Survey time: Should a guy pay on a first date?

Pay without asking...YES
Offer to pay once she offers to split the bill...yes
Insist on paying and make a scene...HELL NO

Be traditional, hold open doors, pull out chairs, give flowers but don't be insulting and over the top.

a TRUE Gentleman will always pick up the check on a first date.

Times certainly have changed since I've been out there. No wonder I'm still single and will be for a while. If this is such a heated topic...where posters start name calling...just for paying for dinner, I can't imagine what else is so damn difficult????

Ignorant for paying for a date? Seriously?

WOW!

My comment about a post being ignorant was a person who was stating a woman is pretending to be a man if she ask a man out. Not to yours. I pointed to yours to why its a good reason for a woman to try to pay since I would stay away from any guy who "lets" a woman do something.

Which is why I immediately pointed to yours...as ignorant. Any woman who feels that a guy not 'letting' her pay for their date is trying to control her...is, well...to use your excellent turn of phrase again...

Ignorant.

Then its ignorant to you but I still think it raises a red flag if a man is that bent on never letting a woman pay. What reason is behind it? Why can't a woman help pay? Is it just out of politeness or is it a mark against his own ego? Basically what is so bad with a woman wanting to pay or help pay the bill?

But honestly, what is so bad about either of those reasons? Whether it be out of politeness, or even whether it's a mark against his ego? And here's a shocking concept...maybe it's about appreciation?

Either way it's not a matter of control.

That's not a shocking concept but can't a guy appreciate a girl even if she wanted to help pay? What if she appreciates the guy so wants to help on the bill? It was probably wrong on me to call out a person on the term "Never lets" since I don't know the person and could be a very nice guy and if he reads this post I apologize but I do think these are good questions to be asked.

I can see maybe a guy doing this because they don't want to be judge and put into a category that they're not a man after reading what many women are writing on here how they wouldn't go on a second date if they had to pay but besides from that I truly don't understand what would be so wrong that a man could never let a woman pay. Enlighten me.

I would appreciate a woman offering!

And as for what's so wrong about it, technically the answer is nothing...just like there's nothing wrong with him paying every time.

I'll give you an interesting example, using myself. My last girlfriend and I lived 150 miles away from each other. Our first date was on about an hours notice. She told me she wished I was closer so we could see each other that night. I asked if she was serious, she said yes...I said be ready in an hour and a half. I drove all the way there, took her to a late dinner and movie, and drove home at 5am (we spent the rest of the night sitting on an overlook talking). I paid, of course.

After that, I drove over 300 miles every single Friday just to see her for less than 12hrs, of which we spent the majority sleeping (or not, as the case may have been lol). I paid for my fuel, our food, drinks...entertainment...and whatever else came up during those visits.

Now comes the interesting part. Shortly before we'd met...I had seriously injured my arm (requiring major reconstructive surgery), and have been out of work because of it for pushing 4mos. Through the course of our relationship, which had become committed, circumstances came up requiring me to spend a large portion of my savings on an emergency. She immediately wanted to take up financial responsibility for our time together, and even tried to help with some of my bills. I allowed it for two reasons. First...because this was supposed to be a 'permanent' relationship. Second, because it would have genuinely hurt her had I not allowed her to share in those responsibilities, and her feelings were far more important to me than my own...even though it absolutely killed me for things to go in that direction.

So which part of me paying for everything was controlling her? And what is so hard to understand about it being difficult as a man to allow her to pay for me?

Also to clarify, I'd like to add that once we were together to the point of shared finances, or even implied shared finances...all of that changes to an extent. At that point, it's 'our' money, and who 'pays' becomes irrelevant.

Times certainly have changed since I've been out there. No wonder I'm still single and will be for a while. If this is such a heated topic...where posters start name calling...just for paying for dinner, I can't imagine what else is so damn difficult????

Ignorant for paying for a date? Seriously?

WOW!

My comment about a post being ignorant was a person who was stating a woman is pretending to be a man if she ask a man out. Not to yours. I pointed to yours to why its a good reason for a woman to try to pay since I would stay away from any guy who "lets" a woman do something.

Which is why I immediately pointed to yours...as ignorant. Any woman who feels that a guy not 'letting' her pay for their date is trying to control her...is, well...to use your excellent turn of phrase again...

Ignorant.

Then its ignorant to you but I still think it raises a red flag if a man is that bent on never letting a woman pay. What reason is behind it? Why can't a woman help pay? Is it just out of politeness or is it a mark against his own ego? Basically what is so bad with a woman wanting to pay or help pay the bill?

