I don't understand how folks aren't embarrassed.

OK fair point, but I do think it helps as a tool to see what his ideals are.

I'm over 17 years out of the dating game so I admit I could be way off. I started going out with my husband at 20, we got married at 25 and grew up together. We had nothing at first, but made a life together.

That being said, I still think i would use a man's willingness to pay to decide whether I wanted to see him again or not.

What nonsense. A man paying for dinner tells you nothing about the man or what kind of partner he'll be. A woman sitting expectantly when the bill arrives tells you more about the woman.

Splitting the bill after offer, discussion and agreement, fine. The personality type of a man who 'insists' on it, not fine.
Men who make it very clear they expect to split the bill are invariably the type that consider themselves a great prize. They believe their modest material acquisitions make them a target for 'gold diggers', and that their mediocre looks and personality affords them access to such a wealth of choice, they don't have to make more than minimal effort.

You seem very defensive. But you lost credibility when you wrote self worth based on how much dinner we pay for, what a pitiful statement.

That's some what of an own goal. It's the 50/50 brigade that's calling anyone who isn't paying for dinner on a date, worthless (and many other derogatory things). I merely repeated their words. And it is indeed, a pitiful statement.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

@TwinsAndTiramisu

You can pretend to have the moral high ground but you have been the worst on the thread for being patronising and name calling.

Absolutely agree

Absolutely disagree

I do think most men over the age of about 40 would automatically expect to pay on a date and if you refused, they would probably interpret that as you "friend zoning" them, to be honest.