Foul Pay
I went out with a feminist who was all into women's empowerment, but when the bill came, she made no effort to chip in. Please explain this type of feminism. Is it somehow possible that she didn't notice the check?
--Incredulous
It is possible that she didn't notice the check. It's also possible that she likes to take time off from complaining about paternalistic behaviors to sample the ones that work best for her.
While this appears to be a glaring example of self-serving selective feminism, research suggests there's sometimes a more charitable explanation for absurdly contradictory beliefs and behavior. Though most people believe that there's a single consistent you (or me) with stable beliefs and preferences, this actually seems to be an illusion. In fact, if there's one thing that's consistent about humans, it's how inconsistent we all tend to be (and -- it gets better -- how consistent we are in vigorously denying that).
Cognitive scientist Colin Martindale theorized back in 1980 that we have a number of "subselves" -- sub-personalities with varying beliefs and priorities -- that go active or sink into the background depending on the context at hand. In other words, whichever goal is front and center in your mind -- like "Fight patriarchal oppression!" or "Take this totally adorbs patriarchal oppressor home to bed!" -- drives how you think and behave.
Research by neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga suggests Martindale was right. Gazzaniga's findings also led him to the conclusion that our mind has a janitor of sorts -- a psychological one he calls "The Interpreter" -- that tidies up in the wake of our inconsistencies by creating justifications for them. These, in turn, allow us to view ourselves as consistent and rational -- instead of laughably hypocritical, like a feminist who, when the check comes, stares skyward, all "Wow! That is one of the most well-preserved examples of the early-'90s popcorn ceiling!"
However, again, more charitably, everybody these days is confused about who's supposed to pay on dates (and when and what it all means). For example, a woman will chip in on the first date because she earns a living, too! -- or because the prospect of sex with the dude is akin to "Would madam enjoy her Caesar salad with a light dusting of E. coli?"
To suss out where this woman is coming from, you need more information, and to get that, you'll need further interaction -- on the phone or, even better, in person. (Action reveals character.) Sure, she could be a hypocrite riding the patriarchal free dinner train -- or maybe she finds it icky to split the check and figured she'd get the next one. It's also possible she'll reciprocate with a home-cooked meal -- because you picked a place where the water alone costs $11 and she's busy completing a dog walking internship while moonlighting as a freelance field hand.
I've been out of the dating pool since 2006 but I noticed most guys really wanted to pay and would often get huffy if you tried to insist on paying your way. So when I was single I would really only insist if I wasn't that into the guy and didn't want to be beholden in any way even for a cup of coffee.
So my modus operendi was to get out my card and make a grab for the check, but if the guy insisted to let him pay. If the guy didn't insist, I had my card out and either paid my part or all. This almost never happened.
I have to say, that when I paid my part it felt more like going out as friends than as a date, though it wasn't always meant that way. It didn't feel like being wooed. But maybe being wooed is archaic. But maybe NOT wooing will make you feel like a friend.
So its possible this hypocrisy has come out of her dating experience and how guys reacted to her attempts to get the check.
NicoleK at February 14, 2019 2:26 AM
Oh and she noticed the check.
NicoleK at February 14, 2019 2:31 AM
Most women want the rights and privileges that come with equality and empowerment. But many go all snowflake-fragile when it comes to giving up blood or treasure, that is still "men's responsibility".
Like NicoleK said, she totally noticed the check, and every minute detail of the moments after it was laid on the table. You were weighed and measured for "alpha fux" or "beta bux".
bkmale at February 14, 2019 7:25 AM
"So my modus operendi was to get out my card and make a grab for the check, but if the guy insisted to let him pay. "
I always insisted on the first date. After that I would be open to negotiation, but the first date was always mine. There were several reasons. One was just to be a general expression of goodwill. The second was because more traditional women prefer that. But, to be honest, another motivation was that over time, I had learned that if the woman insists on going Dutch on the first date, you've probably been friendzoned.
Cousin Dave at February 14, 2019 7:42 AM
If my date graciously allows me to pick up the tab for whatever was on the agenda, I would see that as a buying signal.
Of course, she might also be digging for gold. Time will tell on that account.
But splitting the check on date one, like Cousin Dave implied, is likely a signal to move on.
railmeat at February 14, 2019 10:11 AM
It's also possible she'll reciprocate with a home-cooked meal
Bwahahahaha! I mean *more hysterical laughter* I mean *rolls on floor* that's just *gasps for air* woo, I come this site for the snark, but stay for the humor.
We know this woman can't cook if she's busy complaining about Teh Patriarchy! she might, on a good day, be able to burn water.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 15, 2019 7:27 AM
...aaand whose idea was the date? And where was the date? LW conveniently leaves those parts out.
If HE wants to look like a BMOC by taking her out to the fanciest restaurant in town, it's not on HER to subsidize his wish-fulfillment...especially if she gave him an out, like suggesting a more modest itinerary.
Likewise, if SHE invites him out, it's on HER to spring for it. Unless other arrangements have been made, them's what asks pays.
Of course, the tone of "Incredulous'" letter leads me to believe that his attitude killed the date looong before the check came.
Referring to your date as a label makes you look like a d!ck.
Taylor at February 15, 2019 9:30 AM
Eh, I complained a lot about the patriarchy in my younger years, and I loved to cook. I often did home-cooked meals, I'd go all out with multiple courses, the good silver, candles and a fire in the fireplace... good times.
NicoleK at February 17, 2019 1:18 AM
Since women always expect men to pay, I wonder how lesbians handle the check on a dinner date?
Waiter: "Here's your check. Please let me know if you need anything else."
Heather: [glances at check but continues to talk]
Justine: [likewise]
30 minutes later...
Heather: [still talking, while occasionally glancing at check]
Justine: [likewise]
15 more minutes later...
Heather: [still talking, while occasionally glancing at check]
Justine: [likewise]
10 more minutes later...
Heather: "Well...I suppose we should be going so how about if we ask that guy over there to pay for the check? We can hint that there might be a threesome in it for him."
JD at February 18, 2019 2:52 PM
Taylor: Unless other arrangements have been made, them's what asks pays.
Since it's almost always men who do the asking (because most women require them to), "whoever asks, pays" is basically a disingenuous way of saying "the man pays."
This is, of course, in a male/female dating situation. With two gay men or two lesbians, "whoever asks, pays" is more honest.
JD at February 18, 2019 4:09 PM
Well, there's the problem right there. You shouldn't do that.
Patrick at February 19, 2019 6:10 AM
Leave a comment