paying for your girl friend.

[marjorie]

After paying far too much for too long in a relationship, I now expect a guy to pay for the first 2-3 dates he asks me on. I will generally have an activity to suggest that I have tickets for, or a new recipe that i "just have to" try shortly thereafter.

[more freedom]

Originally Posted by Thrifty Ray

Its been a long time since I dated....so my advice would be pretty dated.

I feel it is a red flag in someones character when they 'expect' expensive 'things' from someone they are dating.

I feel that expenses should be the responsibility of the inviting party unless it is discussed and agreed otherwise...which is easier to do after people get to know each other (dating for a while).

I also agree that when someone 'expects' or 'flaunts' in a dating relationship...they are most likely going to continue that behavior into a marriage.

and 'Hot' or 'not'...those behaviors wear thin after a few years...

Very, very, very well said!

[amberfocus]

Just on the principle of fairness, I'd say that both parties should shell out for dates.

However, the individual situation may not work as neatly, and may need to be tweaked based on personal circumstances.

For instance, I'm too cheap to be willing to eat at a restaurant or see a movie in a theater. But I would also never, ever expect or demand that a guy pay for me. This can be cause for awkward situations when it comes to going out, since I don't want to pay, but I don't want to be paid for, either.

So with my first boyfriend, we solved this by simply not going out. Neither one of us had to pay, and we were both happy. He bragged about how low maintenance I was all the time, and I didn't have to break the bank to date a boyfriend. It worked for us.

My second (and current) bf was different. When we started dating, I was still a (starving and broke) student, but he had already graduated and had a job. And I was/am still too cheap to go out. But because he *wants* to go/take me out, he does pay for everything. When this first started, I felt so uncomfortable, and I asked him time and time and time again if he minded. But he's completely willing to pay, and he actually uses me as an excuse to treat himself, because without me, he's also too cheap go out. So this works, too.

However, I do pay him back in my own way. For instance, I bought him all of his groceries with my spare meal points during the semester, because that didn't cost me "real" money. We both agreed that it was a fair exchange. But if we were to ever start living together, we'd split rent, utilities, and groceries 50/50, no question. There's no way I would live off someone (with the possible exception of parents in an emergency situation).

So the bottom line is: if your gf has the money and is willing to spend it (on herself or on people besides you), then I'd take it as a hint of selfishness if she always expects you to pay for dates. If you're in a serious, long-term relationship, contributions really should come from both parties, unless specifically agreed upon in advance. However, being too nitpicky about the exact way expenses are split can also be a source of discord. So it's a fine balance.

~mimi

[pearlieq]

Well, this might be an unpopular opinion, but maybe I'm a little more old-fashioned than I thought.

Unless there are some extenuating circumstances, I expect the gentleman to pay for the first date, assuming he asked me out. I would be pretty turned off if the check came and he told me what my portion of the bill was! I honestly probably wouldn't see him again, or we'd go out just as friends.

First of all, I do believe that the person who did the inviting should pay. If a guy asks you out on a date, he's inviting you out. But more than that, I believe in traditional American-style courtship. By inviting a lady out and paying for the first date, a man is saying, "I enjoy your company and I'm willing to make an effort for you. I have enough resources to be an acceptable partner for a relationship"

And then, within the first few dates, the lady will pick up the check, provide event tickets, or cook a meal for the man. That's her way of saying, "I enjoy your company too. I'm not looking to take advantage of you, and I also have enough resources to be an acceptable partner for a relationship."

As the relationship progresses, the couple will work out a mutually agreeable way to fund dating. They may take turns paying, or maybe he'll pay for the meal, and she'll pay for the entertainment. In my case, I was a sophomore in college and DH had a good job, so he did most of the paying, but I tried to make up for it by paying when I could, cooking meals for him, and finding low cost entertainment I could take him to.

I certainly don't think a woman should just sit back and demand a man pay for everything, and she should absolutely not be accepting money from him for bills, clothes, etc. To me that seems like taking advantage and doesn't really make her look like a very attractive partner.

[pearlieq]

Originally Posted by pyotr

It's really not so complicated.
Ask yourself, "is she HOT?" If your girlfriend is a blue-chipper, money shouldn't really enter into the equation. If you really want that girlfriend to stay with you, I wouldn't even let on that money is a struggle for you. Women/girls will use your degree of financial ease as a surrogate marker for your general worth as a potential lifelong mate.

If your girlfriend is just a nice plain girl whom you're "playing around with" but would never consider getting married to, HELL YES, make her pay her share. Cruel, but that's reality folks.

Oh ewwww!!! So every pretty woman is essentially a prostitute and/or a trophy???

The only positive I can see about this type of dating philosophy is that at least it tends to attract people who think like this to each other, keeping them out of the dating pool for the rest of the world!