S/O boys paying for dates....your thoughts re. equality..

[PeacefulChaos]

Maybe that's what it boils down to, personality types? I'm TOTALLY practical, I don't have a romantic bone in my body. I see it as "impractical" but if you have a more romantic personality you see it as "wooing"?

 

Hmmm, very interesting!

 

Also, it's not just a se*ual expectation when a guy pays. It's that, a boy pays for this whole date and then the girl legitimately learns she's not that into him, and then he's upset and the people in his life are upset on his behalf because...he spent all this money on you and sent you flowers and you don't want to go out with him again? You're a horrible troll, how dare you. I've had THAT happen to me. I can't believe more people haven't had that happen to them. And it's not fair to anyone.

Either that, or if it's the right guy, it's the right guy. :) I'm not a romantic either, DH says I'm one of the most unemotional, logical females he's met (and please, ladies, don't take that as an insult - we know some doozies!) - and I've gotten softer in the last 8 years, and he still says that. I used to be kind of a... well, I can't think of how to describe it. I was hard. Harsh. Mean, a lot of times. Sarcastic and kind of rough.

I never would have dreamed that DH, with his southern, charming, traditional ways would have snagged me so quickly. ;)

 

Oh, and I think a big part of it is the traditional view that many hold. It has been skewed a LOT by people who use it as a chauvinist, domineering thing. DH's family is totally different - they hold women in the highest esteem. I think that if they came from a background of 'women can't pay for themselves' it all would have happened differently. It was evidenced in our marriage ceremony (which his grandfather officiated) how they feel - the things he said, his biblical interpretation, was awesome. I can't remember the exact wording, but something to the extent of 'not out of a man's feet (created - I know that isn't everyone's beliefs) to be trampled on by him, but out of his side to be equal with him, from next to his heart to be loved by him. Also something about she is honor to her husband, he was dust refined and she was dust double refined, one step farther from the earth. Like I said, I know not everyone believes the Bible, but I'm just giving an example of a 'traditional' pov without it being a negative thing. :) I had a dream once (when I was pg - always had these dreams when I was pg) that DH cheated on me (remember, just a dream! :) ) and in the dream I had nowhere to go local except my ILs. In my dream, they were like, 'well what did you do?' - I told them about it IRL because I knew what their reaction would be - my FIL was like, that would never happen. First off, he'd (DH) never be that dumb. Second, if he was, I'd track him down and beat some sense back into him (and so would MIL - she's feisty). :D I know that sounds silly, but it's nice knowing that not just DH, but his family, thinks so highly of me (and all their DIL's - there are 4 of us). Idk, maybe that doesn't make sense to others, but it's nice.

Of course, I think that's nice for anyone - not just as a female. :) It's always good to know that people have your back. But like the other day, my pg SIL was sitting outside and all the kids were shooting water guns and playing in the sprinkler, and one of them threw something and it almost hit her, and my BIL (her DH) was like, 'someone throws something and it hits her, I hit you.' I thought it was sweet. :) She's perfectly capable of hitting someone herself, and he's well aware. But just the gesture is...nice. :)

Edited May 28, 2012 by PeacefulChaos

[LostSurprise]

When I was young I decided that I would not allow a man to pay for me unless I'd decided we were 'going together.' Ditto kissing. That means we went dutch until I was ready to make some kind of dating commitment, until then we were friends who were seeing if there would be more. After that point he could pay or I could pay, it all depended on who had money or where we wanted to go.

 

However, because there are so many ways people view this issue, I would always caution my sons to bring money for both people. Unless you want to clarify the issue ahead of time (most teens don't).

 

Which reminds me of a story, a good friend was asked to go to a movie with a girl (both in college). He assumed because she invited, she was paying. She assumed because he was male, he was paying. He figured this out while they were standing in line for tickets. Neither of them had money. So he turned around and borrowed $2 (a dollar theater) off of someone behind him, took their address, and mailed it back to them. Moral: never assume.

 

If I had girls I would always want them to carry enough money to pay for themselves, and enough to take a cab home if he's driving.

[Laurie4b]

I started out expecting the guy to pay for dates and ended up splitting the cost as time went on. For one thing, I found that some men thought I owed them for having spent money on me and that I was "using" them by allowing them to pay for a date and then not putting out. Additionally, I tired of the "try out a girl like she's a car" model of dating and I changed my dating philosophy to one of staying friends until I was pretty sure I wanted to marry the guy and that it was mutual. Paying my share was part of the "keeping it friends" bit. By the time dh and I had our first official date, I honestly can't remember whether we split it or if he paid for it.

 

I would prefer that my sons split the cost with girls they go out with because I'd like to see them n "friends" mode for a good length of time. It's not something we'd make a rule about though.

[AdventureMoms]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned... Even if the woman never feels like she "owes" the man anything in a sexual sense, she may feel like he gets to make all the choices since it is his money after all.

 

I know if I were dating someone who I knew would pick up the tab, I'd feel a bit awkward about what I ordered in a restaurant (can he afford steak, or should I just get a salad?) and about suggesting activities that might cost money (that concert would be fun, but I don't know if he can afford it).

 

FWIW, the one man I dated payed for the first date. I found it felt super awkward to do it that way, and we split or took turns after that.

[Dustybug]

I believe that the male should pay for the date and my ds will not date until he is old enough to pay for the dates.

 

:iagree:

 

I haven't read all of the responses but I agree with this. For me, it has nothing to do with gender equality and everything to do with chivalry. I never felt like I owed anyone anything because they paid for my dinner. They asked for my company and I gave it to them, right? Nothing more. I did always come prepared to pay my own way if necessary, but I would not have gone on more than one date with a boy/man who did not offer to pay on a date. FWIW, I don't believe girls should do the asking either, but I know many who don't agree with that view.

 

I will add that once a couple is established, I don't see anything wrong with splitting costs occasionally.

[Dory]

Seriously if Dh started some sort of sexist, man dominated thing about the money, there would be iron skillet batting practice! :D I just do not get these women who are dormats. Dh doesn't get it either and was very determined that dd would not end up being one of those girls. I suppose that is why we have steered her away from "traditional" boys.

 

Faith

 

Be careful not to assume that just because a boy is traditional would mean that he thinks he runs the show. My DH is about as traditional as they come and treats me like royalty, but every major decision that is made in this house (finances, education, and so on) is a joint decision. He makes most the money here, although I also raise dogs, train horses, and a few other small things, but all the money goes strait to a joint account and we have a budget that we stick to. If I want to do something, I have never had to beg for anything, believe me if I had ever had to do that my 'traditional' style marriage would've ended :D. I've always found that a boy that honestly is fairly traditional and views relationship in the concept of loving his wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her, he'll treat my girlie right, and if he doesn't, well she does know karate :D.

[Homemaker]

Guy should pay. Period, I honestly would not want me daughter seeing a guy who asked her to pay. If he can't afford to take her out to dinner, he shouldn't ask.

 

Also, I would of NEVER asked a guy out on a date and I hope my daughters make that same decision. I wanted to be pursued and not the one pursing. If a guy can't man up to ask you out for an evening, why would you want to spend an evening with him. I have never understood that.

Edited May 28, 2012 by Homemaker

[Dustybug]

Be careful not to assume that just because a boy is traditional would mean that he thinks he runs the show. My DH is about as traditional as they come and treats me like royalty, but every major decision that is made in this house (finances, education, and so on) is a joint decision. He makes most the money here, although I also raise dogs, train horses, and a few other small things, but all the money goes strait to a joint account and we have a budget that we stick to. If I want to do something, I have never had to beg for anything, believe me if I had ever had to do that my 'traditional' style marriage would've ended :D. I've always found that a boy that honestly is fairly traditional and views relationship in the concept of loving his wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself for her, he'll treat my girlie right, and if he doesn't, well she does know karate :D.

 

:iagree:

 

We have a traditional marriage. I am far from a doormat and I hate that assumption. Yes, in our home DH is the head of the household, but that does not mean that he just barks orders at me and tells me what I can and cannot do, etc.

[AdventureMoms]

Guy should pay. Period, I honestly would not want me daughter seeing a guy who asked her to pay. If he can't forward to take her out to dinner, he shouldn't ask.

 

Also, I would of NEVER asked a guy out on a date and I hope my daughters make that same decision. I wanted to be pursued and not the one pursing. If a guy can man up to ask you out for an evening, why would you want to spend an evening with him. I have never understood that.

