Should Men Still Be
Expected to Pay for Dates?
February 14, 2002
It's not the most romantic subject
for Valentine's Day, but the unfair expectation that men must pay for
dates, which came under commendable feminist attack during the 1970s,
is, surprisingly, almost as strong today as it was before women's liberation.
There are several standard justifications given for not splitting the
check:
Justification #1: "Women have to spend more on clothes, shoes, perfume,
etc., so it's only fair that men pay."
It's true that women's clothes, shoes, etc., can cost considerably more
than men's, but men who date must reciprocate by having a presentable
car and a presentable place to live, both of which are far more expensive.
After all, a marriage-age man who lives at home is considered undesirable,
but did you ever see a man turn down a promising date because she lived
with mom and dad or drove an old junker? I didn't think so.
Justification #2: "Men make more money than women do for the same
job."
Fortunately, this isn't true. Studies by liberal (AFL-CIO), dissident
feminist (The Independent Women's Forum), and conservative (Hoover Institution)
organizations have found that single men do not earn more than single
women. The gender wage gap is caused by the career sacrifices that mothers
make for their children, and the personal sacrifices fathers make (longer
work weeks, more hazardous jobs, etc.) in order to earn the money to
support those same children. Neither of these is generally an issue
in dating.
Justification #3: "I'm old-fashioned. I expect the man to pay because
it's chivalrous."
The problem is that many men have come to hear this as "I'm old fashioned
when it suits me. When it doesn't, well, that's a different story."
After all, what would a modern woman say if her date said "I'm old-fashioned.
I expect the woman to do all the cooking and dishes"?
Justification #4: "Whoever asks for the date should pay."
And who is always expected to ask? Need I ask?
Justification #5: "Well, if men expect to get something, they should
expect to pay for it."
It is Neanderthal for a man to expect to "get something" simply
because he has paid for a date. Also, since women enjoy sex as much
as men do, even if a woman does have sex with a man "because he paid"
it's still unfair to the man because he's paying for the privilege of
doing something which is mutually pleasurable.
Justification #6: "It's just easier this way."
This claim certainly has merit. The rise of feminism demolished many
of society's rules and traditions, usually for the better. But when
it comes to dating, nobody really knows what the rules are anymore,
and in this confusion often both men and women find it easier to fall
back on tradition.
Enough! The obligation of a man to pay can wound a budding relationship
by placing money and one-sided expectations where love and honesty should
be. In addition, its innate unfairness hinders the uneasy rapprochement
men and women are currently negotiating after three decades of gender
conflict. In the long run, abolishing this outmoded social convention
will benefit both men and women. And what's fair is fair.
Oh, and guys, be sure not to order the most expensive item on the menu,
OK?
