I just turned 40 and have been on the dating scene for about 3 years. I find that I prefer that the guy call me. I don’t like being the aggresor. As far as paying for the date I say whoever asks the other to go out should offer to pay for it. I often take turns with guys. I must say that the guy ALWAYS offers to pay anyway. Sometimes I let him and sometimes I don’t.
" Now boy decides he really likes girl and would like very much to go out with girl again but the thing is he can’t afford to foot the bill for both. Now he can afford to take himself out but can’t afford to take her out."
In that case they better not have sex. If he can’t pay for her food, he won’t be able to pay for her baby, eh, Shakes? 
Well, SHAKES, if he’s broke, there’s nothing at all wrong with calling up and saying, “Hey, I’d really like to see you again. I’m a little broke at the moment, but would you like to come over? We could rent a movie and maybe get a pizza, or we could cook.” This would almost certainly cost less than going out, even on one’s own, and it give her the option of suggesting other arrangements like going dutch or her paying.
It’s rude, tacky, and crass to be such a bad host as to invite someone and then expect them to pay for themselves.
I’m still trying to figure out this whole I-pay-for-dinner-and-a-movie/she-cooks-and-cleans-(and presumably puts out) dichotomy. If she’s okay with that, then a) she’s a doormat, and getting the short end of the stick in a big way or b) you spend a hell of a lot of money on her. I mean, maids start at $20/hour, and $30-40 is more common. If it takes her, say, three hours to clean the mess you can’t be bothered with, do your laundry, cook your breakfast and clean up afterward, we’re talking anywhere from $60-$120, just for the cooking/cleaning bit.
I don’t know about you, but I could go out a whole lot for $120.
If you two are having sex, figure up how long you do that per week, then look into the prices for “escorts” in your area. That’s another few hundred bucks, I’d say.
Damn, boy, you better be spending a whole lot of money on that woman to make this at all equitable.
Just me but I would be a little embarrased to call someone and ask them to pay to take me out…gender isn’t the issue. It just seems rude. Hey, I’ll spring for dinner and you buy the movie just seems crass. Sorry shakes…
I think if I couldn’t afford it, maybe I’d just invite him over for a BBQ or something surely a Texan knows all about BBQ…
OIf I can’t afford it, I just ask to do somethig inexpensive - even free. BUt no I couldn’t ask someone to pay their own way.
Thank you, CrazyCatLady. You have broken it down in a very succinct manner; my point is not that a guy who’s broke shouldn’t date, my point is that he’s just got to be more creative than “Hey, I’ll spring for the Sonic, you buy the movie!” on the second date.
I’ve dated guys who don’t have a lot of money…hell, I’ll even go so far as to say that I’ve never dated a guy who did have a lot of money. You don’t have to wine-n-dine me; renting a movie and inviting me over for pizza/dinner is a great second/third/fifth date, whatever! And far preferable to trying to figure out a way to get your date to cough up dough when you invite her out.
And yes, I still can’t get over the whole “maid-service/short order cook” aspect of the scenario, SHAKES. Sorry, but that kind of invalidates any of your other opinions for me because it’s just so blatantly misogynist. :shrug: Sorry, no dice.
Aright listen Audrey Levins and CrazyCatLady You two need to calm down, first off my GF is NOT a fucking door mat! And furthermore I’m not paying her to give up that ass! If all I wanted was a piece of ass I’d go to the local bar and pick me up a bar whore, its easy enough to do.(at least for me it is) My GF does these thing for me becuase she DIGS HER OLD MAN. And when she fucks me its becuase she wants to fuck my brains out. (that works both ways of course) Even if I were to quit paying for everything she would still clean my house and cook me dinner and all that other kind of crap. Why you may ask? Becuase she knows it pleases me.
I will admit though I do like my women submisive that being becuase I’m what some might call an alpha male. Anyway I guess what I’m saying here is quit acting like my GF is some sort of victim because shes not. Believe it or not ladies,some women LIKE being with dominant men.
