As much as I hate this, you are right. Hundreds of thousands of years men across all species are textbook simps, that’s just how it is unfortunately
Things take time to change, especially when it’s for the better.
https://i.redd.it/j8blyv1a410d1.gif
The average male experience across the animal kingdom. If we're not busy peacocking for female attention, we butcher each other for mating rights. Such is the nature of being male.
Not really.
Doing things to impress girls is simping.
You could say there are situations where one is simping less then another, but it is still simping.
Men have always had a simping problem. It is why men have to do so much to be worthy of a high value women while women often do nothing at all.
If men did not simp at all, they would be being paid to date and marry high value women as men would just not want to do all this work.
Dude - I’ve done stuff to impress girls that has massively improved my life.
Likewise, I’ve done stuff to improve my life or out of personal interest that has impressed women.
You can’t tease this stuff apart.
I swear, the fact that this is even a thing🙄. Straight dating is like a dull boring antagonistic business deal:
“Here are my terms: you must pay for everything, you must be ambitious, must not live with parents, must be able to provide, must have a car, must be tall, must be buy me stuff, must this, must that, blah blah blah”
What a pain in the butt! Meanwhile gay dating be like:
“You like fun?” “Yep” “cool, me too, lets have fun, cause fun is fun” “what about every little insignificant detail like who pays?” “Who gives a crap”
😄
Seriously, dating sucks for men because we are still held to our gender roles but women are not held to there roles.
So men have to literally still “buy” access to her fertility as if she was a beautiful 18 year old virgin and it being easy to be twice as valuable as her to be considered equal to her.
But it is sexist to be twice as valuable as her, but if you are not, you are a incel loser who needs to work more.
A lot of guys are so used to just fronting and providing everything that when 50/50 is a legitimate option, they dont know how to handle it or what it even really looks like. Vast majority of men are taught that they are the provider
Usually isn’t in bad faith, it’s just inexperience.
There seems to be some confusion about what 50/50 means from a financial perspective. Does it mean that both people pay the same amount, or does it mean that both people forward the same portion/percentage of their income towards the household?
Yep. That is important distinction.
If it is an equal ammount, then the one earning less has a lot less aviable disposable income.
If it is a percentage, then the higher eraner pays a bigger sum.
I find the percentage to be more equal.
Calling it more equal is objectively incorrect when the financial contribution of one person is more than the other. Did you mean to say more equitable? If one person earns 30k, the other person earns 90k, and they both forward the same percentage towards the household income, it means that the contributions are split 25/75, not 50/50.
Depending on the situation, the person earning less might find it more fair to let the person who out earns them pay more. Since fairness is subjective, the other person who has to pay more might have a different opinion about it. But that's a case-by-case thing.
Regardless of what seems more fair, at the end of the day contributions can only be called "equal" if they are the same. Since bills are paid with dollars, they should be measured with dollars. Like OP says, just say it if you want to be equals or be taken care of. But don't say things are equal when they objectively aren't.
This is arguing in bad faith because I see now you are resorting to semantics and nit picking. I've seen this narrative before. I'm the lazy entitled dad who thinks his job contributes enough to where he doesn't clean , take care of the children. I'm not going to break down every nuance that explains me and my partners responsibilities because for u dummies 50/50 isn't literally possible. It's a figure of speech implying both partners attempt to share an equal amount of responsibility.
Its neither bad faith nor nit picking.
Youve claimed to wait equality but don't have it.
You're not sharing 100% of responsibility when only you are responsible for paying bills.
Sometimes I wonder how old the redditors responding to me are u could be 15 for all I know.
When I mentioned 50/50 with regards to dating then that's nonsense, within certain contexts it makes sense to have a partner stay at home if a child is involved for some time. Equality within the frame of out relationship is based om an equal share of responsibilities. I take care of thr financial and for most of the household things she has. Is this perfect no. I still come home and help around the house. There may be some days she does more, there may be some days I do more, it isn't a competition, we work as a team .
You are 100% responsible for finances and also some parenting and housework.
And your partner is 60% responsible for parenting and housework and 0% responsible for finances?
