Stories of stingiest first dates

[frtedsbed]

Just comparing experiences here at a friends ... jaw dropping stuff!

Mine asked me to transfer money for a coffee and cake after our first date which was a walk and feeding the ducks.
I thought we were going for lunch ... that was the original invite.
Another asked me to transfer money to r a takeaway having offered to pay for my child and I , as he stayed at mine every weekend. Both ended there and then !

Don’t agree.

OK I still don't understand this "properly interested" and "actually into" business. It's a first date! They're not properly interested or actually into you whether they buy you a drink or not. They don't know you. At best they are very attracted to you and maybe think you've got good chat, but actually becoming "properly interested" and "actually into" someone takes months, not just a couple of dates. You have to see them among their friends, in the house, relaxed and casual - not just in the formal date setting. It's ridiculous to expect anyone to be properly into you after meeting once or twice.

Is this another theory based on the premise that humans are actually birds?

I'm not sure sexual selection is as relevant to 21st century human civilisation as it is to, say, the wood pigeon couple in my garden. But I'd probably argue that each individual person gets to be their own sexual selector and I'm not sure why you'd want it any other way.

Of course I'm not doing men a favour by going out with them. It's something I did for myself, and myself only. If I didn't want to do it why on earth would I have done it to do men a favour? What bizarre logic is that?

Exactly. Women have autonomy to decide who to date and whether to invest their time, just as men do. Both work. Both earn money. A woman decides who to have a baby with as much as a man decides who he wants to be the mother of his children. If two people agree to go on a date on equal terms, they should split the costs.

I still don't understand this "properly interested" and "actually into" business

I didn't think it was that complicated, but OK. If he thinks you're his type and is interested in seeing you again, potentially for more than just sex (because plenty of men who aren't interested enough to buy a drink will still accept sex if it's offered). Hope that clears it up.

I really wish some people would actually look at the cold hard facts around the average earning potential and financial circumstances of women who have had children, before they go on about how everything is ‘equal’. There’s probably the odd woman on this thread who out earns her husband or whose career didn’t suffer due to having kids. But it is not the norm. Far from it.

Women are or should be naturally more choosy about who they procreate with as they are capable of having a very finite amount of children and they bear greater risk is all senses. Men are the opposite.

’50:50’ benefits men more than women. It’s worth having a think about.

yes you owe it to each other. I am talking about not even being bothered to my your own drink.

But it is true, women are, as a rule, more selective than men about their sexual partners because we’re biologically programmed to be more choosey. Men are far more likely to have sex with any female that offers it to him because they aren’t going to be carrying, birthing, or primarily caring for babies and they have to spread their genes about as much as possible. There are exceptions, but it’s still a biological reality.

Just because times have changed now with the way society operates, our brains don’t know that 😂

That's not really "proper interest" though. That's mild interest (and completely par for the course for a first date). Mild interest often fizzles out after a few dates once you get to know someone a bit better, so it's not indicative of anything real, any more than if he just wanted sex.

Speak for yourself I guess. The men I have in my life don't act like rampant animals only intent on "spreading their seed" and I've given very short shrift to men I've met who've actually argued that nonsense.

And once again no one making the "we are prisoners of biology and ultimately nothing more than gorillas/peacocks/lobsters" argument will ever acknowledge that child-free women exist (and only begrudgingly that high-earning, career-oriented mothers exist).

Oh good Lord.

You now know what I used the term to mean. And yes, of course it can fizzle after a few dates. Marriages can end after 30 years. You're now reaching and extrapolating and deflecting and making stuff up to try to make the position - that a man who is interested in seeing you again for potentially more than uncommitted sex will buy you a drink - sound completely unreasonable, essentially by pretending it's something else entirely.

If you want to buy your own drinks, buy your own drinks. I'm not dating you, I don't care. But please don't make ridiculous reaches and pretzels and semantic hairsplitting like this because you don't like the fact that a man sitting opposite his wet dream in Starbucks isn't going to piss and moan about buying her a latte. I didn't invent male behaviour.

