Should the guy pay on the first date?

Spoiler alert: old-fashioned views expressed!

I am of the generation where it was expected that the man would pay for the first date (a) because it was normally the man who made the invitation and (b) as a sign of respect. The first date was a ‘getting to know you exercise’, no doubt with the hope and expectation of a longer-term relationship but certainly with no commitment to one.

As far as expectations of sex are concerned, this is just another sign of the general debasement of human relationships.

” … if women are as capable of earning as men are …”
If.

“… why should women see men as a provider?”
It’s a Darwinian imperative.

“Why not judge each other on their providing potential?”
Because that’s not how it works.

I will offer to pay for my share, but if the guy takes my money without any hesitation, I might have to reconsider a second date, lol.

There seems to be a lot of “women are only after money” comments on this post. It seems to me that those of you who have been unsuccessful with women are using that as an excuse. In reading the tone of your comments, though, I would be more inclined to think it is your thinly veiled misogyny that women are picking up on.

curmudgery said :

It continues, neckbeard_virgin, because the females want to know, among other things, who might be a good provider.

lol, I could swear I said the same thing just a few replies earlier. My question though, is if women are as capable of earning as men are, why should women see men as a provider? Why not judge each other on their providing potential?

It continues, neckbeard_virgin, because the females want to know, among other things, who might be a good provider.

A word to the wise, though. If he watches every penny, he’ll be a misery to live with. And if he flashes a lot of money around it’s probably not all his.

neckbeard_virgin said :

curmudgery said :

The man paying for the first date is symbolic – it’s just one of the many messages exchanged between the two. It says “I’m doing ok in the world, I have resources.” And that’s important to you both.

(Other messages he should include are: “I can dress myself, I’ve heard of personal hygiene and I know better than to blow my nose on the tablecloth.”)

Well, not really. Hygiene and being able to wear clothes has always been a mutual expectation, but the symbol of displaying resources has been a male thing.

Why should that continue?

Think of the term ‘gold digger’ and where it may have its origins. Take a pair of identical twin men. Dress them to look exactly the same. Then tell your test subject which one is the billionaire and which is stone motherless broke. You can bet a clap of thunder to a gooses fart that she will go for the rich boy every time. Any woman who says otherwise is a liar. That is why it continues. Its just a fact of life, and feminism will has not changed it – nor will it ever change for that matter.

curmudgery said :

The man paying for the first date is symbolic – it’s just one of the many messages exchanged between the two. It says “I’m doing ok in the world, I have resources.” And that’s important to you both.

(Other messages he should include are: “I can dress myself, I’ve heard of personal hygiene and I know better than to blow my nose on the tablecloth.”)

Well, not really. Hygiene and being able to wear clothes has always been a mutual expectation, but the symbol of displaying resources has been a male thing.

Why should that continue?

Sorry, but to me just having coffee or a drink together doesn’t count as a ‘first date’ and sex has no place in the first date equation.

The man paying for the first date is symbolic – it’s just one of the many messages exchanged between the two. It says “I’m doing ok in the world, I have resources.” And that’s important to you both.

(Other messages he should include are: “I can dress myself, I’ve heard of personal hygiene and I know better than to blow my nose on the tablecloth.”)

If paying something seems preferable to her then suggest coffee or a gelato elsewhere: a token – that should be enough.

Common sense can then reign happily on the second date.

P.S. If she gets a bit miffed, insists on a 50-50 split and goes on about ‘the principal of the thing’ and ‘equality’ or other variable abstractions then, ok, acquiesce to her preference. But she lacks that ‘je ne sais quoi’ – and it’s more than just having no sense of occasion: it’s about style – and style can’t be bought, studied for or won through debate. Your search continues.

What’s the point of dating, anyway? To assess the suitability of someone as a partner.

Now that we’re in the age of equality, shouldn’t we demonstrate that by accepting a default custom of splitting the bill?

The person asking has no more responsibility to pay than the person accepting. Traditionally, the man would pay, as a token demonstration of his ability and willingness to fit the provider role. But no longer, as women have every opportunity to earn as men do.

Maybe the new custom should be to bring your payslips to a date, calculate the pay imbalance as a percentage, then contribute that when the bill comes.

