Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
Topics (22) All
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
83Opinion
I think men not wanting to foot the bill for every date is a reaction to the behavior of modern women, not the cause of it. You have to admit, there's a lot of hypocritical garbage on both sides of this. But in general, I agree with you.
If a man likes and dates modernist women, then he's justified in not wanting to pay for everything, but he can't complain about how modern women act. If he likes and dates traditional women, then he should abide by traditional dating rules.
Likewise, if a woman wants a traditional man, she should be a traditional woman. Being a modern woman (its not the 40's anymore, you know) but demanding a traditional man doesn't make any more sense than a man who doesn't follow traditional dating customs demanding a traditional woman.
We each have to pick our partner based on our own values (as in the values we ourselves follow), and reject those who don't meet our standards.
I think we should take it a step further and agree that anytime a submissive wimp becomes a woman's slave and potential pay pig, number one, he doesn't make the decision as to whether the relationship is going to continue, and two, not only should he pay for her breakfast, lunch and dinner at her behest, for the arrangement to have any real credibility, he should also pay for her dates with the superior alpha males who are enjoying sex with her.
Any behavior that isn't consistent is female behavior. Wanting your cake and wanting to eat it to is bs.
If a guy wants a traditional girl, he has to be willing to be a traditional guy- which includes courting/ paying for her when they go out.
Layman’s terms of what she’s saying. It looks like a few of you are missing it.
Men are wanting traditional women, why should she show modern women characteristics while dating you? Her example was splitting the check. Traditional women don’t pay the check. You’re requesting her to be something she’s not.
If you want a traditional a girl you gotta go with the traditional lifestyle, right down to paying the check. It’s part of the lifestyle.
Honestly, men need to accept that traditional woman requires a little more dancing. You’re getting just about everything that modern women frown on so yeah we’re gunnu go through you with a comb. We got people constantly telling us, “you’re husband is a grown man he doesn’t need his lunch packed” or “he’s not your son he can do his own laundry” or “he’s grown, you don’t need to cook for him”
Are you really worth dealing with all that constantly 🧐
If she consistently demonstrates that she is a traditionally-minded, submissive woman, then I would be fine paying for dates. Until I'm confident about that, she's just another modern thot who is trying to take advantage of men.
I realize this sucks for the women who aren't feminists but modern dating and marriage are hell for men and we have to do everything we can to protect ourselves from being taken advantage of.
Generally the man should pay for the date as a geasture of good faith and morality. The problem comes when women automatically feel entitled to such treatment and take advantage of it. If I go on a date and she's on her phone the whole time. She's going to pay her half because she isn't participating. Now if you have good conversation and can make me laugh Yea I'll pay because there aren't too many down to earth women left. I'll pay to thank you for the experience.
First off Damn That’s a Nice Ass secondly if a man doesn’t Wanna pay for a date it’s his money 💴 not yours I’m not sure why you females think You are the sole owner of a man’s bank account
I Don’t care I’ll pay For the date I Got plenty of money and I think men that don’t make much money Are the ones that are complaining and That’s understandable And they shouldn’t be pressured to do something when they work there ass off only to Have just enough money to live and buy Some things they want.
I only read the title, I’m not western but where I’m from the man pays for everything even if the wife works.
I think the problem in the west is the toxic democracy that has caused chaos and didn’t make any boundaries thus the collapse of social equality which it was striving for.
I think that is true as well, the constant striving for equality has created more inequality than originally existed in the first place.
Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner that evening!
For the modern woman, the average man would be lucky to get a date at all.
Especially considering most women want to date men who have considerably higher status but the number of men flunking out of school will only get higher and higher as time goes on (and thats only one of the factors of why a lot of men are losing status). I don't begrudge women for going and pursuing their dream life and gaining status themselves but they need to understand that their potential options will shrink as they climb unless they don't follow the hypergamous standard.
Well so long as she's not shoveling equality bullshit, trying to make men and women equal, I don't have a problem paying for a woman I'm dating.
Additionally we have our boundaries, and although you may not like it, they are to be respected, nobody owes you anything just for showing up. Paying for a date is a literal favor, not a requirement.
"... That is why women have the ability to abort or have a child without the father's consent. " Keep voting Republican in the USA and the "legal right" to do that will gone be in about 4 years. A woman won't have ANY right to do what she wants with her body.
… wrong post
in other words, you are justifying that modern women are all gold diggers? interesting
I guess if a woman doesn't want to have sex on date then she doesn't get to complain about "modern men" just because we modern men are heavily influence by porn and rap music we listen to
You didn’t want to put in the effort to read the whole text, so why out in the effort to make an ignorant comment. If men continue to date gold diggers then that’s their own fault and they can’t complain. But ironically modern women take pride in the fact that they don’t need a man for anything which is why they treat modern men like crap, modern men like yourself will complain about a woman wanting anything from them at all, but the type of woman that take care of themselves and don’t need them are modern women, so they have no right to complain. If you benefit from the low standards of modern women you have no right I complain. I genuinely don’t know what a woman would benefit from a modern man, maybe lack of household expectations but people aren’t getting married anyway, but if a woman goes after modern men than yes they don’t have a right to complain about that either. I think it is hilarious how the vast majority of you men making comments clearly put no effort into reading or comprehending the full my take but have the nerve to stand on your soapbox and make your piece as though you could have something worthwhile to say in a topic you don’t even have the attention span to read through all the way.
