Can I act like a broke dude if Im making 6 figures?

[EyeBRollin]

I always go dutch and have no problem telling her what I do. No girl would ever dare bust me for not picking up the full tab, and if she does I bust her back for sexism or some free lunch bs. If she tries to make a big deal about it I pay my half and dip.

Women that expect the man to pay for everything from date number one are the worst.

I'll treat her when I'm good and ready.

Cheap. In the initial dates, men pay. We pay the bill, they provide the sex. If either side isn’t clear on that they are getting a raw deal.

Women who let you go Dutch are either low quality or not into you (women that don’t want to feel obligated to fvck you offer to split the bill).

Franky, its etiquette for at minimum the inviter to pay the bill.

 

[DEEZEDBRAH]

I make good $$$, most chicks know that when I go out with them because the conversation about jobs have come up usually. (Once I lied and told her I was a bouncer at a strip club.)

Anyways, Im getting tired of picking up the tab. Many girls don't offer to split or pay, and I dont know why it bothers me, but it does. I dont like paying all the time. Dont get me wrong, Im still getting the draws, but always having to pay for drinks before or whatever is annoying me.

Dudes that aint got jobs, no car, can take girls to sh1tty dive bars. Could I do the same or would it appear too unnatural / incongruent?

One of my mates is a high roller HENRY (High earner not rich yet). Self made. On track to be a millionaire. Women just know. He dresses like a frat boy unless in the office. when women ask the question about what he does he says UNEMPLOYED. They know better. women try moving in and nesting. STOP !

Its not her business. Be vague. Generic. Downplay it. I know morons in the leased BMW dude bro pretending. He gives ZERO indicators of high value but is.

Vet better. I'm not paying tabs. I don't do dinner. I am not dating. op, you are not doing it right kuz!


Provider male meant something to our grandmother. It doesn't matter to skanks when hot and young. It's a different play when the milk goes bad. starts pushing 30. provider 'I pay bills' is what Kevin Samuels bragged about on a podcast. it screams sucka !


How old are you? Do you remember being a broke ass student ? how did you pull then ? the PLAY is to come off as OMW but not there yet. pull from charm, Game, charisma and it just so happens YOU DOWN PLAYED SIX FIGS. As in, it's not relevant until it is. She hasn't earned ****. Not moving her in or considering.

These are plates brother. 99.9% aren't worth the time after busting.

I lead. She follows or next.

Hotter girls are turning 18 everyday.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Women are smarter than that when it comes to game. They know you’re $$$ value by how you move. How you interact with people. Raggedly clothes can’t hide it

 

[EyeOnThePrize]

Cheap. In the initial dates, men pay. We pay the bill, they provide the sex. If either side isn’t clear on that they are getting a raw deal.

Women who let you go Dutch are either low quality or not into you (think: women who don’t want to feel obligated to fvck you will offer to split the bill).

Franky, its etiquette for at minimum the inviter to pay the bill.

Ha I would never want a woman to feel obligated to fuuck me just because I paid for dinner, what a toxic mentality rooted in lack.

We have sex if we're enjoying each other's company and find each other attractive. The women I date have absolutely no problem going dutch and they usually wake up in my bed or are on me in the parking lot. Only the bittchy stuck up prudes have ever complained about it. I avoid those women like the plague.

You're the type that gets preyed on by women that go on dates solely for a free meal.

Women who go dutch realize it's fair because we're strangers. First dates are always cheap or free spots, why would I drop hundreds on someone I don't even know if I'll like? Why would I pick up their tab if I'll never see them again?

You should be qualifying women based on their behavior, not trying to guilt them into sex by paying for their dessert. Not to mention that would be awful sex.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Ha I would never want a woman to feel obligated to fuuck me just because I paid for dinner, what a toxic mentality rooted in lack.

I didn’t make the rules. That’s how the mating dance works.

We have sex if we're enjoying each other's company and find each other attractive. The women I date have absolutely no problem going dutch and they usually wake up in my bed or are on me in the parking lot. Only the bittchy stuck up prudes have ever complained about it. I avoid those women like the plague.

You sound new at this. All women want you to pay the tab when you go out. The ones that don’t have low interest.

You're the type that gets preyed on by women that go on dates solely for a free meal.