 

Because men who are nervous or shy or just plain poor can be worthwhile too? Especially in highschool - the late bloomers are sometimes the best ones there...

[BrotherAtticus]

My fellow neoconservative christians friends joke how this is only thing Feminist dont want because otherwise they would have to pay 60$ a date! In all seriousness, I will pay for the girls way as I feel that if i ask out its MY Responsibility. Of course to save money, a date comprises of group at local discount theater and then mickey d's.

[higginszoo]

I think that the asker should pay for the date. I'm not opposed to the girl being the one who asks/plans the outing, and then she would pay.

 

My older ones aren't really interested in dating yet, but I have a boy and a girl who are getting closer (within a few years).

[Homemaker]

Because men who are nervous or shy or just plain poor can be worthwhile too? Especially in highschool - the late bloomers are sometimes the best ones there...

 

 

 

I said nothing about amount of money. I was just as happy with a cheap date if the guy was sincere and did his best. I was always polite and told them how much I appreciated everything.

[PinkInTheBlue]

I can not wrap my mind around the expectation that boys should pay. I am all for equality. My DD and my DS get allowance and jobs independent of gender. I expect women to be paid the same as men for the same work.

So, the notion that guys are expected to pay seems to be not in tune with current economic and societal roles of women. I can not think of a single reason that would make this necessary. It is a relic from times when women were not financially independent.

.

 

That is exactly how I see it. Equality when it's convenient and most to your favor? How right is that??

 

:iagree:

The door opening thing does not bother me though. I don't wait for people to open the door for me. But I am gracious if someone does. I hold doors for people on a regular basis too.

 

This is me as well. I'm always appreciative to someone holding a door and I hold many doors as well.

[Dory]

Because men who are nervous or shy or just plain poor can be worthwhile too? Especially in highschool - the late bloomers are sometimes the best ones there...

Those late bloomers can be amazing men....some day. But they obviously aren't there yet. If they want to date my daughter, they would be more than welcome to, when they have matured a little, and can prove that they can provide for a family. My oldest son will probably be one of those late bloomers. There's no harm in him waiting to date.

[TippyCanoe]

.

[justamouse]

A guy paying has nothing to do with equality, it has everything do with being gentlemanly.

Same with opening the car door, opening ANY door, and standing up when a woman comes to the table (at a dinner, not at home obviously).

[Rosie_0801]

I still hold to the notion that financial generosity in a man is, by and large, a sign of good character-- traditional or not. The stingy, cheap men were the ones to be careful around because they tended to be very selfish and looking out for #1.

 

How can you tell the difference if you go dutch all the time? There has to be some opportunity for a guy to demonstrate his generosity or lack of it.

 

I think it is a good idea for a guy to allow his date to pay occasionally. He needs to know that she has manners and isn't just bluffing too.

 

Rosie

[AdventureMoms]

Those late bloomers can be amazing men....some day. But they obviously aren't there yet. If they want to date my daughter, they would be more than welcome to, when they have matured a little, and can prove that they can provide for a family. My oldest son will probably be one of those late bloomers. There's no harm in him waiting to date.

 

True, but many of those late bloomers will be snatched up by women who are confident enough to do the asking (and possibly the paying) and recognize the great man inside the shy teenager. I know several marriages that started that way. I would have zero problem if my daughter was confident enough to ask out a man who was still too shy.

 

Also, I'm an engineer. I spent years and years around engineers, all of whom made an excellent salary and could easily support a family, and many of whom were very nice men, but most of whom would never, ever ask a girl out. Even as adults. Some guys just stay shy. That doesn't mean they can't be good husbands or good providers.

[Zebra]

True, but many of those late bloomers will be snatched up by women who are confident enough to do the asking (and possibly the paying) and recognize the great man inside the shy teenager. I know several marriages that started that way. I would have zero problem if my daughter was confident enough to ask out a man who was still too shy.

 

Also, I'm an engineer. I spent years and years around engineers, all of whom made an excellent salary and could easily support a family, and many of whom were very nice men, but most of whom would never, ever ask a girl out. Even as adults. Some guys just stay shy. That doesn't mean they can't be good husbands or good providers.

 

Very well said!

[TippyCanoe]

.

