Debate: Why "the guy should pay" is an outdated "rule"

[DrDope]

Very sensible post, whistler. I agree.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Maybe I should add some clarification to my posts here. While I think it's fundamental that men will either directly or indirectly pay for a woman's intimacy over the course of a lifetime, I would in no way advocate spending more than the bargain is worth, $0 being optimal. And in fact this is the whole of the contention, getting the best deal for the least amount of effort. Just as FRANCISCO has been saying, the idea isn't to overtly buy a woman's intimacy, but to find ways to avoid even the appearance of doing so. In fact the less you appear to be doing so the better your odds for achieving her intimacy are since in doing so you become the PRIZE to be won rather than the resources you posess.

That said however, it in no way invalidates that men will pay for a woman's intimacy, but your financing plan may vary.

 

[00Kevin]

If a girl insists on paying for half then it just shows me that she is insecure about letting a man lead the way. It is a good indication that she will try to fight for power in the relationship.

I like to see a woman that is happy when I take her out and show respect for me when I am the provider.

It might be true that women work, but who wants a woman with a career? I don't give a damn **** how much the girl makes and I don't want a woman who tries to be a provider. As a man I am the provider and it is that simple.

You guys can be "Gender Neutral" and basically castrate yourself all you want, but I think I would rather be the man and do things the way I fu-cken please. I also couldn't give a damn shi-t for 50/50.


Gender Neutral = "Castrated" or it means that you have both a c-ock and a pu-ssy.

 

[00Kevin]

Originally posted by Rollo Tomassi


Men and women find each other acceptable for intimacy because each meets a certain criteria for their attraction. Women base these conditions on a man's ability to provide security, men base their own on physical attraction and sexual availability. It's simple supply & demand economics.

I agree, her attraction to you has nothing to do with the fact that you pay or don't pay for everything.

 

[whistler]

Originally posted by Rollo Tomassi
Just as FRANCISCO has been saying, the idea isn't to overtly buy a woman's intimacy, but to find ways to avoid even the appearance of doing so. In fact the less you appear to be doing so the better your odds for achieving her intimacy are since in doing so you become the PRIZE to be won rather than the resources you posess.

That's great!

Perhaps you can work that into a substantial post for the rest of the board.

 

[Luveno]

I will only go on a date or get into a relationship if it MAKES MY LIFE BETTER.

If a girl wants to do the same with me, I'll assume it makes hers better too.

Me paying for my date is illogical. I have my own things to pay for. I do not need to pay for someone else who I know can pay for themselves.

Only until I know that the relationship will last and that favors will be reciprocated will I pay for a date.

And no, sex is NOT a favor.

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

Originally posted by DrDope
It's not that your points aren't well thought through and logical--they are. It's just that reality isn't well thought through and logical.

Some girls might be cool when you insist they pay. Most people will think that you are a cheapskate (not a good thing to be).

Should it be that way? No.

Is it that way? Yes.

You can argue the merits of it forever. It won't change reality.

It's like arguing for world peace. Yes, there should always be peace but there never will be.

I understand where you're coming from bro. But here's the thing...the rule is being broken more and more. I provided my own anecdotal evidence of this (girls offering to pay for me). Also, other people in this thread have shared similar experiences.

My whole point in this is to try and shake this "obligation" off of guys and dispell the myth! The more that this is done, the less and less "the guy paying all the time" will be "reality".

peace

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

Originally posted by 00Kevin
If a girl insists on paying for half then it just shows me that she is insecure about letting a man lead the way. It is a good indication that she will try to fight for power in the relationship.

I like to see a woman that is happy when I take her out and show respect for me when I am the provider.

It might be true that women work, but who wants a woman with a career? I don't give a damn **** how much the girl makes and I don't want a woman who tries to be a provider. As a man I am the provider and it is that simple.

Well that's all fine and good, but you're making assumptions here.

I think it would be fair to say that you're pretty much assuming that this girl is "wife material" or at the very least, very LTR material.