However CrazyCatLady I will agree with what you said in your post about comming over and cooking dinner bit. Thats more or less the point I was trying to get across. (Fecklessly I might add) The main point I was trying to get across to the OP is that typically it will be left up to the man to handle that awkward situation.
So, um, who’s the one shouting here? Oh, that would be you, SHAKES. So perhaps we’re not the ones who need to calm down, hmmm? Besides, go back and read your previous posts. You tell us that she cooks and cleans in return for you paying for everything, then get all bent out of shape about us taking that to mean that she cooks and cleans in return for you paying for stuff? How fucked up is that?
And yes, some people might call you an “alpha male.” Others might call you a “misogynistic jackass”, “lazy slob”, or “macho jerk.” It’s a matter of perspective, kind of like whether I’m “assertive” or “a ballbusting bitch.”
Aside from the “lazy slob” crack I’'ll totaly agree with you there. Because I do clean up after myself when I’m in between girlfriends.
But the reason why I pay for everything is not to get free housecleaning but becuase she caters to me, thats the kind of woman I’m attracted to; is that so wrong? And yes the day she stops doing these little things for me yeah I probably will dump her ass and find another one that will. Why?because I know what I want. And if you’re feeling sorry for these women don’t they know from the word go what they’re getting into with me. As you said in the quote above I may be alot of things but one thing I’m not is a bull shitter.
And besides I’m not so sure whats wrong with me paying for everything and expecting a little something in return anyway? Why is this such a bad thing? please explain.
SHAKES, look. Does your GF work for a living? Do you support her? Do you pay her bills? Does she live with you?
I’d guess not, since she “comes over to your house” on weekends.
Ergo, she’s a grown woman who takes care of herself. The fact that you take her out should be an expression of your pleasure in her company; it isn’t an “exchange” of free food/entertainment for housecleaning. You shouldn’t be thinking in terms of getting something back on your “investment” in her entertainment. You should be taking her out b/c you like spending time with her, and enjoy her company, not so that you can say, “Well, y’know, I took you to that nice steakhouse, babe, so why don’t you go ahead and knock out my dishes and whip up some breakfast. Ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.”
The fact that you only clean up after yourself when you’re “in-between girlfriends” is wrong on so many levels that I can’t even begin to explain it to you, b/c it’s obvious you don’t get it. And the only thing even more remarkable than this is the fact that you find women willing to do your dirty work in exchange for free meals.
Put it this way: I’ve dated my fair share of men, and I’ve never had a man expect me to clean up his house in exchange for the dinner tab he picked up. I don’t care how much he spent; I’m not after a man’s money, and if he happens to have some and he’d like to spend it on a nice dinner with me, that’s his perogative.
I don’t owe him a clean house or breakfast in exchange, and any man who expected either would find himself single again.
And the whole “I’ll dump her ass if she stops” comment…
Jesus.
Just b/c you “know what you want” and you find women who’ll give it to you doesn’t mean we aren’t free to think there’s something wrong with both of you.
Audrey Levins I know you probably think I’m a big giant twit but I can’t help thinking you’re one cool chick, if not for anything but you’re mad writting skills and your way of knocking a guy down a peg. CLASSIC.
Anyway I guess you and CrazyCatLady are correct I am a LITTLE fucked up.
But there is one more thhing I’d like to ask, isn’t the whole bit about spending time with each other supposed to be a mutual thing? I mean why should the man have to pay if you’re BOTH enjoying each others company?
OOPS! I meant [your writting skills
Hmmm…not trying to takes sides here but…this is sorta’ what I am thinking as well. Maybe not if this was the Victorian era. However, since it isn’t, I think this can be considered the fallout from the women’s lib movement (ie. the who pays dilemma). As they say, be careful of what you wish for. Women want equality. Equal pay, fly fighters, fight with the men on the front lines, interview football players in the dressing rooms after a game, etc. So why does it stop at the cash register? I’ll tell you why (and this is strictly my .02 worth). As Richard Pryor once said, “They got the pussy and they know it’s good!” He, he.