[AdventureMoms]

How can you tell the difference if you go dutch all the time? There has to be some opportunity for a guy to demonstrate his generosity or lack of it.

 

I think it is a good idea for a guy to allow his date to pay occasionally. He needs to know that she has manners and isn't just bluffing too.

 

Rosie

 

I would hope that a man (or anyone) would be generous in ways other than just who pays for what. In fact if the only way a man knows to show generosity is by paying for his date, I'd be a bit concerned.

[TippyCanoe]

.

Edited November 21, 2012 by Doodler

[kokotg]

Eh....I've never heard any reason that makes sense to me why boys/men should be the ones who pay. But then I feel the same way about women being the ones to change their names. I'm not especially....gendered in a lot of ways, I guess. I need more of a reason than because that's just how it's done, traditionally. DH is the same way. It's funny because we DO fall into fairly traditional gender roles in lot of ways....I stay home with kids while he works outside the home (although one could debate how "traditional" that really is....the separation of home and work spheres being a fairly recent invention itself ;)).....but I at least like to think that we do things the way we do them because they make sense for US, right now...not because people did it that way 100 years ago. Like boys paying for dates in an age when boys and girls are equally likely to have jobs.

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

Here's a question asked from true wish to understand the thinking behind a certain stance. For those of you who say that you would not allow a guy to date your daughter until he's demonstrated that he can provide (some say for the date/dates, some for a family), do you make any adjustments for a tanked economy and high unemployment rate? Should a man not date until the economy is better and he can find work, or work that pays high enough to support a family?

 

I ask because I know a lot of people have posted on this very board over the past few years about husbands losing their jobs, about teens and college grads having trouble finding work, or work that pays well enough to live on; there have been numerous articles in newspapers and journals about the high percentage of people in their twenties and thirties having to return to the parental home because they've been downsized or their company has gone under. It happens. It happens to people who have held down well-paying, steady jobs for DECADES. So how does your philosophy take this into account, or doesn't it? I mean I can see someone saying well, then, do free stuff together for dates. But how far can that go? Should they not be allowed to marry?

 

Great question! :lurk5:

[FaithManor]

That poses an interesting question in my mind: is paying for a date the only way to demonstrate generosity to a woman a man is attracted to?

 

 

Very good question! If it is, then only the upper middle class and well-to-do set of boys who are also really out going will be considered "date worthy".

 

Faith

[Slartibartfast]

I am finding the "date worthy" thing a bit offensive and materialistic. I will definitely teach my son that anyone who uses the term "date-worthy" is not worthy of his attentions.

 

I wouldn't expect someone dating my daughter to provide nor insist they should be paying. I would advise her to offer to help with the cost of the date. My first dates were generally with a group of people. My parents gave me money to pay for my movie ticket or pizza.

Edited May 29, 2012 by Sis

[Murphy101]

Relationships are not professional business.

 

I absolutely want my dh to treat me like a queen. And I am usually happy to spoil him like a king. It's mutual, as it should be.

 

He has always opened doors for me, paid for anything he could, and offered me just about every courtesy a gentleman could ever offer.

 

I absolutely want that for our daughters.

 

We both expect our sons to treat any other woman that way, and certainly any family member - including their future wives.

 

Date worthy is something we wouldn't shy from discussing. Dang right it is materialistic. Food, clothing, shelter - are all materials we want all our children and grandchildren to have. If the guy can barely buy himself dinner, much less his date's dinner, then yes we would like to know how he plans to help our daughter or, in the case of our sons, future daughter in law get fed should they decide to build a life and future together?

 

If the purpose of dating is to find someone to marry, then we think these are reasonable expectations.

 

And if the goal is not to create a deep and life long relationship, then what are his intentions? Are they honorable?

 

I met my dh when we were both 16 and working fast food. He was pt and I was ft. Which meant I made a LOT more money than he did. He still paid for our dates. If it was a "date" he paid. And he showed me in a thousand other ways that he was serious about me and willing to put me first. Money was not the deciding factor at all. In all our dating/engagement, which spanned my junior year and senior year and another 6 months post, dh very rarely mentioned money, much less asked me to pay for anything. I think a few times while he was at college for gas, and I always paid for my own hotel when I went to visit him at college a few weekends during my senior year.