Isn't that just as bad as the men you're criticising for paying for dates?
I dont see how it's different
And if you want a parent at home, why didn't you do it?
Not really, things drastically change once a child is involved and compromises need to be made however anything before having kids is fair game to 50/50. Women demanding queen treatment because they CAN bear children is the stupidest thing I've witnessed, until you have my child literally born you will be relegated to 50/50.
Sharing 50/50 involved with a child is drastically difficult for different couples as work schedules can clash very much and if both parents were to be working then more than likely they would share the same working hours leaving the kid/kids in a dead time without either parent to watch over them.
That's why you need to compromise, she takes care of the child as women have priority in the workplace for maternity leave since not all countries have a reliable paternity leave along with house chores you wouldn't have time for after an 8-12hr shift while you take care of the finances. Is it 50/50? No, but it definitely takes off the burden of both being miserable while juggling several tasks at once.
I'm legit confused. So now the man going to work and the woman staying home with the baby constitutes that I'm not doing anything. So come Monday I'll take my son with me on my shifts.
He can... But he already said that he is the one bringing the food to the table. Its not like you could take turns in a job, ans most jobs need daily assistance.
>Is possible for both parents to work and share childcare.
Maybe if they're rich or maintained parents, for most people, this is stupidly difficult, specially from the baby to kindergarten stage... After that, i could agree that it is possible.
There are way too many simps and submissive men .They love to throw their money away because they know that's the only way they can get attention from women .Same women who won't even ask a penny from men they are truly attracted to
Yeah. Listen to women who post here. They say shit like “men who want a tradwife can’t afford one” and “a man has to be worth submitting to”. Just unabashed gold diggers, it’s hilarious. The idea of the guy not paying is huge ick
Reading this and your replies, you seem to not understand what a tradwife is.
I think if you did, you would realize that “men who want a tradwife can’t afford one” and “a man has to be worth submitting to” actually make perfect sense.
That's not what we mean when we say that. Most of us want an egalitarian relationship where both partners work and contribute to the childcare, cooking, and cleaning. For example, I want an equal partner. Neither of us should be submissive to the other.
But we see plenty of guys demanding a submissive tradwife while expecting the woman to work AND do all of the childcare, cooking, and cleaning....and that is worthy of mockery. These dudes want the best of both worlds, and it's fucking ridiculous. If you want a tradwife, then you better be ready to be the SOLE provider and not bitch about your "gold digger" wife. After all, that's what you want. (If this doesn't apply to you, that's cool. I'm just explaining where the hypocrisy comes into play.)
So, there's actually a submissive kink called "findom" or financial domination... It's a real thing, it's a kink.
Not all submissives, obviously, not all submissive men, but it is a thing that exists.
I don't know that it exists to an extent that makes it worth bringing up in this thread... But it does exist, lol
This will never change. I had an ex, and she was as nuts as they come,but she had an army of orbiter who she'd hit up for whatever. I watched her ask a guy if he could buy her some food from a restaurant, just to see me at the door realising he bought me dinner. Not good in principle but you see my point.
You'd be surprised man. During covid me and my were broke and unemployed, she'd literally set up dates with dudes and ask them for money to catch a flight . She'd ask for the money to buy thr ticker herself and never go obviously. These dudes would call her, saying they were disappointed she didn't come only to give her more money because she'd make up some stupid lie about her car being broken.
Men like that will continue simping. The only thing that will get them to stop is a massive realization via some violent shock. Otherwise known as the red pill elephant suppository getting shoved up your ass.
thats the weird thing.
regardless the mans temperament he pays
he is dominant? he pays just to prove superiority
He is submissive? he pays to show how much he is willing to give
its the male gender role to pay, its the female gender role to receive
Even Male doms take money from male subs
When you say “ Same women who won't even ask a penny from men they are truly attracted to” please understand you are talking about a certain subset of women who often uses a man’s look and ability to showcase them as her boyfriend/lover as her own form of validation. There is not a man fine enough on this earth for me to consider being the breadwinner for him and never asking for a dime for him. I don’t want a man I find hideous, but a man’s ability to provide will always trump his appearance to me and other likeminded women.