But honestly, what is so bad about either of those reasons? Whether it be out of politeness, or even whether it's a mark against his ego? And here's a shocking concept...maybe it's about appreciation?

Either way it's not a matter of control.

That's not a shocking concept but can't a guy appreciate a girl even if she wanted to help pay? What if she appreciates the guy so wants to help on the bill? It was probably wrong on me to call out a person on the term "Never lets" since I don't know the person and could be a very nice guy and if he reads this post I apologize but I do think these are good questions to be asked.

I can see maybe a guy doing this because they don't want to be judge and put into a category that they're not a man after reading what many women are writing on here how they wouldn't go on a second date if they had to pay but besides from that I truly don't understand what would be so wrong that a man could never let a woman pay. Enlighten me.

I would appreciate a woman offering!

And as for what's so wrong about it, technically the answer is nothing...just like there's nothing wrong with him paying every time.

I'll give you an interesting example, using myself. My last girlfriend and I lived 150 miles away from each other. Our first date was on about an hours notice. She told me she wished I was closer so we could see each other that night. I asked if she was serious, she said yes...I said be ready in an hour and a half. I drove all the way there, took her to a late dinner and movie, and drove home at 5am (we spent the rest of the night sitting on an overlook talking). I paid, of course.

After that, I drove over 300 miles every single Friday just to see her for less than 12hrs, of which we spent the majority sleeping (or not, as the case may have been lol). I paid for my fuel, our food, drinks...entertainment...and whatever else came up during those visits.

Now comes the interesting part. Shortly before we'd met...I had seriously injured my arm (requiring major reconstructive surgery), and have been out of work because of it for pushing 4mos. Through the course of our relationship, which had become committed, circumstances came up requiring me to spend a large portion of my savings on an emergency. She immediately wanted to take up financial responsibility for our time together, and even tried to help with some of my bills. I allowed it for two reasons. First...because this was supposed to be a 'permanent' relationship. Second, because it would have genuinely hurt her had I not allowed her to share in those responsibilities, and her feelings were far more important to me than my own...even though it absolutely killed me for things to go in that direction.

So which part of me paying for everything was controlling her? And what is so hard to understand about it being difficult as a man to allow her to pay for me?

Also to clarify, I'd like to add that once we were together to the point of shared finances, or even implied shared finances...all of that changes to an extent. At that point, it's 'our' money, and who 'pays' becomes irrelevant.

If you want to pay that's fine if she's fine with it.. But if you won't "let" her pay then it's contolling. When you won't allow someone to do something that's a completely rational thing to do it's controlling.

Times certainly have changed since I've been out there. No wonder I'm still single and will be for a while. If this is such a heated topic...where posters start name calling...just for paying for dinner, I can't imagine what else is so damn difficult????

Ignorant for paying for a date? Seriously?

WOW!

My comment about a post being ignorant was a person who was stating a woman is pretending to be a man if she ask a man out. Not to yours. I pointed to yours to why its a good reason for a woman to try to pay since I would stay away from any guy who "lets" a woman do something.

Which is why I immediately pointed to yours...as ignorant. Any woman who feels that a guy not 'letting' her pay for their date is trying to control her...is, well...to use your excellent turn of phrase again...

Ignorant.

Then its ignorant to you but I still think it raises a red flag if a man is that bent on never letting a woman pay. What reason is behind it? Why can't a woman help pay? Is it just out of politeness or is it a mark against his own ego? Basically what is so bad with a woman wanting to pay or help pay the bill?

But honestly, what is so bad about either of those reasons? Whether it be out of politeness, or even whether it's a mark against his ego? And here's a shocking concept...maybe it's about appreciation?

Either way it's not a matter of control.

That's not a shocking concept but can't a guy appreciate a girl even if she wanted to help pay? What if she appreciates the guy so wants to help on the bill? It was probably wrong on me to call out a person on the term "Never lets" since I don't know the person and could be a very nice guy and if he reads this post I apologize but I do think these are good questions to be asked.

I can see maybe a guy doing this because they don't want to be judge and put into a category that they're not a man after reading what many women are writing on here how they wouldn't go on a second date if they had to pay but besides from that I truly don't understand what would be so wrong that a man could never let a woman pay. Enlighten me.

I would appreciate a woman offering!

