Money Moral Dilemma: Should I let my date pay when I'm not keen?

fierystormcloud

Horrorhiker wrote: »

This is the have your cake and eat it mentaility of modern feminists.

I look forward to the time when equality means equality and would never in a million years ask out someone who had the attitude of fierystormcloud, anyway, as I dont see a huge sense of entitlement as attractive.

TBagpuss wrote: »

Nonsense.

It's actually a long-standing rule of hosting that if you invite someone somewhere, you are the host and therefore the default is that the other person is your guest and you pay. it's not about feminism, modern or otherwise, and there is no sense of entitlement in expecting your host to act as a host, regardless of gender.

So, if he invited her, the default would be that he was paying, if she invited him, the default would be that she is paying.

in this case, OP offered to split the bill and their date declined. So, not rude to force the issue.

Agree totally. :T If I met a man who decided not to see me again because he thought a girl expecting a man to pay on a date he has asked her on was having a 'sense of entitlement;' I would consider me having dodged a bullet.

So what do YOU do 'horror hiker?' Ask a girl out, and then present her with an invoice for her half of the bill? How incredibly rude and what terrible manners. Thankfully most men I have been asked out by have better manners and know how to treat a girl.

I am also sick to death of men coming out with this 'you want equality, you got it, so you can pay for yerself ' garbage too. Can you actually hear how you sound?!

TBagpuss wrote: »

Actually, a 'militant feminist type' would be far more likely to insist on paying for herself, and possibly for you too.

An ordinary feminist (or, 'normal person who believes in equality') would normally expect to pay their way but would probably also get the point which you appear to miss, which is that where person A invites person B out, Person A is acting as host.
.

100% bang on! :T

Person_one wrote: »

You ask, you pay.

Nothing to do with being a 'modern woman'. This rule also applies to same sex dating and to certain friendship situations.

Once again though, I fail to see any sort of 'moral dilemma' in the OP and am starting to wonder if the forum team actually know what either of those words mean...

Agree with this too! :T

pollypenny wrote: »

If I bump into someone in town and suggest we go for a coffee, I insist on paying as I did the inviting.

She was correct to offer, the guy was correct to refuse. Courtesy on both sides. No dilemma.

Exactly! Well said. :T

Fujiko wrote: »

When I was young - many years ago! - there was no problem, if a man asked you out he paid and I think the men I went out with would have been mortally offended if I had offered any contribution.

If I invited a woman friend to meet up for coffee or even a meal, as I had made the invitation I would certainly not expect her to pay other than perhaps a drink before or after the meal.

Exactly!

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

It would be awkward if say you got to the end of the night, and your date/friend/colleague etc who had asked you out for a meal then asked for your share of the bill. So then, you're left with two options, either pay it, or create a scene in the restaurant by refusing to pay it.

I think it's very presumptuous for anyone just to assume that because they have been asked out for a meal, that the asker will be the one who pays the full bill, and I think that a person should always offer to pay their way.

Could just be because I have never known it to be the case. Growing up when my Mam & Dad went out with their friends, everyone just paid their own way, and the same happens now. Do people really automatically assume because someone has asked them out for a meal then they will be paying for them?

Not being funny Georgie, but you seem to be moving the goalposts to suit your argument. You're coming out with things like

"When my parents went out with friends, everyone paid their own way..."

"When I go out with a friend I don't expect her to pay..."

"I think it's very presumptuous for anyone just to assume that because they have been asked out for a meal, that the asker will be the one who pays the full bill."

And "my point is that just because someone has asked them out for a meal doesn't mean that they would expect the asker to pay."

What have those scenarios got to do with anything? This isn't what the dilemma is about. It's about a man asking a woman on a date, and whether she thinks she should pay half because she doesn't want to see him again. It was nothing to do with parents or friends.

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

And if you ask him out then you pay I take it?

And yes I would want to pay if I asked a man out, because I had asked HIM out.

But again, this dilemma is not about that is it?

As has been said, it's naff-all to do with feminism or age; the fact is that if a man asks a woman on a date, then he should pay. If it was me on a date that a man had asked me on, and the bill was presented, and he said 'well that's 30 quid each then;' it would be our first and last date.

Asking a girl out on a date, and then expecting her to pay her half, is rude, discourteous, and incredibly poor etiquette, and the man should not be surprised if she chooses to not see him again. I certainly flippin' well wouldn't see him again. All this does is scream 'tight fisted git,' and I do NOT want to be in a relationship with someone who is a penny pincher.

I'm not saying men should always pay more than women for everything, and I always pay my fair share in general in life, but to ask a girl on a date and then expect her to pay her share is just horrible.

Georgiegirl256

Torry_Quine wrote: »

I wouldn't be embarrassed just saddened that they were such a swindling.

Swindling?? I guess as with everything, people have totally different pov's, and where you see swindling, I would (if I was the bloke) see an embarrassing situation and a sense of entitlement. Unless of course I'd made it clear that I would pay in the first place.

fierystormcloud wrote: »

Not being funny Georgie, but you seem to be moving the goalposts to suit your argument. You're coming out with things like

"When my parents went out with friends, everyone paid their own way..."

"When I go out with a friend I don't expect her to pay..."

"I think it's very presumptuous for anyone just to assume that because they have been asked out for a meal, that the asker will be the one who pays the full bill."

And "my point is that just because someone has asked them out for a meal doesn't mean that they would expect the asker to pay."

