Dating has become a very complex thing. It used to be cut and dry. Man made money, man chose woman, man treated woman, man wooed woman, man proposed to woman, woman accepted or not. The only problems arose when she didn’t want who was proposing to her or had more than one suitor to choose from. Marriage was way more stifling then. Once married, she became property for all intensive purposes—in some cases, becoming a maid and cook and baby machine to someone who viewed her as nothing more than a societal requirement or convenience. Often these women were battered and abused, cheated on, left alone in misery in a bad marriage. Trapped in a cage of not their doing but of societal norms and expectations that could not be “broken”. Women did not work except in 3 “accepted” vocations: nursing, school teacher, or prostitute. Nursing and teaching required formal training of some sort, which, of course, required some amount of money to pay for the formal training which was only provided by the woman’s family if they were well enough “to do” to provide such an education. So women were extremely dependent upon men for their livelihood and this dating ritual was often more about catching the right wallet rather than about love.
In some cases, it is likely that some women gave up one thing for another—perhaps the lesser of two evils. A cheating man with money might be viewed as a better mate than a gambling man who was faithful. Of course, all this was the true gamble, because the women often had a very limited view of the man until married. Courtships were a couple of hours a day maximum, and no “good” woman lived with a man until married. So often, the men and women ended up with what they ended up with. If they married someone uninterested in sex, there was little release other than to find a whore if the man was the disappointed party, and even less release if it were the woman suffering with an uninterested man. Men often entered into a relationship thinking that what they had seen over the courtship was what they were going to get, but often were blind to the true motivations of the other party (yes, I do realize that some of this hasn’t changed much sadly—but that is, of course, another blog). Certain things were not open for discussion in polite society before marriage, and obviously, disappointment could be had by either party if the end result was that their needs were not met in the union that they entered.
Now women make their own money, can support themselves, and can enter and exit relationships as they choose. So can men. However, the impact is that the “dating game” has changed considerably. When we are young and naive, dating is not as complicated because we don’t have any baggage, but who pays for what at that point still seems obvious. In high school, most fathers want to know the boy taking their daughter to the movies is paying. In college, we still generally accept this rule of thumb, as best as I can tell, that the guy pays if it’s a date. It seems like the quandary comes once a woman is making her own money. There are a slew of reasons for this issue.
For one, some women get insulted if a man pays. I don't actually know any of these women, but I have quite a few male friends that have had dates like this. The woman gets upset if they open the car door, the restaurant door, or pays. Since I haven’t ever met one of these women personally, I have to say that I have no understanding of their reasoning. Other women don’t want to feel obligated to participate in more than the meal. I actually have a friend who if she pays her half that is her way of letting him know he’s never getting any. She is done with the date, and very likely done answering his calls and any other future communications. I’ve also heard of women that want to be sure a man is comfortable with her making her own money. On a first date, this sounds a bit extreme to me. I’m sure it can be determined over time if he’s comfortable with the woman he’s with having her own paycheck. Still this is an excuse that has been thrown out there to me before. On the flip side, I have friends that consider it an insult if a man doesn’t pay—even if they asked the men out. This seems to be a baby boomer thing especially. They seem to have a very rigid approach—either all or none. Even the baby boomer women that don’t want a man paying seem to have a very militant approach to the “all or nothing” concept. I’ve met some gen-x that feel this way—not as militant about it, but simply feel it is a man’s obligation.
Now my perspective is probably a little unique, for whatever reasons, I believe a woman should be able to pay her own way and it is completely dependent upon the circumstances. This seems to be part of the my generation’s view and most of the gen-y view. How to determine these circumstances becomes a bit of a quandary. I expect a man to open the door for me in a social setting. I expect the niceties that I was raised by Silent Generation women to expect. In fact, in an example where a man makes less money than the woman and the woman is paying, these pleasantries should not only be expected but required. Gen-y women seem to be surpassing the mass majority of men their age in income earning potential, especially since around 60% of college graduates for their generation are female. There are less and less boys attending college and more and more of the women with the money. I have a couple of very close gen-y friends, and they often pay for the guy they are dating after a few dates. The biggest problem that they seem to have is the men giving them the respect they deserve as a lady—opening the doors, pulling out their chairs, just behaving as a gentleman would.
In my own experience, though, I’ve never dated anyone that made less money than me. I know shocking, but I haven’t. I am not used to paying my own anything. It is not that it bothers me to pay or not to pay, but I have never had to give it a second thought. Of course, it also might be that since I haven’t gone out on more than 1 or 2 dates with most of the men I’ve dated in the last decade that I simply haven’t reached a point where I’m willing to pay. I most certainly believe the first few dates should be the man’s responsibility. So when a couple of baby boomer acquaintances jumped my *ss when I said I had paid for something when going out with a guy that I’ve been dating for awhile, well, I really didn’t know what to think. I had read an article on the yahoo homepage about whether men needed to make more money and inadvertently started to contemplate what I thought of all this. Yes, he had asked. I was not expecting him to ask. The plans were his with a buddy. Including me was thoughtful and sweet. Next, we’ve been dating for several months. I do feel a little out of place paying my own way, but as I said, I’ve technically never reached a point in a long time that this has become an issue. On past occasions, he’s paid for things. This is really only the second or third time that I’ve paid for anything, and perhaps coincidently, the only times have been when we have been out in a group. Of course, the ladies were upset because it was a supposed lack of respect. Is it a lack of respect when a man doesn’t pay? Obviously I have friends that would disagree depending on the financial situation of both parties.
The stone thrown, and I had to contemplate this. Seriously, I think I have other things that are far more important to worry about: do I enjoy the time I spend with him? Does he start to bore me after an hour? (Trust me this is huge. Most guys can’t keep me entertained or engaged for 45 minutes, let alone hours.) Do I find him interesting, insightful, genuine, honest, sexy? Does he find me interesting, insightful, genuine, honest, sexy? Do we share like interests? Does he keep me captivated in a conversation? Can I talk to him for hours, or vice versa, simply sit there contently saying nothing for hours? Do I like the way he smiles and carries himself? Is he confident? Is he sweet? Does he treat me with respect on a personal, intellectual and emotional level? Does being around him make me feel better when I’ve had a bad day? Do I want to make him feel better if he’s had a bad day? Do we share the same values? Am I confident that I can trust him? Does he have a taste for adventure like I do? Does he still have the need to have roots with a taste for adventure? (Amazing to me how exceedingly rare this quality actually is.) And of course, possibly most important of all, when either of us is difficult, and all people can be difficult at times, can I overlook it in him, and vice versa, can he overlook it in me?
We being only human, we should look for someone who is compatible with what and who we are. I want someone who can afford to go do things but consider money a very small ponderance in comparison to the importance of finding that person that makes me happy and that I make happy. I believe that was my grandmothers’ generation’s point to wanting to be able to vote and work and make our own money. It wasn’t just to “upset the apple cart”, but to offer both men and women the chance to find someone on their emotional and intellectual merits, rather than on the need or thickness of a wallet.
No comments:
Post a Comment