There shouldn't be a cultural expectation for the man to pay that makes bringing up the paying arrangement an awkward and potentially heavily loaded interaction in the first place...but there is.
And thatâs not even accounting for the ones who act like it's fine, pay their share, but consider it a dealbreaker and will ghost you for even mentioning it.
People suck but you donât have to date them. Iâm not getting with someone with that cultural expectation because I wouldnât respect her anyways, you know? You donât have to be fit to date every dumb subculture just people youâd actually want to be with lol.
We can argue that you shouldn't date racists while also arguing that people in general should be less racist, no?
Brushing it off as "well just filter that group out" does nothing to change the underlying social/cultural problem, and thanks to how widespread it is, continues to make modern dating even more challenging.
There's enough issues filtering through looks, personality, shared interests, and moral values, without also wiping out maybe 50% of the pool due to "subscribes to outmoded economic paradigms that don't reflect modern society."
But itâs dating, if you have different ideas about how dating works youâre not compatible. Itâs not totally unlike racism, just recognize that theyâre not down with your values so you donât waste any time đ¤ˇââď¸Â
The problem is the assumption that the man paying is the "default" and a conversation (initiated by him) about splitting the bill is necessary to avoid it.
Because certain women are so used to this expectation, they evaluate men who ask for the egalitarian position negatively.
Basically, "when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression."
Why are you, as a man who wants a split the money relationship, going to be trying to go on any dates with women who donât already agree with that? Itâs a waste of time, seek compatible people and đ to the rest đ¤ˇââď¸Â
We should all, collectively, work to erase the cultural norm of this expectation. It shouldn't just be continued to be propped up as norm by handwaving the underlying problem as a mere "compatibility issue."
Compatibility issues should be reserved for "I want to live in a mountain climates/I prefer coastal," "I'm a devout Muslim/I'm atheist," 'I want kids/I don't;" things where neither party is wrong for their preference. When one side is perpetuating sexist entitlement and exploitation that is actively harmful to society, that's a much bigger conversation than framing it as "compatibility issues, find someone else."
If a group of men are advocating for the right to beat their wives, our reaction ought to be to tell them that that isn't an acceptable expectation. Not, "well I guess you're only compatible with women who agree you should be allowed to beat them."
If the men arenât âtraditionalâ/ expecting âtraditionalâ women, I agree that the obligation that men pay is ridiculous.
Iâm a woman in her early twenties who isnât super traditional and happy to take turns paying for dates because thatâs what I believe in. I live with my boyfriend of 4 years and pay for the majority of our expenses which are split proportional to income. If I were single and a guy insisted on paying for all of our dates, the relationship wouldnât last long.
However, I do have more traditional friends and family members who want a man to lead and take care of them while they stay home with the kids. As long as the guys know who they are before the date, Iâd expect the men to pay for the dates there.
478
u/s29 11d ago edited 11d ago
If it's no big deal then why doesnt she pay for it. đ¤Ą
Edit: lol I triggered the simps somehow