If a girl is willing to accept an invitation to go on a date she should not expect to pay nor should she make a big deal about the guy paying. Of course the guy shouldn’t make a big deal for paying either.

If a girl wants to pay on a date, she should invite. If a guy accepts her invitation he should not make a big deal about her paying.

Basically I think whoever extends the invitation should be willing to pick up the tab and whoever accepts the invitation should be willing to be treated. After all there is the next date (hopefully)…

If I were meeting a friend for lunch/dinner, we’d probably split the bill. So I always go in with that intention and assumption. But if my companion stops me from paying, I’m not going to make a scene either.

The responses to this post intrigued me. I guess I’ve come to think that you should first take yourself “out to dinner” enough to know your rhythm. How you’re wired. Ya know? Then decide things you know work well for you in relationships, platonic or otherwise, that work well for you. THEN think about how those characteristic manifest themselves in actions, especially early on.

I know this about myself, I’m wired to keep running in one direction, really hard, until I hit something. Very strong. But the thing is, I’m always interested in being with people who are more interested accomplishing the end goal, rather than nitpicking the particulars of how you got there, and who does what. That drives me bonkers. “Eye on the prize, people.”

If a man said to me, “let’s go dutch,” meaning splitting a check and using two cards, yada, yada, I’d know he wasn’t right for me. Especially if we were deep in conversation (and if you’re not by the end of the first meal, you never will be), and he put it on hold to negotiate the payment. Boring.

It’s not about principal or gender to me. It’s also not about what is owed by the recipient of the meal. That’s just silly. It’s about the fact that I know I’m focused on getting through the boring, though necessary, stuff in life quickly and efficiently to get to the fun stuff, like where you’re going for ice cream. And I know that matching yourself with someone who feels fundamentally different about things is bad. And I know that fundamental beliefs are always evident in tiny decisions. Voila.

I would encourage people to think less about what “who pays” means culturally, and more about what it means about their fundamental values. It will be different, and should be different, for most people. Then ask if they match your own. Easy, right?

(Laughing) Not so much.

Nice site, Seth.

Jen

I’m a bigger fan of actually admitting to interest and building a relationship on a foundation of trust instead of churning through a fuck-and-leave machine because I’m scared of loving and losing.

“suggesting” going Dutch seems to be emerging as a common way of telling a date they suck.

Which is too bad because it blurs the line between independent and uninterested. It also reinforces my feeling that the pay-for-play mentality is far more deep-seated than most are willing to admit.

I’ve done a fair amount of asking myself and have no problem paying for dinner, drinks & tip.

If I’m not having a good time or I’m just totally uninterested in the person, I always suggest going Dutch.

I like how you make it clear that you need not be impressed right from the start. I think we’d all do very well to do that. =)