First dates are always cheap or free spots, why would I drop hundreds on someone I don't even know if I'll like? Why would I pick up their tab if I'll never see them again?

That is a straw man argument. The person who pays (the gentlemen) is the one picking the venue. The gentleman treats within his means, the fool lavishes to impress.

Women who go dutch realize it's fair because we're strangers.

No. Fair is if the guy and the gal go Dutch on all dates and don’t have sex.

You should be qualifying women based on their behavior, not trying to guilt them into sex by paying for their dessert. Not to mention that would be awful sex.

Women are smarter than you think in this arena. Did it ever occur to you that they don’t go on second, third, and fourth dates with guys they don’t want to fvck?

 

[EyeOnThePrize]

didn’t make the rules. That’s how the mating dance works.

That's how it works for men that are attempting to compensate for their insecurities with their wallets.

What do you do if she decides not to have sex with you? Complain to her about how you paid for her meal and that 'thats how the mating dance works'? Resent her and never see her again because she owes you sex and didn't come through? Think she must be amazing in bed because you've paid for 10 dates and she hasn't put out?

When you pay for a woman you're dating it should be unconditional, and that status for her comes from your attraction level. Thus you qualify, to see what type of person she is, so that you can praise her for being a fun and compatible girl, not praise first and expect her to become compatible. The former is abundance, the latter is lack and needy.

You sound new at this. All women want you to pay the tab when you go out. The ones that don’t have low interest.

I've had plenty of women offer to split the check and proceed to bang my brains out less than an hour later then subsequently go on multiple dates with me or simply come over.

A woman that values your time and attention doesn't feel she needs to be bought, and will move mountains to see you. Going dutch makes perfect sense to her.

The person who pays (the gentlemen) is the one picking the venue.

I've heard this before.
Women have been barking for equality for decades, paying for them is giving them a double standard. In fact I would saying going dutch shows women that I respect them and have no issue walking if it's an issue.

My first date is always cheap, and when we go dutch she gets the message that I split the check with strangers. If she feels a future venue is too expensive for her taste I expect her to tell me or pick a cheaper spot herself. I'll cover for her if I feel like it but generally her response is a huge qualifier to show me her maturity and ability to communicate.

No. Fair is if the guy and the gal go Dutch on all dates and don’t have sex.

This is assuming she gets nothing out of sex, which tells me you believe you have nothing to offer in the sack. This is the exact opposite of an 'i am the prize' mentality.

Women are smarter than you think in this arena. Did it ever occur to you that they don’t go on second, third, and fourth dates with guys they don’t want to fvck?

I've heard plenty of stories of women milking men's wallets for x number of dates simply because he always pays for everything, stringing him along for the free meals. Doesn't matter if she's posh or from the trailer park, many of them try it.

Do you really think a woman won't fuuck you because you went dutch on the bill? Do you really think the women that do fuuck you are getting wet thinking about how you picked up the check? Maybe a gold digger.

Women are smart in that they can pick up on what you value. If you value your time and attention they'll have no choice but to value it too, otherwise they won't exist in your world.

 

[YouSpitToMe]

Can I act like a rich dude if I'm making 4-5 figures? Just the opposing side here, and it happens every day. So learn to tone it all down in your case. It's like for business travelers and government personnel on temporary or long-term assignment overseas. No big bold logos (or at all). Colors not screaming out for attention. A tiny calculator watch, no other jewelry. In this case you don't have to change your footwear to match the local population, unless you are wearing $400 dress shoes all the time.

 

[rjc149]

I'm seeing a lot of silly paranoia here -- fear that women are all out to swindle, leech, use, exploit, rob financially-stable men etc. All this advice seems more intended to keep pick-pockets away when you're walking around in Calcutta or someplace. "Don't wear flashy clothes, look like an average schmo, don't advertise that you have money, don't pull your cash out etc" like you're trying not to get jumped and stabbed.

Yes some women are gold-diggers. Some women will show you interest and give you clear positive signals, agree to go on a date with you, then simply milk you for a free meal and ghost you because they saw you as beta.

That's probably like .5% of situations you'll actually find yourself in with a girl who is interested in meeting you for a date.

You're the man, YOU PAY. Just keep things reasonable, and yes you can push back if you feel it's her turn to chip in. But that first check is yours, whatever or where ever it is. You take care of the woman.

