Over the years, the United States and many other countries have developed certain social traditions for dating. In old-fashioned but still very prominent traditions, men held doors, made the first call, drove the woman and paid for dinner. However, women do not play the same naïve, helpless role in society now that they did in the past. A lot of these actions are now seen as “anti-feminist,” as women do not want to be perceived as passive and dependent, but strong, robust people with the same capabilities are men. In short, women today are finally beginning to be recognized as independent members of the workforce who are very capable of doing each of these things themselves. From 1960 to 2011 in the United States, the proportion of households in which the mother earned all or most of the income roughly quadrupled , changing from 10 to 40 percent of all households. Despite that, men are still expected to pay for all dates as they were in earlier years. This begs the question: is it considered anti-feminist for men to pay for dates?
For clarification purposes, feminism does not mean that women want to be superior to men. Feminism does not encourage hating men. By definition, feminism is the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. So after considering whether or not men should pay for dates, I do not think it is an issue of feminism. In modern society, men do not pay for dates because the woman cannot. Men pay for dates as an act of kindness or a practice of tradition. Women could easily do the same if it was important to them to do so.
It cannot be as simple as male versus female in dating scenarios within the LGBTQ community. How then, should lesbian or gay couples choose who pays for dinner? As stated by Steven Petrow — aka Mr. Manners — “In the gay community, you don’t have that tradition to fall back on.” Words such as “gentlemen” and “lady” simply do not apply. Petrow goes on to say that “The one who gets to the door first, please open up the door for yourself and the person who’s behind you.” He says the same principle should be applied to dating: the person who invites is the person that pays.
If the man that pays for a date makes a woman feel like a bad feminist, the problem is the man, not the fact that he is paying. Men should not make a woman feel inferior, make snarky comments, or tease a woman after he has made the decision to pay. Not only is this bad taste, but it’s a quick way to ensure that he will not get a second date. Some rather simple ways for women to avoid feeling this way would be to always offer to pay or in a relationship, to pay for half of the dates, cover the tip or alternate who pays for dates.
Where feminism does come into play, however, is when considering the question of what the woman “owes” the man in return. My answer to that: nothing. A woman does not owe a man anything because he paid for dinner. In a 1985 study published in Psychology of Women Quarterly, the results showed that subjects had a blurred definition of sexual assault. “Rape was rated as more justifiable,” if the man had paid for dinner than if he had not, said the authors who had administered the test. Although this was thirty years ago, these results are nothing short of disturbing. And in 2010, yet another study found that more men than women thought that sex should be expected when a man pays for dinner. Importantly, though, women cannot expect men alone to change their views on women, but should also change their views of themselves.
Paying for dates should be thought of as a gift or kind gesture that does not have to be reciprocated in any way. Who is paying for a date is not a male versus female issue. Men and women both need to take the initiative and see that a man paying for a date is not a loaded gesture and should not be viewed as such.
Lauren Horne is a Viewpoint Writer.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Big donors are dominating the Board of Visitors
By Ryan Williams | 2 days agoSuch appointments being dictated by connections and donations creates a Board composed of big donors instead of members passionate about University goals.
EDITORIAL: Collectives are a misinterpretation of the mission of NIL
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoA large driver of this inequality comes in the form of collectives, the structures many schools use to organize their NIL payments.
CARTER: Data science without sustainability is insufficient
By Nathaniel Carter | November 9, 2024The University appears committed to a future defined by data, but lacks the dedication to meeting this future’s energy needs in a sustainable way.