Nothing says romance like equality!

This:

fabforty said :

If it’s a first date then just go out for coffee or a drink. There is less stress all round.

… followed by this:

dkNigs said :

I’d offer to pay, if she insists, I’ll offer again, if she insists again, then we’ll split. You only ever offer twice!

In general, however, I would say that whomever initiates the date should be ready to pay for it. By showing someone that you are willing to pay a price for their companionship, you are giving them the message that they are “worth it” without being awkward – and that’s a win already.

If it’s a first date then just go out for coffee or a drink. There is less stress all round.

If, at a later date, you decide to see the person again and maybe go out for lunch or dinner then I think the person doing the inviting should plan for paying for the meal, but it is considered good form for the other to offer to pay their share.

But, really, if you (male or female) invite someone out on a date and then get totally bent out of shape if the other person expects you to pick up the bill, then please just don’t invite people out to begin with.

Just be generous and kind, people. It is the cost of one night out. If you sulk and get bitter you will never find out if the other person may have planned something lovely for you in return.

I’d offer to pay, if she insists, I’ll offer again, if she insists again, then we’ll split. You only ever offer twice!

astrojax said :

HenryBG said :

“Are there really blokes out there that think that in exchange for a meal they should expect sex? I think they’ve mistaken dating for prostitution.”

Ummm….that’s kind of how sex works, didn’t you know? Females expect a man to provide, and choose partners on the basis of what they perceive to be a man’s ability to provide.
If it weren’t this way, prostitution wouldn’t be such a one-sided affair.

ummm, i think henry you’ve conflated prostitution with a genuine relationship -.

Huh?

Do you seriously want to believe that women do *not* make partnership decisions based on materialist considerations?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140501132636.htm

“Attractive body (more important to men)
Attractive face (more important to men)
Earning potential (more important to women)
Ambition (more important to women)”

You can call it prostitution if you really want, but it is a fact that we belong to a sexually-differentiated species, and it is a fact that differentiation means there are differences – one of those differences is the higher priority females place on materialism over sex, compared with males.

I think that’s why coffee dates are good to begin with, minimal cost and minimal time. Then if it goes well you can invest in something more substantial like a dinner.

I always found that if I knew I didn’t want to see the guy again I would make sure to split the bill or give some cash to cover my part. If I let him pay (with a thank you), it was generally because I wanted to see him again and would pay for the next meal/date in return.

HiddenDragon said :

Wasn’t there something in the news this week about an 18% gender pay gap, so maybe the rule of thumb should be a 60/40 split……but seriously, the suggestion made by others of having some cash (and not just in the form of $50 notes) might be useful.

Yeah one doesn’t have to work if the guys are paying bills for them.

I once dated a lady who expected me to pay everything, so I did. She was insulted that I asked her if she needed a lift home “of course I do”. She also expected me to have sex with her. This I declined.

farnarkler said :

Knowing my luck, she’d order the lobster thermidor and a bottle of Krug, say she’s forgotten her purse and never call or return calls again.

That sounds like a very flash maccas!

Knowing my luck, she’d order the lobster thermidor and a bottle of Krug, say she’s forgotten her purse and never call or return calls again.

Traditionally, on a ‘serious’ first date, the guy pays, and I would think you should try and enjoy the date rather than sweat about who is paying the bill. First dates are fraught enough.

And if he’s the sort of guy that expects some action in exchange for paying the bill, take his money and walk with a clear conscience.

I’m still traumatised by my first date with the girl of my adolescent dreams. Channeling James Bond, I nonchalantly paid the bill with my then new credit card. It bounced, and in those days there were no ATMs in western Queensland. I had to leave my date sitting there as security while I went home to borrow cash from my parents. She was kind about it, but not so kind that she would go out with me again.

Whenever I’m feeling a bit smug, I just have to think back to that night.

Wasn’t there something in the news this week about an 18% gender pay gap, so maybe the rule of thumb should be a 60/40 split……but seriously, the suggestion made by others of having some cash (and not just in the form of $50 notes) might be useful.

braddonmonsta said :

This is made so much more complicated in Australia since most restaurants refuse to split bills, meaning the non-paying person would have to take out their phone and do a bank transfer, which is really quite awkward for recent aquaintances.

