ABSOLUTELY not. I would absolutely not have a man pay for me on a date.
Here's one of those instances where you look around at your sisters wearing your "Am I right?" face and expect to see expressions of agreement reflected back.
Not so, it seems. Women like free things as much as or more than they like gender equality.
This summer dating is the ratings winner. Love Island has captivated a swathe of the nation and First Dates is back, giving glimpses of the awkward opening scenes in the theatre of human mating.
Every year as First Dates returns so too does the annual question: Should the man pay on a date?
As we’re talking about love and romance, I’ll frame it this way: it breaks my heart that we’re still having this conversation in 2018.
Why is a man expected to pay on a date in the first place? Because of ancient patriarchal conventions of men as providers, women as dependents. Because of the outdated idea that a woman is a prize and the man a competitor.
A woman is something to earn rather than someone to enter into an ever deepening conversation with.
Expecting the man to put his hand in his pocket is reinforcing the assumption that a romantic partnership is something for the woman to give and the man to get.
A man paying stems from the idea that men do the asking. So, if he's asked a woman out then he should pay for her time. Why give men the reins?
It's all so retro, especially when women are no longer waiting to be asked. Internet dating is changing the landscape of courtship and making the framework one of mutual exchange.
Women have more sexual and romantic autonomy than ever before yet there still exists this normalisation of women's economic dependency on men, we're too comfortable with it.
Romantic relations are also economic relations, the two things intertwined. It always has been and will likely always be.
However, as we shuffle and crawl towards equality, a journey that currently feels two steps forward and one step back, why aren't we fighting to ensure the economic relation is one of two people with financial autonomy, rather than an unequal power balance?
Of course, it's not an altogether easy shift to make. Men have gender roles to cleave to, just as women do.
It's not about the money, I'm told. It's about acting out the expectation of gentlemanliness. Boys are told to make chivalry a priority. That it is good manners to take care of a woman on an evening out.
In one notable recent First Date episode the chap whined that by insisting on paying, his date was denying him his opportunity to be a gentleman. "Shut up," he told her, "Shut up. I'm paying," demonstrating a belief that any behaviour is gallant as long as a man has a credit card in hand.
Chivalry is showing respect, it is meeting a woman as an equal in all things. Not viewing a woman with money as an affront to masculinity or paying a bar tab as penis affirming.
It isn't chivalrous to be patronising, it isn't gentlemanly to assert financial authority. But this is how men are expected to behave and it's a bold chap indeed who dives in feet first and asks the woman to pay up.
This is one for the women to take the initiative on. Go on your first dates with your readies ready.
It's not a meeting of equals if one part expects to be dependent on the other while the other party expects to provide.
We will never have equality without fiscal equity and such things exist on a continuum: it starts with him buying you a gin and tonic and it ends in the gender pay gap.
Be successful, threaten the man. Buy your own gin.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel