Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    There are also very heated discussions of this same topic in womannotes
    and mennotes... you might also want to read there...
    
    
    MENNOTES is on QUARK:: and WOMANNOTES-V2 is on RAINBO::
    
    Gale

    RE .0, my experience is that all variations of who pays are accepted
    today.  The only confusion and embarrassment comes about when two
    people go out for the first time, haven't discussed the situation
    in advance, and one of them has the wrong expectations.
    
    I think that it is acceptable for one person to invite another one
    to go somewhere and not pay, as long as the invitation is worded
    in a way that the other person realizes that the first person is
    not offering to pay for them.  This is done all the time between
    female friends and I don't see why it can't extend to opposite sex
    friendships.  What I've noticed about guys seems to be that if they
    are "interested" in a woman, they still do offer to pay (especially
    at first) but if they want to be "just friends" with a woman they
    make it clear that they expect the woman friend to pay her own way.
     
    My ex-boyfriend had financial problems because he was raising two
    children on his own, and although he earned more money than me,
    I don't have any dependants, so we each always paid our own way.
     I realized that he really couldn't afford to keep treating me.
     I accepted it as being part of what I had to put up with :-) in
    order to have his charming, entertaining company.  My current boyfriend
    also earns more money than me but has so much child support deducted
    from his pay that he can barely get by, so I still usually pay my
    own way, and sometimes I pay his way if I really want to go out
    and he has no money left.  But, then sometimes he surprises me by
    offering to pay for me.  On the other hand, I have male friends
    who are financially in fairly good situations who offer to pay for
    me often, and I always accept.  
    
    Basically, I see it like this.  If the man is making three times
    my pay (as one of my friends is since I'm a secretary) and has no
    financial problems to speak of, and offers to pay my way, I'll accept
    it.  One of the reasons is that I really don't make much money and
    sometimes I just can't afford to do what the other friend wants
    to do - such as eat at a nice place instead of McDonald's.  One
    of my closest female friends also has quite a bit more money than
    me and often offers to pay my way so that we can go to nicer places
    to eat than I can afford.  (I always graciously accept, and if I
    had the money I would do the same for friends who had less.  In
    fact, I have, on occasion, and I don't even have the money!)
    
    On the other hand, if I enjoy someone's company enough I'll go out
    with them even if they never offer to pay.
    
    Lorna
    

    And in STARCH::SINGLES, too. (I've never found this to be a major
    issue, myself, but some folks say they've gotten into very hot water
    over it.)
    
    My opinion:
    
    o Barring explicit arrangements to the contrary, the person who
    invites, pays. Guest may offer to split check but is not obliged to;
    offer may be accepted or refused, with no loss of face on either side.
    [Note: Invitations are not always as clear as they might be; if you
    intend to invite someone to dinner as your guest, it wouldn't hurt to
    specify, "I'd like you to join me for dinner, as my guest" rather than
    "Let's grab some dinner," which - to me - implies that each intends
    to pay his or her own way.]
    
    o If the couple met via a neutral source, such as a dating service, in
    which it is not clear who invited whom, the default would be to split
    the check - again, barring explicit arrangements to the contrary.
    
    o In an ongoing relationship, some effort should be made to meet
    hospitality with hospitality; the one who's usually the guest can do
    the inviting for a change, or can insist on taking the check, or make
    dinner at home - whatever fits both the closeness of the relationship
    and the capacity of the budget.
    
    Most important: when in doubt, spell it out.
    
    -b

    It is not an issue of women paying their share of "the dates".  That 
    is a common misunderstanding of the issue.  It is, instead, women 
    "paying", (in a more general sense), their share in the overall 
    "dating situation".
    
    Which means, in practice, that women "pay their share" of the rejection
    involved in dating by now also having the privilege, (and/or the
    curse, however you look at it), of asking for dates they want.
    
    The basic rule, which has never changed - not even "nowadays" -
    is whoever does the asking, pays.  That has always been a social
    rule.  What has changed is the fact that women were prevented from 
    doing the asking.  It isn't so much that women weren't supposed
    to "pay", per se, we weren't supposed to be "seeking" in the first
    place.  
    
    With the freedom to ask comes the responsibility to pay.  No one gets
    something for nothing.  All "freedom" comes with responsibility.
    
    So if you still do all the asking, guys, you still do all the paying!
    

    I (almost)  always go Dutch. I know of some women who are appalled
    at  a man not paying for her dinner, and I know of some (including
    my  fiance)  who  insist  on  paying  their  share. Unless someone
    explicitly  says otherwise, I assume that we're going to split the
    bill.

--David

.5> 							Unless someone
.5>    explicitly  says otherwise, I assume that we're going to split the
.5>    bill.


