As a man who was deeply inspired by chivalry when I was growing up... I used to always pay. But some girls will take offense or be suspicious. I've learned to go "so do you want to split the tab?" while making it obvious that I'm about to pay for it otherwise(pull up the wallet, get out the bills for the full sum, or the debit card), and if she's looking undecisive I'll just say "you can pay for the next one if you want".
Poll: Am I disgusting for not paying for the first date?
- Thread starter Holy_Handgrenade
- Start date
THIS! I generally think that trying to resort to subtext and conventions on etiquette is detrimental to a relationship when chosen over actually communicating with each other. My girlfriend trained me quite thoroughly to think more pragmatically than that.Redlin5 said:
Not paying for the date is fine. Assuming that it makes you a better person to default to not paying for the date is disgusting. If you're going for equality, then you stick to logical considerations:
Which of you is wealthier?
Who asked and who accepted for the date?
Who picked the restaurant or film?
If you're the asker, picker of establishment, and/or wealthier party then you should probably begin with offering to pay. Deciding your choice of action uniformly based upon defining every party you could date as 'the female I am on a date with' is significantly more sexist than what is ultimately an act of generosity... functionally, if you want to decide as equal parties, the course of action is this:
Consider who should pay for it via a variety of factors, none of which is gender.
If yourself, begin by offering to pay; if your partner, ask how she would like to have it paid.
Work something out, then look back to ensure the decision is based upon a compromise between your desires rather than assumptions of philosophy or tradition.
Which of you is wealthier?
Who asked and who accepted for the date?
Who picked the restaurant or film?
If you're the asker, picker of establishment, and/or wealthier party then you should probably begin with offering to pay. Deciding your choice of action uniformly based upon defining every party you could date as 'the female I am on a date with' is significantly more sexist than what is ultimately an act of generosity... functionally, if you want to decide as equal parties, the course of action is this:
Consider who should pay for it via a variety of factors, none of which is gender.
If yourself, begin by offering to pay; if your partner, ask how she would like to have it paid.
Work something out, then look back to ensure the decision is based upon a compromise between your desires rather than assumptions of philosophy or tradition.
Dutch on the first date is fine. Hell, Dutch on every date is fine. It really depends on the people involved.
If you want to cover all your bases, offer. If she declines and indicates a desire to pay her half, don't push the issue.
If you want to cover all your bases, offer. If she declines and indicates a desire to pay her half, don't push the issue.
Yes, I know. The gesture has its origins there. However, the reactions that the OP was talking about (men being called disgusting for not paying a bill) is an example of sexism against men.Olas said:
Speaking of sexism inherent in polite gestures, I have a male friend who wanted to open and hold doors for women, but got called sexist for it. His response was to open and hold doors for everyone no matter their age, sex, or anything else. He said that it couldn't be sexist if he treated everyone the same - and he was right. Now he just comes off as extremely polite, and he still gets to open and hold doors for women (and everyone else).
Female here
I don't expect the guys I go out with to pay for me, I prefer splitting the bill.
If they really insist, then I'll let them. (some guys take that really seriously and get offended/hurt when you want to split the bill, which is why this topic is here in the first place). If I invited you, knowing you don't have any money, I'll pay.
I don't expect the guys I go out with to pay for me, I prefer splitting the bill.
If they really insist, then I'll let them. (some guys take that really seriously and get offended/hurt when you want to split the bill, which is why this topic is here in the first place). If I invited you, knowing you don't have any money, I'll pay.
Not answering the poll.
The correct answers are "Go Dutch", "Offer (Don't Insist) to Pay" or "Decide in Advance", none of which are options.
The correct answers are "Go Dutch", "Offer (Don't Insist) to Pay" or "Decide in Advance", none of which are options.
If it's truly a "date," then the person who asked the other out should pay.
If it's more of an agreed to "hey, maybe we should go do this" then you can negotiate or ask or deal with splitting. However, an actual date, proposed by one person to another, implies "I would like to take YOU out somewhere. It's on me."
If it's more of an agreed to "hey, maybe we should go do this" then you can negotiate or ask or deal with splitting. However, an actual date, proposed by one person to another, implies "I would like to take YOU out somewhere. It's on me."