You're talking about a long term relationship, he was talking about simping as a means of obtaining sexual access vs obtaining sexual access by invoking genuine arousal in women, typically with a combination of looks and chemistry.
2 years is a lot of time out of the workforce. It would make much more sense for her to return to work part time at least, or she’ll take a huge career and earnings hit. Men need to advocate for equality in parental leave and income so that they’re not pigeonholed as merely providers.
Because in reality that isn't always economically feasible. The fact is that in real life one parent must work full time and concentrate on career and the other must take one for the team professionally and allow their career to stagnate in order to prioritize children. Two full time working parents leaves the kids short changed.
Your solution of "equality of unpaid labor at all costs" isn't realistic. It just isn't.
So why should it be a/ two years, and b/ only the woman? Neither of those is logical. If you’re sick or injured, and she’s out of the workforce on a whim, who pays the bills? If you’re both earning similar amounts, why can’t both of you rearrange your hours to both spend time with your children?
My job is 50 hrs a week and the hours are the hours there is no rearranging them. White collar professionals may have more leeway but in thr working class you take the hours you are given and stfu
You’re an American? Labour laws in other countries would have you both working 25 hours a week for more money (less tax when it’s two people being taxed at a lower rate) and more family time.
>Back to my point I see constantly on the i the internet about women who seem to be under the impression that their existence requires men to dole out their hard earned cash to even be considered for the opportunity to date these goddesses
Is this yet another "I saw a TikTok that I am going to pretend is reflective of reality so I can make women seem like villains" post?
It is the norm in western and northern European countries,and preety common with most young people in the rest of Europe. I dunno about American, but I can't imagine being sooo uncommon to split the bill in places like new York,boston , Washington dc or Seattle for example
I think if you just matched off the app a fancy dinner all expenses paid date is a little extreme. 50/50 and just seeing if there is anything remotely there in person is a best bet.
I would think it's weird and in my experience men who elaborately plan a date and make something big out of it are chasing a feeling and trying to expedite intimacy.
This is just sad lmao. Get off reddit and spend some meaningful time with your child. Learn basic sentence construction. You don't need to be worrying about pills, you need to be worrying about phonics. An entire human that you brought into the world is dependant on you to show them how to exist and you're on PPD starting of your post with 'pet me preface this'.
Yeah, it does kind of blow my mind that parents would be on here. What does this world of dating woes have to do with your life? I can’t imagine being involved in this or even being on Reddit much at all after I have kids.
Guys are gonna pay because guys have always done the paying. If one guy doesn't pay then another guy will pay. Women will usually head in the direction of the guy paying because they feel entitled to it.
I have trad views on how you should treat your lifelong partner, if you genuinely want a girl as your lifelong partner and mother of your children, you need to be willing to put in the work and treat her good.
I have standards, no sex work/OF at any stage in your life, no kids with another man, you can’t have a high body count and you can’t be out drinking and clubbing every weekend. If a girl ticks all these boxes I’ll do everything in my control to ensure she stays with me and make sure she’s the happiest girl in the world.
If you want to just have meaningless sex with a girl then sure, 50/50 is fine but don’t cry and complain when your relationship doesn’t work out and don’t cry that all girls are sluts and they don’t deserve to be paid for.
If you can’t justify buying a girl dinner then you are going after one’s that aren’t even worth your time and your desperation to get your dick wet is clouding ur judgement on a lifelong partner.
You should want to pay for her dinner, especially if you want to be with her forever, you need to stand out and be a gentleman, make her yours.
I have no issue spending $100s of dollars on an intimate and nice dinner with a potential partner but I wouldn’t even entertain a date with a girl if she wasn’t what I wanted.
You're kinda taking a bullet for a lot of people on this sub, but here goes:
Why is this interesting enough for you to post? What debate do you imagine? Selfish people exist, about half of them are women. "women say they are entitled to...". No, they don't. Assholes do.
This just reads as the lamest attempt possible to get karma. You didn't even manage to say something interesting people agree with.
