Paying for dinner during the dates prior to a relationship is NOT chivalry. It is not being a "man" or showing you are "invested" in a relationship.
Put quite simply, paying dinner is the purchasing or buying of a woman for an intimate sexual relationship.
Millions of men out there have been duped into this old fashioned idea that the modern woman is the "weaker sex". That the modern working woman of today is somehow in distress and needs to be "rescued" by a conquering white knight of a male. This is not true. If women need to be rescued, then so do men as well. Why can't women do the rescuing?
Women shall never be equal in our society unless they reclaim the notion for themselves. Sign up for selective service, become the main breadwinner (as many wonderful single moms are), unleash your sexual prowess in the bedroom, and above all, split the check at dinner or happy hour.
Millions of women are going on online dating sites to freeload off of desperate men. On average they most likely go on one or two or even three dates with you. They get their free meals/drinks, etc. and then they move on to the next guy on their list of a hundred messages on Tinder or dating sites. They have their sexy pictures and nonchalant and non-committal profile.
In order to increase their freeloading opportunities they say nothing controversial about themselves. Religion? Blank. Kids? Blank/None. Job? Blank.
It all is justified by phrases like, "The woman does the cooking and laundry. The man pays for food" or "As I man I pay or feel Emasculated". Why? Women embrace misogyny for their own benefit. They say things like "Paying is manly". No it is not. Paying is paying for dinner. How a man treats you and respects you is what is manly. For even if it is two friends hanging out, he is no less a man for splitting a meal or not paying.
Why can't men expect women to pay? Why can't men say, "If a woman doesn't pay for my meal she isn't womanly?" If the expectation is that a man pays on the first date and she pays on the second, what you will see is women refusing to go on second dates. Often times this has happened. Gents, don't be tricked into the alternating payment plan trick.
The most disgusting argument that I have heard is, "A man must show 'investment' in me. If he doesn't pay for dinner then it shows he's not invested." I had no idea that a woman's sexuality and dating experience was a stock option. Please Gents, don't fall for this either. What a woman is really saying is that she has the expectation to essentially be bartered for. if a woman really would like to see investment in a man, she must realize that simply being there and spending time with her is a clear sign of investment. Time is far more precious and expensive than money. That is what many women I have seen in the dating world do not get.
I even heard one woman say, "I think a man has to pay. He has to show effort in a woman. A man must conquer a woman." Money has nothing to do with effort. Time is effort. And why does a woman have to be conquered? Why can't a man be conquered? Women are openly admitting these days that they view themselves as inferior to men and the 'weaker sex'. But when it doesn't suit them, then they complain. Which is it?
Women say, "If he doesn't pay, I wouldn't find it attractive." As a man, why can't we say, "If the woman doesn't pay, then she isn't attractive." if women want to be treated equal then why can't a man say that? And what about paying for dinner makes a man attractive or less attractive?
MONEY.
These ladies out there are GOLD DIGGERS! Let us stop having double standards. Let us split meals evenly on every single date. All sexes are created EQUAL.
Most Helpful Opinions