Okay so this whole thing has totally disintegrated from an ettiquette question to women’s lib, submission, and taste. Guess it’s all a matter of taste and your preference for what class of women of men you prefer. I personally am the sort of women SHAKES would “kick to the curb” or maybe I would kick him to the curb or wouldn’t look twice at to begin with. I look at a man as an equal. I have no problem with paying but I am not about to be his servant or pick up after him. I don’t expect him to pick up after me either. It’s a matter of self respect and respect for my partner.
It’s only my opinion but the whole thing just seems tacky and low class. Sorry Shakes, I’m sure you aren’t really that way but the more you write, the more it seems that way. Sometimes you get what you pay for.
Actually, SHAKES, I think if you re-read my and Audrey’s posts, you’ll find that we’ve never said the man has to pay. In fact, I specifically said that whoever does the inviting is the host/hostess. So clearly, I expect women to pay at least part of the time. Lord knows I’ve paid for plenty of evenings out with Dr.J. In a relationship between equals, there’s a roughly equivalent give-and-take.
And yes, the whole point is to take pleasure in each other’s company. The most enjoyable dates I’ve ever had have been nights when we’ve picked up Happy Meals or a bucket of chicken and gone to the park. It was there that we tended to have the fewest distractions from one another and were freest to be ourselves, both as individuals and as a couple. If we want to talk about the stuff we pulled out of patients today over dinner, we could do so without grossing out the diners around us. If we wanted to snuggle a while, or go play on the swings before dessert, we could do that.
I’m not so sure I’m on board with the whole “I like it and she likes it, so it’s okay” thing, but I don’t want to hijack this thread any further. I think I may start another on the subject, though.
(Devil’s advocate here)
Wouldn’t etiquette be tied to women’s lib in this instance? What was etiquette pre-1960’s is certainly different than it is now. Wouldn’t you agree? Then, women probably couldn’t really afford to pick up the tab so there was a practical rational behind men paying. Consider this as well:
I meet girl. I think I might be interested in getting to know girl strictly as friend, then see where it goes. I ask girl, “Hey, let’s go see a movie together” (or let’s have lunch, etc). I should pay, right?
How about this?
I am girl. I meet another girl that I might be interested in as a friend. I ask girl to, “Hey, let’s go see a movie together.” (or let’s have lunch, etc.) O.K. The question is, who pays? Wouldn’t it be assumed it would be dutch unless suggested otherwise.
Here’s my postulate. Isn’t there an unconscious understanding by both parties (of opposite sex) of sexual bartering, therefore one would expect the man to pay in the former situation but no such expectation in the latter? Otherwise, why would the situations be different? I’m sure if SHAKE asked a buddy of his to go to a concert he would expect his buddy to pay for his own ticket. Unless, of course, SHAKE was gay which I think all of here are pretty sure he isn’t. He, he.
nah, not in my opinion. I guess in the whole women fighter pilot point of view if you take it all the way back to Victoriana.
So pre-1960 ettiquette is definitely diferent than now but we certainly aren’t talking about that, you asked about now. You know about ettiquette from 17 years ago or you wouldn’t have asked.
If you are a girl and you meet another girl and ask to go tpo a movie presuming you aren’t gay, yes you assume you are going dutch.
Male or female if you do the asking, you should pay. My boyfriend does pay more often than I do, not because I want him to…it’s his archane male pride that prods him to do that not that I expect him to. Although I have to say that I do treat him often and tend to buy him more expensive presents as well.
But to think that the man should pay and the woman should do the laundry in return is classless. I stick to that assessment regardless if your sexual orientation.
I meet girl. I think I might be interested in getting to know girl strictly as friend, then see where it goes.
Let me ask you: Do you have any platonic female friends? Are you really approaching this the same way you would if you were cultivating a new friendship with another man? I think it’s a case of conflicting intentions - you don’t approach other men with a “see where it goes” attitude, do you? This is understandable, but it’s still in conflict with your principle that women should be treated the same as men (I just had to use the word principle again - ha, ha).
Seriously though, I think the approach is the first problem, for your scenario in particular.
But in general, the sex bartering business is still a dilemma.
