Chivalry

Mellie289

It's a very one sided, arrogant and entitled view of the situation...

The man also spends "time with you on the date", probably respects you and is courteous by communicating politely after the date (as opposed to poofing). So... is this supposed to come for free?
I won't contradict you though that women generally value themselves higher than men in terms of dating, i.e. they consider they are the prize, that only the man worthy of them will deserve and have a higher intrinsic value than men. It's fair as society bred us (all of us) this way... Just look at the guilt men feel when they don't get to pay for a meal to realise this!

This explains why one of the pillars of "Pickup artists" strategies is to throw this higher value women are convinced they have by the window (by nagging, etc.), which is destabilising for many women ("This man values himself enough to ignore me!").

PS: yes, I'm from the new school of dating obviously, not the traditional old school!

Some more info, if you are interested in the biology behind this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mate_Choice

I in no way stated that a woman has higher value than a man... or his time. I merely stated that a woman's time on a date has more value than the price of a drink or a meal. To think you owe someone something (and with dating, the implication is sex) for a free drink or a free meal means that person doesn't value themselves more than the cost of those things.

Things are skewed toward men spending more money in dating in the initial courting stages, but many women will reciprocate later. I try to alternate paying from date 3 onward if things are going well, although I do offer every time and say thank you. It's probably a carryover from times when men brought home the bacon and women didn't work, but I don't see the men I've been dating trying to change this. The guy I dated before my current boyfriend wouldn't let me pay for a date until 6th time out or so and I had to insist. I'm very happy now with things shared pretty evenly in our relationship and I wouldn't have been comfortable for the long haul with someone who is always paying for me (I know some women just love that, but I'm not looking for someone to take care of me).

My whole point about the courtesy and communication is I think too many people do poof - I know you probably think that is acceptable as part of your new school of dating, but I don't, so I believe the only thing owed someone after he has bought me a meal is the courtesy of not avoiding his phone calls and texts to try to disappear and to let him know that I don't feel a connection (if that's the case).

nolachick

I like a man who knows how to treat me like a lady. I definitely appreciate chivalry but I can also appreciate a man who will let me be me and be independent when I want to be. I think its all about balance. :flowerforyou:

TheKitsune6

I'm from the new school of dating obviously, not the traditional old school!

I'm a dating school dropout because *kitten* DA POLICE!

Rules are dumb. Do what makes you happy and find someone that fits into that paradigm. If it makes you more unhappy to be alone with the standards, the adjust your expectations and go from there. It's really quite simple.

Rules (guidelines as they should be called) are dumb, perhaps, but are also useful to frame interactions and are a general measure of what people should expect from an interaction.

For example: the man should pay for the first meal is one guideline, a man won't get a *kitten* in the pub on a first date in public is another.
For someone who isn't very experienced with dating, it can be useful to gauge what the current practice is, then you can go free form from here.

What is dumb really is following these guidelines as rules that cannot be transgressed... but I know I have benefited greatly from reading this kind of material in terms of dating.

Those guidelines change from person to person, and so aligns with what I was saying "Find what makes you happy, and function within those paradigms". Does if make you happy to have the other person pay for the date? Date someone that will pay. Does it make you happy to give a BJ the first night you meet? Go for it. So even if you are inexperienced, you don't have to figure out the current practice to know what you want out of a partner. Just find the right fit. Don't adjust your expectations, unless you are unhappy being alone with those expectations.

meshashesha2012

I'd very much like it if girls just went with the flow. If I bump a drink out of your hand or offer to pay for lunch/dinner, just take it at that and let it go. No it doesn't mean I want in your pants, it just means I'm a decent person and thanking you for giving some of your time.

I think my biggest pet peeve when going out with a girl, someone I'm dating, is her insisting on paying. I don't know why it's so deeply etched into my head, but I'm thoroughly embarrassed if a girl pays for me. I understand the politeness of her gesture and if she really wants to give me the money after the fact that's fine, but I feel like such a punk/scrub if she pays for a movie/dinner or something...

