Who pays for a date in this 'sexually liberated' era?

Post Reply New Topic

I'll only open a door for someone if they look like they'll struggle opening a door (because their hands are full or something). I don't like any expectation that I should be a "gentleman" just because I am a biological male. How about I just be me, and you be you? If you like the words and thoughts that come out of my head, it's a whole lot more meaningful than whether or not I pull out a chair you're perfectly capable of pulling out.

Or in other words, I'm impolite. I've no patience to dance with the needless subtleties of social interaction. And if one dislikes me for it then fine, it's unlikely I'll get along well with someone who places a high value on appearance and confined social roles anyway.

I wonder if these things might aggravate me more if I were female. I do not like being expected to partake in such pointless rituals, but I imagine I may like it even less if people were to do those things without my consent. I would be unnerved by someone pulling out my chair for me, and the gesture would not be appreciated.

I always hold the door for man or woman if I'm in a position to do so. Sometimes they thank me sometimes they ignore me. I don't care either way.

If she expects me to do that then I would be like a true gentleman and puke in a vomit bag.

"I am sorry milday, I am allergic to bs".

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 14 Jun 2014, 6:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

..

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 14 Jun 2014, 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That's totally different.

I'm so glad this is simplified in gay dating.. the guy always pays!

Yeah, but what I mean is that holding the door should be natural. If I'm at my side of the car and my hand is on the handle, I do not want to wait for him to come around to my side so he can open my door. I would find that supersilious.

This makes me think of the Avril Lavigne song, The Best Dammed Thing
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2i5Jp7mdMc[/youtube]

At that stage in the game any little thing can throw up a red flag and cause the other person to turn the other direction. It doesn't necessarily mean anything about someone's character, because most of us do it, whether or not we admit it. I think that Sly is right...if you ask someone in advance if they'd mind splitting the bill, they'll probably subconsciously think of you as cheap...even if they themselves prefer to split the bill. Typically I just wait for the check to come and say that either I can pay or we can split, whichever they prefer.

This.

I think it's very nice when a date opens the door for me. Depending on how, when, and why he's doing it. If he's doing it because "he's the man" and he's trying to show me what a gentleman he is, the effect is nearly always utterly slimy. It's also a major PITA because he's imposing this social game on me that I actually don't want to play. If he does the unctuous handing-me-out-of-the-car thing, I can either be ungracious and do the equivalent of leaving his end of the handshake hanging in the air, or I can go along and be the simpering helpless lady. And I'm annoyed to be put in that position. If he's simply polite-- my hands are full, he's in an easy position to open a door, whatever -- that's fine, nice. But I remember one boyfriend who'd practically knock me down in his eagerness to open every f*****g door in my path, and who'd make me stand there while he went through some elaborate chair-pulling-out ritual. And to hell with that.

Here are the men whose politeness I appreciate most: those who notice that a mother is struggling with a stroller, and run to open a door. Who see a pregnant woman or an older woman or a woman with a young child standing on a long bus or subway ride, and immediately offer their seats. Who recognize and speak to children as people. Who demonstrate awareness of and respect for all people outside their age bands. Who are slow to judge.

I remember one time I was on an uptown New York City bus and a schoolboy got on; he sat down in the front, and an old woman immediately set to quizzing him. Then she noticed that the old man across from her had a shoe that'd come untied, and she started yelling, "Your shoe, tie your shoe." The old man was deaf as a post, couldn't figure it out. So she said to the boy, "You tie his shoe," and the boy did, and she told him he was a good boy. When he got off the bus, she and the driver and the old man had a solid five minutes of telling each other what a good boy he was. And you know what? It was true. That's the kind of politeness I like to see.

I pay for my own tickets and usually every other time for drinks and food.

starvingartist is giving an advice based from a female perspective, her advice is very applicable for females but not for males.

If a woman tells her pre-dates "We split the bill, ok?", most guys would assume that she's being egalitarian or doesn't want to make the man pays everything, none of them men would even think of the possibility that she might be cheapskate.

But if a man tells her pre-dates "We split the bill, ok?", then a lot of women, maybe even including those who split, would assume that this guy is very paranoid of paying extra money = cheapskate; most of them won't assume he's requesting that due to egalitarian values nor that he doesn't want to make the woman pays all, It would put the man in a very negative light no matter how he says it.

I see a lot of this on WP, people who throw advice and ideas which are ideal but they fail to see they are only applicable for their own gender.

This. Plus when my mom asked dad for a divorce he immediately closed out all the joint accounts so she lost all her hard earned money. He even closed out the college fund she started for us kids. My brother went to school through the military. I never went to college.

Anyway if you theoretically part or not, in the end you have anyway a shared income. If something broken needs to be fixed, then if you wasted your monex, that you needed, then both of you suffer. I do agree that the financial parts are an relevant part on the stability on the relationship, but not in the way: "Lets talk about it as less as possible, so that no problems come up." but in the way "Lets take in mind, that this is an serious issue, and talk about it and find an agreement, when we plan to get serious."

There are simply bills that needs to be paid anyway. And for what is left of your both budget, you need to make up a plan. How much of what is left do you both want to save for unexpected stuff as repairs? So agree on each other on an amount that you want to have for safety reasons? How much do you want to save for planned stuff as house renewing, building, how much will that cost, when do you want to acchieve it = how much each month should you save for that reason?

And then what is left of your shared money, and is not needed for unavoidable bills, is not needed for your emergency polster, and is not needed for stuff you both plan on, you simply share and each can do with that sum, what he/she wants. And noone bothers, anyway how stupid that might seem for him, simply because its the partners share of the income on which you agreed, that you can spend it on whatever you want. As example on an sh***y american side by side fridge, that we definitly dont need. But its his share of our savings that we agreed on, that it can be wasted, so goddamn if he wants that stupid fridge, I will ask him one time if he really, really, really wants that (At least I loose 45 cm of kitchen storage room, because of that stuff. ^^), and if he says yes I will vent in wrongplanet and shut my mouth. ^^There is no "getting upset"/"wont let me" about us spending money, when we both made before a money plan for the stuff, we need to save our money, and agreed on giving each of us a certain sum each month, that we can spend or save on whatever we want. He saved his share of our "money to spend" amount for it, so thats the way it is and that we agreed on.

Seriously, this happens all the time. I'd always been careful to keep my own money and the college money separate, but I didn't realize how common it is for guys to do this. And often the women are trying their best to be friendly and peaceable during the divorce, taking the long view, so they won't fight hard for the money, which turns out to be a terrible idea. The divorce lawyers don't often help because they're focused on custody -- the standard thing is for the guy, on his lawyer's advice, to threaten a custody battle even if he doesn't want it, and try to scare the woman away from as much money as possible.

I remember being shocked by how cavalier the lawyers were about college money, but in retrospect I think they just don't want to have to deal with the issue. Custody, support, asset division, bill the client. I don't meet too many divorce lawyers who're good with financial planning or tight with the numbers, either, it's just not their strength. So if there's something you want you really have to get in there and fight, sometimes with your own lawyer. I put in all kinds of stuff my lawyer objected to -- not only are we responsible for part of our kid's college costs, which is just state boilerplate, but if she waits and goes when she's older, that's cool, we're responsible then. Or if she gets a full ride somewhere, we help out with grad school. If I'd known how this stuff works, I'd also have put in shared costs on the testing fees, application fees, etc. --that stuff comes to hundreds of dollars per kid, and most kids will visit college campuses, too, another expense.