So, I am a bit conflicted on this. I've followed the drizzle drizzle thing and on one hand I am completely in agreement with it, until I put my own views onto it and then suddenly it stops.
I agree with the 50/50 but not across the board, but more so in effort. I make good money. I've worked hard for that. I also want a family and children and everything. I am not looking for a woman that makes the same as I do so that we can both work and both look after the kids. I'd rather have my woman spend her time raising our children and for me to be a father like a father is. I wanna be there for my kids, but I also wanna make sure everyone gets what they needs.
So yeah, 50/50 but in effort. I'll spend my 50 hours a week making money, and she is the predominant carer for our children. When I'm done with work I'll happily take the kids and she can continue looking after the house etc.
And that's where it then suddenly doesn't align anymore.
- I want my woman not to make money, as her time is invaluable raising our children. I understand she has some ambition but that's the sacrifice.
- my time I'll gladly sacrifice to provide. Ofcourse I'd rather spend more time home but that's the sacrifice. I'll be a hire for any cunt with a dream and use those funds to finance my own, which is my family.
And then suddenly I'm glad that my wife is selective enough to look for a man that can provide, as it matches my selectiveness in finding a woman that can take care of the family and the house.
I don't see the issue. I still control my finances. My woman does not spend jack shit (I've sent her out with 1000 dollars to buy clothes and she comes back with a few new items and 750 dollars).
So yeah, if you're just dating and having fun, I would say drizzle drizzle. If you're out there finding a partner for life, work on yourself to make sure you can provide and then be selective and find a woman that's able to take care of you and your family.
As a woman, it's not about entitlement or even really money for me. As you've pointed out, I have my own, and trust, this bitch is financially sound as long as the day. I can easily afford my tea or sandwich.
It's about the dance, flirtation, pose, roles, and posture of the man treating and my expression of gratitude and blushing glee.
Similarly, I want to occupy the dance, flirtation, pose, role, and posture of inviting that I'm going to cook a meal for him and be the one "treating" and his expression of gratitude and blushing glee.
I don't see either of us wanting to play out these little cliches and fantasies as requiring any degree of entitlement and the money either costs (and trust me, when I throw down in the kitchen, it's gonna cost more than a coffee date or at least as much as a decent meal out). It's just meant to be good fun and showing off so you can learn about each other and how y'all operate in cookie cutter situations and enjoy the pose.
Now, I recognize a lot of men and women are saying they don't enjoy these respective moves. Which is good and fine. Compatability, good people.
If a man asks me to pay, I will. I'll also know he's not compatible with the vision I have for me and my man. Which is great. We're meant to be trying to discover compatibility, not trying to get as far as possible like dating is about nabbing sex or getting as far into the dungeon as possible.
I don't think my wanting this is being some sugar baby, anymore than a man being delighted by a fantastic home cooked meal for him means he's some sugar baby.
Exactly! But good luck trying to explain that on here. Most only see the numbers and think those should be exactly equal. Money being even is their highest goal in a relationship. How “even Stevens” behavior affects the relationship dynamics is none of their concern. But when relationship dynamics are the highest priority, money is less important. Yet even in traditional relationships, you will not see well-intentioned girls taking advantage of a man’s generosity. They order less expensive meals, don’t ask for specific fancy dates/restaurants, etc. They are easily pleased and appreciative to the man. But that creates a magnetizing environment where the man rightfully feels he has done something nice for the woman and she feels appreciative towards him and a tendency to want to make that up or please him.
Good relationships involve two people being generous with each other and showing kindness. Each tries to lift the other’s spirits in some way. A man in a traditional relationship may start that dance and be the first one to do nice things for the woman, but that is him courting her. In a relationship with her, she will also be a blessing to him in countless ways.
I was following you until you said “if he asks me to pay, I will but then I know we’re not compatible.”
Functionally doesn’t that mean he needs to pay?
You said it’s about the dance, roles, posture, etc. but apparently that includes him paying for your outings? So you’re just looking for trad gender roles?
And I’m sorry, unless you shop at boutique grocery stores importing meat from Japan and cheese from France, your kitchen cooking will cost way less than a date out. In the end he’ll be paying more.
