Who pays on second date( but first dinner date)

[Mountainhare]

Prob will get slated for this but just being honest
Second date - but first dinner date- with guy I like.
I offered ( said “ do you want me to...” when the bill arrived) and he said “ yes let’s split it”
He had asked me out for dinner and I feel quite traditional in that it would be nice if the guy who has asked you pays for the first time you go for dinner. Not every date, just in this situation maybe
Prepared to be slated though... thoughts please?

I would say, well, thank you, may I pay next time? (If interested, of course). His response may give you another hint about whether or not he is interested too.

If you are not interested, then let him pay if he invited/selected.

I understand what you’re saying itsall, but I think it’s wrong to confuse “feminism” with the “female cause.” For a start, feminism means different things to different women. Even if you take the definition of feminism to mean that equality = sameness (ie no gendered behaviours or differences whatsoever), surely you can see that this is not something all women would want.

Dating is not really the same as other social behaviours because, as I said, men and women will express their sexuality or romantic / emotional needs in a different way. The monkeys in the zoo comparison, would only be relevant if you were looking at the mating rituals of monkeys. People should be allowed to express themselves in whatever way comes most naturally and instinctively to them. I don’t know why people think different roles or needs means inequality - not necessarily anyway.

You could have a man who splits bills all the way while dating, but then after the couple have DC, does the whole “my money”, “your money” thing that we see so often on MN. So she suffers for the biological fact of childbearing, bf and maternity leave. Is this feminism?

When DH and I were dating it was nearly 20 years ago. He tended to pay mostly on dates, but it never occurred to me for one second I was any less equal to him . I know I’m equal to him, but I don’t need to be the same as him to prove that! Anyway, I would book things ahead etc, so that it didn’t feel unbalanced. After we got married, all our finances have always been joint and I’ve been able to be with my DC without feeling incumbent on him because our relationship isn’t like that. We respect our differences and what we bring to the family and our relationship, so we’ve found a balance that feels instinctively right for us. Why pretend to be something you’re not??

So what is feminism? These days, women will make different choices according to what they see as the “female cause.” Human relationships, sexuality and psychology are too complex and contradictory for narrow dogma about what “should” be. Not everyone wants a totally gender-free world and feminism has to be flexible enough to tolerate that so that women can fully define themselves.

Not everyone wants a totally gender-free world and feminism has to be flexible enough to tolerate that so that women can fully define themselves.

Except I don't think it's the role of feminism to do that. Fully define yourself by all means but accept that in some very small part this is ultimately at the expense of other women.

In another very small part, “feminism” as you would define it, could be seen as damaging or at the expense of other women. People are more than theories in text books and dogma usually alienates people. Don’t replace one set of restrictions with another.

Also, of course someone can identify as subscribing to a religion without being fundamentalist! Let’s hope so anyway or god help us. Just as you can identify as a Conservative or Labour member, witbout subscribing to JC or BJ’s ideologies.

I would expect him to pay if he was interested. If he wasn’t that in to me (but probably still up for a shag) I would expect him to go halves

Unfortunately many women have found that it’s the ones who insist on paying for your dinner who also think they’ve bought more than food.

Some women are wary of accepting that he pays, because bitter experience has shown that it does indeed alter the power balance and makes you feel beholden to him in some way, or at least HE feels that you owe him something.

I always wondered why that was the case, why any man would presume that buying dinner meant that you owed him sex, but hearing on here how other women feel that dressing nicely and having their hair done to make them look pretty is somehow a treat for their date, and that they feel special when paid for, I can see how some men might get the impression that by getting the bill they’ve fulfilled their half of a transaction. It’s making me feel a bit icky tbh.

FWIW as I mentioned earlier, DP insisted on getting the bill on our first date so I’m not totally against it on principle, but I’m against the idea that a woman should expect it and that by looking pretty she’s brought something to the table herself. Yuk.

