Dating, Money and Compatibility
Lately, I’ve been reading a lot of articles on dating on Medium. Particularly articles about the cost of dating and who pays the bill. This is a little odd for me as I’m not interested in dating: I’m married. In fact, I’ve been married for 20 years. The titles of many of the articles drew me in and I found myself obsessing on it. I think the topic interests me because I have a son who is approaching dating age. So I’m throwing my hat in the ring and writing my perspective on the subject. My purpose in writing this article is to codify the advice I will give to my son about money and dating and get feedback on that advice. This advice is specific to straight cis-gendered men.
I believe young men can be too focused on attraction and not focused enough on compatibility. I say this because that’s how I was when I was young. I would stay in relationships with women that I was incompatible with because they were very attractive. This attitude was objectifying to women and it was ultimately harmful to myself. I think it’s important for men to understand the goals, attitudes and behaviors of the women they date with regards to money early in order to determine compatibility.
The First date: Egalitarianism, Chivalry and Social Norms
Traditionally there has been the expectation on dates between two romantically involved people, that the man pays the expenses. This expectation was originally rooted in the fact the men were the primary income earners and women either didn’t work or held significantly lower paying jobs. However, the gender wage gap has closed significantly in the last 20 years, particularly for young singles, where women make roughly 93 cents for ever dollar a man makes.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/25/gender-pay-gap-facts/
Regardless of this move towards equality, attitudes about who should pay for dates have not changed much relative to the new reality. Men still seem willing to pay for most of the expenses of dating, particularly for the first few dates. Correspondingly, women seem to expect men to pay for dates. In a study done in 2017 by Money.com
- 78% of respondents think that men should pay for the first date. Surprisingly, men are primarily driving this sentiment (85%), women to a lesser degree (72%)
- 1/4 of single Millennials disagree that men should pay on the first date. Additionally, 1/3 of single Millennial women disagree that men should be expected to pay on the first date.
This was very surprising to me. Men are more responsible for the adherence to the practice of paying, at least the first date. I believe that this is an example of benevolent sexism. While it may seem to be favorable to women, in reality, in infantilizes them and it implicitly justifies the gender pay gap. Regardless, this is still the prevalent social norm. On principle, I believe that men and women should just split the check. However, my advice to young men is to simply pay the check. Bucking this social norm on the first date will not earn you any respect or admiration. You’ll have a difficult time convincing your date that your reluctance to pay the full bill is based on your strong egalitarian convictions. Regardless of her feelings on the subject in general, she’s may think that you are being cheap and selfish. Also bear in mind, paying the full check means you’re only complying with said social norm. You aren’t buying anything from her. Beyond a thank you, don’t expect anything in return.
The Offer to Split the Check
Many women will offer to split the check on the first date. According to a study done by NBC.com (old…circa 2008. Couldn’t find a more recent study):
- 57% percent of women always offer to split the check, even on the first date.
- 34% of them don’t like it if a man accepts
- 46% are don’t like it if he refuses.
I believe this is a test, both for the man and the woman. The offer is expected to be made and initially declined. When a woman makes the offer, she is communicating the following:
- She is capable of taking care of herself.
- She doesn’t expect you to pay for everything.
Initially declining the offer gives her the benefit of appearing egalitarian, while still getting treated on the date. For the man, it’s a nice compatibility test. Women that do not make an offer are more likely to be aligned with traditional gender roles. This may not be compatible with your world view. If you accept the offer, you are bucking the same social norm that dictates that men should pay for the first date. You may be viewed as cheap and selfish. If you don’t want to invite her on a second date, you may not care how you are viewed. However, if she is expecting you to decline the offer regardless of the outcome, accepting her offer may put her in a bind. I think the polite thing to do is decline regardless of whether you want to take her on a second date.
If she further insists on splitting the check, it is likely due to one of the following:
- She’s not interested in a second and she’s kind enough to not make you pay for a rejection.
- She’s firmly committed to her egalitarian principles and feels like she should pay her share.
Either way, if she insists, let her split the check. If she’s not interested in a second date and you insist on paying then you are undermining her attempts at letting you down easy. She’s may feel like she’s being guilted into going on a second date and she may resent it. Furthermore, you’ve unnecessarily spent your money on a woman that has no romantic interest in you. If it’s because of her egalitarian principles and you insist on paying, you’ll just come off as a sexist jerk. If you have strong beliefs on traditional gender roles (i.e. you are as sexist jerk), then you’re not compatible with her anyway. An alternative approach may be to let her get the next one, but this doesn’t really help if she doesn’t want to go on a second date.
After the first date
Social norms heavily influence my guidance on who pays for the first few dates. This should change after a month or so. Each couple will need to agree on what works best for them. As an egalitarian, I do not believe that men should pay for all of the expenses of dating indefinitely. Eventually, men and women should share the expenses of dating. If they cannot agree on how to share the expenses of dating, it is unlikely they will be able to agree on how to share the expenses of living.
There are women who will refuse to offer to chip in on any dates and still consider themselves egalitarian. They cite the gender pay gap, the pink tax and the costs of beauty that women have to bear as justification.
The gender pay gap is an aggregate statistic and bears no relevance to a couple’s specific situation. Regardless of what the gender pay gap is, the income for each respective person is what it is. If the man makes significantly more than the woman, then it makes sense for him to bear more of the burden of dating. If she makes more, then she should pay for dates more often.
Likewise, the same can be said about the expenses that either person has to bear. It’s possible that a man’s living expenses are higher than the woman’s. This may be because of medical problems, parental responsibilities or having to give financial assistance to family members. The assumption that the woman’s living expenses are higher are a faulty one. Each situation is different, and treating your partner with understanding and compassion is important in long term relationships.
Regardless, it’s unreasonable for the man or the woman to be unwilling to contribute anything monetarily to the cost of dating, unless they are in extreme hardship. To me a woman that is unwilling to share the expense of dating at all on the basis of gender alone will have the same attitude about sharing the expenses of living. My advice is to avoid such women. Likewise, men that are unwilling to allow a woman contribute to dating expenses are probably sexist.
So this is my perspective on money and dating. Feel free to comment, but please be respectful to each other (and me! :) ).
References:
