Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Right. I have recently started dating. Not something I'm used to having always been in long term relationships - usually with men who have been introduced to me by other mates. I am now conducting a survey as to whether I should offer to pay for anything or not - because recently, I was told by a bloke that he feels bad if a woman offers to pay. Another (female) friend said, "if you offer to pay now, you'll always pay and he'll have no respect for you". Other female friends have voiced the same opinion.


I was brought up to believe that if you earn, you do.....


another friend said "if he wants your company, he'll pay for it". Not sure what to do..Do I sit there waiting or do I offer to buy the next round. I have been on a date when the guy backed out the door upon arrival of the bill.


What is the form? I am a forward thinking gal with enough money to pay for a night out - but do I offer to...?


Any thoughts? I'm confused!!!:-S

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/12518-to-pay-or-not-to-pay/
Share on other sites

1st date - dinner he pays, drinks after offer to buy a round but he should refuse.

2nd date - dinner he pays, drinks after buy a round or two

3rd date - go dutch

4th date - you pay and then alternate paying for meals thereafter if you're earning but he should pay for expensive places.

I might be reading too much into this, but a better question might be, what do you want to do? Start how you mean to go on. You earn money, you're not out to spend all of his just for the hell of it, you sound like you want to contribute and you sound like you have your own opinion. So do what you want to do, and hope he's open minded enough to take a generous offer for what it really is rather than take offence. And if he politely turns down your offer, so be it.


If he does take offence, is he really the man for you?

Personally I think you're looking at this all wrong......


For one, you're fully expecting this guy to be a nice, gentleman like fella who is going to be great company and pay for everything all night.


An example of what you're not expecting was conveyed to me on one of my first dates with my now partner, who after a reasonably OK first date some years ago, proceeded to watch the guy use the calculator on his phone to work out the tip.....nothing too harsh there, but then divide by two and explain her half was XYZ.


The only opinion is yours, go on the date, expect what you expect and offer is you wish to offer, personally I would appreciate the offer to pay half of dinner, however would decline it, getting the first round in afterwards would just make me think you were a cool girl who isn't a money grabbing princess who expects everything to be bought for her.


There is enough pressure on a first date/second date/third date as it is without throwing expenditure into the mix!


Just go and have fun! You never know, the guy could be a secret millionaire!

Concur with DB,lb and sb. In these enlightened times, don't be leading him on by making him pay. Some other things to consider at all times:


1) If he chooses the venue then expect him to pay BUT if during the date you don't think it's going to work out then offer to go dutch.

2) If you know/establish that he's not flush with cash then be prepared to go Dutch. BUT if he tries to stick you with the bill then you'd better fancy him rotten to stop you from walking right then, just make sure you fancy him for the right reasons.

3) If you'd like to go on another date with him then before the bill arrives say how lovely a time you've had and it'll be your treat next time. That way he'll be encouraged to pay and hope to see you again.

4) If you had the courage to ask him out and choose the venue then expect to pay but don't insist if he offers to pay or go Dutch.

5) If it's just rounds in a bar then go Dutch so no expectations are encouraged as the fog of drunkenness descends (that's if you let yourself get in a state).


It troubles me that your lady friends were all pushing the "no respect" thing. Can only assume they've all dated some complete b@$tards. Any modern, well-mannered gent would only respect you more for offering to pay. It sets up a partnership dynamic of sharing rather than a dependency one. When it comes down to it go with how you appear to have been raised, if you want to be respected as an individual who's capable of making her own way in the World then behave like you can.


The "If he wants... ...he should pay" thing is even worse. I pity the girl who sincerely believes that because she's making herself nothing more than a mercenary and perhaps worse. There's nothing wrong with making him work for your affections in other ways but if it's all down to the amount of moolah he lays down he'd be better off taking a number from a card in a phone box than yours.


I wish you fun, luck and future happiness back in the dating game. Just stick up for what you know is right for you.


Happy hunting and Tally-Ho!

Offer to pay or don?t just don?t be weird about it. Most blokes want to pay when they take someone out but won?t feel put out or threatened if the lady wants to.


None of it will make any difference.


If you want to see him again the important things are a decent cup of coffee and a bacon sandwich in the morning.

LOL!! Thanks everyone...you've confirmed what I thought all along. (However, this is after years of being with someone who used to conveniently go and 'check out the DVD's' at the crucial till moment in Sainsbury's). Needless to say, he is no longer.


Will keep you posted....x

tallulah71 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> LOL!! Thanks everyone...you've confirmed what I

> thought all along. (However, this is after years

> of being with someone who used to conveniently go

> and 'check out the DVD's' at the crucial till

> moment in Sainsbury's). Needless to say, he is no

> longer.


Have an 'accident' did he?

daizie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The man should pay . He should want to impress you

> . If he thinks going dutch is acceptable , pay

> your way, then dump him pronto. Go home to a good

> vibrator .



Spoken like a true feminist!!! now get back in the kitchen luv!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • If you want to look for blame, look at McKinsey's. It was their model of separating cost and profit centres which started the restructuring of the Post Office - once BT was fully separated off - into Lines of Business - Parcels; Mail Delivery and Retail outlets (set aside the whole Giro Bank nonsense). Once you separate out these lines of business and make them 'stand-alone' you immediately make them vulnerable to sell off and additionally, by separating the 'businesses' make each stand or fall on their own, without cross subsidy. The Post Office took on banking and some government outsourced activity - selling licences and passports etc. as  additional revenue streams to cross subsidize the postal services, and to offer an incentive to outsourced sub post offices. As a single 'comms' delivery business the Post Office (which included the telcom business) made financial sense. Start separating elements off and it doesn't. Getting rid of 'non profitable' activity makes sense in a purely commercial environment, but not in one which is also about overall national benefit - where having an affordable and effective communications (in its largest sense) business is to the national benefit. Of course, the fact the the Government treated the highly profitable telecoms business as a cash cow (BT had a negative PSBR - public sector borrowing requirement - which meant far from the public purse funding investment in infrastructure BT had to lend the government money every year from it's operating surplus) meant that services were terrible and the improvement following privatisation was simply the effect of BT now being able to invest in infrastructure - which is why (partly) its service quality soared in the years following privatisation. I was working for BT through this period and saw what was happening there.
    • But didn't that separation begin with New Labour and Peter Mandelson?
    • I am not disputing that the Post Office remains publicly owned. But the Lib Dems’ decision to separate and privatise Royal Mail has fatally undermined the PO.  It is within the power of the Labour government to save what is left of the PO and the service it provides to the community, if they care enough; I suspect they do not.  However, the appalling postal service is a constant reminder of the Lib Dems’ duplicity on this matter. It is actions taken under the Lib Dem / Conservative coalition that have brought us to this point.
    • Hello We are looking for a stroller lightweight pushchair to use on holidays etc. Our son is 18 months. Anyone looking to sell one? Thanks! 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...