I agree with you hei.so. There was recently this girl I work with who was married and filed for divorce because the guy was not being very proactive in the money making department. Of course everyone jumped in and was like “that bum!.. dump his ass”. However, I kinda wanted to chime in and point out if it was him dumping her for not making enough… he would still be the A-hole! That’s not right! I agree feminism has a second phase where it forms more integrity for itself. I think if women want to be social equals (yes, I know physiological differences make fundamentally equal nonexistant) then they have to not only have equal opportunity to get that job, but also equal responsibility to pay on a date (for example).
Well, if you want to go that rout (and I don’t)… maybe it is actually women who are better equipped to be productive in this technologically age. Maybe you guys should raise the kids!
It’s based on millions of years of evolution, biology.
That’s a meme, human ideas with no genetic basis.
When I learned how much women have to pay to get their hair done right and nails and clothes that are flattering, I decided not to worry over the cost of a first-date dinner if she made the effort to look (and act) nice. All this irrespective of whether anything more was on the menu.
So your the poindexter who buys dinner for the girls I meet up with for drinks and late night booty calls. Thanks.
true, good points…
Nonetheless, I think it is apparent the old symbiosis was no longer beneficial to both parties… hence the feminism.
I think we all know the answer to the feminist shitlib campaign. We just choose to ignore the bickering because we are MEN.
If I’m not interested, you’re [sic] definitely welcome to the leftovers.
burn 
Damn it, not again. Last time it was that Japanese chick, now you. Why are you putting [sic] in your own comment? It should only be used when copying or quoting a comment where a word is misused so people know you didn’t mess up when quoting the original comment. As far as I can tell, that’s neither a quote, nor is “you’re” misused.
I find it interesting because either:
- you feel that her time is so much more valuable than yours that you have to pay for it because your a Betamax tape 2) you think women can’t afford to pay their own way and so you treat them like escorts because you compensate them for looking and acting pleasing to you.
One of the hilarious contradictions in the arbitrary American sides; "the libtards” say in words they believe in evolution, while denying its products, and “the conservatives” accept products of evolution like male/female roles while denying evolution happened. LOL, where do these bizarre sides/views come from??? What happened to basic reasoning skills?
I don’t see any proof of that. Feminism’s birth seems more about maximizing corporate profits; double the count of slaves, miserable broken family units buy more products (lawyers, child care, fast food, etc), and child support and alimony drive the slaves harder. And when slaves revolt, who does the revolting? The men. If you beat down the men, no threat of revolution, thus no risk to profits. Humans, outsmarted again by the corporate AI.
I did it deliberately, because the comment I was quoting had “your the poindexter” as opposed to “you’re”. So my [sic] meant: “see, it’s spelled right in my post.”
I realize it is non-standard usage, for an ironic twist, but it was knowingly placed there.
Bravo, well done.
No, it’s just a realization that women may well pay a lot more to primp and prepare themselves for a date than I need to, so if we are concerned about dividing costs equitably for a date, I accept that her prep costs can factor into the equation, and I don’t worry too much about the cost of a dinner if she has made an effort to be attractive and makes reasonable efforts to be a pleasant companion.
But the other issue is that a lot of male-female relationship interactions start at a symbolic level. Being sexy (man or woman) is largely an act of theatre. So there is satisfaction in playing out traditional roles for a lot of us. That doesn’t mean the traditional roles are the only ones that need apply, and certainly rules get renegotiated as relations evolve, but when you barely know someone, they are helpful as a default unless you have an indication that you want to work with other parameters.
Ah, a subtle jab. Nice.
#2 it is then.
Also, you misspelled evolve, I fixed it in my quote of course. ah you went back and edited- nothing escapes Sir Bchad 
No. The part you quoted just means that if a person shows up for a date and clearly hasn’t prepped at all (reasonable excuses accepted), or is unpleasant in her demeanor or attitude, then it feels pretty frustrating to pay for her dinner. She doesn’t have to sing for her supper, the way an escort would, but she has to project an honest effort on her part to make the outing pleasant (as do I).
If it was truly horrific, I might well suggest splitting the cost. Most of the time, I’ll pay anyway because it is part of my own sense of integrity, and I will take that as a license not to worry about being considered impolite if I never ask for a second outing.
I don’t think equality has to mean sameness.
^ Still #2. You are just restating what you have already said. You reward her for good behavior by picking up the tab and now you suggest that you might punish her by not paying for the full cost if she is unpleasant.
You have made it abundantly clear that the cost of the meal does not really matter. A dinner out is no large expense to anyone posting on this forum. The principle is what matters. Why do you feel inclined to reward her for the amount of money she spends on makeup and clothes or the time it takes for her to get ready? Why does she not feel inclined to reward you in the same way? Why is it not expected that the two of you should split the bill but instead it is something which must be discussed rather than an instinctive reaction? I may be wrong but I imagine there are more women who look the other way or get up to use the bathroom when the check comes than do the purse grab around you.
Yes, I reward women for being pleasant while on dates. I suggest other outings with them. If they’re not interested, then that sucks for me, but at least I’m not wasting effort on things that aren’t appreciated.
That does not make me tantamount to a John, no matter how hard you stretch things to try to put me in that box.
–
(And obviously, over time, if she just seems to see me as a meal ticket, that’s a problem. But those types are usually pretty easy to spot, because they spend a lot of time dropping hints on what they expect their men to do for them financially and what level of luxury will be acceptable to them. I would not use “did she pay for dinner the first night out” as a key criterion, although I do think proper etiquette is for the woman to offer to pay, and for the man to refuse the offer. So I do notice if she offers, even though I will pretty much always pay.)
As I write this, I realize I haven’t actually been on a date in a long time, since I am in a relationship, but these were my rules back when I did date. They worked pretty well, and they seem to fit how I would approach it today, as best I can determine.