If anyone is really b!tching about covering a $30 drink tab because she's "using" you for free drinks, you have both financial and emotional insecurity. That's really unattractive.

 

[YouSpitToMe]

So you think that they are truly at their most humble now because of a pandemic? Really? Play stupid games and win stupid prizes. And waste your time and money.

 

[SW15]

Six figures isn't all that impressive anymore. I know men in the lower end of six figures ($100,000 - $149,999 annual income) who struggle to attract women. In a lot of the bigger cities, if you're a man 30+ and dating women 30+ women, it is almost expected that you earn $100,000 per year. You don't get any special treatment from women based on your income until $150,000 in a moderately priced U.S. city and $200,000 if you're in the expensive Northeast or West Coast cities.

Many six figure earners are men with STEM majors working in computer science or engineering professions. Many of them have poor social skills too. $100-200k annual income isn't enough of an incentive for an attractive woman for a computer science or engineering guy in most cases. The threshold of income needed to compensate for being a dork is likely $400,000+.

 

[B80]

Six figures isn't all that impressive anymore. I know men in the lower end of six figures ($100,000 - $149,999 annual income) who struggle to attract women. In a lot of the bigger cities, if you're a man 30+ and dating women 30+ women, it is almost expected that you earn $100,000 per year. You don't get any special treatment from women based on your income until $150,000 in a moderately priced U.S. city and $200,000 if you're in the expensive Northeast or West Coast cities.

Many six figure earners are men with STEM majors working in computer science or engineering professions. Many of them have poor social skills too. $100-200k annual income isn't enough of an incentive for an attractive woman for a computer science or engineering guy in most cases. The threshold of income needed to compensate for being a dork is likely $400,000+.

Yeah and even then tge dork is likely to get screwed eventually over if she's attractive.

Personally I like wearing designer clothes, owning a nice car. I'm not going to downgrade in fear of it attracting gold diggers.

I also don't mind picking up the tab most of tge time and can't recall a girl that hasn't picked up it up every 2nd or 3rd date in the past.

Yes, it runs the risk of the odd incredibly devious girl who can keep up an act, but I'm confident they can be picked out fairly quickly and tge chances of encountering one is minimal anyway.

Like yiu say, if you're worried about spending a few hundred on a girl over numerous dates, who's fun and having regular sex with, yiu may have other issues to sort.

It's almost like having a great physique but wearing baggy clothes because you're worried they're only interested in your body.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

Dinner after sex. Never before.

I have a developer close friend who is a multi millionaire and drives a beat up truck. I make plenty of money and my newest vehicle is 2006 Ford diesel. I mostly drive a 1998 Tacoma.

Six figures isn't all that impressive anymore. I know men in the lower end of six figures ($100,000 - $149,999 annual income) who struggle to attract women. In a lot of the bigger cities, if you're a man 30+ and dating women 30+ women, it is almost expected that you earn $100,000 per year. You don't get any special treatment from women based on your income until $150,000 in a moderately priced U.S. city and $200,000 if you're in the expensive Northeast or West Coast cities.

Many six figure earners are men with STEM majors working in computer science or engineering professions. Many of them have poor social skills too. $100-200k annual income isn't enough of an incentive for an attractive woman for a computer science or engineering guy in most cases. The threshold of income needed to compensate for being a dork is likely $400,000+.

Better yet align to females who are in that space. Guys try to use intelligent females and downplay them over the more social but "dumber" visual stunners. So the more intelligent babes are always complaining that men try to "use" them.

 

[rjc149]

Six figures isn't all that impressive anymore. I know men in the lower end of six figures ($100,000 - $149,999 annual income) who struggle to attract women. In a lot of the bigger cities, if you're a man 30+ and dating women 30+ women, it is almost expected that you earn $100,000 per year. You don't get any special treatment from women based on your income until $150,000 in a moderately priced U.S. city and $200,000 if you're in the expensive Northeast or West Coast cities.

Many six figure earners are men with STEM majors working in computer science or engineering professions. Many of them have poor social skills too. $100-200k annual income isn't enough of an incentive for an attractive woman for a computer science or engineering guy in most cases. The threshold of income needed to compensate for being a dork is likely $400,000+.

