And which of those other things of dating does taking free food preclude her from doing?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
One third of straight women have gone on dates just to get free food
- Thread starter thediamondage
- Start date
And which of those other things of dating does taking free food preclude her from doing?
If you specifically approach a woman and tell her "I am inviting you fellow earthling to a free meal" and the girl goes only because of the free meal, then it's fine. If you're asking someone on a date there's a world of implications. Going, not being interested and thinking "well, at least it was a free meal" is fine, but specifically going with the intent of a free meal is... well, you need to lack a sense of shame that's for sure.
Pretty crazy this is still a thing. I did a decent amount of online dating but I must have only found the women that not only didn't care about me paying but a lot would outright refuse anything but half and half. I can't actually remember any first dates where I paid in full. Dates with the woman who became my wife were paid by whoever didn't drive to the other person's place (it was like an hour and a half drive). Everyone else I've been with we split things. Most first dates were at coffee shops and casual places to talk though so easy to get your own shit.
It says the women who go on "foodie calls" tend to believe in traditional gender roles, and showed Machiavellian personality traits (deceiving and manipulating people), so I think it's just women who think men should pay for everything taking advantage of men who pay for everything lol.
That the person asking you out is interested in you and wants to know you better.
Without touching any of the other stuff, I want to say that being a progressive doesn't make you immune to social conditioning, or grant you complete freedom from social expectations. You might be a feminist and still expect/desire some old chivalric norms like men paying for the meal. You might still wear make up in public/professional settings even if you're fighting for gender equality. AOC, for example, does both. She's both an activist for gender equality and someone who presents herself as society expects from professional woman: well dressed, good makeup. There's certain things you can only do if you present yourself the right way, this is an unavoidable truth of society.
I would say more generally American society is transitioning away from "man pays" because it's an old norm but a lot of people have been raised in the old norms and it might be what makes them feel comfortable which is, really, the paramount issue of "personal freedom".
This discussion reminds me of the hijab back-and-forth that goes on in France and some other European countries. Yes, the hijab is a symbol of female oppression. Yes, a Muslim woman should not be forced or feel pressured to wear a hijab. Is it possible to wear a hijab and not be oppressed by it? I would argue that true freedom is being able to wear a symbol of the patriarchy and not submit to patriarchy, but nailing down that line is very difficult in practice.
There's no "stance" to be had. I don't think any less of a woman because she believes men should always pay on the first date. I'm just not going out with her. I don't have to go out with every woman, and she might not even be interested in me anyway lol.
Should all men stop dating these women? I don't speak for the rest of ya'll lol. If you don't mind coming off it, then do so. No I don't think men should insist women do anything--that's part of the problem now. Always insisting our opinions on women. If you're turned off by a woman not paying her half on the first date, just don't ask her out. This ain't gotta be a big thing like this thread makes it seem. Eventually another man will ask her out, or she'll change her mind based on potential guys.
Realistically you should go into every first date expecting it may not go anywhere. If not because she's just there for the food, for any other reason it may work out.
But if she knows from the start she has no intention of interacting beyond getting free food that's not what we should see as socially acceptable behaviour. Not to imply any further dates are owed (they are not), but it's a really shitty thing to do to know from the start there will be nothing further and purposefully leading the other person on with the intent on getting them to pay for stuff.
But if she knows from the start she has no intention of interacting beyond getting free food that's not what we should see as socially acceptable behaviour. Not to imply any further dates are owed (they are not), but it's a really shitty thing to do to know from the start there will be nothing further and purposefully leading the other person on with the intent on getting them to pay for stuff.
I just don't think it's productive having this kind of discussion (not to say you can't have this kind of discussion...) if we end up just vilifying all women/men in this case.... All you can do is take precautions if this type of behavior really bothers you (establish protocol prior to the date about splitting the bill or meeting up for drinks). Internet match is basically a meeting b/t two strangers....you go into such a meeting on terms both parties should be comfortable with.
Well they are interested enough to share a meal and conversation with you unless you believe women are going out for a meal with people they despise or just sit through the meal without talking or anything. It may not be romantic interest, it could of course turn that way, or into a friendship.