    Geezz.. I'm just the opposite... unless someone says something to me
    before hand, they will find that I normally won't have enough cash on
    me to cover 1/2 or the whole finances of the evening...

    If I am in a single dating situation (first date, jury still out on a
    second date), I 99.9% of the time do not pay, nor offer to pay.

    If I am in a committed dating relationship, it normally just seems to
    even out.  He might buy theatre tickets, I'll pay for dinner, or
    vice-versa.  he may pay for this date, and I'll get the next... He may
    say he's feeling broke, and I'll make sure he doesn't get put in a
    situation to ever have to open his wallet, and I'd expect him to do the
    same when I'm feeling broke...  If he is making many times more than I
    am, then I usually let him pay 98% of the time, but I do little special
    things for him to let him know I appreciate him picking up the tab
    (like a card on his windshield at work)...

    I think its something you need to discuss when dating - but on the
    first couple of dates, I think the male should pick up the cost.

    Just my 3� worth...

    Well, I haven't been able to find any hard and fast "rules" that apply. 
    
    I'm of the opinion that both parties should contribute equally.  The
    "man always pays" approach just seems to me to reinforce the tired old
    "male superior" stereotype.  But there are exceptions.  When there is
    an significant pay inequity, for example.  A person I was dating a
    month ago made a lot less than I did, so it seemed fairer for me to
    pick up most of the tabs.
    
    However, its been more my experience that both people tend to wind up
    contributing equally.  First dates are tough, but its been my general
    understanding that the inviter pays but, if offered, graciously accepts
    money from the other person.  It hasn't even come up for discussion
    with the person I'm currently going out with; from day one it just seemed
    perfectly natural for us to split things roughly down the middle.

    re:.8
    
    That's reminds me of a VISA card commercial in which a couple,
    obviously out on a first date, have just finished dinner, and
    the man whips out his card, saying, "I'll get this one, you can
    get it next time." Her unspoken response is, "Oh, good, there's
    going to be a 'next time'..."
    
    Me, I tend to assume that it's even steven unless specified
    otherwise.
    
    --- jerry

    .4
    
    Nice point...
    
    This whole arena has really become "The exciting game without any
    rules," for which I for one am thankful.  The old roles stopped working
    a long time ago.
    
    R.
    

    	Unless someone says to me "I'd like to take you to dinner/
    movie/theater/whatever", or "I have tickets to such and such, would
    you like to go?", I usually assume we'll split the costs.  In a 
    first/second date situation, I almost always offer to split the 
    bill.  Sometimes it's accepted, sometimes it's not, and often I've 
    found the person says I can get the movie, or the next dinner.  
    (For movies, I usually keep passes in my wallet, which I've
    already paid for.  So, if we're going to a movie, I try and use 
    these...when they're accepted, anyway.)  If it's not the first or 
    second time out, and he's paid previously, I'll offer to get the 
    whole bill.

    	I don't believe a guy should feel he has to pick up the tab...
    if he wants to, fine (it's nice to be treated every now and then!
    :^) ), if the person he's with can't really afford it, great, but if 
    he doesn't, that's fine too.  And it's fun for me to treat someone 
    as well - I've found they don't usually expect it, and appreciate it.  
    In an ongoing relationship, things have a way of working themselves 
    out.

    	Unfortunately, there are no 'set rules'.  I feel that if I at
    least offer, I'm "covered".  If the man wants to pay, he can
    refuse my offer.  If not, I've made it clear that I don't expect
    him to.  Most of the time I feel it's just "wing it", and hope things 
    work out without any embarrassment or hard feelings (which they
    usually do).  Going out these days can be rather expensive, and I
    just don't think it's fair to expect one person to bear the entire
    financial obligation, especially if both make comparable salaries.

    	amy

    
    	It depends on who I'm with and what the situation is.  When I 
    	had a relationship with someone who earned $150K a year, which
    	is a hefty salary in Colorado Springs, I didn't pay for much.
    	That was his preference and I didn't have many problems going
    	along with that.
    
    	Now that I'm with someone who makes less than I do we go Dutch
    	almost all the time.  It's never an issue and it makes us both
    	feel very comfortable.
    
    	In a casual or semi-less-than-casual date situation, it would
    	depend on who invited who.  If I invite, I pay.  If the other
    	person invites, I expect the other person to pay the majority
    	of the evening's expenses.
    
    	Carla
    

 I don't date anymore (being married and all:-). Thus, all of my lunch dates,
whether with other males or with females have no romantic component (not that
the thought doesn't occur to me. :-)

 I generally expect whomever I am eating out with to pay their share. There 
have been instances when my companion is a little short of cash- if I've got
it, no problem. I wouldn't want to have to pay more than my share all of the 
time, but what're friends for if not to help out in a pinch?