 

When married, we have been in agreement for some 17 years now that I'm better with family money than he is and we have always shared one joint bank account. Some times he asks for money, sometimes I do, sometimes a kid does. Most of the time we just pay the mortgage, buy some food and books and call it good.

 

My husband's desire to open doors for me, pay for dinner, bring home flowers, or remember what Sookie Stackhouse books I've already read do not interfere in anyway whatsoever with his ability to respect me as an equal and partner.

 

The notion that a man being chivalrous must have a lesser or somehow demeaning view of women is completely ridiculous to what chivalry is.:confused:

 

And yes, we have talked to our sons about what types of ladies might be date worthy as well. Are they furthering their education? Do they have reasonable expectations financially or just expectations that son feels comfortable with?

 

And of course, part of dating is to learn if they have any suitability or not. I guess if a girl is offended that the guy wants to buy her dinner and open doors, she might not be the gal for him. And that's one quick way for a guy who wants to be chivalrous to find out whether a gal is the one for him.

[Dory]

Relationships are not professional business.

 

I absolutely want my dh to treat me like a queen. And I am usually happy to spoil him like a king. It's mutual, as it should be.

 

He has always opened doors for me, paid for anything he could, and offered me just about every courtesy a gentleman could ever offer.

 

I absolutely want that for our daughters.

 

We both expect our sons to treat any other woman that way, and certainly any family member - including their future wives.

 

Date worthy is something we wouldn't shy from discussing. Dang right it is materialistic. Food, clothing, shelter - are all materials we want all our children and grandchildren to have. If the guy can barely buy himself dinner, much less his date's dinner, then yes we would like to know how he plans to help our daughter or, in the case of our sons, future daughter in law get fed should they decide to build a life and future together?

 

If the purpose of dating is to find someone to marry, then we think these are reasonable expectations.

 

And if the goal is not to create a deep and life long relationship, then what are his intentions? Are they honorable?

 

My husband's desire to open doors for me, pay for dinner, bring home flowers, or remember what Sookie Stackhouse books I've already read do not interfere in anyway whatsoever with his ability to respect me as an equal and partner.

 

The notion that a man being chivalrous must have a lesser or somehow demeaning view of women is completely ridiculous to what chivalry is.:confused:

 

And yes, we have talked to our sons about what types of ladies might be date worthy as well. Are they furthering their education? Do they have reasonable expectations financially or just expectations that son feels comfortable with?

 

And of course, part of dating is to learn if they have any suitability or not. I guess if a girl is offended that the guy wants to buy her dinner and open doors, she might not be the gal for him. And that's one quick way for a guy who wants to be chivalrous to find out whether a gal is the one for him.

 

Wow!! You are my new hero. I wish I could've said it nearly that well!

[LillyMama]

Here's a question asked from true wish to understand the thinking behind a certain stance. For those of you who say that you would not allow a guy to date your daughter until he's demonstrated that he can provide (some say for the date/dates, some for a family), do you make any adjustments for a tanked economy and high unemployment rate? Should a man not date until the economy is better and he can find work, or work that pays high enough to support a family?

 

I ask because I know a lot of people have posted on this very board over the past few years about husbands losing their jobs, about teens and college grads having trouble finding work, or work that pays well enough to live on; there have been numerous articles in newspapers and journals about the high percentage of people in their twenties and thirties having to return to the parental home because they've been downsized or their company has gone under. It happens. It happens to people who have held down well-paying, steady jobs for DECADES. It happens to kids with college majors that seem that they should lead to secure work in a particular field yet do not. So how does your philosophy take this into account, or doesn't it? I mean I can see someone saying well, then, do free stuff together for dates. But how far can that go? Should they not be allowed to marry? I'm thinking of kids in college for one thing: there's no way to know at this point whether a good job is going to be necessarily a consequence of a degree. I'm also thinking of the underemployed, who make enough to get buy, or who are holed up with parents in order to save, but who cannot at the particular time support a family. No marriage? If no marriage, is dating with an eye to the future also not a good idea?

 

I think this brings up a great point. Up to now, we all seem to be talking as if teenage boys all could have money if they were only willing to work. And any teenager that hasn't decided to earn his own way is not ready for the responsibility of dating. (This assumes dating is marriage-prep and not just fun.)