Sexual equality doesn’t exist. This is my stance, and it’s got nothing to do with how much a woman enjoys sex. In many cases (if not most), the double standard is still going strong, for one thing. As long as a man perceives it that way, he can’t expect women to pretend it’s not so. Casual sex? Okay, but what does that really mean? It means something is being held back, and that something might be more important for female sexual satisfaction than it is for a man. The age old question of what comes first, chicken or egg? The rooster comes first. There’s no reproductive imperative for female satisfaction, and the impulse/mechanics of sex are primarily reproductive. If there’s no emotional component on the man’s part - well, good luck ladies. Use a condom, and don’t expect that next day call. That’s the way it is, like it or not.
So it’s part social conditioning, and part physiological (or anatomy as destiny), and speaking of equality: Tell me Doctor, the last time you encountered a pregnant male patient…
Flame me if you must (anyone), but IMHO, SHAKES’ approach is actually preferable: He’s fairly self aware, he’s not a bull shitter, his cards are on the table from day one, and he’s ready to deal. And because it’s a deal, you can negotiate for what you want or need. I’d only critique his presentation (but then again, once you begin to couch your words, you increase the chances of misunderstanding). The roomate thing is a little weird too - but that’s another issue…
annaplurabelle I want to date you. Except I am taken plus I’m a woman 
Oh well.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Artemius *
**I meet girl. I think I might be interested in getting to know girl strictly as friend, then see where it goes.
[Quote]
Originally posted by Annaplurabelle
Let me ask you: Do you have any platonic female friends? Are you really approaching this the same way you would if you were cultivating a new friendship with another man? I think it’s a case of conflicting intentions - you don’t approach other men with a “see where it goes” attitude, do you? This is understandable, but it’s still in conflict with your principle that women should be treated the same as men (I just had to use the word principle again - ha, ha).
Funny you should mention that. My ex and I were platonic friends for 8 yrs. Met her thru her girlfriend that I had dated. My ex was and still is a hottie. But at the time I was just divorced and only interested in having fun. It seemed there were girls I was only interested in having sex with and others a good solid friendship. Don’t get me wrong, I WAS curious though. (he, he) We all went out mainly as a group but I would sometimes sleep over with my ex in the same bed (while her boyfriend was out of town, of course). I valued our fun times together too much to try anything and frankly wasn’t interested. Then one day (7 yrs later) she asked me (while laying in bed about to take a mid-afternoon nap) why I never put my arm around her. Well, the rest is history. So, in this case I wanted just friendship from the get go. Incidentally, we all went dutch when going out.
Even now that we are divorced, we’re like friends again and have met out for dinner a time or two - dutch - I might add (which had not been worked out prior to and just worked out that way) I’m even babysitting her cats this weekend.
I’m not sure why all the dilemma. I don’t think I ever projected a confusing message regarding my intentions to the women I currently see/saw. IMO, I think girls see me as a single doc ($$$), I live in a Bible belt conservative town, and they can only see me from one perspective. To drive the point home: If I woke up and discovered I was now a woman, gainfully employed, and a guy asked me out, I’d offer to go dutch on the first date. Otherwise I’d feel like I was taking advantage of the situation. Or, what I might do is accept his offer and add, “Why thank you and the next one is one me.” (or something along that line) Why? Women want equality, equal pay, equal respect, want to fly combat aircraft, fight on front lines, do and have all the things men have and do. If they want equality they can’t expect to have it both ways.
ANNAPLURABELLE I’m not sure what you are driving at regarding condoms and pregnant males. Surely you know you are preaching to the choir. I practice safe sex, end of story. I only date good girls (he, he), preferably Catholic with all that repressed guilt (he, he).
Artemius…maybe you should move to a bigger city where there are more affluent males. Or maybe you should date women who make roughly the smae amount of $$$ that you do and then it isn’t going to be that issue.
I tend to date men who are roughly within my income range and then I avoid a lot of those weird “he’s only dating me for my my money” or “he expects things from me because thinks he’s loaded” kinds of mentatlities. There are some good things to be said about living in metropolitan areas.