We live in a liberated society. Women are equals (if not better, but don’t tell them that…ssh) than men. On that note, why shouldn’t we at least go Dutch on a first date? OK, I’ll tell you why — as that totally wasn’t a rhetorical question. It goes against the natural order of things. Sorry, but it’s the truth.
Men LIKE to be the aggressors, the chasers. John Gray, the author of “Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus” even writes that it’s been scientifically proven that a man’s stress levels decrease when he’s being, well, the man in a relationship. And who are we to prevent a guy from living up to his full masculine potential?
The reason I bring up this whole “to pay or not to pay, that is the question” topic, is because a new survey analyzed how likely men are to pay on a first date. One third of the men said they would be willing to shell out, while HALF said they’d prefer to go Dutch. Most men agreed that they’d at least like some sort of contribution.
Additionally, one in five men saying they’d be happy to pay for parts of the night, including a round of drinks, but not the whole drinks/dinner/entertainment equation. Five percent said they’d be happy to allow the women to pay for the whole evening, and an outstanding 91 percent said that they would leave a bad date early in order to save some money.
Now, I believe in being a progressive female, but part of me — that outdated, antiquated, old-fashioned part — believes that if a guy asks you out, he should pay…for the first and second dates, at least. After that, why shouldn’t we offer (and expect) to pay? If we like a guy, it’s OK. But start as you mean to go on, I say. You don’t want to become a sugar mama, and you certainly don’t want the guy to feel like he “has” you because you’re nice enough to offer to pay.
And FYI to all the guys that are cheapskates/toolbags, happy hour/frozen yogurt dates cost very little. It won’t break your bank and it keeps us happy. Again, I ask — why disrupt the natural order of things?
Do I stutter?