 

Perhaps we'll all have to change our opinions. My first hope is that, when my daughter is ready to date, this economy will be different. But, if it's not, I hope she and I will both be able to look at a young man's responsibility as being demonstrated by more than his pocketbook. For example, a struggling pre-med student will probably eventually be able to support a family. But a man studying to be a pastor or teacher or missionary will most likely never have a lucrative income. But I think I'd probably prefer she date a quality man who has chosen not to chase a career path just for the money. If he seems to make sound financial choices, but she has to help pay for dates- I think I would be okay with that.

 

Besides, dating cheaply is good practice for learning to spend time together without all the bells and whistles. Bike rides, walks, picnics in the park- my husband and I look back on those dates more fondly than the fancy dinners and concerts. They made us value each other for who we are rather than what we can afford to do together.

[happymomofboys]

I believe that the male should pay for the date and my ds will not date until he is old enough to pay for the dates.

 

:iagree: If I had a girl, I'd teach her to always carry enough money on her to pay, just in case, but that any boy who expected her to pay probably isn't worth a second date.

[Isabella]

I think I've finally formed my opinion! ;) Martha said it so well....

 

 

Relationships are not professional business.

 

No, I agree, they are not, but equality is not certainly not limited to professional business. In my life (far away from professional business) equality in relationships is much more relevant! :001_smile:

 

I absolutely want my dh to treat me like a queen. And I am usually happy to spoil him like a king. It's mutual, as it should be.

 

:iagree:completely! This is so important - it's GOT to be mutual!

 

He has always opened doors for me, paid for anything he could, and offered me just about every courtesy a gentleman could ever offer.

 

I absolutely want that for our daughters.

 

We both expect our sons to treat any other woman that way, and certainly any family member - including their future wives.

 

I absolutely want that for me, as well as them!! :D

 

 

I met my dh when we were both 16 and working fast food. He was pt and I was ft. Which meant I made a LOT more money than he did. He still paid for our dates. If it was a "date" he paid. And he showed me in a thousand other ways that he was serious about me and willing to put me first. Money was not the deciding factor at all. In all our dating/engagement, which spanned my junior year and senior year and another 6 months post, dh very rarely mentioned money, much less asked me to pay for anything. I think a few times while he was at college for gas, and I always paid for my own hotel when I went to visit him at college a few weekends during my senior year.

 

This all makes good sense!

 

 

My husband's desire to open doors for me, pay for dinner, bring home flowers, or remember what Sookie Stackhouse books I've already read do not interfere in anyway whatsoever with his ability to respect me as an equal and partner.

 

The notion that a man being chivalrous must have a lesser or somehow demeaning view of women is completely ridiculous to what chivalry is.:confused:

 

Go, you and DH! This fits my thoughts too!

 

I was still mulling over what the whole issue really meant to me, but now that you have worded it so well, Martha, I'll just agree with you!:D

[Rosie_0801]

I would hope that a man (or anyone) would be generous in ways other than just who pays for what. In fact if the only way a man knows to show generosity is by paying for his date, I'd be a bit concerned.

 

Sure, but we don't see him caring for his ailing mother while we're out on a date! Maybe we should be teaching our children to fake non-contagious but debilitating ailments to see whether their prospective will come and sit by their bedsides. :tongue_smilie:

 

Here's a question asked from true wish to understand the thinking behind a certain stance. For those of you who say that you would not allow a guy to date your daughter until he's demonstrated that he can provide (some say for the date/dates, some for a family), do you make any adjustments for a tanked economy and high unemployment rate? Should a man not date until the economy is better and he can find work, or work that pays high enough to support a family?

 

I think plenty of people have made it clear a date doesn't need to be expensive and a walk in the botanic gardens is just fine if you haven't money for more. I don't see why that would need to count against a guy. If he's not spending money when he doesn't have any, that's a point in his favour. If he's creative enough to think of something nice to do that doesn't blow the budget, there's a point in his favour. He asked you out anyway instead of sitting at home feeling sorry for himself, that's in his favour. If he gets work and keeps doing those things, you might get to wondering if he really likes walking or if he's too tight to spend the money. It'd be a fair question.