And as for what's so wrong about it, technically the answer is nothing...just like there's nothing wrong with him paying every time.

I'll give you an interesting example, using myself. My last girlfriend and I lived 150 miles away from each other. Our first date was on about an hours notice. She told me she wished I was closer so we could see each other that night. I asked if she was serious, she said yes...I said be ready in an hour and a half. I drove all the way there, took her to a late dinner and movie, and drove home at 5am (we spent the rest of the night sitting on an overlook talking). I paid, of course.

After that, I drove over 300 miles every single Friday just to see her for less than 12hrs, of which we spent the majority sleeping (or not, as the case may have been lol). I paid for my fuel, our food, drinks...entertainment...and whatever else came up during those visits.

Now comes the interesting part. Shortly before we'd met...I had seriously injured my arm (requiring major reconstructive surgery), and have been out of work because of it for pushing 4mos. Through the course of our relationship, which had become committed, circumstances came up requiring me to spend a large portion of my savings on an emergency. She immediately wanted to take up financial responsibility for our time together, and even tried to help with some of my bills. I allowed it for two reasons. First...because this was supposed to be a 'permanent' relationship. Second, because it would have genuinely hurt her had I not allowed her to share in those responsibilities, and her feelings were far more important to me than my own...even though it absolutely killed me for things to go in that direction.

So which part of me paying for everything was controlling her? And what is so hard to understand about it being difficult as a man to allow her to pay for me?

Also to clarify, I'd like to add that once we are together to the point of shared finances, or even implied shared finances...all of that changes to an extent. At that point, it's 'our' money, and who 'pays' becomes irrelevant.

Times certainly have changed since I've been out there. No wonder I'm still single and will be for a while. If this is such a heated topic...where posters start name calling...just for paying for dinner, I can't imagine what else is so damn difficult????

Ignorant for paying for a date? Seriously?

WOW!

My comment about a post being ignorant was a person who was stating a woman is pretending to be a man if she ask a man out. Not to yours. I pointed to yours to why its a good reason for a woman to try to pay since I would stay away from any guy who "lets" a woman do something.

Which is why I immediately pointed to yours...as ignorant. Any woman who feels that a guy not 'letting' her pay for their date is trying to control her...is, well...to use your excellent turn of phrase again...

Ignorant.

Then its ignorant to you but I still think it raises a red flag if a man is that bent on never letting a woman pay. What reason is behind it? Why can't a woman help pay? Is it just out of politeness or is it a mark against his own ego? Basically what is so bad with a woman wanting to pay or help pay the bill?

But honestly, what is so bad about either of those reasons? Whether it be out of politeness, or even whether it's a mark against his ego? And here's a shocking concept...maybe it's about appreciation?

Either way it's not a matter of control.

That's not a shocking concept but can't a guy appreciate a girl even if she wanted to help pay? What if she appreciates the guy so wants to help on the bill? It was probably wrong on me to call out a person on the term "Never lets" since I don't know the person and could be a very nice guy and if he reads this post I apologize but I do think these are good questions to be asked.

I can see maybe a guy doing this because they don't want to be judge and put into a category that they're not a man after reading what many women are writing on here how they wouldn't go on a second date if they had to pay but besides from that I truly don't understand what would be so wrong that a man could never let a woman pay. Enlighten me.

I would appreciate a woman offering!

And as for what's so wrong about it, technically the answer is nothing...just like there's nothing wrong with him paying every time.

I'll give you an interesting example, using myself. My last girlfriend and I lived 150 miles away from each other. Our first date was on about an hours notice. She told me she wished I was closer so we could see each other that night. I asked if she was serious, she said yes...I said be ready in an hour and a half. I drove all the way there, took her to a late dinner and movie, and drove home at 5am (we spent the rest of the night sitting on an overlook talking). I paid, of course.

After that, I drove over 300 miles every single Friday just to see her for less than 12hrs, of which we spent the majority sleeping (or not, as the case may have been lol). I paid for my fuel, our food, drinks...entertainment...and whatever else came up during those visits.

Now comes the interesting part. Shortly before we'd met...I had seriously injured my arm (requiring major reconstructive surgery), and have been out of work because of it for pushing 4mos. Through the course of our relationship, which had become committed, circumstances came up requiring me to spend a large portion of my savings on an emergency. She immediately wanted to take up financial responsibility for our time together, and even tried to help with some of my bills. I allowed it for two reasons. First...because this was supposed to be a 'permanent' relationship. Second, because it would have genuinely hurt her had I not allowed her to share in those responsibilities, and her feelings were far more important to me than my own...even though it absolutely killed me for things to go in that direction.