There’s this new fangled invention, I think it’s called “cash” or something similar that might help in this situation.

braddonmonsta said :

This is made so much more complicated in Australia since most restaurants refuse to split bills, meaning the non-paying person would have to take out their phone and do a bank transfer, which is really quite awkward for recent aquaintances.

Alternatively you could have some cash on you, given that you knew you were going on a date and knew you may have to pay half.

This is made so much more complicated in Australia since most restaurants refuse to split bills, meaning the non-paying person would have to take out their phone and do a bank transfer, which is really quite awkward for recent aquaintances.

If someone says “I’ve got this”, I don’t think it’s necessarily polite to contest that – just make sure you get it next time. If someone doesn’t ask you out again on principle for not offering to split the bill, I think that’s pretty immature and stingy really.

“Another friend thinks that it should be split because of feminism. Full stop. I’m not sure what’s feminist about it, but that’s how she feels.”

This kind of woman would not get a second date with me. Screams difficult and high maintenance. It reminds me of a time I was officially counselled in the APS for referring to some of my female co-workers as ‘ladies’, the argument being that it is not my place to judge if they were ladies or not. True story!

“This all seems to boil down to the fact that no one can win. Whether the man pays, the bill is split or the woman pays. Someone is going to feel ripped off, p*ssed off or emasculated by what’s taken place.”

I prefer to view it this way: if the other person pays, I had a free lunch. Say, “thank you,” and maybe wonder once or twice over the next few days about whether you’ll hear from that person again.

From my own perspective, it has never been “paying for dinner” that led to men expecting to have sex with women, it’s simply that the woman was (an attractive) female that led the man to hope to have sex with her. The cost of dinner was incidental.

HenryBG said :

“Are there really blokes out there that think that in exchange for a meal they should expect sex? I think they’ve mistaken dating for prostitution.”

Ummm….that’s kind of how sex works, didn’t you know? Females expect a man to provide, and choose partners on the basis of what they perceive to be a man’s ability to provide.
If it weren’t this way, prostitution wouldn’t be such a one-sided affair.

ummm, i think henry you’ve conflated prostitution with a genuine relationship – the former being an arrangement where the commodity is only sexual; the latter being a more equal relationship where love and trust, among other things, are shared. ‘dating’ is here, i take it, to be a precursor to finding the latter. fyshwick is for the former…

“Are there really blokes out there that think that in exchange for a meal they should expect sex? I think they’ve mistaken dating for prostitution.”

Ummm….that’s kind of how sex works, didn’t you know? Females expect a man to provide, and choose partners on the basis of what they perceive to be a man’s ability to provide.
If it weren’t this way, prostitution wouldn’t be such a one-sided affair.

I always offer to pay the full bill. If the female offers to split, I insist that I pay in full. If the female continues to insist I split the bill.

Personally I don’t think its a good sign if the If the female doesn’t at least make an offer to split the bill.

It’s a good sign if the female pay waves before I even get a chance to use my card, which is what my girlfriend did on our first date 🙂

usually if it’s on a date it’s pay your own way or one pays for dinner and the other pays for the movie or the drinks. It’s far easier this way. All our early dates were split like this.

“However I have friends who disagree wholeheartedly. One saying that if they’ve gone to the effort of asking them on a date she expects them to pay – basically it was their idea therefore they should foot the bill.”

Does this mean if she asks him on the date she would expect she has to pay for both? Just wondering if she thinks it goes both ways.

For me, I’ve always thought the “Man must pay” tradition is silly. Maybe back in a time when women were less likely to be working or, if they were, getting paid less in their work than sure, he could pay.

I would prefer just to split the bill on the first date.

Although it also depends on how well you know the person. Is it someone you’ve recently met and are going out on a date or is it someone you know well and the relationship has changed? If it’s the latter I’d probably offer to pay in the expectation that at some point in the future they’d foot the bill.

Hypothetically, if I was on a date and the lady offered to split the bill I’d insist on paying. If the lady expected me to pay I’d pay, but never ask her out again.