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

WantSome

Allowing someone to pay for your meal (whatever the circumstances) does not entitle them to any more of your time. As a result there is no debt owed, ergo, no advantage has been taken.

Most times I try to pay for myself. Sometimes the gentleman insists on paying the full amount. That's on him.

Gentlemen seldom allow me to pay the full amount even though I always offer (especially if it's a second or third date and they have previously paid for things). That's on them too - I earn a decent living, and it doesn't dent my pride to pay or be paid for, in the way that it appears to be a matter of pride for some men.

NBLondon

It's interesting that most people here have assumed that just because the asker is male in the original dilemma - the askee is female. Does it make a difference if the askee is male (or non-binary or fluid)? It shouldn't do - but maybe it does.


There's a difference between:


"Would you like to have dinner with me?" - asker is offering to treat askee and should be prepared to pay all; askee can offer to pay their own way and the two of them agree possibly based on whether they think there will be a further meeting. Asker ususally chooses the venue.


"Shall we meet for lunch sometime?" - a mutual meeting where either side may offer to treat the other or both pay their own way.


The problem can be when one side thinks/assumes its a date and the other doesn't...


In the dilemma - it's accepted that it's a date so the answer is - Offer to pay your share but if the asker insists, then it's not wrong to accept that gracefully even though you don't intend a second date.


I think (I hope) that the assumption of paying for dinner meaning an expectation of anything more than company at that dinner is now extinct - but maybe not.

WantSome

NBLondon wrote: »

It's interesting that most people here have assumed that just because the asker is male in the original dilemma - the askee is female. Does it make a difference if the askee is male (or non-binary or fluid)? It shouldn't do - but maybe it does.
[...]

Interesting point. Although I mentioned it sometimes seems to be a matter of pride with gentlemen that they won't let a lady pay for them, I wonder then what the rules are for two gents dating (or any other combo)? Does this make the paying for a meal question easier or more difficult?

As to expectations: I suppose it would be a moral dilemma if the askee has given the asker to understand that there would be a future meeting. If the asker insisted on paying *this time* under the impression that there would be a *next time* and other opportunities to pay or be paid for, then the dilemma is in the askee's honesty and the askee has to square that with their conscience.

Still, the asker in this scenario insisted on paying so that's their risk to take.

Angry_Bear

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.

Speaking as a feminist, I would generally view a first date as a mutual agreement to meet up and would assume that we would each pay our own share. However, if I invite a man out, then as I am the host, I will expect to pay for him, (but will be willing to allow him to pay his half if he offers). If he invites me out, then I will offer to pay my share, but will not push it if he refuses, and will allow him to pay for me if he wishes, as he is my host.
And exactly the same would apply if I were to invite, or to be invited by, another woman.

^^ This in its entirety.
If I was "asked out", I'd be fully prepared to pay half and would always offer. However if the askee "insisted", I'm hardly going to make a huge scene just to cover my meal!
If I "asked someone out", I'd expect to pay the whole amount and may or may not "insist" even if they offered half. I wouldn't be offended if they didn't offer half.

If I "asked someone out" and they insisted on paying for the whole thing, I'd feel so uncomfortable that I'd almost certainly never agree to go out with them again.

Peter333

I would never expect a woman to pay for herself if I asked her out on a date. I can't understand why anyone would expect payment from the person they'd asked out on a date. How rude.

If I asked a woman on a date and she didn't want to meet again, I still wouldn't accept payment from her.

Maybe it's down to your upbringing.

burlington6

fierystormcloud wrote: »

Did you even read the dilemma?

She was asked on a date by a man. Why on earth should she be paying half if HE asked HER out?

And re your comments that I have bolded; why would she be asking you for a second date when YOU were the one who asked her out in the first place, and she was not interested in seeing you again?!

Like I said, did you even read the dilemma?



As Torry said. ^^^ If I was asked on a date I would expect him to pay and would not offer.



Exactly! He should pay. End of!

It's not Victorian for a man to pay if he asked the woman out for the date! Good grief!

You want equality, you got it.

He asked, SHE AGREED.

Flip the genders round and I bet you'd be telling the woman not to pay even though she asked him

Angry_Bear

burlington6 wrote: »

Flip the genders round and I bet you'd be telling the woman not to pay even though she asked him

Going by the posts on this thread I think you're very wrong there!

doctorblunkett

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 entitlment 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.

no no no no no.


lets do a simple scenario. person A asks person B out for a meal. they have the meal. person B thinks like the above and expects person A to pay for the entire meal.


person B believes they are 'entitled' to a free meal.


you pay for what you consume. that's the rule. not sure why 'hosting' has been brought into this as it is nonsensical in this scenario.




to answer OPs dilemma - you offered to pay and that offer was rebuffed so no real dilemma. as long as communication was good then there can be no conflict.

pitry

It took me quite a bit of time to get used to my current boyfriend's gentleman's manners, and for him too, as apparently he never went out with a woman who paid her way until he met me!
7 years later we're very happy.
We now have a joint account to pay for dinners, how romantic! ahahahahah

I have a suspicion that although he "forced her hand" by not accepting her money, he might have thrown it back in her face when she refused to go out again.
Unless he was like my man, in which case he would have just taken it on the chin and moved on.

TBagpuss

doctorblunkett wrote: »

no no no no no.
lets do a simple scenario. person A asks person B out for a meal. they have the meal. person B thinks like the above and expects person A to pay for the entire meal.

person B believes they are 'entitled' to a free meal.

you pay for what you consume. that's the rule. not sure why 'hosting' has been brought into this as it is nonsensical in this scenario.

If you invite someone you are their host. That's why hosting comes in to it.
If you invite me to a dinner party at your home I do not show up expecting to pay for the cost of the food I eat.
If you outsource the cooking and instead, invite me to have the meal in a restuarant, youare still the host. Part of this is because, if you have issued the invitation, you have made the choice about hwere to eat and therefore, what the meal is likely to cost.

If you and I make a mutual agreement to meet up somewhere get a meal, neither of us is hosting so we each pay our own way.

Many of us prefer to pay our own way so will offer to split the bill even where we have been invited by another person, but that doesn't alter the underlying position.