- It's not the most romantic subject for Valentine's Day,
but the unfair expectation that men must pay for dates, which came under
commendable feminist attack during the 1970s, is, surprisingly, almost
as strong today as it was before women's liberation. There are several
standard justifications given for not splitting the check:
-
- Justification #1: "Women have to spend more on clothes,
shoes, perfume, etc., so it's only fair that men pay."
-
- It's true that women's clothes, shoes, etc., can cost
considerably more than men's, but men who date must reciprocate by having
a presentable car and a presentable place to live, both of which are far
more expensive. After all, a marriage-age man who lives at home is considered
undesirable, but did you ever see a man turn down a promising date because
she lived with mom and dad or drove an old junker? I didn't think so.
-
- Justification #2: "Men make more money than women
do for the same job."
-
- This is one of the most persistent myths of our time.
Studies by liberal (AFL-CIO), dissident feminist (The Independent Women's
Forum), and conservative (Hoover Institution) organizations have found
that single men do not earn more than single women. The gender wage gap
is caused by the career sacrifices that mothers make for their children,
and the personal sacrifices fathers make (longer work weeks, more hazardous
jobs, etc.) in order to earn the money to support those children. Neither
of these is generally an issue in dating.
-
- Justification #3: "I'm old-fashioned. I expect the
man to pay because it's chivalrous."
-
- The problem is that many men have understandably come
to hear this as "I'm old fashioned when it suits me. When it doesn't,
well, that's a different story." After all, what would a modern woman
say if her date said "I'm old-fashioned. I expect the woman to do
all the cooking"?
-
- Justification #4: "Whoever asks for the date should
pay."
-
- And who is always expected to ask? Need I ask?
-
- Justification #5: "Well, if men expect to get something,
they should expect to pay for it."
-
- It is Neanderthal for a man to expect to "get something"
simply because he has paid for a date. Also, since women enjoy sex as much
as men do, even if a woman does have sex with a man "because he paid"
it's still unfair to the man because he's paying for the privilege of doing
something which is mutually pleasurable.
-
- Justification #6: "It's just easier this way."
-
- This claim certainly has merit. The rise of feminism
demolished many of society's rules and traditions, usually for the better.
But when it comes to dating, nobody really knows what the rules are anymore,
and in this confusion often both men and women find it easier to fall back
on tradition.
-
- Enough! The obligation of a man to pay can wound a budding
relationship by placing money and one-sided expectations where love and
honesty should be. In addition, its innate unfairness hinders the uneasy
rapprochement men and women are currently negotiating after three decades
of gender conflict. In the long run, abolishing this outmoded social convention
will benefit both men and women. And what's fair is fair.
-
- Oh, and guys, be sure not to order the most expensive
item on the menu, OK?
-
- This column first appeared in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
(2/14/02).
-
- Glenn Sacks writes about men's and fathers' issues. His
<http://www.glennsacks.com/glenns_columns.htm>columns have appeared
in dozens of the largest newspapers in the United States.
|
