From: krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:22:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.014405.5579@cs.ucla.edu> gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
>>In article <15916@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>|>In article <1992Dec15.192027.25721@cs.ucla.edu> gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
................... stuff deleted ...........................
>
>That "no class" crack really has twisted the panties of a few net.men here.
>Let's go over the scenario once again.
>
>A women is asked out by a man that she does not know well.  Since they
>are not currently good friends, homeboys, or otherwise, let us assume that
>this is considered a date.

For the sake of this discussion, I will assume that this is a date.
I will also assume that this is a "first date" or nearly so...
that sort-of "feeling-out" period when folx try to determine if
they have a basis for future contact, romantic or otherwise.
>
>The man picks her up and takes her to a restaurant for dinner.  She has
>not selected the restaurant.  

Was she not even _consulted_ as to where she might like to go?

>She orders as she would normally do, and lets
>say the total bill comes to $60 without the tip.
>
>The man then asked the woman for $30 but said "I'll get the tip."
>
>It was the womans opinion that this man has no class and I agree with her.  

Let's see here, a man is _expected_ to take a woman out to a fancy
restaurant on a first (or-nearly-so), and pick up the entire tab there,
presumably to impress her with how much money he can blow on a "night out".
I wonder what kind of impression this makes on the woman.... if she
goes out with you again, on the same basis, is it because you have
deep eyes or deep pockets?  Is it not possible that a woman can enjoy
the company of a man that she might want to get to know better, without
automatically expecting (in some cases, even _demanding_) that he foot
the bill?

>That's the scenario she described and "going out with the homeboys" is not
>the thing.
>
.................. stuff deleted ....................
>|
>|As I said before, it has nothing to do with contracts; it has to do
>|with consideration for the other person's feelings, which I believe
>|was one of the reasons Lauren stated *for* offering to pay on a date.
>|It's the difference between blithely letting someone spend money on
>|you, and acknowledging that they're spending money on you, and saying
>|"hey, I understand, let me share a little of the burden."

Thanx Greg,
I couldn't have said it better m'self.
> 
>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
>a handshake.

Are these options mutually exclusive?  Can a woman not enjoy the company
of a man _and_ be considerate enough to share the expenses of dating?
If a man picks up the tab, does that mean that the woman will give him
a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Should a man foot the bill if he
hopes for a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Suppose the woman hopes
for a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Is that when she should pay?
(after all, what is the differrence between going out on a "date",
and "going out with the homeboys/homegirls")
Why the double-standard?

Keith R
>
Newsgroups: soc.singles