I have not posted for a while because this draft has been clogging my dashboard and won’t let me move on. I am still getting used to the over-exposure of writing about personal opinions online, but then I am reminded of the bro blog advice that circulates in many self-help podcasts: if it’s shit no one will read it anyway, so you may as well write what you think.
Paying for meals/drinks/things is a big thing in Greece, where I was born and raised, and was particularly so in my family. Growing up my dad would give extra pocket money to me and my brother to ‘treat’ our friends. At meals out with family friends the parents would fight among themselves about whose turn it is to pay- the winner being allowed to pay, rather than the other way around. My mother was an expert in sneaking to the loo to corner the waiter and force them to accept her payment before the bill reached our table. Shouty arguments would ensue when friends felt my mother paid one too many times- it was a matter of honour. I believe there were similar scenes in other families and social circles. The financial crisis diluted this performance of generosity but only just about. Maybe the meals have been replaced by coffees but Greeks still very much recoil at the idea of splitting the bill, particularly for smaller amounts. In my age group (28 at the time of writing) my friends will cringe if I buy a coffee for myself and do not offer to buy one for them, with zero expectation to be paid back.
When I migrated to London I begrudgingly got used to the new normal. In the UK, the most common scenario for paying is when you go to the pub. There, each friend goes to the bar in turns to buy everyone their chosen drink- mostly for practical purposes as there is usually no table service and the bar can get busy. The unspoken rule is that you don’t leave till you buy your round and that you each buy similarly priced drinks (beer or wine) till you all switch to pricier ones (gin, vodka etc.). In all other scenarios, the bill is split and if you bought an extra side or a more expensive dish you are expected to pay for your own things - a toe-curling faux pas in Greece, where we usually share everything.
What about (heterosexual) dating though? Romance and seduction are performative. Who pays is not just a matter of manners and cultural background, but also a symbolic gesture and, for me at least, an aesthetic preference.
In many Western cultures, it is customary for the man to pay, in some Middle Eastern, Asian and African cultures a lot more is expected but I will stick to the ones I know, i.e. Greek and British/American. In the UK it is not unheard of for men to pay but it is not entirely expected either. In my social circles, it is common for women to deride this custom. I have a lot of (mostly British) friends who see it as unnecessary and some who see it as archaic.
I recently watched a clip from ‘First Dates’ - a British tv show where two strangers are set up and go on a dinner date- where a female acquaintance of mine attempted to pay for her male date’s dinner. He counteroffered to pay for hers at which points she protested and became visibly offended, explaining that it is the 21st century and there is no apparent reason why a woman can’t pick up the bill. I should note she looked gorgeous in that clip. She was wearing a fiercely fitted red dress, stilettos, glamorous rhinestone earrings and red lipstick. She looked like a flower. As I see it if you are embracing every other cultural signifier of femininity (makeup, sexy clothes) it is baffling that you are offended by a cultural signifier of masculinity (gentlemen pay).
I shared the clip in a group chat with common female friends who know her and one commended that they hated the act of a guy paying. The word they used was ‘submissive’. Had I shared that clip with some of my Greek girlfriends it would have been received with scorching anathemas. Amongst my Greek girlfriends men not paying on a first date is not only seen as a lack of interest and manners, it is felt as deeply deeply DEEPLY UNSEXY.
Cancel me if you must sisters, but I won’t take part in your delusions. Heterosexuals are slaves to the reproductive instinct, the one that tells you men are providers and protectors and women are healthy, beautiful baby-making machines. That is why unless you are gay there is no such thing as casual sex. If there is a 1% chance of a new human being created (and even with the most effective contraception method these are the stats) then it cannot, by definition, be casual. No matter how many Disney movies you watch, no matter how many times you flip through ‘The Ethical Slut’, if you are a female attracted to males or vice versa your lizard brain will sooner or later take over in the form of hormones responding to sensory stimuli.
Homosexuals are protected from biological destiny, which is why I am baffled when religious people hate the Gays. They are clearly God’s chosen children.
NOTE: I accept there is a *tiny* percentage of women who are genuinely polyamorous, please move on if you are one such, we come from different planets and I do not mean to bother you, nor do I plan on ever stepping on your rights- I am a sexual conservative but a political democrat.
For the >98% of the rest of us, we dismiss evolutionary psychology at our own peril. In the same way that, even though socially and politically you may oppose women having to beautify themselves for men, you would think it wise and anodyne of a girl to dress up pretty before a date, accept that there is utility in a guy paying on a date. It is misogynist to think the former is more acceptable than the latter.