One of my earlier points was that many of us look back at our dating days and refer to or remember the dates with someone who ended up being a long term partner.
So, so many dates end up never seeing each other again, and from a man's POV, should he be expected to pay all the time just because he wants to find a partner? I can see how it might feel like he is 'buying' a partner because if he doesn't put his hand in his pocket, he gets called tight fisted, rude and slovenly (according to this thread).

In another very small part, “feminism” as you would define it, could be seen as damaging or at the expense of other women

Someone will always lose out at the expense of those for whom the situation improves.

Simply, if re-educating men to understand that women are not objects and this results in some women not living with fear or oppression or violence, but another woman no longer gets her dinner bought for her because her date's view of women has been realigned, I know which I'll take.

Simply, if re-educating men to understand that women are not objects and this results in some women not living with fear or oppression or violence, but another woman no longer gets her dinner bought for her because her date's view of women has been realigned, I know which I'll take.

See, in an ideal world I would agree with this. However, the fact is (in my opinion) that men who suggest splitting the bill are not taking that position because their view of women has been 'realigned'. They are doing it because they're tight.

What have you decided OP? 3rd date or not?
In your position I think I'd try the 3rd date and see how I feel after that. I'm in agreement with your sentiments but not tipping would be a turn off.

I believe in equality for everyone. I don't have an "us and them" mentality or feel hard done by because I'm female. There's a lot of people in the world who face oppression because of their sexuality, religion, race etc. We're all just people & no 2 are the same.

If I came across a man with a backwards view that women are second class citizens I'd see him as nothing more than insecure. It highlights a weakness, lack of education, guidance, love. He's been deprived of something. I hold no value in the opinion.

I agree with Moomin8. I've came across very few males who always want to split & in all honesty they've been selfish & entitled.

Humans are complex. I've had a great education & career in a male dominated environment but I also love to cook & I'm house proud. Call me sexist but there's things around the house I won't allow dp to do because I know I'll do a better job. There's things he's better at so I'm happy for him take over. The house is my domain, that's a traditional pov but it's my pov & my choosing.

Dp took me out on Sat, yip he took me. He drove, opened the car door at both sides of the journey (I'm heavily pregnant so was very grateful) he helped me up & down some very steep stairs & paid for an expensive meal. He's been this way from the very beginning, kind, supportive & encouraging which is why I love him. Does he see me as less than him because of his chivalry? Absolutely not, I know he holds me on higher ground. Am I backwards because I'm happy with a chivalrous man? No chance, this is the first time I've properly been respected. He knows I'm strong and can hold my own & I respect him too.

itsallverywell that's okay, we've all been there

The irony is that the men who always want to split the bill at the beginning do tend to be the ones who will be financially controlling later on. They will also be mean with their time, consideration, emotional support, and selfish in bed.

A theory is one thing but the reality is another.

Is there anyone on this thread who can honestly say you are now in a relationship with a man who wanted to split the bill from the beginning and he turned out to be the most kind and attentive partner ever?

The irony is that the men who always want to split the bill at the beginning do tend to be the ones who will be financially controlling later on. They will also be mean with their time, consideration, emotional support, and selfish in bed.

How do you actually know this? That's a massive statement to make, did you do a survey or something

I would offer to split OP - but in all honesty, I'd be disappointed if he accepted my offer. I know it's 2019 etc etc, and this opinion will get slated on MN, but I still agree with you.

@AryaStarkWolf - it's entirely based upon my own dating experiences.

Which is why I'm genuinely asking people on the thread if things have ever turned out great with a man who started out like the OP's date...?

@Moomin8 how many of these guys who split the bill did you end up in a relationship with though that you would have all that kind of information about them? How they're selfish in bed and emotionally etc? It surely can't have been that many?

I do remember having a conversation a long time ago about this subject with me DH, he did offer to pay on our first date and I said ok but I was paying the next time, and I did. He said that he would be very wary of women who didn't pay that second time because he would feel taken advantage of and it's not a very good prediction of their character and if they're going to be selfish. That makes absolute sense to me and he is dead right imo

The irony is that the men who always want to split the bill at the beginning do tend to be the ones who will be financially controlling later on. They will also be mean with their time, consideration, emotional support, and selfish in bed.