 

Eh, why am I bothering to post after Martha? :)

 

Rosie

[Lab1]

When I was dating, the invitor paid. If I invited a guy to go to a haunted house I got the tickets. If I was invited to say come over and watch a movie, I'd offer to bring cookies. Just like I would for a friend. I'm casual that way! We mostly hung out though. I kept things casual and fun. I'm just that type of girl!

 

My poor DH spent many shopping trips with me at the grocery store, helped carry groceries in and kept me company as I cooked dinner for my family. He was frequently at our dinner table. (Can you tell we were in HS? Although it was the same in collegd, just add my apartment) I had responsibilities to run a household with a sick mother. We still enjoy grocery shopping together. We "dated" in real life. I do sometimes wish we had more paid dinner dates and such, but he didn't have much money. We still don't have the money for such things!

[Heather in Neverland]

Relationships are not professional business.

 

I absolutely want my dh to treat me like a queen. And I am usually happy to spoil him like a king. It's mutual, as it should be.

 

He has always opened doors for me, paid for anything he could, and offered me just about every courtesy a gentleman could ever offer.

 

I absolutely want that for our daughters.

 

We both expect our sons to treat any other woman that way, and certainly any family member - including their future wives.

 

Date worthy is something we wouldn't shy from discussing. Dang right it is materialistic. Food, clothing, shelter - are all materials we want all our children and grandchildren to have. If the guy can barely buy himself dinner, much less his date's dinner, then yes we would like to know how he plans to help our daughter or, in the case of our sons, future daughter in law get fed should they decide to build a life and future together?

 

If the purpose of dating is to find someone to marry, then we think these are reasonable expectations.

 

And if the goal is not to create a deep and life long relationship, then what are his intentions? Are they honorable?

 

I met my dh when we were both 16 and working fast food. He was pt and I was ft. Which meant I made a LOT more money than he did. He still paid for our dates. If it was a "date" he paid. And he showed me in a thousand other ways that he was serious about me and willing to put me first. Money was not the deciding factor at all. In all our dating/engagement, which spanned my junior year and senior year and another 6 months post, dh very rarely mentioned money, much less asked me to pay for anything. I think a few times while he was at college for gas, and I always paid for my own hotel when I went to visit him at college a few weekends during my senior year.

 

When married, we have been in agreement for some 17 years now that I'm better with family money than he is and we have always shared one joint bank account. Some times he asks for money, sometimes I do, sometimes a kid does. Most of the time we just pay the mortgage, buy some food and books and call it good.

 

My husband's desire to open doors for me, pay for dinner, bring home flowers, or remember what Sookie Stackhouse books I've already read do not interfere in anyway whatsoever with his ability to respect me as an equal and partner.

 

The notion that a man being chivalrous must have a lesser or somehow demeaning view of women is completely ridiculous to what chivalry is.:confused:

 

And yes, we have talked to our sons about what types of ladies might be date worthy as well. Are they furthering their education? Do they have reasonable expectations financially or just expectations that son feels comfortable with?

 

And of course, part of dating is to learn if they have any suitability or not. I guess if a girl is offended that the guy wants to buy her dinner and open doors, she might not be the gal for him. And that's one quick way for a guy who wants to be chivalrous to find out whether a gal is the one for him.

 

:iagree:

You are my hero. :D

 

.

[Soror]

If a guy can't man up to ask you out for an evening, why would you want to spend an evening with him. I have never understood that.

 

That was my husband. I was tired of manly and macho men. So, dh came by the icecream place I worked at for 6 months every day and ordered a huge icecream. He was exceptionally polite every time and tipped me. He would smile and blush but could never get past idle chitchat. Finally I did speak up. He is certainly plenty man enough. He has been a great husband and father but he thought I was "out of his league" and just couldn't get up the nerve. Well, perhaps in another 6 months or so he might have but I was tired of waiting :). Anyway, I gave him my number and he took it from there. He had no problem talking on the phone and asking me on dates after that.

[Soror]

Relationships are not professional business.

 

I absolutely want my dh to treat me like a queen. And I am usually happy to spoil him like a king. It's mutual, as it should be.

 

He has always opened doors for me, paid for anything he could, and offered me just about every courtesy a gentleman could ever offer.

 

I absolutely want that for our daughters.