The income thresholds in this post are eerily accurate.

 

[rjc149]

There's a sound bit of red pill advice which is to not marry a woman who is well below your means, or stands to gain financially by divorcing you. If the disparity in income offers her a financial incentive in divorce proceedings, you're taking a huge risk. I have actually seen this play out in real life.

The holy grail of red pill philosophy, a wealthy man his 40's marrying a hot 22-year old, because only women in their teens and early 20's offer anything of value to men and old men are somehow entitled to young pvssy because of "SMV wall" or whatever, was promptly (after 3-4 years) divorced-raped by said 22-year old. She then went on to enjoy the remainder of her 20's in expense-paid luxury and an all-you-eat buffet of c0ck on his dime.

So, a guy earning $200K+ should not marry a woman earning less that $100k. He should marry a woman who is more comparable to him in terms of financial status, although still marginally lower.

But if a wealthier guy just wants to play the field, then hell yeah, flaunt that wealth. Yeah, pay for dates, but flaunt it like an Instaho flaunts her bubble butt.

And if you want to draw the analogy that this is the same as paying a hooker, which I hear often -- a hot woman finding you attractive because you've worked hard to achieve status and wealth is not the same as a hot girl allowing you to fvck her because she's getting paid to allow it. Spinning plates is about our egos and validation, after all. Not just fvcking.

 

[EyeBRollin]

That's how it works for men that are attempting to compensate for their insecurities with their wallets.

What do you do if she decides not to have sex with you? Complain to her about how you paid for her meal and that 'thats how the mating dance works'? Resent her and never see her again because she owes you sex and didn't come through? Think she must be amazing in bed because you've paid for 10 dates and she hasn't put out?

I've heard plenty of stories of women milking men's wallets for x number of dates simply because he always pays for everything, stringing him along for the free meals. Doesn't matter if she's posh or from the trailer park, many of them try it.

The fixation on insecurity is projection.

Men lead. If a woman doesn't want to fvck after a date, we as men have to choice to not invite her out again. Simple, eh?

When you pay for a woman you're dating it should be unconditional, and that status for her comes from your attraction level. Thus you qualify, to see what type of person she is, so that you can praise her for being a fun and compatible girl, not praise first and expect her to become compatible. The former is abundance, the latter is lack and needy.

Dating is conditional. "Unconditional love" is blue pill bullshvt. If your wife gained 60 lbs in your marriage, would you still "love her unconditionally?"

I've had plenty of women offer to split the check and proceed to bang my brains out less than an hour later then subsequently go on multiple dates with me or simply come over.

A woman that values your time and attention doesn't feel she needs to be bought, and will move mountains to see you. Going dutch makes perfect sense to her.

I've heard this before.
Women have been barking for equality for decades, paying for them is giving them a double standard. In fact I would saying going dutch shows women that I respect them and have no issue walking if it's an issue.

My first date is always cheap, and when we go dutch she gets the message that I split the check with strangers. If she feels a future venue is too expensive for her taste I expect her to tell me or pick a cheaper spot herself. I'll cover for her if I feel like it but generally her response is a huge qualifier to show me her maturity and ability to communicate.

This is assuming she gets nothing out of sex, which tells me you believe you have nothing to offer in the sack. This is the exact opposite of an 'i am the prize' mentality.

Women are smart in that they can pick up on what you value. If you value your time and attention they'll have no choice but to value it too, otherwise they won't exist in your world.

None of these concepts are mutually exclusive. Gentlemen pay the bill when they extend the invitation. Whether you choose to accept it or not, all women want you to pick up the tab when dating romantically. You're going against nature my friend.

Do you really think a woman won't fuuck you because you went dutch on the bill?

Yes. Frankly, she is low quality if she doesn't have that minimum standard. She's putting out for a guy that is too cheap to pick up a check?

Do you really think the women that do fuuck you are getting wet thinking about how you picked up the check? Maybe a gold digger.

That's a strawman argument. Paying is the bare minimum.

 

[SW15]

There's a sound bit of red pill advice which is to not marry a woman who is well below your means, or stands to gain financially by divorcing you. If the disparity in income offers her a financial incentive in divorce proceedings, you're taking a huge risk. I have actually seen this play out in real life.