I don't think it should be a gender obligation for the guys to pay for the first date, but I tend to do it anyway to make a good impression. For the sake of equality though, guys shouldn't feel obliged to pay for their dates' meal. I don't know why it's so ingrained in our culture still.
You are not disgusting for not paying for a date their is absolutely nothing wrong with splitting a check. I would even go and say the worst you could get are the "ungentlemanly" but that little bit of shame don't mean much way back when there was a reason but right now its just a hollow expectation.
Personally I would rather go full out treat in a established relationship over the beginning of it because that just makes more sense to me.
So not paying for the date doesn't make you digusting and I would not worry the whole 'ungentlemanly" thing as long as the two parties enjoy themselves and no one is being a jerk about its fine.
Personally I would rather go full out treat in a established relationship over the beginning of it because that just makes more sense to me.
So not paying for the date doesn't make you digusting and I would not worry the whole 'ungentlemanly" thing as long as the two parties enjoy themselves and no one is being a jerk about its fine.
I insist on paying for the first few dates but once I'm in a relationship things tend to even out, E.g sometimes we buy our own, sometimes I pay, sometime she pays.
I'm not sure why I have the compulsion while dating, I just feel really weird if I don't pay (I've not paid on a couple of occasions), I don't quite know how to explain it, possibly it was just how I was raised so going against it feels unnatural to me.
I'm not sure why I have the compulsion while dating, I just feel really weird if I don't pay (I've not paid on a couple of occasions), I don't quite know how to explain it, possibly it was just how I was raised so going against it feels unnatural to me.
I'm a man and I'll always intend to pay. If she wants to split, fine, if not, fine as well.
A first date is not the time to ponder on traditional gender roles, not for me anyways. I simply and selfishly want to maximize my chances by trying to be gentlemanlike and not coming across as cheap. If a woman isn't happy with me intending to pay, well, as somewhat of a feminist myself and no stranger to these debates, a good conversation might result out of that, so it's a win-win.
But if someone wants to make a statement about supposed reverse sexism here, then of course by all means he's free to go ahead.
A first date is not the time to ponder on traditional gender roles, not for me anyways. I simply and selfishly want to maximize my chances by trying to be gentlemanlike and not coming across as cheap. If a woman isn't happy with me intending to pay, well, as somewhat of a feminist myself and no stranger to these debates, a good conversation might result out of that, so it's a win-win.
But if someone wants to make a statement about supposed reverse sexism here, then of course by all means he's free to go ahead.
It's a courtesy thing. I'd say that whoever asked the other one out would normally pay, if not it can be worked out between the two of them. I don't think that the man should always pay in the same way that I don't think that the woman should, as a rule I do pay for, or at least offer to pay for, whomever I'm going out with, at least for the first few dates.
As a man who, on the whole normally dates men, I guess the gender bit doesn't really apply to me.
As a man who, on the whole normally dates men, I guess the gender bit doesn't really apply to me.
I'd start off by just asking them how they want to proceed, if they leave you with the decision then offer to split it (either by price or by what each person ate).
If they want you to pay then you get to decide if the cost of dating that person outweighs the benefits or otherwise
Simples
If they want you to pay then you get to decide if the cost of dating that person outweighs the benefits or otherwise
Simples
No you're not disgusting. If you picked your nose, wiped it on the bill, then handed it to your date...that would be disgusting.
But you need a "it depends" in the poll. In this day and age I think the proper etiquette should be that whoever did the asking out should pay for (and arrange for that matter) the date.
On the other side of the scale, my friend thinks women who don't at least offer to split the bill are disgusting.
But you need a "it depends" in the poll. In this day and age I think the proper etiquette should be that whoever did the asking out should pay for (and arrange for that matter) the date.
On the other side of the scale, my friend thinks women who don't at least offer to split the bill are disgusting.
I much prefer to split the bill but I'll always offer to pay. If she insists that she wants to pay I'll bring up the split the bill idea. With my current girlfriend though we pay for each other depending on who's idea or exactly who's treating who.