snapdragon wrote:And Godstud, I doubt if you’ve dated as many men as I have. I also have three adult daughters and women friends and we’ve shared our experiences.
No, I haven't dated any men, but I have an adult daughter who wouldn't agree with you and I know of no friends who think like that.
snapdragon wrote:Men who offer to pay for the meal often expect it to reap the reward of sex afterwards. That’s a fact.
Then again, I can talk to three men who say women are only interested in what's in men's wallets, so it must be fact, right?
Anecdotal evidence and all...
snapdragon wrote:But dr lee took it further. He advises men to insist on paying, even if the woman demurs - and that is domineering behaviour and not advice that ought to be acted on.
No, what Drlee is talking about is a traditional thing that gentlemen do. It's about as domineering as opening a car door for a woman, or pulling a chair out for her to sit on.
snapdragon wrote:He might have the best intentions. How is she supposed to know?
By his behavior.
snapdragon wrote:If it’s important to a man that he pays for the evening , then it’s a good idea to make it plain to his date that there no strings. She will feel more comfortable and will feel able to relax and enjoy herself.
That would come off as completely creepy to most women. "Don't worry, if I buy dinner I don't expect sex." Do you honestly think that would come across any other way?
snapdragon wrote:Otherwise, split the bloody bill and have done with it. This is the 21st century, not the 19th.
Yes, and many women still expect the man to take them out, not go on a Dutch date.
“Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.” ― Ralph Waldo Emerson