The holy grail of red pill philosophy, a wealthy man his 40's marrying a hot 22-year old, because only women in their teens and early 20's offer anything of value to men and old men are somehow entitled to young pvssy because of "SMV wall" or whatever, was promptly (after 3-4 years) divorced-raped by said 22-year old. She then went on to enjoy the remainder of her 20's in expense-paid luxury and an all-you-eat buffet of c0ck on his dime.

The best ideal is an iron clad pre-nup if you must marry or not to marry at all. I'm 37 and never have married. I'm not an extremely high earning man. I think there's some value in the approach of not marrying at all. It's the path I've chosen. While I won't rule out marriage in the future, it seems like an unlikely path for me.

The most common way that an early 40s man gets an 18-25 year old woman is by using money. An early 40s man can offer an 18-25 year old woman more money than an 18-25 year old man.

So, a guy earning $200K+ should not marry a woman earning less that $100k. He should marry a woman who is more comparable to him in terms of financial status, although still marginally lower.

But if a wealthier guy just wants to play the field, then hell yeah, flaunt that wealth. Yeah, pay for dates, but flaunt it like an Instaho flaunts her bubble butt.

The problem with women earning $100k+ is that a lot of them are careerist women who are typically not good girlfriends. A good girlfriend has a more feminine energy. Female lawyers, doctors, and business executives comprise a large portion of the $100k+ earning female population and these women don't have strong feminine energies.

Any man, but especially a high earning man, is better off with a lower earning lower who is less careerist and feminist.

Once again, avoiding marriage can make sense here.

If all else fails, flaunting wealth can get you laid. I don't really recommend flaunting wealth as a primary attraction means. It is effective under certain conditions.

 

[EyeOnThePrize]

The fixation on insecurity is projection.

Men lead. If a woman doesn't want to fvck after a date, we as men have to choice to not invite her out again. Simple, eh?

You'd be surprised how little going dutch on the check has to do with whether you'll screw.

Dating is conditional. "Unconditional love" is blue pill bullshvt. If your wife gained 60 lbs in your marriage, would you still "love her unconditionally?"

You give to a woman, or anyone for that matter, with no strings attached, that's what I mean by unconditional giving. If there are strings attached, no one will want your 'gifts'. The decision to give sure, conditional, but once you choose to give, it should not be coming from a place of 'now you owe me', that's more of a loan, and is rooted in lack.
The guy buying everything for a woman he hardly knows in hopes of sex is absolutely more blue pill. Those are m'lady levels.

None of these concepts are mutually exclusive. Gentlemen pay the bill when they extend the invitation. Whether you choose to accept it or not, all women want you to pick up the tab when dating romantically. You're going against nature my friend.

I've closed plenty by paying half of what you would. It has absolutely zero significance when it comes to attraction, unless of course she's after your money. In fact going dutch takes all pressure off. No hidden expectations or implications for picking up the bill. Like I said, if it's a problem I expect her to voice her concern, and in hundreds if not thousands of dates that's happened once.

Yes. Frankly, she is low quality if she doesn't have that minimum standard. She's putting out for a guy that is too cheap to pick up a check?

It has nothing to do with being cheap, and everything to do with removing all hidden expectations and distractions from genuine attraction. I use going dutch as a means to gauge attraction. If she decides she's not interested in me because she didn't want to pay for her drink or food on the first date then she has very low interest. You seem to do the opposite, to bank on her putting out because you got the bill.

Then you go on to make this assertion that she's low quality because she likes you as a person when she should only like you if you get the bill. It's like you would rather have women that are more focused on the money than you.

You're basically begging the universe to only give you women that expect a completely one sided relationship(in her favor), generally gold diggers or super entitled women seeking the royal treatment at your expense. Women that expect you to buy your way into their pusssy.

We're on two different planets my friend. From experience I can tell you going dutch hasn't stopped me from slaying across all classes of girls. And like I said, when I feel like gifting and treating I do so unconditionally. Doing things for others and expecting something back is a great way to breed resentment and push people away. Give freely.

 

[EyeBRollin]

You'd be surprised how little going dutch on the check has to do with whether you'll screw.

That isn’t the point.