So which part of me paying for everything was controlling her? And what is so hard to understand about it being difficult as a man to allow her to pay for me?

Also to clarify, I'd like to add that once we were together to the point of shared finances, or even implied shared finances...all of that changes to an extent. At that point, it's 'our' money, and who 'pays' becomes irrelevant.

If you want to pay that's fine if she's fine with it.. But if you won't "let" her pay then it's contolling. When you won't allow someone to do something that's a completely rational and adult thing to do it's controlling.

And not so much about you, but if the a man's ego is injured if a woman pays for a date, then I'd say he's got a fairly fragile ego.

or maybe some people are just way too sensitive and go out of their way to find things to get offended by such as some one paying for their meal? just a thought.

I know equal right and all that but if I guy does not pay for me on the first date I just assume he is a tight a*rse and he not getting a second date.

Your instincts are correct! In a way, it's a test to make sure they really care about you. A man should want to provide for his woman, whether she needs it or not. If a man expects me to take care of myself, how can I trust him to look after me if the need should arise?

I've gone out with guys I wasn't really interested in dating because we were doing something fun that I wanted to do. In that case, I insisted on paying my share because I wanted to be sure they don't think I owed them something. If I was truly interested in a man, I allowed him to be a gentleman and pick up the tab like a man.

It's good for a man's self-esteem to be able to provide for a woman. It's good for a woman's self-esteem to know a man wants to take care of her.

One caveat: It occurs to me that women sometimes ask men out. In this case, the woman should pay, unless the man insists on paying. If you care about him, and he insists on paying, it's good to give in.

At 60, I'm "The Voice of Experience."

That doesn't seem controlling at all but looks like it was a relationship with mutual respect/love.

but wait...he paid all their first dates....isnt that what you were calling controlling?

I would appreciate a woman offering!

And as for what's so wrong about it, technically the answer is nothing...just like there's nothing wrong with him paying every time.

I'll give you an interesting example, using myself. My last girlfriend and I lived 150 miles away from each other. Our first date was on about an hours notice. She told me she wished I was closer so we could see each other that night. I asked if she was serious, she said yes...I said be ready in an hour and a half. I drove all the way there, took her to a late dinner and movie, and drove home at 5am (we spent the rest of the night sitting on an overlook talking). I paid, of course.

After that, I drove over 300 miles every single Friday just to see her for less than 12hrs, of which we spent the majority sleeping (or not, as the case may have been lol). I paid for my fuel, our food, drinks...entertainment...and whatever else came up during those visits.

Now comes the interesting part. Shortly before we'd met...I had seriously injured my arm (requiring major reconstructive surgery), and have been out of work because of it for pushing 4mos. Through the course of our relationship, which had become committed, circumstances came up requiring me to spend a large portion of my savings on an emergency. She immediately wanted to take up financial responsibility for our time together, and even tried to help with some of my bills. I allowed it for two reasons. First...because this was supposed to be a 'permanent' relationship. Second, because it would have genuinely hurt her had I not allowed her to share in those responsibilities, and her feelings were far more important to me than my own...even though it absolutely killed me for things to go in that direction.

So which part of me paying for everything was controlling her? And what is so hard to understand about it being difficult as a man to allow her to pay for me?

Also to clarify, I'd like to add that once we are together to the point of shared finances, or even implied shared finances...all of that changes to an extent. At that point, it's 'our' money, and who 'pays' becomes irrelevant.

That doesn't seem controlling at all but looks like it was a relationship with mutual respect/love.

Exactly, but from your original commentary/viewpoint...she should have weeded me out, because I'd never have willingly let her pay for ANY date.

Why wouldn't you had let her pay?

Why wouldn't you had let her pay?

For a multitude of reasons. It's what I was taught. It's my responsibility as a man. I don't want her to have to, or even feel like she has to. I want to show her (in a rather simplistic way) that I hold her above other girls who might be 'friends'.

The list certainly doesn't end there...and not one of those reasons on that list involves controlling her.

Why wouldn't you had let her pay?

For a multitude of reasons. It's what I was taught. It's my responsibility as a man. I don't want her to have to, or even feel like she has to. I want to show her (in a rather simplistic way) that I hold her above other girls who might be 'friends'.

The list certainly doesn't end there...and not one of those reasons on that list involves controlling her.