My girlfriend has short-term memory loss, so when we go out she pays and I tell her I'll pay her back, which of course I don't because she always forgets. It's a very abusive relationship, I admit, but the free food's nice.
Dating and paying for dinner, okay to go halfsies?
- Thread starter Eclipse Dragon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I haven't gone on a date in 6 years and have no intention to start. But, if I was struck by a bought of madness and went on a date tomorrow, I would expect to go halvsies, because I'm real cheap. There's no way I'd be stuck paying for every meal just because I was born a guy. She (presumably) has a job, she can pay her own way.
If she offered to pay, I'm not sure what I'd do. I hate owing people, however, I am cheap.
Eating at restaurants is a waste of money, though. You can pretty much eat for a week on the price you pay at a restaurant.
If she offered to pay, I'm not sure what I'd do. I hate owing people, however, I am cheap.
Eating at restaurants is a waste of money, though. You can pretty much eat for a week on the price you pay at a restaurant.
I always paid for what I ate personally. Split checks, not splitting the checks but having separate checks. Women wanted equality, so I gave them exactly that, their equal share of paying for what they eat. *half-joking-tone*
Did I ever pay for a date's meal? A few times when it was a special thing but I saved the "paying for a meal" aesthetic for actually cooking a meal for the date rather than go out to eat. I'm no slouch in the kitchen, my homemade chicken alfredo is quite delicious and I'd daresay better than most restaurants can do.
Of course I'm married now and don't date, but if I were still in that game, only a special person would ever get me to pay for their meal as well as my own.
I'm not an asshole, I just won't go out of my way either. I got burned a few times on early dates, women who wanted a free meal and nothing else so I started not paying for anyone but myself.
Did I ever pay for a date's meal? A few times when it was a special thing but I saved the "paying for a meal" aesthetic for actually cooking a meal for the date rather than go out to eat. I'm no slouch in the kitchen, my homemade chicken alfredo is quite delicious and I'd daresay better than most restaurants can do.
Of course I'm married now and don't date, but if I were still in that game, only a special person would ever get me to pay for their meal as well as my own.
I'm not an asshole, I just won't go out of my way either. I got burned a few times on early dates, women who wanted a free meal and nothing else so I started not paying for anyone but myself.
Well, me and my gf are both fucking poor at the moment, so if we didn't both help out we wouldn't be able to afford dinner dates at all. I think in this day and age, halfsies isn't so bad.
Me and mine typically do go Dutch in regards to paying for meals. Neither of us have that much money and she knows that I could never afford to pay for every meal since we're both students. Occasionally one of us picks up a meal, but the other picks up the next one.
As a guy, I usually offer to pay early in relationships because I'm worried I'll look cheap. Secretly I'm hoping they'll say split it because that seems like a fairer option, but I'm too awkward to point it out. If I'm comfortable enough in a relationship we usually agree to splitting the bill or taking turns- I'm not the kind of person that needs to pay for everything to feel like they're a good boyfriend or use it as some kind of sex-currency.
Interestingly though, a lot of girls seem to prefer splitting it to being paid for. Seems like an old fashioned chivalry thing that's going to way of the dodo, thankfully, because it's entirely illogical. Gender dynamics aren't the same as they used to be.
Interestingly though, a lot of girls seem to prefer splitting it to being paid for. Seems like an old fashioned chivalry thing that's going to way of the dodo, thankfully, because it's entirely illogical. Gender dynamics aren't the same as they used to be.
My girlfriend hates it when I pay or get her stuff.
She feels somehow that 1. I'm trying to "buy her love" or something and 2. that she can take care of herself. And these 2 confuse the shit out of me to be honest xD, 1. I know she likes me and I like her, I don't need to bribe her, I do it because I feel it's nice to give her something small once in a while and 2. I know for sure this is a woman who can take care of herself! Then there's also the third alternative which is that she feels like she's in debt to me if I get her something.
