Poll: Am I disgusting for not paying for the first date?

[SecondPrize]

But that's not selfish at all. If we were to go out for lunch and you absolutely insist on grabbing the check, then by declining to argue about it if I instead give you what you wanted then I'm being quite selfless.

But therein lies the dilemma. Do you selflessly refuse to argue and selfishly let me foot the bill? Or do you selfishly make a fuss for the selfless reason of trying to save me money? It doesn't matter which you choose. The important thing is that you at least made the offer.

No, I selflessly take you up on your offer, putting aside any desires I may have had on the matter without argument because to do so would be so very selfishly rude of me to just take your offer and reject it out of hand as if were not honestly intended. I'd be being a fucking saint, akin to Mother Teresa at her very best, but sometimes you must cast your own desires aside and suffer for the good of others.

 

[FeralDynasty]

The person who asks, pays. Simple.

 

[Naeras]

Discussions like this, and the fact that people seriously judge others for their opinions on the matter, is one of many reasons I'm glad I never had to do this "dating"-thing in the first place. WEIRD SOCIAL RULES I CANNOT COMPREHEND AAAAAAAAAAA~ D:

And no, I'd think it's completely fine to not pay for the first date. Just as it's completely fine to pay for the first date as well. It completely depends on the situation and who you're going out with.

 

[BarbaricGoose]

If you have the money, pay. It's just the nice thing to do. Don't do it because you're a man, or you feel like you have to, just do it because it's polite. It's not rocket science.

Unless your date specifically asks you not to, no one's gonna think better of you for not paying, believe me. They could very well think worse of you, though.

 

[josak]

This is a subject I've debated with my friends at length, when a friend stated that a guy should pay for a woman on dates. After I told him I didn't do that with my current girlfriend and I didn't do that for my first date which he found even more shocking, he accused me of not being a gentleman. My reasoning behind not paying for a girl is a case of sexism. while I'd never bang home to anyone that they shouldn't pay for a date, I chose not to due to the fact that a relationship should be built on equality and that old tradition is kind of starting it on the wrong foot. The reason I thought about this again is because I was watching a UK show called 'First Dates' in which a man insists he will pay for the woman as if he doesn't it's disgusting. Now Escapists, what is your view?

EDIT: For people wondering about why I don't just pay to improve my chances of a relationship; I'm not that desperate for a relationship that I'm going to pay her as such to convince her. Another reason I just say "Do you want to go dutch?" as if this is an actual date and I'm looking for a relationship anyone who refuses that yes I will pay for but is not the sort of person who I want to see again so it levels out as a handy test now I think about it.

I understand the reasoning that if you extended the invitation that you should pay but I think that argument is a bit of a cop out as you never see that in the reverse, I've been asked out by women before and they never offer to pay not that they should and most people would see it very strange if I expected them to. Also with that reasoning it should hold in a platonic setting but friends do not expect their friends to pay for them if they are invited somewhere.

Also when I say split the bill I mean going dutch, I should have made that more clear originally.

I always saw it as whoever asked the other out has to pay for the first date.

On the other hand I do see asking someone to go Dutch on a first date as very bad form, you are bringing money into an equation where it should be clear that someone's time was valuable to you (goes for men and women).

What you are saying is "Spending time with you was not worth anything to me" and the other person would quite rightly never see you again.

 

[Raikas]

I think that whoever did the inviting should pay and that's especially true if they're also choosing the restaurant. If you invite someone to an expensive place and then expect them to pay half, that doesn't make you ungentlemanly, it makes you an asshole (I feel the same way about groups of friends who don't take each other's financial status into consideration when they all go out together as well).

I also think it depends on your age - I think it makes sense for students to split bills since they're probably on a budget, and I think that couples with high income discrepancies should tilt towards having the wealthier one pay the bill (which is often the guy, but not always - my sister outearns her husband 5-fold, for example).

 

[The Lunatic]

"Let me take you out for dinner."

Implies you'll pay.

"Do you want to go out for dinner?"

Implies split.

 

[DevilWithaHalo]

It really depends on the situation.

If you're a stingy sonofagun who doesn't care for the girl enough to be a gentleman, then sucks to be you, and I pity the girl who wants to date you.