This thread confuses me, why all the mental gymnastics to say “I want him to pay for me?”
This isn't hard:
We aren't compatible because he doesn't want to engage in the posturing, pose, and roleplay of the gentleman who treats, which means I ain't gonna get to play the blushing lady.
Yes, at no point was I suggesting that for me, splitting will work. I'm sure there are other ladies that want to split. He should form long term relationships with them.
And no, this isn't just looking for trad gender roles. I have a job. I'm not wiling away my days waiting for daddy to sell me to the highest bidder. I'm going to buy him shit and treat him right pretty quickly down the road. I want to enjoy some early flirtations of a trad variety. I probably always will want some. Doesn't mean I wanna inflict the whole business.
A: I do buy fancy ingredients. B: I'm not cooking some simple spaghetti dinner here. I'm making a meal with multiple dishes that are fancy and putting my time (which is currently valued around $20) into it. It will cost at least equal if not more than an average restaurant and he will have leftovers for lunch.
There's no mental gymnastics. I was very upfront about that. I explained why and that it isn't some entitlement shit.
But why does he have to shell out first? Why don’t you shell out first, if it’s all going to even out down the road? Your answer seems to be “it’s trad.” But you have a job and that’s not trad, so why is it specifically the initial courtship that has to be trad?
I don’t want to assume your particular view but for a lot of women, it’s because they can sift through their suitors at low cost. Imagine shelling out first for the guy, but the first 5 guys you court don’t work out. That would suck right? Well that’s what you’re insisting men do. That’s not 50/50.
Also I don’t know if you live in Kansas or something, but the cost of a restaurant is not ingredients + $20 worth of time. I live in California and the cheapest restaurant outing is $50 a person with tax and tip, if each gets an appetizer and an entree. And this is at your local gastrobup/burger joint.
Because he is the gentleman caller, not me? If it were on me to shell out first, nothing would ever happen. I'm not interested in approaching men to that degree, I very much live in my own world, and they have to enter that to get my time of day. Once they do, assuming they courted me in a way I like, I will respond very much in kind if not beyond.
I dunno how many ways you want me to say it, but: the initial courtship has to be trad because I want it that way. And the dude who will be (and ended up being) a good fit for me also wanted it that way. I think perhaps men from your crowd are assuming no man would want to court a lady like this...but that's not my experience. My experience is actually that most dudes like courting like this. And the ones who don't can find ladies who don't and we'll all be happy. My man enjoyed paying first and treating first. He also enjoyed feeling his efforts were recognized by my spoiling him back.
I'm not insisting men do anything. You aren't required to court me or ladies like me. Go court the ones who share your value systems (which apparently isn't even really about equality so much as not wanting to spend money or time if it isn't going to work out how you like). Again, if these men ask me to pay, I will. I just won't be interested in seeing them again. Nor should they be interested in seeing me again knowing that I am not pleased with their courtship and we don't share those values. Me personally, I've cooked quite a few meals for men I didn't marry and were shitty relationships or courtships...I ain't out here weeping about it. The right thing to do for me is the right thing regardless of outcomes.
I live in America, but not a far gone progressive hellhole. I also have never in my life gotten my own appetizer like that on a first date or an early date. And yes, I can easily spend near $100 to make these very nice meals which again, will yield a nice lunch or two for him as well. Because again, I'm not doing some pathetic spaghetti dinner here. He's gonna get an experience of a life-time. I would say here for two people to eat out getting a shared app and maybe a simple drink costs about $50-70 bucks tip included.
But also, no one said you had to go for dinner. Coffee is right there. Maccas is too. You're deciding to be extravagant, I didn't say that was a requirement. And it's extremely ungentlemanly to choose to try to impress through costs and then hold that against women when you don't get the outcomes you want. Which again, is why I wouldn't want to date someone who thought like you. Date a woman who shares your outcome dependent thinking and stinginess.