“But ironically modern women take pride in the fact that they don’t need a man”
No, this is complete horseshit. “Modern women” in general don’t say this, only feminists do. And sis you’ll be surprised how many women who say such nonsense actually MEAN IT.
And once again nobody made the effort to read your nonsense because this take is full of no thing but generalizations and things that women love to say but never actually mean it in the end
"and remain bothered loser"
dude wtf? how am I a bothered loser? so just because I'm not thirsty as the rest of the real losers who spend all their salaries dating women hoping that they're gonna get pussy in the end makes me a loser?
"Just say your reading level is not up to par and go on. Bitter is as bitter does, I’m done."
nah sis, I dont need to read shit. I pay observe people's action, that is what I do cause in the end action speaks louder than words. the women who SAY they dont need a man are usually the ones going through insanity in their late 20s and early 30s once they get old and realize that they are not "happily married and starting a family" like the rest of their female friends and relatives
If you married to him and don't have a job then you might have a point, why should he pay for a woman that he barely and might not meet again? and why she can't pay for herself if she have a job?
I mean barely know.
Because you are investing in recovering more from them than you would someone you have and want to have a platonic relationship with, therefore expect to receive nothing from. You would have to be naive to expect to put the minimal amount into any endeavor whether it be work or a relationship and somehow reap the maximum reward from it. You invest in a business before it becomes a success so that it will become a success and in the same way you should invest in a relationship in order to make it a good relationship or else you should expect it to fall apart or be of lower quality. That means investing your time, investing effort in such a way as can be seen, appreciated, and reciprocated by your date such as: being on time, dressing nicely, showing manners, and yes paying for the date. If you’re only willing to do as much or even less than what you would do for a friend for a prospective or current romantic interest, then you need to realize that there is no incentive or reason for them to see you as more than a friend or even as a friend. You can give a girl friend treatment and she spect boyfriend benefits that’s ridiculous. The real problem I have with this argument is that I am a generous person myself, and I can’t even imagine putting up this much of a fuss about paying for one of my friends whom I expect nothing from, which I do all of the time. But somehow you men think the prospect of paying for someone you likely asked out, you are interested in, you want a future with, you have expectations from, is unseemly. That’s just cheap.
Investing money to get sex? traditional women was housewives and didn't had jobs.
A relationship is more than sex. You are expecting this person to take the brunt of you emotional burden, to invest more time in you than anyone else, and yes to take in a physical risk to their health, safety, and future by having a sexual relationship with you. What part of the risk taken on by women in being sexually active is unworthy of any likewise show of investment in the man’s part? Not that I believe in being sexually active before marriage, neither did the traditional women to which you refer. What men like you seem to overlook is that the benefits of a “traditional wife” largely did not take place until after the couple had been married. So this women wasn’t sleeping with him, or cooking for him, or cleaning for him, or paying for dates, while they were dating- he invested and received a return on that investment so to speak after they were married. The very system is exactly the sort of investment principle I have just described and yet you act as though they were two different phenomena.
* you can’t give a girl “friend” treatment and expect to receive boyfriend benefits
I also investing my time into her, and people was marrying pretty quickly in the past.
Again, we expect more from romantic partners and so we should give more. If you only give what you would give to a friend, to a romantic partner, then you should only expect to be treated as a friend. You’ve got to give more to get more. Also nothing is stopping you from getting married fast today, that’s a personal decision.
Why all your expectations are based on money? it don't sounds romantic to me.
I literally just said above that it isn’t just about money, it’s about all the ways that you show you’re investing into the relationship.
@lisizzie I'm unsure what you're saying so I'm just going to ask for clarification so I don't assume. Are you saying if a man wants more than friendship he has to not be cheap and needs to look at a potential woman as an investment?
If that's what you mean, does that suggest that a woman is is a goal that needs to be achieved? If it's worth it you'll go all out for it? If I'm wrong correct me. If I'm right in interpreting what you've said so far, what is the woman in this equation? How do you define each person if it's a man and woman relationship? It seems like you're saying only the man has to work for a relationship more than a friend based on what you've just said above. Am I accurate or misunderstanding you? Thanks for clarification.