I have an issue with men payin for me, especially when we just start dating. I feel like because they bought me a meal I "owe" them something. I would rather pay for myself and not feel like I owe them anything.

i've never thought of it that way, but then again i know my goodies are worth more than the cost of a movie theater ticket and popcorn. the price of vagina maybe have devalued over the past few decades for many women, but not for this woman over <

---

there.


i also agree that rules should pretty much just be guidelines since they are going to change from situation to situation and person from person.

pa_jorg

i've never thought of it that way, but then again i know my goodies are worth more than the cost of a movie theater ticket and popcorn. the price of vagina maybe have devalued over the past few decades for many women, but not for this woman over <

---

there.

Omg, love this :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

flimflamfloz

I in no way stated that a woman has higher value than a man... or his time. I merely stated that a woman's time on a date has more value than the price of a drink or a meal. To think you owe someone something (and with dating, the implication is sex) for a free drink or a free meal means that person doesn't value themselves more than the cost of those things.

Gotcha! Actually, it didn't even crossed my mind that any of the participants should owe the other one sex or anything after a date.

If both "daters" act willingly and in accordance with what they believe they should normally do, then there is no expectation. If I pay or if I don't pay, I have no expectation from you.
If I decide to offer a drink or pay a meal to someone (anyone, a date, a friend or even just random dude), it's because I am pleased to do so, and it doesn't even cross my mind that the person now owes me anything (I don't keep tabs).

When I replied to what your wrote (quoted below):
The key is to value yourself enough that you will consider the time you spend with him on the date, and the respect and courtesy you extend him in polite communication after the date (as opposed to poofing) worth the price of a meal.
The way I read what you wrote was: "Because I'm a female and I spend some time with you, then you (man) owe me the price of a meal".
At any rate, in this text, concretely you are saying there HAS TO BE a return on investment after the date (for whoever paid the date) but that the time you spent with the person should be considered an acceptable ROI for the other person.
Somewhat, I'm not sure if you're really helping your cause (or anyone who has self esteem issue and think they are not worth the price of a meal) by saying that...
I think personally that you should rather assume that there is absolutely no expectation of ROI (which might or not be true depending on who you are with), but that's how it should be and whoever has an expectation of a ROI is an idiot (I'm talking direct ROI).

Also I'd be frankly annoyed if someone had offered something to me with an expectation of a ROI (even if I was imagining the "time spent" and some "courtesy" in the future as a sufficient repayment).
Maybe I'm naive. My New School Of Dating bible doesn't go into much details on this particular point..

It's probably a carryover from times when men brought home the bacon and women didn't work, but I don't see the men I've been dating trying to change this.

I know. Men still have this impression that they must pay for dates, etc. But there is no reason other than "because it's like that" for men to pay.

My whole point about the courtesy and communication is I think too many people do poof - I know you probably think that is acceptable as part of your new school of dating, but I don't, so I believe the only thing owed someone after he has bought me a meal is the courtesy of not avoiding his phone calls and texts to try to disappear and to let him know that I don't feel a connection (if that's the case).

I don't particularly like when people poof either.
I think what you really mean to say is that if someone treats you well (by for example paying for the food), then you treat them well in return.

Well, I personally think there are many other (non financial) ways to treat someone well that do not require to pay for the food and which will ensure my date does not poof.

flimflamfloz

Rules (guidelines as they should be called) are dumb, perhaps, but are also useful to frame interactions and are a general measure of what people should expect from an interaction.

For example: the man should pay for the first meal is one guideline, a man won't get a *kitten* in the pub on a first date in public is another.
For someone who isn't very experienced with dating, it can be useful to gauge what the current practice is, then you can go free form from here.
What is dumb really is following these guidelines as rules that cannot be transgressed... but I know I have benefited greatly from reading this kind of material in terms of dating.

Those guidelines change from person to person, and so aligns with what I was saying "Find what makes you happy, and function within those paradigms". Does if make you happy to have the other person pay for the date? Date someone that will pay. Does it make you happy to give a BJ the first night you meet? Go for it. So even if you are inexperienced, you don't have to figure out the current practice to know what you want out of a partner. Just find the right fit. Don't adjust your expectations, unless you are unhappy being alone with those expectations.