What have those scenarios got to do with anything? This isn't what the dilemma is about. It's about a man asking a woman on a date, and whether she thinks she should pay half because she doesn't want to see him again. It was nothing to do with parents or friends.

I'm not saying men should always pay more than women for everything, and I always pay my fair share in general in life, but to ask a girl on a date and then expect her to pay her share is just horrible.

Sorry, but where did I say that bolded bit at fiery? If I went out with a friend then we would both pay our own way regardless of who invited who.

But yes, you're right, it has nothing to do with parents and friends, that was merely an example to mention that I have never known it for the inviter to pay for the whole meal or date. If a guy asked me out on a date then I would not take it as a given that he was going to pay, and nor should anyone IMO. But re the "dilemma" in question, I think the woman in question should pay (offer to pay) half regardless of whether or not she wants to see him again unless he absolutely insists he wants to pay. But, maybe she should actually mention then and there that there would be no chance of a second date.

tenuissent

In the early 60s when I was a student in London, I confess that anyone who invited me to a meal or a play/film/hop/whatever should jolly well pay for my company. I am ashamed about it now, but had a number of amusing encounters and eventually married one of them.

I certainly do not have that sense of entitlement now, and try hard to pay my way in spite of a very generous second husband.

Torry_Quine

Georgiegirl256 wrote: »

Swindling?? I guess as with everything, people have totally different pov's, and where you see swindling, I would (if I was the bloke) see an embarrassing situation and a sense of entitlement. Unless of course I'd made it clear that I would pay in the first place.



Sorry, but where did I say that bolded bit at fiery? If I went out with a friend then we would both pay our own way regardless of who invited who.

But yes, you're right, it has nothing to do with parents and friends, that was merely an example to mention that I have never known it for the inviter to pay for the whole meal or date. If a guy asked me out on a date then I would not take it as a given that he was going to pay, and nor should anyone IMO. But re the "dilemma" in question, I think the woman in question should pay (offer to pay) half regardless of whether or not she wants to see him again unless he absolutely insists he wants to pay. But, maybe she should actually mention then and there that there would be no chance of a second date.

That should have been skinflint, autocorrect error.

To me inviting someone is saying that they are paying.

Brighton_belle

Torry_Quine wrote: »

That should have been skinflint, autocorrect error.

Oh that's a shame , I thought it was another of those rather lovely regional words I had never heard of but sounded so descriptive.

Saibal

I do feel strongly enough about this to reiterate and concur with some other posters that a girl expecting a man to automatically pay if he asks her out (which is the usual convention in dating, rather than the girl doing the asking) is a pretty horrific sentiment, and very well-described as a sense of entitlement. People saying it's got nothing to do with feminism are mistaken in my opinion, unless those feminists interpret their brand of feminism to mean true equality in paying or offering to pay their way. I've been out with far too many girls with this sense of entitlement to consider it very rare to meet someone who offers to pay.

The argument about the asker being the payer falls down immediately when we see the spectrum of opinion in this thread itself, where some do and some don't agree about it. I would certainly agree it's very presumptuous to expect this, and much better to see her accept graciously when the offer is made anyway. And if she is the type who would not be seeing me again because she has offered to pay half and I have dared to accept, then that's really no loss for me.

Really, you can't shout feminism and 'oh, but the man pays, otherwise he's a skinflint/tightwad/ungallant/doesn't know how to treat a woman properly' in the same breath. It's either/or, because these two opinions are mutually hypocritical.

smerch1468

I think if the woman offered and a man insisted its no problem to me. But these days a lot of people meet online, I think this is a totally different ball game tbh. If I went on a date with a woman I met on a dating site, and she didn't pay for half the bill then that would put me off wanting to see her again. I wouldn't make a fuss out of it or even suggest that we go dutch, I would offer to pay so the onus would be on her to offer. You find out a lot about people in these sorts of situations.

alittlemadam

I always offer to pay my share of the contribution of a meal regardless of who I am out with, if I am told no I always ask are you sure, if its still a no then I don't ask again.


I do it because I don't want the other person(s) to feel that I have taken advantage. Having been invited out with work colleagues previously where the meals in the venue they have chosen are known to be expensive and knowing that I wouldn't have to pay I have still offered.


It just shows manners and respect for others I think

Ebenezer_Screwj

HE invited YOU out to dinner therefore he pays - especially as he insisted. When you ask a girl out you take a chance on her reciprocating your interest, this time he lost.

drmouse

"I feel that as he asked her out, then he should pay"

Would you feel the same in reverse? If you asked a guy out, would you expect to pay?

Even if this is the case, to be honest, I think in this "age of equality", men still ask women out more often than the reverse (by a long way), so you are still basically expecting the man to pay for every first date. While I don't have a problem with this, personally, I think it shows how far away from equality between the sexes we really are, but not all of it is negative for women.

Personally, I always offer to pay the full bill (where I can afford it) unless it's been agreed in advance that we'll split it. If I can't afford it, I either agree beforehand or arrange the date somewhere cheaper where I can afford it. If someone offers to split the bill, I would ask if they were sure, but wouldn't make a big deal about it either way.

On a recent date, for example, the lady offered to split the bill. I had had a much more expensive meal, though, and didn't feel it would be right. However, as we had already agreed to go to a nearby bar for a few drinks, I suggested that I pay for the meal, and she pay for the drinks. This stopped any disagreement, kept us both happy, and avoided an awkward situation which could have spoiled the night.

In the case asked here, I don't think there's a moral dilemma. You offered to split the bill, he declined. Whether you see him again or not, you've not taken advantage.