I’d also be interested to hear though, how many men who insisted on paying ended up being sexist and controlling in other ways?

Quick google found this article

@Moomin8 My boyfriend split the bill on our first few dates (which I agree is the correct thing to do), he is none of those things, in fact he couldn’t be any further from them.

First date with ex-husband. Completely attentive, opened car doors, insisted on paying for everything. Had brought me a box of chocolates. Turned out to be an emotionally and physically abusive controlling twat. Once told me I should be willing to have sex whenever he wanted as "I bought you". He wasn't referencing solely the first date.

Current partner, met on OLD. First date we met in a bar in a city, he arrived earlier than me as he felt that was the right thing to do. I wouldn't have batted an eye if I'd got there first. Sprang up as I arrived to buy me a drink. Next round was on me. The next on him. And so on. When we socialise with others we take our individual turns to buy rounds of drinks, same as everyone else. He's kind, attentive, respectful, emotionally secure. He's perfect for me.

Humans are complex. I've had a great education & career in a male dominated environment but I also love to cook & I'm house proud. Call me sexist but there's things around the house I won't allow dp to do because I know I'll do a better job. There's things he's better at so I'm happy for him take over. The house is my domain, that's a traditional pov but it's my pov & my choosing.

Which household tasks are you inherently better at because you have a vagina?

I don't think there is any right answer to this question though, it's just what is right for you.

The early dating days are about assessing whether you are compatible and one area that causes a lot of stress for couples is attitude to money.

I am quite free with money, I don't price check in detail or keep tabs, I tend to pick up the bill with friends a lot and enjoy it but graciously accept if they want to treat me. If I'm a little short financially because of this I don't notice and it certainly doesn't affect my lifestyle. If I kept a tighter rein on my spending I would possibly have a better house, holiday fund etc. But I enjoy living without worrying about the pennies, the pay off is the lack of stress.

I've always regarded earning more money than you need as a great way to stay independent. I am in a profession now that pays considerably less but I reduced my outgoings in terms of mortgage, clothes etc so I still feel free.

My point is I would not be compatible with a man who was bothered about the 25£. He either was paranoid about being taken advantage of or living on the edge of his means. And neither would be a good match with me.

I am early 40s btw and did A LOT of dating before meeting dp.

@itsallverywell Exactly, your new DP see's you as an equal, both show your respect for eachother by not taking advantage or expecting something in return because he "bought" you

*I'm not saying every guy who pays for dinner thinks this btw, I'm just saying if people are going to say a guy splitting the bill indicates, meanness and selfishness, you can also flip it and say people who buy dinner think they've bought you and a right to your body etc. Basically, I think trying to generalise the character of all men who do one or the other based solely on that, is silly

Itsall - well you’ve obviously had a bad experience with your ex and I’m sorry to hear that. But you can’t extrapolate from that one relationship that any man who tends towards paying for dinner will turn out to think he “bought you” somewhere down the line. Nor can you conclude that a man who splits the bill will be financially controlling in the future. It’s all nonsense. A feminism that says paying for dates = chauvinist is way too simplistic. Give people a bit more credit than that because they more than understand your kind of feminist rationale. They’ve just moved past it really. Most people are secure enough in themselves to not need to interpret everything literally and in such black and white terms.

@Turningtides I wasn't attempting to extrapolate - I think it was Moomin's prior post that was doing that. I was simply saying that Moomin's experience doesn't match mine.

Most people are secure enough in themselves to not need to interpret everything literally and in such black and white terms.

Again, I'm not talking about feminism on an individual level. I'm talking about the type of feminism that actually results in change. I'm an activist but I accept not everyone wants to be, though they may benefit from the efforts of women and men who do fight for change.