On average, laser hair removal in London costs 200-600 pounds, a blow dry will set you back around 20-80 quid, the contents of most women’s makeup bags cost 100s and that’s before I even start breaking down the costs of ‘wearing clothes while female’. Most enlightened, metropolitan, cultural elite, women who regularly shit on the custom of men paying, quietly foot the female tax on looks. Of course they do, educated women are just as, if not more, competitive with other women as any low-brow female on one of those deplorable dating reality tv shows you make fun of (Love Island or whatever). The difference is that a university degree, a Twitter account and a desk job at a cultural/political/educational institution means you have to hide it better.
The equivalent of female beauty is male power. In 2023 male power is no longer brute force (*sight* :’)), most often it is wealth. Cultural and social influence also works, especially if you are a knowledge worker.
This is not me telling you to get rich to get pussy- au contraire. This is me explaining what I see as highly subconscious processes of how heterosexual attraction works. I should note here that particularly in big western cities like London I have encountered people who don’t abide by gender norms (while still identifying as their birth sex), e.g. women who don’t shave, who date guys who are ok with that. Obviously, these people live away from the binary and won’t find much use to my advice, potentially they also don’t see the feminine/masculine urges I describe here. This post is not for them then, but if you are a woman who wears tight-fitted clothes and heels, who puts on makeup and shaves, or a man who is attracted to women who do all of the above, then keep on reading.
Beyond my cultural background, the reason I think men should pay on first dates is the same reason I think people should be politically correct in professional environments even if they disagree with whatever is the politically correct rhetoric de jure. E.g. Say you are against gay marriage but not because you are a raging homophobe but because you have some very sophisticated reasons about how marriage is a vehicle of the heteronormative patriarchy and gay culture should challenge rather than comform to heteronormative standards. You work for a big American corporation and your HR department puts up an event celebrating LGBTQ progress and a speaker mentions the success of gay marriage. Were you to protest that you would be rightly seen as an idiot, by your colleagues, no doubt, but also from me, an anti-cancel culture extremist. Why? because above else, your behaviour shows poor social skills. This is not the place or the time for that conversation. The likelihood of you being misunderstood is massive, and you will cause a lot more offence than enlighten anyone with your nuanced pro-LGBTQ stance.
How is that connected to men paying on first dates? They both show social skill. The choreography of taking out your wallet and soliciting an accepted offer to pay for a girl without causing offence takes a number of skills valued both in dating and at work: the ability to read social queues, fluid, non-threatening body language, appropriate tone of voice, and eye contact. You are not an anonymous avatar in an opaque Reddit forum, you are a man trying to court a lady/employee trying to survive corporate America.
When I recall my experiences of men paying or omitting to pay the impression I was left by men who knew how to pick up the bill without causing too much fuzz was one of confidence and self-respect. The worst impression was left by men who spent part of the date showing off how much money they make and then proceeded to comment on how expensive the drinks were - presumably in an attempt to solicit a splitting of the bill on my part. Alas, I have a rule, I will always offer to split the bill, indeed I will insist I split the bill if I know I am not interested in a further date or if I have good reasons to believe it is an unwise financial decision on your part to pay for me (e.g. you are a student and come from a low income family). But, you dare bring up your banker bonus or your family’s London property or choose a private member’s club with 22 quid cocktails for a date with me, a bleeding heart liberal doing God’s work working for charities and campaigning for social welfare for the poor and needy? Then let me reassure you, nothing short of an active shooter in my immediate vicinity will make me move an inch when that bill hits our table.
Which brings me back to my statement above, I am not advocating for women dating rich men or for men chasing wealth when what they want is love. The meals and drinks I appreciate the most are those paid for by men who were not rich, or even by men who were poor, because these mean so much more. A lot of rich men don’t pay anyway, my mother would say that’s how their families hoarded their wealth, by being misers (dubious financial logic, but anecdotally it checks out). If we return to evolutionary psychology a man being rich does not equate a man being willing to invest in you, financially or otherwise. It does, however, mean a man with a lot of options. I have dated only one man who identified as polyamorous and he was a third-generation Etonian. I believe his financial background is inherently connected to his ability to advertise his sexual deviance without being scared of social consequences.
Hoarding women is a very popular male fantasy. Should women allow men to hoard multiple girlfriends at a time, many men would jump at the opportunity. Accumulated female wisdom tells us to drain the resources of our partners to ensure they can’t offer them to other women. Ladies, order the steak.