 

We both expect our sons to treat any other woman that way, and certainly any family member - including their future wives.

 

Date worthy is something we wouldn't shy from discussing. Dang right it is materialistic. Food, clothing, shelter - are all materials we want all our children and grandchildren to have. If the guy can barely buy himself dinner, much less his date's dinner, then yes we would like to know how he plans to help our daughter or, in the case of our sons, future daughter in law get fed should they decide to build a life and future together?

 

If the purpose of dating is to find someone to marry, then we think these are reasonable expectations.

 

And if the goal is not to create a deep and life long relationship, then what are his intentions? Are they honorable?

 

I met my dh when we were both 16 and working fast food. He was pt and I was ft. Which meant I made a LOT more money than he did. He still paid for our dates. If it was a "date" he paid. And he showed me in a thousand other ways that he was serious about me and willing to put me first. Money was not the deciding factor at all. In all our dating/engagement, which spanned my junior year and senior year and another 6 months post, dh very rarely mentioned money, much less asked me to pay for anything. I think a few times while he was at college for gas, and I always paid for my own hotel when I went to visit him at college a few weekends during my senior year.

 

When married, we have been in agreement for some 17 years now that I'm better with family money than he is and we have always shared one joint bank account. Some times he asks for money, sometimes I do, sometimes a kid does. Most of the time we just pay the mortgage, buy some food and books and call it good.

 

My husband's desire to open doors for me, pay for dinner, bring home flowers, or remember what Sookie Stackhouse books I've already read do not interfere in anyway whatsoever with his ability to respect me as an equal and partner.

 

The notion that a man being chivalrous must have a lesser or somehow demeaning view of women is completely ridiculous to what chivalry is.:confused:

 

And yes, we have talked to our sons about what types of ladies might be date worthy as well. Are they furthering their education? Do they have reasonable expectations financially or just expectations that son feels comfortable with?

 

And of course, part of dating is to learn if they have any suitability or not. I guess if a girl is offended that the guy wants to buy her dinner and open doors, she might not be the gal for him. And that's one quick way for a guy who wants to be chivalrous to find out whether a gal is the one for him.

:iagree:

[Myra]

I've had many discussions with my teenage college-bound boys about this topic. I have taught my sons about courtesy (and being generally chivalrous, polite, and respectful) - shaking hands, opening doors, etc - courtesy extended to both guys and gals when the occasions arise. We have come to the conclusion that the first few dates - whoever asks/sets up the date pays. Then from then on the costs of dates should be shared evenly as possible unless there is a "special" occasion. If a girl objects to this set up, then you need to reevaluate whether she is indeed "date worthy" - the kind of gal you'd want to have as a supportive partner for the rest of your life.

 

That's just our 2 cents worth!

Myra

[FaithManor]

I've had many discussions with my teenage college-bound boys about this topic. I have taught my sons about courtesy (and being generally chivalrous, polite, and respectful) - shaking hands, opening doors, etc - courtesy extended to both guys and gals when the occasions arise. We have come to the conclusion that the first few dates - whoever asks/sets up the date pays. Then from then on the costs of dates should be shared evenly as possible unless there is a "special" occasion. If a girl objects to this set up, then you need to reevaluate whether she is indeed "date worthy" - the kind of gal you'd want to have as a supportive partner for the rest of your life.

 

That's just our 2 cents worth!

Myra

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

Faith

[*********]

I'll throw my 2 cents in...

 

For my little boys, I expect them to court. Meaning, they would not ask a young lady 'out' unless they were considering marriage. Obviously, this means they would need to get to know the young lady as a friend first. :001_smile:

 

I alos expect my boys to be able to support a family before marriage. Now, that might mean they are capable of renting a small apartment, it might mean they've bought a home, or even that there is room/arrangements for them to live in the family home with their new bride. Whatever the case, they need to be able to support their wife financially.

 

So to me, this means that if one of my boys asked a young woman out, he would be capable of paying and would ALWAYS do so. Is there anything wrong with the young lady planning something on her own and paying for it? Not at all. However, for my boys, I want it to be a given that they will pay.

 

(And no, I would have no problem with a dil of mine working, assuming that they have no minor children at home and that her and her dh agree. However, I want my boys and their wives to be able to have mom home to raise the children and homeschool.)