First Date: Who Pays?

D Lion, if a dentist who has "a staff" (this is not someone just out of school) doesn't have the discretionary income for a decent meal I would not date him on the basis of his being incompetent with money.

Perhaps he should have held the mortage down to a managable million so he could eat well. That would be my kind of man.

You know it could be said that men that won't let you pick up the check are male chauvinists. I mean doesn't it mean that the ickle female can't be an equal cause we can't expect her to pay?

There's always sugardaddy.com too!

The more I read your posts, the more it sounds like you're more interested in the materialistic aspects of a relationship, as in what they can buy, what their house is like, and so on, than in the person you would be spending time with. What is more important to you: the man, or the resources he can share with you?

This is unfair.

Most people will not take a dating partner who is going to cause a material adverse change in their economic position, quality of life, or security.

I think she is doing it right, and has a common, well-thought-out attitude.

I would not even contemplate marrying a woman who would jeopardize what I've worked for; a woman has the same right.

This is a good point, but sometimes there is only a VERY fine line between baggage and useful experience.

I'll step out into the fire on this one and let every one jump all over my butt for being an idiot, but I won't say anything here I haven't said elsewhere on this forum.

I had a habit of picking women who expected me to give and give. My last serious relationship went past that and she actually started demanding more and more work from me to fix this and that and would throw tantrums if I couldn't fix it and even said things like, "Why should I thank you? It still doesn't work?"

People don't start out treating you like that on a first date, even if they're sick, they somehow know to hide those things until you're "trapped" in the relationship.

My baggage: I've been seriously and royally used a number of times by women who claim to be generous, but are nothing more than emotional vampires.

My experience: People are often not who they say they are and often have a much more flattering view of themselves than others will.

How does that translate to life: I want to know if I'm going out with a giver or a taker, or someone in between. I want to be sure I'm not setting myself up to be sucked dry again. So I can create a scoring system with a lot of tests, just like when I was a teacher, or when I was a programmer and everything reduced to numbers. If she offers to pay her part on a check, that's a point in her favor. If she doesn't offer, that's a point against. If she offers but I can tell she's testing me, that's two points against.

When I walk her to my car and open the door for her, does she take the effort to reach over and unlock my door or not? If she does, that's a point for, if not it's a point against.

At the end of a date, I can tally up the points and if she scores high enough, I go out again. After two dates, I repeat. Eventually I can have a score that tells me if she's "safe" or not.

Or I can remember that we're both human beings. We both have strengths and weaknesses. Sure, I'll notice if she takes more than gives, after all, I've been burned in that area before, but I won't score her and I won't be in a hurry to write her off in two dates or less.

Setting up tests and rating someone on how they score is baggage. Keeping an awareness of what is going on and using that past experience as balanced guidance to help me see what a woman is like while I'm enjoying my time is using my experience to my benefit.

I agree again.

In my experience, almost all women state they want to see me again, but a good portion then simply disappear.

If I find enough interest to ask a woman on a second date I will pay for it.

I've had some first dates where the woman was interesting but may have been off her game a little. The second date is a good chance to see what the woman is like once she is a little more relaxed.

In other words, the message you are sending is that you have decent housing, are the kind of person with a future, and are not up to your neck in debt and bills.

See how easy it is to make whatever assumption you want, when you make assumptions?

What you call cheap I call responsible.

Instead of assumptions, better to get some data to make a real decision.

I'm sorry, but I take issue with the "what I've done for you V what you've done for me" score keeping. I do things for people because I like doing them, period. Been used? Yep. Feel pity for them for having to use someone, move on. ...