If you and the girl went on a gender equality agreement that each should pay for their own food so that the girl doesn't feel inferior, it's odd, but if it pleases the girl, then you're actually being a gentleman.

And if you care about who pays the bills on the date so much, I don't think you like that girl.

That's some impressive shaming language you've got going there.

 

[LeQuack_Is_Back]

Honestly, it's between the people dating, I'd say. If, for example, you know your date has a soft spot for the old gentlemanly ways, paying (or at least offering) seems like a good way to start things. Another example would be taking finances into consideration. For a long time, I was broke, and as much as I'd have wanted to pay for a date, I wouldn't have been able to.

Basically, work it out with whoever you're going with. That's who it ultimately affects, no?

 

[Cloned31]

I always got frustrated with this social norm. You see, I think it's one of those dumb things instilled in most of us men when we grow up like the phrase "Be a man", which I have a problem with btw, considering it's societal implications.

But anyway, I think it is sexist to have to pay for a date based on some stupid arbitrary "rule". Though you shouldn't be a dick about it. Both of you should prepare to bring money (especially considering it is the first date) and if one of you expects the other to bring money, there is an obvious an issue here.

 

[Cloned31]

Honestly, it's between the people dating, I'd say. If, for example, you know your date has a soft spot for the old gentlemanly ways, paying (or at least offering) seems like a good way to start things. Another example would be taking finances into consideration. For a long time, I was broke, and as much as I'd have wanted to pay for a date, I wouldn't have been able to.

Basically, work it out with whoever you're going with. That's who it ultimately affects, no?

Though I think if you are having this date you should atleast feel comfortable just asking to either go dutch or just have one person pay. As a college student with retired parents I never really had the funds to always pay for a date fully or at all.

 

[Patathatapon]

It shouldn't be a required trend. Also, people from the U.K. no nothing of being a gentlemen, they find it ridiculous to thank a bus driver (Source is Yahtzee)!

This doesn't mean the woman should pay for the bill either. The couple should either split the bill, or, for one date one person takes a bill, and the next take the other takes the bill. Though I've never been in a relationship, nor do I plan to due to my violent nature. In short, my opinion may be the equivalent of a grain of salt.

 

[Holy_Handgrenade]

It really depends on the situation.

If you're a stingy sonofagun who doesn't care for the girl enough to be a gentleman, then sucks to be you, and I pity the girl who wants to date you.

If you and the girl went on a gender equality agreement that each should pay for their own food so that the girl doesn't feel inferior, it's odd, but if it pleases the girl, then you're actually being a gentleman.

And if you care about who pays the bills on the date so much, I don't think you like that girl.

I do not equate being a nice guy with being a gentleman on a date I am polite and a nice guy as I like to think I am in everyday life. Though I won't bend over backwards to satisfy this gentlemanly idea that women can't function by themselves or try to please and convince the girl to like me, to do so seems needy and unattractive. I go into a date looking at it as a chance for two people who mutually like each other to get to know each other more. It is not a question of generosity, neither would I be disappointed at a girl who didn't pay for me if they asked me out.

 

[Uhura]

I think that people who expect that their date pays for them and then get upset if that doesn't happen come off entitled and childish.

My policy is that each person pays their own meal. If one person wants to offer to pay, then that's cool, but don't force your "generousness" on other people. If the other person for whatever reason feels uncomfortable with your offer, just accept it and drop the issue.

 

[KouDy]

Equality of gender is non-sense if you ask me. Men are better in some things while women excel in other things and in some areas it's a tie. Why to make big deal out that.

Voted "No" of course. Gentlemen my ***. Paying for someone is not mandatory. We are not thick skinned creatures. It's up to mutual agreement. If man/woman agrees to pay for the other one then why not.

 

[Nathan Crumpler]

No one should pay, just dine and dash...

 

[theboombody]

Man, if you're not flat broke and if you're going out with a girl, treat her to something. Otherwise, just don't go out. What the heck else are you going to do with the money?

 

[Playful Pony]

I pretty much always offer to pay on a date... And I'm a woman. It is not a matter of gender for me, but it is a gentleman thing (can't think of a better, gender-neutral word for it).