Usually we pay our own or take turns, we just take it as it comes and it'll even out in the end
But "splitting" is something I never understood, if 1 eats a stake and has 2 glasses of wine and the other has a sallad and a glass of water, then splitting just seems weird. Pay what you have in that case.
She feels somehow that 1. I'm trying to "buy her love" or something and 2. that she can take care of herself. And these 2 confuse the shit out of me to be honest xD, 1. I know she likes me and I like her, I don't need to bribe her, I do it because I feel it's nice to give her something small once in a while and 2. I know for sure this is a woman who can take care of herself! Then there's also the third alternative which is that she feels like she's in debt to me if I get her something.
Usually we pay our own or take turns, we just take it as it comes and it'll even out in the end
But "splitting" is something I never understood, if 1 eats a stake and has 2 glasses of wine and the other has a sallad and a glass of water, then splitting just seems weird. Pay what you have in that case.
Hm, in my own expirience and the discussions i had with friends it's usually that everyone pays his own share. Also on the first date - unless you specifically say you gonna pay for everything.
I don't see any problem with this. If we're going out for dinner it's because we want to get to know each other and have a nice time, so everyone pays his own share. You're grown up damnit, pay for what you eat and drink.
Any entitlement of any form in this scenario from either side just shows me that you're a person i'd rather not date.
It's diffrent if you want to treat someone, but then, as i said, you specifically tell the person you're paying. And the notion of "the one who asks has to pay" leaves me with a bad taste. That sounds to me as if you've to buy their attention, because going out with you isn't good enough if it isn't for free.
I don't see any problem with this. If we're going out for dinner it's because we want to get to know each other and have a nice time, so everyone pays his own share. You're grown up damnit, pay for what you eat and drink.
Any entitlement of any form in this scenario from either side just shows me that you're a person i'd rather not date.
It's diffrent if you want to treat someone, but then, as i said, you specifically tell the person you're paying. And the notion of "the one who asks has to pay" leaves me with a bad taste. That sounds to me as if you've to buy their attention, because going out with you isn't good enough if it isn't for free.
People should pay for their own food. At the most, you guys can split it. To fall prey to the feminist agenda.
It's not really chivalry so much as it was financially sound in a society where men were generally both the initiators of the relationship and the sole breadwinners.TheRightToArmBears said:
Men paying for the meal arose in an era where women rarely had jobs, and those that did made significantly less than most men working. At the time, women got jobs, men built careers.
Up until the 60's it was generally the norm for a woman to only work until she got into a relationship, then she would quit in order to help raise her children and keep house for her husband. Some of it was symbolic, a man proving he could take care of his potential wife by proving he could afford to support them both, but it also made practical sense as the man in the relationship was building a career while the woman was expected to drop her job when she found the right man, the man paid because often the woman couldn't afford to.
The expectation has become more cultural than financial nowadays, so it mostly sticks around out of chivalry, although the 50's style nuclear family where the man supports the whole family still exists, it's no longer the majority or considered as much of a cultural ideal as it used to be, but some women do still marry to become homemakers.
So yes, gender dynamics have changed and expecting the male in a relationship to pay for everything is no longer considered the norm, but it was a tradition that once had actual financial reasoning behind it, it didn't come about simply because of chivalry, more likely it was simply because a woman couldn't reliably be expected to be able to afford splitting the check.
More on-topic: Simple answer, decide whether you are comfortable with being the primary payer in a relationship, or being paid for if you are a woman, then lay it out with your date. It's up to you to decide how important supporting or demolishing an old tradition is to how much you want to date someone, I've dated women that expect at least the first couple of dates to pay for them, and some that have insisted splitting every bill from the beginning. Especially in more rural areas where women can sometimes still be expected to be homemakers, this tradition lives on, but it is becoming more and more old fashioned as time goes on. It's not a tradition that ever bothered me, but since I'm a man, I won't exactly be sad to see it totally die either, less of a financial risk if the first couple of dates don't work out. With women in the work force building lifelong careers now, it makes more sense equality wise nowadays anyway.