Before I got married, I would always offer my dates a gamble when the check came: both of us put our cards down, and the waiter chooses one behind their back. That person pays for dinner.
I've never had a date refuse, and in the long run, I came out ahead (better than 50/50). It's egalitarian, sporting, and adds some excitement to a failing date.
Call me old fashioned, but yes, you (men) should pay or at very least give a sincere offer to pay.
If you invite the other party on a date, then you should pay. You presumably controlled the choice of venue after all.
If the other party invited you on a date then you should offer to pay (the full amount) given first impressions and societal baggage.
The only excuse (IMHO) to not pick up the tab is if the other party is clearly uncomfortable with that and offer more than token opposition to the notion.
I'm really talking about the first few dates here. Once you strike up a real relationship and understand each others preferences and resources you can sort out who pays for what. I recognize that my views might be old fashioned and are based on me typically being in a much stronger financial position that the average person I might have met.
First date should be coffee or drinks. Not just for your wallet but for your mental health. If you don't click, you move on with the rest of your day. If you do, you make a dinner date.
Coffee date is usually each getting their own. Drinks date, you can offer to pay -- it's not a bad sign to show that you are stable enough to afford a drink. That's sexist, but it's not uncommon for him to make more money, so it's less unfair than it seems at first blush.
The one who picks the place for dinner should be prepared to pay. The other can throw their credit card out at well; most wait staff take it as a sign to split it evenly.
If you've made it through two dates you should be talking enough to communicate how much money you each make and what kind of money you are each prepared to spend on subsequent dates.
If you are spending $600 a month it's because you're going to dinner too often. There's no need, and it's wasting both of your time.
There is no loss of masculinity in allowing women to pay for their own drinks, or even for them to pay for yours.
My girlfriend (now wife) had great difficulty in letting me pay for her drinks and meals. She insisted on either paying for her own or even paying for mine too or maybe paying for the whole meal in return the next time we went out.
When it came to buying an engagement ring about 4-5 years later, she insisted on paying half, instead of me paying for all of it. What that meant, in practice, was that she ended up with an engagement ring that was twice as expensive as the one that I could have afforded to pay for alone. ("Win - Win")
There are 'givers' in this world, and there are 'takers'. If you are a 'giver' and you don't manage to find another 'giver', you will have an unhappy union. Because eventually the 'giver' gets 'gived out' when the 'taker' has taken everything away.
(It gets a bit hilarious when you have two 'givers' in the relationship, because there is nobody to 'take'. Eventually the two 'givers' learn to both 'give' and 'take'. And everybody is happy. We've now been together for 34 years. My first marriage only lasted 16. She was a 'taker'. We went broke.)
Back to your problem: I suspect women on Tinder are mainly 'takers'. Discard all the 'takers' you find. Look out for the rare 'givers'. Spend your time and money on those ones.
You don't have to spend big. A coffee or a drink along with a chat will give you enough evidence.
5 comments
[ 0.23 ms ] story [ 25.4 ms ] threadI've never had a date refuse, and in the long run, I came out ahead (better than 50/50). It's egalitarian, sporting, and adds some excitement to a failing date.
If you invite the other party on a date, then you should pay. You presumably controlled the choice of venue after all.
If the other party invited you on a date then you should offer to pay (the full amount) given first impressions and societal baggage.
The only excuse (IMHO) to not pick up the tab is if the other party is clearly uncomfortable with that and offer more than token opposition to the notion.
I'm really talking about the first few dates here. Once you strike up a real relationship and understand each others preferences and resources you can sort out who pays for what. I recognize that my views might be old fashioned and are based on me typically being in a much stronger financial position that the average person I might have met.
Coffee date is usually each getting their own. Drinks date, you can offer to pay -- it's not a bad sign to show that you are stable enough to afford a drink. That's sexist, but it's not uncommon for him to make more money, so it's less unfair than it seems at first blush.
The one who picks the place for dinner should be prepared to pay. The other can throw their credit card out at well; most wait staff take it as a sign to split it evenly.
If you've made it through two dates you should be talking enough to communicate how much money you each make and what kind of money you are each prepared to spend on subsequent dates.
If you are spending $600 a month it's because you're going to dinner too often. There's no need, and it's wasting both of your time.
My girlfriend (now wife) had great difficulty in letting me pay for her drinks and meals. She insisted on either paying for her own or even paying for mine too or maybe paying for the whole meal in return the next time we went out.
When it came to buying an engagement ring about 4-5 years later, she insisted on paying half, instead of me paying for all of it. What that meant, in practice, was that she ended up with an engagement ring that was twice as expensive as the one that I could have afforded to pay for alone. ("Win - Win")
There are 'givers' in this world, and there are 'takers'. If you are a 'giver' and you don't manage to find another 'giver', you will have an unhappy union. Because eventually the 'giver' gets 'gived out' when the 'taker' has taken everything away.
(It gets a bit hilarious when you have two 'givers' in the relationship, because there is nobody to 'take'. Eventually the two 'givers' learn to both 'give' and 'take'. And everybody is happy. We've now been together for 34 years. My first marriage only lasted 16. She was a 'taker'. We went broke.)
Back to your problem: I suspect women on Tinder are mainly 'takers'. Discard all the 'takers' you find. Look out for the rare 'givers'. Spend your time and money on those ones. You don't have to spend big. A coffee or a drink along with a chat will give you enough evidence.