 When I was dating, I generally expected to foot the bill for the evening on the
first date. Some women were uncomfortable with that arrangement. I always
endeavored to treat women in the way they liked most. So if they offered to
pay for their share, I'd tell them it wasn't necessary, but I'd not push the
issue if they seemed uncomfortable with the idea.

 Some aspects of the "old school" seem to remain valued by the majority of
women. The man paying for both on the first date seems to be one of them.

 The Doctah

    I'm old-fashioned enough that I expect to pay and modern
    enough to be gracious when she offers. ('gracious' = say
    "thank you" and smile.)

	 I've never really thought much about this....because most of
	 the dates I've been on have been very inexpensive (in college
	 that is how they had to be) and in a relationship, everything
	 just evened out in the wash...no big deal.


         Now I'm finding it rather interesting that a good male friend
         of mine seems to really enjoy paying for the two of us when
         we go out, buying things he knows I like, etc.......and I
         find that it makes me feel a little uncomfortable, almost
         guilty....NOT because I don't like it, but simply because I'm
         not used to it.

	 Even though he seems to enjoy doing it, I feel like somehow,
	 perversely, he's really thinking that I'm taking advantage
	 of him and his money.

	 Go figure!  Maybe it's good to feel that way, because that
	 that makes me realize just how much I appreciate him and care
	 for him.....I don't think I EVER want to come to thje point
	 where I expect someone to pay for me.......



	 kath

    I usually go out expecting to pay my share (I always make sure I
    have enough money with me to cover it).  I don't like to be caught
    without the cash in case I misunderstood the situation.
    
    In my last relationship I was told that since he made more money
    than I did that I should keep my money and let him pay.  As the
    relationship progressed and the amount of time we were together
    increased (and his funds got a little tighter) I began to feel 
    uncomfortable that he was always picking up the tab.  Since we 
    were eating out quite a bit I told him I would at least pay for 
    my own lunches when we had lunch together, also I began to pick 
    up the tab for dinner occasionally or we would split the cost.  
    Alot of times he would pay the tab and I would leave the tip.  
    Or, he would pay for the movie and I'd by the junk food, etc.
    
    Jan

	My wife usually pays...... Unles she passes me the money.

    I tend to agree with Gale....<- .6
    
    -Dotti.
    

    I will usually go out expecting to pay for the date since I usually do
    the asking. Like others have said it tends to even out in most cases.
    I do however prefer dutch treat on certain dates like a ski trip where
    I consider equipment rental,lift tickets,ect to be the other persons
    expense to bear. 
    
    -j

    RE: .19
    
    Before I bought my own equipment, and my own season tickets, I have had
    guys pay for my lift ticket and rentals...  guess it just depends on
    the guy...

    re.20
    I'd say it depends more on his income after I pay $100-150 for the
    room, $30 a head for dinner,gas and my own expenses I would have to
    pay my mortgage late to pay hers too. How much am I expected to pay?
    
    -j(poor homeowner bachelor that tryes to keep a balance)
    

    RE: .21
    
    Who said anything about a ROOM?  You are assuming a heck of a lot
    here... last time I went skiing that *he* paid for everything, the lift
    ticket was $17.00, the rentals were $15.00, and the hot chocolate
    during the middle maybe $5.00 for a total of $37.00 for the whole 4pm to
    10pm evening for me, add $33.00 more for him, the total evening cost
    $70.00...  I've paid more for theatre tickets for two... :-)
    
    I'm just saying that it CAN be done, and not cost an arm and a leg, and
    he can pay for it, and allow his mortgage to still be met... Just the
    same as I can buy theatre tickets for two and still pay mine...

    RE: .22


	 Gale....skiing in Colorado is NOT the same as skiing in New
	 England...it's at least 2-4 hours to the nearest ski resort,
	 each way.....after a day of skiing, most times it's nicer to
	 rent a room and just stay up there.....especially if the
	 sun's already down and the roads are icey.

	 It's pretty much standard practice here, if you go on a ski
	 date, to spend the night there.....I do it quite often
	 whether with girls or guys....it's understood to be platonic
	 (sharing the room).......and shouldn't be considered anything
	 else.
	 

	 kath

>	 It's pretty much standard practice here, if you go on a ski
>	 date, to spend the night there.....I do it quite often
>	 whether with girls or guys....it's understood to be platonic

 After a full day of skiing, it is very difficult for it to be anything
but platonic. (I would bet that this is even more true in the higher
altitudes out west). At the end of the day, a glass of wine in front of the
fire means "lights out." :-)

 The Doctah

> After a full day of skiing, it is very difficult for it to be anything
>but platonic. (I would bet that this is even more true in the higher
>altitudes out west). At the end of the day, a glass of wine in front of the
>fire means "lights out." :-)

	 Well, if you ski every weekend (just about) like I do, you
	 get used to the altitude, but you're exactly right,
	 Doctah...after a hard day of skiing, and a nice relaxing
	 dinner, and a glass of wine by the fire, there is no desire
	 for anything else....hahaha... ;-)

	 

         	 kath

    OK, Doctah, ok, /wildkat, seems to me some wool is getting pulled
    over someones' eyes.  Or maybe you folks just don't enjoy life the
    way we do in the Sierras...one glass of wine, when you're snug in
    your cabin for the evening, with a hot woodstove, and dinner all
    done and dishes put away, surrounded by your fellow cabin members
    and whatever guests the members dragged along *this* weekend...hardly
    seems to do your opportunities justice!  
    