Today I learned that it's called poundsaver menu in Europe. Lol
Here in the U.S. is the Dollar Menu.
POUNDSAVER BABY!
OP
OP
is this woman eating a free meal in any danger?!?!
Although now I wonder if Its Always Sunny has had an episode about this issue, it seems like its straight up the shows story beats
That's where I think the study fails. The people who only use tinder to go to get a free meal fully knowing that they won't be open to see if a friendship or a romantic relationship develops mack a sense of shame if they know they're just wasting the dude's time. Like I said in my other post though, going on good faith into a date, nothing working out and then thinking "well, at least it was a free meal" is fine, even if you weren't open in the beginning and just wanted to see how things turned out.
Theproblem is that the study is putting both cases into the same bag, and I think the number would be far lower if they accounted for it.
Yeah, it's def missing a lot of nuance in not knowing the specific context of the responses.
The closest I can think of is when Dee was banging dudes just to rate them 1 star. She got a power trip out of it. Turned out the dudes didn't give a shit and still were dtf, making Dee feel....less than stellar about herself lol.
Two completely different things. Not to mention, the chance of success with free food on a first date is significantly higher than the chance of success with a one-night stand on a first date.
This feels like something where the framing makes a huge difference. For example, there's a big difference between deciding that you will find someone on a dating app or whatever who will buy you dinner vs deciding that you will go on a date where you're not overly interested in the person but think a night out and a nice meal might be cool.
If a person can't afford their share of a meal, then get out of my life. I'm not here to babysit children.
Meh if it was the other way around men would take advantage of it too
That's why when I went on first dates I don't take them to really expensive restaurants...that's for suckers
And before you call me out on being old fashioned...if I ask a person to take time out of their life just to get to know a (sometimes) total stranger the least I can do is foot the bill
That's why when I went on first dates I don't take them to really expensive restaurants...that's for suckers
And before you call me out on being old fashioned...if I ask a person to take time out of their life just to get to know a (sometimes) total stranger the least I can do is foot the bill
to be fair, if you're making arrangements with someone to have a meal somewhere it's a reasonable expectation to think that meal will cost money
For sure, and I'm all for going dutch. I just worry that sometimes people have unrealistic expectations for a first date, especially when you meet casually or over an app.
honestly, it's worth it to share a good meal with someone out in public, does wonders psychologically when you're typically a loner
luckily i'm charming as all get out, so it often turns into an actual date
luckily i'm charming as all get out, so it often turns into an actual date
yeah and the thread's about splitting the bill which stems from a perfectly reasonable expectation
If men stopped offering to pay for meals, eventually women would just have to deal with it if they want to continue to date men. So, yeah, I think the onus is on men to change this if they want to.
I totally agree, some in this thread seem to be dead set on putting the responsibility on men (and men only) to correct this old, sexist tradition.
While I think men need to have a great roll in changing this norm, I don't think they can achieve it alone, I am genuinely asking and trying to seek answers on how to make splitting the bill on the first date the cultural norm (At least in Western society) ? Do you think it's inevitable, maybe a generation or two? a few decades?
Yeah this is some wack stuff. There's nothing feminist about this, accepting a date you have no interest in purely for the sake of food is straight up mean.
The comparison with "going to a date just for sex" makes no sense. You cant have sex without a date, but you can definitely eat without one.
I always split the bill, but Id offer to pay everything if the girl was considerably poorer than me or if I had chosen the restaurant.
I always split the bill, but Id offer to pay everything if the girl was considerably poorer than me or if I had chosen the restaurant.
As someone who's dated men and women, the men I've been out with usually pay for what they eat/have no questions asked. Either that or we work out a way were one pays for one thing, and the other pays for the next thing. But then I'm very selective of these men.
The more... Shall we say "pushy" men usually immediately default to insisting we go straight to their house to cook food there. While not footing a bill of some sort, I'm pretty sure it's a similar sort of "I'll prepare the food and everything and then I'll get sex as a reward" attitude as paying for the woman, so I never take up this offer.
Most of the girls I've went out with were either during college or come from working class backgrounds. So they're either used to always splitting bills or they liked to make a big deal out of how they always want to split the bill and are better than other women that don't split the bill. Never had any of them demand I pay for something.