@Friendlybro79 the relationship is the goal, especially if marriage is in the picture. Women, especially in a traditional marriage, do the brunt of the heavy lifting in the home and in the marriage scenario and so yes an investment is expected- more than financially. But just in general, nobody wants to be treated cheaply, as though they were some sort of disgusting burden when you’re the one who asked for their time whether it be a man or a woman. I am not saying that only a man has to work for a relationship, but rather that given the traditional and biological roles of men and women as opposed to this modern crap, because the women takes on the brunt of the risk physically and socially by entering into a relationship, men are and traditionally have been expected to invest in securing their mate. It is like that in literally every species on the planet so I’m not sure why so many men seem to think it is unfair. In every species the man goes out of his way to secure a mate by convincing the female that he is a worthy specimen. But for some reason men think that they should be exempt to nature or that nature is somehow unfair , or rather society I’m enforcing what is seen throughout nature is unfair.
I don’t see any reason to walk on eggshells or be pc about something which would’ve been common sense 10 years ago. While both men and women should put effort into the relationship, the woman is the prize. Men initiate, men seek, men have the privilege of choosing or chasing but women have the privilege of accepting or discriminating. As said above this is seen all throughout nature as well.
Nature stuff is a little arbitrary because then wouldn't it be fair for a man to say expect indefinitely because it's in our nature to spread out seed? if we're not evolved at all from absolute control by nature and how things are in the animal kingdom, what's the point in being angry at the some guys you're talking about? Also, not all women agree with you in your opinions. That said how do you think that impacts an average guy when every woman has a different point of view of what they expect from a man?
@Friendlybro79 I’m not saying that we’re not evolved but that we are still as human beings a part of nature and subject to its laws and patterns. Therefore the expectation of a man pursuing a woman before recovering something is not an unfair standard and to suggest such is patently ridiculous. And in regards to your last question that means that we are all individuals who will have to deal with unique situations and circumstances in order to be with the individual we should desire, no two people will require the exact same thing and yet so far as what we can predict and control gendered expectations that come from the roles we each will take as men and women in a heterosexual relationship are predetermined as well as efficient in avoiding the majority of the problems modern relationships run into.
Define fair and unfair in the terms of your opinions here? I think you're saying a lot of things that are overcomplicating the fact that for a relationship to work there's give and take and as long as the two of the people know that together they equal 100%, without keeping score constantly, everything will be great.
@Friendlybro79 I’m not opposing that and I hardly think what I’m saying is complex let alone overcomplicated. The simple fact of the matter is that yes both parties are required to do some work in order for the relationship to even take off, but it is an observable fact that for a heterosexual relationship to thrive certain gender roles will play a major part.
Ok I understand what you're saying. I think prize is an interesting word for you to choose. I think we could argue over semantics which is silly so I won't.
This connection though to your original thought is odd. Today isn't ten years ago and it isn't caveman times. That said because times are changing, some people have more traditional values and some still trying to figure out the rules. It's going to be confusing to many people.
I don't care about traditional or modern. Body count needs to be within 25% of mine on the upwards scale and I just will have to date her for a while to see if an arrangement can be found both are happy with. Which didn't happen yet.
Setting it in stone what I want is destined to leave me single, I'm open to talk, negotiate and discuss. Again though I'm not going to let anybody walk over me, If I'm not happy with the arrangement I will leave, which I already did a few times.
Hahahahahaha. Hahahahaha.
If he doesn’t want pay he doesn’t get to complain.
So now men must pay for her royal highness to have their own opinion.
Modern women suck. Also, why are you on here. Shouldn’t you be baking muffins or doing some menial chores around the house?
I pay so I get to have my opinion.
I can only speak for me on this matter and if people agree cool and if not also cool.
The way I do it is if I invite you out I’m under the impression that I will pay ( you are my guest) then I will front the bill.
If the woman invites me out I’ll be understanding that it’s on her ( I’ll check and let her know first)
If that person wants to go Dutch then all good no major issues for me.
When I was single if a woman wasn't willing to pay for herself on the first date for anything be it dinner, at a coffe shop, fair, festival etc it sends the message that she belthat her time is more valuable than mine is. She probably think my money is for everything like bills, things that need to be fixed or replaced, groceries, when we go out together, personal stuff etc and hers is for just her to spend however she wants if she makes money.
You're forgetting one crucial thing : the aforementioned "modern women" are the kind to feign being interested just to get free stuff, and all with no remorse at all, hence the safety measure that is "just pay for your own stuff". This is a very basic test : if the woman expects you to pay for her so early, dump that money hungry bitch because you can expect entitlement later down the line and no self-respecting man wants that.
"If a woman doesn't like tacos, she doesn't get to advocate for legalizing abortion".
False equivalence error again. Make as much sense as your assertion regarding paying for dates and complaining about "modern women".
False. 99% of the time women are modern before the man goes on a date. Every had casual sex? Modern. Have a job? Modern. Degree? Modern. Not wanting to pay for modern women is a response to being on a date with a modern woman. This is no chicken or egg scenario, it's clearly and obviously the women have made the first move here and started this cycle.