First few dates etiquette

BigAunty

aileth wrote: »

For anyone interested she told him to stuff it and didn't go.

Thanks for the update.

You wrote "She has just contacted him to say she is really low on funds (they have a date tonight, think it's third or fourth), and would he be able to cover them and she'll repay it at a later date, otherwise she might not be able to go. He has replied back with a rather upfront response effectively saying no and she has to buy her own food."

I've started to wonder if he would have responded differently to her simply saying 'I'm a bit strapped for tonight's occasion." and seeing if he offered to pay, postpone it or nominated a free replacement event.

I happen to think he would still act as if he was put out as he comes across as quite stingy but just wonder if a more subtle approach would have yielded a different response than 'How about an IOU'?

Cottage_Economy

BigAunty wrote: »

....but just wonder if a more subtle approach would have yielded a different response than 'How about an IOU'?

I doubt it. To get to a third date and have one person state they have no intention of contributing is plain rude. It smacks of someone very tight that thinks all women are out to fleece him.

My husband insisted on picking up the tab on our first three dates as he was old-fashioned, but I sneaked in a drink and coffee here and there (had to wait until he went to the loo mind!) plus managed to get my money into a taxi driver's hands before he did.

The fourth date he asked me to choose where we were going and at that point I insisted that the next date was mine to pick up the tab for. He agreed though made it clear that he was happy to pay for all of our dates.

I didn't have a problem handing over £10 for drinks and chicken and chips in a basket at the dog track. I also gave him his stake money for each race - I lined up all the 20ps across the table for him.

Basically I wanted to see how he would react to something unexpected and very different to a restaurant.

He asked me to move in with him :rotfl:

burnoutbabe

Cottage_Economy wrote: »

I doubt it. To get to a third date and have one person state they have no intention of contributing is plain rude. It smacks of someone very tight that thinks all women are out to fleece him.

but the OP's sister is the one who is saying they won't contribute and he should pay?

he may not have any idea that she paid for more of the first 3 dates, depends how it was done? did she just happen to buy all the rounds? and they split the food? it can get out of whack without it actually being anyone's intention.

jamesml

Haven't read all 7 pages and whilst I think he is being pretty stingy, I also think she could have approached it better - it would have been much better (IMO) to have said something along the lines of 'I'm really sorry, but I can't afford to go out this week because I've just had an unexpected bill through. Can we reschedule?' That way there is no pressure or assumption on him to foot the bill - if he offers than great, but at least the choice is there for him without forcing the issue.

Having said that it does sound like she might have dodged a bullet - albeit he could have read it wrongly and thought he was seeing red flags. Text is too tough to really understand peoples thoughts/motivations for important stuff, and is easy to misread.

fivetide

Lives with his parents but has a good job. Sounds like a catch. How terribly unfortunate if your sis binned him. Absolutely her loss...not.

Personally as a chap, if I invited someone out then I would expect to be paying. However, I'd find it strange if she didn't offer to buy a drink or something and make some form of contribution.

After that, if things are going well it would be taking turns.

Cottage_Economy

burnoutbabe wrote: »

but the OP's sister is the one who is saying they won't contribute and he should pay?

he may not have any idea that she paid for more of the first 3 dates, depends how it was done? did she just happen to buy all the rounds? and they split the food? it can get out of whack without it actually being anyone's intention.

I probably think he has a very good idea of how much he is contributing compared to her. Stingy people keep track. If they're splitting food equally and she's buying all the drinks he knows. He's not stupid. He's letting her.

She must be upset to find out that the guy has so little interest in seeing her that he won't pay for her on this occasion even though she has offered to pay him back. He didn't even suggest doing something together that didn't cost money so it wasn't such an issue for her.

This is not the man for her.

OP, I have to say your sister's way of dealing with the issue leaves a lot to be desired. I wouldn't be telling any guy I didn't know well so early in the dating game so much information about my personal finances.

I would simply have stated a preference for doing something for a few hours during the weekend and, without saying why, suggested something that didn't cost any money. Choosing a weekday evening reduces your options to those things that cost money, like dinners, cinema, drinks etc. At the weekend, especially during the spring and summer, there's more low cost things going on during the day, and you can eat before and after the date to avoid paying for food becoming an issue.

aileth

Yep I definitely agree she could've handled it more delicately. She's quite a fiery personality though. I suggested they go for a walk perhaps or to the local park and share a bottle of Co-Op's finest, but she was already feeling very put out, somewhat understandably perhaps but blown up a little by her.

End of the day, from what I've heard he's a bit of a tw*t and she has dodged a bullet. She definitely needs a lesson in the fine art of subtlety though.

Peater

This old chesnut.

I would be rather offended/disappointed if some i'd asked out didn't even offer to contribute. Come on, have some pride woman! Whether or not I then insist and paying in full after that is by the by.

The purpose of a date is, or at least should be, mutually beneficial. If a lady goes out with the intention of being won over by being bought stuff and eventually sleeps with the guy as a result, she is technically a prostitute.

BugglyB

I don't know why its ok for women to justify otherwise illogical things by saying they prefer to be 'old fashioned' or 'traditional' or because its 'nice'. By that same token surely men could insist that women iron their clothes because its traditional, or old fashioned or nice.

Takeaway_Addict

BugglyB wrote: »

I don't know why its ok for women to justify otherwise illogical things by saying they prefer to be 'old fashioned' or 'traditional' or because its 'nice'. By that same token surely men could insist that women iron their clothes because its traditional, or old fashioned or nice.

Quite...sexism only works one way apparently