Dating Norms: Do Men Still Pay? (And if so, should they?)

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

The most honest type of romantic relationship is where money is exchanged directly for sex. The market pretty clearly values women.

Oh, so you just meant to say that men are hornier than women. That's an interesting usage of the term "romantic".

1 Reply

@Thomas,

That's interesting Thomas. In the US it is equally rude to keep score. But if you did you would find that men spend a lot more on romantic partners than women do.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

How would you define the term "romantic" that would exclude the exchange of sex for money? Marriage is at its core an economic arrangement designed to protect the interests of the two parties involved. Is marriage a romantic relationship?

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

How would you define the term "romantic" that would exclude the exchange of sex for money? Marriage is at its core an economic arrangement designed to protect the interests of the two parties involved. Is marriage a romantic relationship?

No, marriage is a contract about terms of joint childcare, joint property, joint insurance contracts of various sorts, and inheritances when one partner dies. Romantic feelings may lead people to enter this contract, but the marriage contract itself is utterly unromantic.

If there's any English dictionary by which the exchange of sex for money is 'romantic', I'm not aware of it.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

How would you define the term "romantic" that would exclude the exchange of sex for money?

I can't think of a definition of romantic that includes any material exchange, but maybe I'm too romantic (don't think I've ever been accused of that by anyone other than Spendy, or was it Mathos)

0 Replies

@Thomas,

How the state views marriage and how the 2 people in a marriage may be completely different. For some people marriage may be only a legal contract for others it may be the most romantic thing you could ever do.

2 Replies

@parados,

I don't know if there are too many dating norms these days. I know one woman in her 50s who belongs to a dating service and she expects the men to always pay. I also know people that always insist that things are split equally so no one feels obligated.

1 Reply

@parados,

Right, that's part of what I was curious about -- how much data we could get to indicate whether there are trends, and if so, what they are.

My own experience is most in line with Thomas' of those who have responded so far, for example.... I think that's probably mostly a function of age (he's just a bit older than me) and general social milieu (academic types). That despite the fact that we're talking about different countries.

Max, there are two different levels to look at re: whether this custom makes sense. I already addressed the individual level, you're just reiterating what I said there.

However there's a larger social level too, and that's the one I mean when I say it doesn't really make sense in this day and age (though it may have made some sense in the past).

Take foot-binding. It made sense for a Chinese woman in the 19th century who wanted to marry well to bind her feet. That's the individual level. However, the custom itself didn't make sense, and made less and less sense as time went on. It eventually disappeared.

1 Reply

I am out of the dating loop for a long time now, but I never went on a date where I did not anticipate to pay my fair share. There were times when the bill was so secretly paid that I didn't have a chance to contribute, but lots of times it was split in half. We were all students and had little money, so why assume that the guy should pay for it.

In the United States it's a bit different, even today! I hear that most guys have to pay the entire tab. One recently divorced friend told me that he started dating via a dating website and he's had many many "first dates" only - not one woman offered to contribute to the bill, on the contrary, many of the women took the most expensive item on the menu and indulged themselves. These weren't young girls either, mostly women in their late 30s and 40s.

1 Reply

@CalamityJane,

My personal feeling is the person initiating the "date", meeting or whatever should have right of first refusal. The right to refuse to let the other person chip in.

As to the women that didn't even offer to contribute, might I suggest -Be gracious and offer to pay something even if you are hoping they will be more gracious and not let you.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

How the state views marriage and how the 2 people in a marriage may be completely different.

Not to be a pedant, but I'm going to be a pedant anyway. As far as romanticism is concerned, two people don't care about marriage at all. They care about their relationship. To see the difference, imagine you and your girlfriend on Robinson Crusoe's island. No judge, no priest, not even Robinson Crusoe. You'd never be married, because there would be nobody to marry you. But nothing would change between the two of you as far as you'd be concerned. That's because to your romantic relationship, marriage is irrelevant. The two are almost completely distinct.

2 Replies

@Thomas,

I actually was just reading a really interesting article about weddings and... oxytocin? Let me see if I can find it.

What I remember is that it was in line with my thinking that weddings really DO matter, even if nothing obviously changes before or after. (We were living together before our wedding, we got some gifts and a piece of paper but other than that there shouldn't really have been any changes... but there were.)

This is part of why I'm pro gay marriage, too. Probably a larger part is just all of the legal benefits afforded by marriage. But I think gay couples should be able to have the intangible benefits of a wedding, too. (I guess they could even if it's illegal... hmm. Would like to see how the [oxytocin?] levels work there.)

Here we are!