There is a difference between some girl you're just dating or jsut met and wife/LTR material bro. I agree with you 100% if this was a long term commitment and you could really see yourself with her in the future with her as your wife and you as being provider husband.

However, not every girl you start dating is wife material. You're debating this perspective of 50/50 from a whole different set of assumptions. Granted, I want a wife who will respect me as a provider and I'll be a provider. However, I should not be expected to pay for a girl I just met and hardly know, simply because I'm a guy. That's what I'm really attacking here, I'm not attacking being a provider in a LTR/marriage period.

When she qualifies herself as wife/LTR material, then and only then will I care to take on the "provider" role and be fine with paying her way through. Again this is a mutual relationship. I provide and she respects me as a provider. If she starts to take me for granted, she's gone.

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Originally posted by DrDope
Francisco,

I totally agree with you about not buying dinner. It's something I rarely do and never do early in the dating process. I keep everything pretty low dollar to begin with even though I am a fairly big earner.

My only point is that if you're on a first date with a girl that you initiated, you roll into an ice cream stand for an ice cream cone, and you stand there tapping your foot waiting for the chick to pay for her own ice cream cone, you are going to look very lame.

Sure she should offer to pay. Sure, if she expects you to pay she's a b1tch. But reality is reality. If you ask someone out and insist that they pay then you will look cheap because you ARE CHEAP.

The solution is to avoid anything where the amount of money spent is material. It does cost money to bump around but you can keep costs low. I'm all for making sure women are putting in their fair share and that they are paying an equitable portion.

But the original post in this thread is long on sociological theory and short on the reality of the world. That's all I meant. We actually agree on 99% of everything.

Well that makes sense. Keeping things pretty minimal in the beginning is a good thing. Plus it helps the woman feel that she isn't obligated to do anything just because you bought her dinner.

The ice cream cone thing is good, I've even bought a woman a refill of coffee since our date was going very well. She bought a milkshake for us to share later. It was more like we were a couple of kids hanging out having a good time together instead of me attempting to impress her by buying her dinner.

My whole thing is guys that feel that they HAVE TO take a girl to dinner in the beginning to get anywhere with her. Most of the time a woman will invite me to her place for a home cooked dinner before we ever go out to a restaurant. I see it as her way to prove to me that she's a keeper.

 

[coolguy676767]

Originally posted by Francisco d'Anconia
Guys, why waste effort on women who would judge you on whether of not you stuff her pie hole (with food).

LMAO,

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Originally posted by TillTheEndOfTime However, not every girl you start dating is wife material.

And this is exactly why you shouldn't attempt to overtly purchase intimacy. Far, far too many guys, particularly those with ONEitis, feel compeled to consider a legitimate date as a marriage interview. I went back and re-read this thread and thought, "who actually dates anymore anyway?" More often than not we hook up at clubs or events, and anyone we end up intimate with after this we may 'date', but even this is a bit misleading. It's like when kids on the Highschool thread tell me they like to 'Hang Out' with their girlfriends and when you ask them to go into detail 'Hang Out' usually means 'wait around until she comes around and wants to make out or more'.

Going to dinner together, irregardless of who pays, is a very inefficient method to get to what you want out of the date anyway (i.e. intimacy/sex). I mean think about it, how often does the investment of time and/or money in a 'date' pay off in comparisson to the nights you meet an HB at a club, maybe bought her a drink and ended up back at her apartment that night? How about on vacation in Cancun, Lake Havasu, Mardi Gras or hell, even at a buddies party on a given night? And then, more often than not, we end up 'dating' the woman we met at one of these events, who was quite happy to fvck us right there or on a subsequent 'date' thereafter anyway. You pay? Fine. She pays? Whatever,..It's the initial attraction that gets you in the door in the firstplace.

For the longest time, this is exactly what I did in my 20s. Hook up, screw, and then if I was into it again I'd hit her up for a 'date' that I knew would end up in sex again. That's not Dating, that's the shortest distance between 2 points. Some women would pay for the 'lead-up' to the end of the night sometimes I would, but the end result was the motivator.