You give to a woman, or anyone for that matter, with no strings attached, that's what I mean by unconditional giving. If there are strings attached, no one will want your 'gifts'. The decision to give sure, conditional, but once you choose to give, it should not be coming from a place of 'now you owe me', that's more of a loan, and is rooted in lack.

Taking a woman on a date is not a “gift.” It is the bare minimum. This forum has some broken guys that are too paranoid to show class and etiquette. Men lead. Men pay.

I've closed plenty by paying half of what you would. It has absolutely zero significance when it comes to attraction, unless of course she's after your money. In fact going dutch takes all pressure off. No hidden expectations or implications for picking up the bill. Like I said, if it's a problem I expect her to voice her concern, and in hundreds if not thousands of dates that's happened once.

Closed low quality women. A woman who goes Dutch and also puts out is getting a bad deal.

It has nothing to do with being cheap, and everything to do with removing all hidden expectations and distractions from genuine attraction. I use going dutch as a means to gauge attraction. If she decides she's not interested in me because she didn't want to pay for her drink or food on the first date then she has very low interest. You seem to do the opposite, to bank on her putting out because you got the bill.

Then you go on to make this assertion that she's low quality because she likes you as a person when she should only like you if you get the bill. It's like you would rather have women that are more focused on the money than you.

You're basically begging the universe to only give you women that expect a completely one sided relationship(in her favor), generally gold diggers or super entitled women seeking the royal treatment at your expense. Women that expect you to buy your way into their pusssy.

We're on two different planets my friend. From experience I can tell you going dutch hasn't stopped me from slaying across all classes of girls. And like I said, when I feel like gifting and treating I do so unconditionally. Doing things for others and expecting something back is a great way to breed resentment and push people away. Give freely.

It’s cheap and it’s low class. Just own it. You expect people in your orbit to pay their own way if you invite them. You are 100% wrong on this.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

The income thresholds in this post are eerily accurate.

If $400k+ is the trigger point for a woman to desire an engineer, computer science or stem cell guy, then it's a bad deal. She can NEVER appreciate him and what it took for him to get to that dollar level. His communication is setup for being efficient and transferring and absorbing technical information.

There's a sound bit of red pill advice which is to not marry a woman who is well below your means, or stands to gain financially by divorcing you. If the disparity in income offers her a financial incentive in divorce proceedings, you're taking a huge risk. I have actually seen this play out in real life.

The holy grail of red pill philosophy, a wealthy man his 40's marrying a hot 22-year old, because only women in their teens and early 20's offer anything of value to men and old men are somehow entitled to young pvssy because of "SMV wall" or whatever, was promptly (after 3-4 years) divorced-raped by said 22-year old. She then went on to enjoy the remainder of her 20's in expense-paid luxury and an all-you-eat buffet of c0ck on his dime.

So, a guy earning $200K+ should not marry a woman earning less that $100k. He should marry a woman who is more comparable to him in terms of financial status, although still marginally lower.

But if a wealthier guy just wants to play the field, then hell yeah, flaunt that wealth. Yeah, pay for dates, but flaunt it like an Instaho flaunts her bubble butt.

And if you want to draw the analogy that this is the same as paying a hooker, which I hear often -- a hot woman finding you attractive because you've worked hard to achieve status and wealth is not the same as a hot girl allowing you to fvck her because she's getting paid to allow it. Spinning plates is about our egos and validation, after all. Not just fvcking.

The last part. Her fvcking due to status and wealth is very similar to paid for with a prostitute.

But women do choose to seduce other men due to mental and physical sexual arousal. That's the best sex and she can get addicted to your sex.
.

 

[EyeOnThePrize]

Taking a woman on a date is not a “gift.” It is the bare minimum.

My time and attention are a gift. All you've convinced me of is how little you value your own.

Just own it. You expect people in your orbit to pay their own way if you invite them. You are 100% wrong on this.

I've been owning it this entire time. You wouldn't expect a friend to pay for your meal if they invited you out. An acquaintance or complete stranger are no different. Many women would feel uncomfortable with you picking up the tab, especially if aren't into you.

What's truly low class is expecting pusssy because you paid. The only women that will sleep with you for that reason are gold diggers or really cheap wh0res. Luckily there's plenty of compatible women for both of us. We can agree to disagree, I have absolutely no intention of changing my methods. I'm done here.