Quote:

For his book, The Moral Molecule, Paul J. Zak drew blood from a bride, groom and their parents, before and after the vows, to measure the oxytocin levels:

Quote:
The bride's oxytocin level shot up by 28% after the vows, "and for each of the other people tested, the increase in oxytocin was in direct proportion to the likely intensity of emotional engagement in the event." Bride's mother: up 24%. Groom's father: up 19%. The groom: up only 13%. Why? It turns out that testosterone interferes with the release of oxytocin—and Mr. Zak measured a 100% spike in the groom's testosterone level immediately after the ceremony.

The guests are affected as well:

Quote:
It looks as though humans have devised this ritual that induces oxytocin release in a way that bonds people to the wedding party. It provides this social support system, so that this couple presumably can be successful at reproducing.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/06/the-chemistry-of-a-wedding.html

1 Reply

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

Personally, I think that having the man pay is holdover from when a man's earning potential had a lot to do with his suitability as a husband. Dating was a way for him to demonstrate some of his wealth, as well as other more personal attributes.

Just from my personal interactions, it looks to me as if a man's earning potential still has a lot to do with his suitability as a mate.

2 Replies

@DrewDad,

That's true.... I think it has less of an impact now than it used to, but it's not nothing either. (Again with a lot of variations.)

0 Replies

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

What I remember is that it was in line with my thinking that weddings really DO matter, even if nothing obviously changes before or after. (We were living together before our wedding, we got some gifts and a piece of paper but other than that there shouldn't really have been any changes... but there were.)

Interesting. Like what? If you don't mind expanding.

Sozobe wrote:

(I guess they could even if it's illegal... hmm. Would like to see how the [oxytocin?] levels work there.)

That would be an interesting experiment. For example, I don't think Dyslexia and Diane were ever legally married. But from looking at them look at each other, I'm pretty confident that their oxytocin levels shot through the roof just from that. (Of course, I have no way to prove it.)

1 Reply

@Thomas,

I'm sure people in love have increased oxytocin levels too, just in general. Weddings in particular seem to cause spikes in all involved though (more so depending on emotional involvement).

My position is not that everyone should get married, but that marriage is not necessarily a completely neutral thing, either (no change from before to after).

As for what.... hmm. It was just a much more profound experience than I expected. We weren't super caught up in the marriage thing, it was more that we wanted to express that level of commitment to each other, and wanted to include friends and family who wanted to see it (and each other). We didn't really expect much to change.

Not sure if I can articulate what it was that did change. Maybe it was just the oxytocin spike. But a deeper level of connectedness, a certain gravitas (in a good way). I definitely remember conversations with him after the wedding about the whole thing -- event itself and aftermath -- being much more meaningful than we thought it would be.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

You completely ignore what romantic means Thomas. You could argue that a candlelight dinner is not romantic because on Robinson Crusoe's island that would be the only way to eat after dark. Yet you wouldn't be able to convince most people that a candlelight dinner can never be romantic.

Romantic is whatever the 2 people involved decide is romantic. It isn't something someone outside the relationship decides. For some people being married is romantic. It certainly isn't that way for all and perhaps not even for most and yet for some marriage is romantic.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

Just happened across this, it's related:

http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_2_family-breakdown.html

Quote:

Add what social scientists call “assortative mating” to the mix, and you have greater, more intractable inequality. Assortative mating refers to marriages between men and women of similar educational status. In the past, women tended to “marry up”: nurses married doctors and secretaries their bosses. But as women increased their presence on campuses and then began to bring home more money, college-educated men decided that they were better off marrying one of their own. Think of the implications for household earnings. A lawyer was always likely to earn more than a plumber—but today, plenty of upper-income households are headed by two lawyers. That considerably widens the gap between a power couple and a lower-middle-class duo. Sociologist Christine Schwartz has estimated that assortative mating brought about a 25 percent to 30 percent increase in inequality among married-couple families between 1967 and 2005. Between power couples and single-mother families, the gap is far wider.

(Haven't read the whole article yet, won't vouch for it.)

0 Replies

@sozobe,

I am curious if acts of prostitution leads to increased oxytocin. My guess is that it does.

0 Replies

@sozobe,

Quote:

Max, there are two different levels to look at re: whether this custom makes sense. I already addressed the individual level, you're just reiterating what I said there.

However there's a larger social level too, and that's the one I mean when I say it doesn't really make sense in this day and age (though it may have made some sense in the past).

Sozobe, you aren't addressing my main point-- and perhaps this is a third level to look at.

Whether men pay or not is determined by the economic system that is dating. Dating is costly (not only in money, but in time, energy and emotional risk). Men are willing to date because they have a goal in mind and they believe there is a reasonable chance they will be successful.

American men pick up the tab because it is economically advantageous for them to do so. Doing so makes it more likely that the date will be successful. Men who don't pick up the tab are at a disadvantage in what is an economic competition for desirable females.

That is the reason that men continue to pick up the tab.

2 Replies

Dating Norms: Do Men Still Pay? (And if so, should they?)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know