I think we agree in principle...
Where I think we disagree is I believe the amount of "common/recognisable behaviour" from person to person doesn't change that much, and that you have a few staples/constants that you will encounter in most of your dates, and so the "rules" can be applied to 80% of the situations encountered during one particular date/set of dates (then you can go free form for the remaining 20% and play it by ear). It does help to know where you stand most of the time and being able to decypher what is happening.
That has been my experience.

TheKitsune6

Rules (guidelines as they should be called) are dumb, perhaps, but are also useful to frame interactions and are a general measure of what people should expect from an interaction.

For example: the man should pay for the first meal is one guideline, a man won't get a *kitten* in the pub on a first date in public is another.
For someone who isn't very experienced with dating, it can be useful to gauge what the current practice is, then you can go free form from here.
What is dumb really is following these guidelines as rules that cannot be transgressed... but I know I have benefited greatly from reading this kind of material in terms of dating.

Those guidelines change from person to person, and so aligns with what I was saying "Find what makes you happy, and function within those paradigms". Does if make you happy to have the other person pay for the date? Date someone that will pay. Does it make you happy to give a BJ the first night you meet? Go for it. So even if you are inexperienced, you don't have to figure out the current practice to know what you want out of a partner. Just find the right fit. Don't adjust your expectations, unless you are unhappy being alone with those expectations.

I think we agree in principle...
Where I think we disagree is I believe the amount of "common/recognisable behaviour" from person to person doesn't change that much, and that you have a few staples/constants that you will encounter in most of your dates, and so the "rules" can be applied to 80% of the situations encountered during one particular date/set of dates (then you can go free form for the remaining 20% and play it by ear). It does help to know where you stand most of the time and being able to decypher what is happening.
That has been my experience.

We will have to agree to disagree then (on the little bit that we are disagreeing with anyway)

Mellie289

The way I read what you wrote was: "Because I'm a female and I spend some time with you, then you (man) owe me the price of a meal".
At any rate, in this text, concretely you are saying there HAS TO BE a return on investment after the date (for whoever paid the date) but that the time you spent with the person should be considered an acceptable ROI for the other person.
Somewhat, I'm not sure if you're really helping your cause (or anyone who has self esteem issue and think they are not worth the price of a meal) by saying that...
I think personally that you should rather assume that there is absolutely no expectation of ROI (which might or not be true depending on who you are with), but that's how it should be and whoever has an expectation of a ROI is an idiot (I'm talking direct ROI).

Also I'd be frankly annoyed if someone had offered something to me with an expectation of a ROI (even if I was imagining the "time spent" and some "courtesy" in the future as a sufficient repayment).
Maybe I'm naive. My New School Of Dating bible doesn't go into much details on this particular point..

I'm not sure what you're saying here. I can't follow it, as that's not what I'm saying.

Look - a meal isn't all that much money. to me. I will buy dinner for friends on occasion (like if they need cheering up) and it's no big deal. Like mesha already so eloquantly put it, moving forward with me is not going to happen because someone bought be a dinner because this girl isn't for sale and I wouldn't value myself so low any way. No woman should! I do think courtesy and decency are owed a date, unless he behaves in some way that is very rude or disrespectful. That's just my sense of decency.

I most certainly am not saying a ROI is owed. I don't consider dating an investment (or time spent as the return on that investment). I am in no way equating dating to banking (as you seem to be) - I am talking about men buying women dinner on a first date as courting behavior. If anything, I'm comparing it more to a peacock showing off his feathers to a peahen to impress her. When it all boils down, we're still animals and there is an underlying biological basis for males to try to win the attention of females of the species.

TheKitsune6

we're still animals and there is an underlying biological basis for males to try to win the attention of females of the species.

Eggs are more expensive than sperm, it's why more often than not the female is the more discerning of the two genders.

Courting serves a purpose, I get that. But we are pretty far removed from "nature" so I think it our culture it is more beneficial if we court each other. Whether the guy wants to pay while the woman pretties up or if you just think of something creative and fun to do together... eh. Whatever works for ya!