    The rule is: anything goes, AS LONG AS...
    
    you make the 8AM tram at Squaw in the morning! ;-)
    
    DougO

        Phhttt!! The biological impact of altitude is over-rated.
    
                                     Greg

>    OK, Doctah, ok, /wildkat, seems to me some wool is getting pulled
>    over someones' eyes. 

 Qui? Moi? :-)

>    The rule is: anything goes, AS LONG AS...
>    
>    you make the 8AM tram at Squaw in the morning! ;-)

 Well, when I was in college, that's how it was. :-) I always needed a vacation
after a week at Killington. I still can't believe we all made it, nobody got
arrested (well, I didn't) and nobody got hurt. :-) 

 You get alot of hair-brained ideas when your fraternity goes skiing for a
week. (Anybody want to go traying on an expert trail at midnite? 10 hands
go up. :-)

 And who could forget my first day at Killington? (-35, wind chill -76)

 Ah, the memories...

 The Doctah

    Well after a hard day on the slope and partying at the Mogul in Breck
    I'm lucky if I have the strength to climb the steps to go to bed. 
    I have always considered the sleeping arrangements to be platonic on
    ski trips sharing a room or bed is simply a matter of economic
    convenience.
    Funny as it seems all of my ski dates to date have assumed tickets and
    rentals would be dutch guess it's different here.
    
    While I'm at it I have 4 to date scheduled weekend trips that have
    openings for 4 people to share a 10 person condo in Breckinridge. If
    anyone is interested in joining in send mail and I will forward info.
    Marital status is non-data only requirement is ability to have fun.
    
    -j
                                                                       

    I'd agree with Amy, you play it by ear. I always have enough money to
    pay for my food, entertainment, and travel, because you never know. 
    When I went out with students, we always shared costs.  When I dated
    someone who sold real estate, he usually paid (and probably wrote it
    off as a business expense, knowing him!).
    
    On a first date, I offer to pay my share for the meal.  If he says "no,
    it's on me," I will react in one of two ways:  if I like him and want
    to see him again, I let him pay, thank him, and say the next one's on
    me.  If I am not interested in pursuing the relationship as a romance,
    I insist and pay for my share.
    
    It's a strange feeling to go out for the evening and not know how much
    it will cost you!
    
    Pam

    
    A simple solution to end an awkward situation -- buy 
    Boston '89 (or soon to be called Boston '90). (No, I don't 
    sell them.  You can buy them at Lauriat Bookstores or thru 
    ads in the Globe.  It's $35 in the bookstore or $25 if you 
    buy it through an ad in the newspaper.)  There are 
    HUNDREDS of 2-for-1 coupons for restaurants.  When I date 
    a man I always tell him I have the book and let him glance 
    through it to see what restaurants I have coupons for.  
    If we feel like going to one of the restaurants (they 
    vary in price, type of food, etc), we get the least expensive 
    dinner for free.  I feel that that's my contribution to 
    the bill.  It doesn't cost me any money and the man is 
    happy.  "Some" men feel uncomfortable using a coupon, 
    but MOST don't.  
    
    If I'm on a first or second date, we're not using a 
    coupon, and I ask how much I can contribute towards 
    the bill, I find that most men don't accept money.  
    If they do, they just suggest that I can pay the tip.
    Generally speaking, I find that most men expect to pay.
    If we're dating for awhile and I cook dinner occasionally, 
    they tend to feel that makes up for them paying each time
    too.
    
    Many of the men I've dated live quite a distance from me 
    so they're not familar with restaurants in my area. 
    (They always come to me -- they never expect me to 
    meet them half way).  When they ask me to recommend a 
    restaurant I'm very conscious of the pricerange and 
    always pick something moderately priced.
    
    Gale R. (I've noticed there's another Gale in this conference)
    

Re: .31

You should go read note 672 and its replies.  And then ask yourself again
if your solution is as "simple" as you currently think.

				Steve

P.S.  The Greater Boston '90 book is available through Employee Activities
at many sites.  There is also a similar (and I think better) Entertainment '90
book available for many regions throughout the country.