All that changed when I met my wife. I can remember when I met her at a gig my friend's band was playing at, getting her number, asking her out on a legitimate date, going out to dinner, paying for it and then having her blow me off for 3 days. I thought, "WTF? I did everything by the book? Why is she not down?" only to have her call me on day 4 and ask me if I wanted to go out with her. We went on for weeks like this and I gradually understood that we were dating maturely like adults should. I was so used to an immature formula for dating that I thought her lack of contact translated into a lack of interest. Later we got together more significantly (obviously), but for the first 2 months we were dating non-exclusively.

So I think it's kind of ridiculous to quibble over who gets the check, when really, if she's genuinely interested, the result is the same.

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

Originally posted by Rollo Tomassi
So I think it's kind of ridiculous to quibble over who gets the check, when really, if she's genuinely interested, the result is the same.

I agree 100%. It was for this exact same reason that I originally stated in my first post:

"First of all, from my experience, who pays does not matter (whether you pay all or go 50/50)"

 

[Maestro Monk]

Fortunately for me, the majority of gals I have dated have offered to pay their half. But here's the million-dollar question: If the gal doesn't offer to pay, how do you guys decline? For example, if the date were for dinner or drinks, would you request different tabs?

 

[DrDope]

Originally posted by Maestro Monk
But here's the million-dollar question: If the gal doesn't offer to pay, how do you guys decline? For example, if the date were for dinner or drinks, would you request different tabs?

This is what I was getting at also. I say you have to bite the bullet here assuming you initiated the date and it's early (there is no implied social contract between you yet).

 

[mikel]

If you ask her out on a date, and invite her to eat. Then you should pay. Thats like someone inviting you to a party, then when you get there, them asking you why you didn't bring the beer.


If she asks YOU out on the date then the circumstances change a bit, but pay for it if its your idea.

 

[00Kevin]

Originally posted by DrDope
This is what I was getting at also. I say you have to bite the bullet here assuming you initiated the date and it's early (there is no implied social contrct between you yet).

if the gal doesn't offer you to pay how do you decline? well.. it wouldn't bother me at all.. but if you want I suggest that you give her a neg hit.


"hey... you must be broke from spending all your money on looking sexy. "

of course I would add something like, "It's ok ... I'll pay for everything just make sure you always look like a hottie ok."

 

[Jake-inator]

"hey... you must be broke from spending all your money on looking sexy. "

of course I would add something like, "It's ok ... I'll pay for everything just make sure you always look like a hottie ok."

She's a selfish wh0re and you're an AFC.

Perfect match actually. She wants something and you get it for her just because she's hot.
By the way she's THE PRIZE not you, if you haven't figured that out yet.

Whatever works for you... although I prefer to be the selfish wh0re in the relationship rather than the chump.

 

[Oxide]

First of all, from my experience, who pays does not matter

So why in the world would you pay for her? Do you have too much money? I got bills to take care of, i'll use my money for ME.


The way to go about it to make it look smooth is buy one thing and let her pay for the next one.. she buys the dinner you buy the movies. Dont think about prices, just keep it realtively same.

For all of you guys thinking men should pay. In my experience, women LOVE to buy the guy stuff when she is going out with him. I got countless friends who get clothes and gifts from chicks they are going out with.. stop worrying about her wallet, worry about your own!

 

[Oxide]

^^^ To each his own man, if you like spending, go for it.

I remember this old Futurama episode about this:

Usually Billy would work a hard job so he can earn enough money to take Jenny out for dinner in hopes that she will have sex with him.


What do you mean "gotcha b1tch?" When you stop paying for dinner after 3 dates, do you really think she will accept it? Or will she already be used to you paying...

 

[Francisco d'Anconia]

Just got back from a late afternoon date with a woman I just met. We were originally just going to meet for coffee but the coffee shop she picked sucked. I suggested we go to the Applebee's down the street because I hadn't eaten all day.

Guess who paid for dinner? Not me, I didn't even have to say a word.