No, like I said society has changed now, but it’s still a fact that ultimately, whether a man gets sex or not is down to whether or not he meets the women’s standards, whether or not she thinks he’s likely to stick around and protect her and provide for her and any children.

Whether or not someone wants children, our brains are still programmed to subconsciously think in this way. If a woman went out in the street now and asked a man if he wanted to go back to hers for sex, he is far more likely to accept that invitation than a woman would if being propositioned by a random man, because men don’t have the need to be as choosy. It’s just reality. Certain factors mean there are exceptions but it’s largely subconscious.

And I’m not even one of the people that insists on men paying 🤣

I suppose I have higher aspirations than being someone's wet dream.

Also "male behaviour" isn't really a thing unless you think they're all a homogeneous mass who behave in identical ways.

I don't think any of this is true tbh. It's all just stereotypes. I've known plenty of women (and have been one!) who enjoyed sleeping around without any thought of whether the men would be good fathers. Also know plenty of men who hate casual sex and say it leaves them feeling empty. Neither group of people go around talking any of this up because social conditioning means they're expected to want the opposite - the women who like sex are wary of being called slutty, the men who want commitment before sex think they'll be seen as less manly. Those narratives are changing, I hope, but as we can see, anyone who deviates from gender stereotypes is still perceived as being abnormal (or just non-existent, or denying their subconscious).

Yes fantastic. Let’s hope women feel ‘empowered’ to go around having loads of casual sex.

Never mind she risks getting pregnant and the child is raised in a single parent family. Around half of which in this country are on the poverty line - basic stats. Women are also more likely to contract STIs.

It’s not about being ‘slutty’ it’s about not being stupid.

Like I said, exceptions exist and it’s a general rule, but women as a whole sleep around far less than men do, and women hold all the cards about whether he gets sex, so yes, in that sense, it’s important that a man shows his worth to a woman that will make that choice.

It isn’t stereotypical, it’s the way we’re built. Women are also far more likely to fall in love with a casual sexual partner because they generally get more emotionally attached than men do so there’s another reason they have to be choosy. Where as men are more likely to cheat etc. It’s not about hard and fast rules, but more about general patterns and principles. That’s what I’m saying. Humans do not have as much autonomy as they like to think.

So isn’t that saying men are a meal ticket? Most women meeting a man for date don’t yet have children so they are not disadvantaged. It’s possible for both men and women to date when they have children already. The man is probably already paying child support for them. So in that sense they are both struggling financially.

For the record, I understand what you are saying completely. Basically if he is into you, the price of a coffee will not phase him. In fact he would probably want to buy you a drink… it’s the little things. He offers you a drink, is interested in you, doesn’t talk at you. It’s a pleasant first date scenario in my opinion.

It was a slightly facetious figure of speech used in mild exasperation (and an attempt at mild humour; before you complain about that, you don't have to find it funny). But we've already seen that you like to split hairs to create a non-rebuttal. Replace it with "woman of his dreams" if you truly cannot parse the meaning otherwise.

In essence, if he likes you, he will be happy to buy you drinks. If he's a dude who likes you and wants to see you again but is resentful about the cost of a coffee to indicate interest and a little effort for you, I haven't met him. If you have, good job. Please continue to keep them away from me.

Thank you. It's OK, gannett understood it too.

Because they are cheapskates.

Well maybe he's not you then !
And some restaurants, particularly fancy ones really have an evening date vibe.

@EchoChamber ... Women are disadvantaged in society. There's a gender pay gap study for a reason. It's not just about children or no children. It's a vast topic.

I mean what is up with going for a walk as a first date. I have no clue why women on here seem to think trudging around the streets is acceptable as a date. It isn't. Oh, but when I refuse to go for a walk, apparently I am spoilt and hard work.

This is simply false. Studies have long shown that men make up their mind with respect to attraction almost instantly compared to women.