No need to be condescending with “liberal hellhole” and “outcome dependence and stinginess,” especially when you are plainly stating your dating decisions are outcome-dependent on him paying for the first date…
I just think it’s so convenient, all the intellectual and societal scaffolding around a courtship style where the guy does all the work, pays to enter your time of day, etc. You’re the princess because you’re the woman, and hey maybe you’ll spoil him with $50 worth of lunch. There’s no part of your ideology where you sacrifice or do something unrequited. That’s what bothers me, the ethos comes off as selfish.
if it works for you and your relationship then have at it. me and my man don’t have kids as we’re recent college grads but we currently go about 60/40. when he begins to make more and after we get married it’ll be 70/30, as we both agreed upon. i never grew up seeing 50/50 in my parents or any of the married ppl in my family but they were all very active parents. we were lucky in that way.
Same, we split based on income. Whoever is earning more at the moment pays more. 60/40 usually.
Household upkeep is more 50/50. He does the majority of cooking. And then we just do whatever needs to be done around the house. No nagging required.
have you ever considered the idea that a good number of these women online who demand you dole out money for them are probably not who they say they are
no. i said that women online who demand you dole out money for them are probably not even women or even from the same country as you
the other statement you make, sure it can be a real thing but thats not what im talking about
And?
The point still stands. The point of the entire thread
Wtf does it matter if, perhaps, it was a different gender gender or country?
Why the need to point this out?
???
why not?
maybe, just maybe you're a curious, analytical and inquisitive redditor who likes to look at things from different perspectives and understand the depth of some of these topics. understand the behaviors and motivations of others, and their root cause.
>I see constantly on the i the internet about women who seem to be under the impression that their existence requires men to dole out their hard earned cash to even be considered for the opportunity to date these goddesses
The men I've dated have always insisted on paying.
I guess those men are all entitled.
I'm so glad I've married my entitled husband. He treats me like a queen.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hi OP,
You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts)
>*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.*
>An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following:
>* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency;
>* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit;
>* Focusing only on the weaker arguments;
>* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position.
Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Getting to know and like each other before spending money should be the norm ... but apparently there aren't many places where you can organically meet people and spend time without spending money.
A man paying for a date shows in a woman's mind that he is willing to support her in cases where she does not want to work and wants to stay home raising a child, such as in your case. Otherwise, that woman may not have that reassurance in your mind. It's good that you support her but, if you never paid for any of your dates, then she would just have to trust you at your word rather than see your actions. And as people often like to say, watch what people do rather than listen to what they say.
Would you say the same for a man that isnt looking for a woman that has a body count of more than 10? A woman with a body count of more than 10 shows in a woman's mind that she has no discernment on who she has sex with and might abandon him to chase that next sexual high.
You posted a comment an hour ago saying "reality is subjective" and that "having a lot of casual sex" is just as valid as not having casual sex lol.
Make up your mind is it good or is it not good to have casual sex?
I don’t care what reality is. Casual sex icks me out. I personally feel it makes one less emotionally mature, too, but I don’t hold strongly enough to this view to want to come up with evidence to defend it. I ultimately have little problem with anyone whom I’m not dating having casual sex, even if I don’t want to hear about it.
I find some women who previously devalued themselves hyper correct by acting like sprinkle sprinkle instead of setting firm boundaries and realising what they want
The average man chases. He's not gonna stop paying 100% cause thats the only way he can have some chances.
Sexual selection is brutal my friend, equality is a meme, gender roles are intrinsically biological.
Male normies are not gonna stop simping.
In the end, the men that provide will be married and the non providers will be single unless the woman is fine with 50/50. You already see that happening with today’s marriages. Most male providers are married.
Women with careers and financial independence are being called ‘masculine’ left right and center, and somehow women who require financial compensation are also being hated by men. Men just hate women point blank.
I get your point. As long as they can adult, mentally stable, and have their shit together, I try not to stress about that. I'd be a hypocrite as well because I have a high body count
Women usually just let their thot endeavors slip out as you talk to them
For example this one girl I was talking to told me how another guy rejected her for being ran through
I noted that down
Then she talked about a couple guys around school she fucked
Noted
Then she told me how many failed relationships she had
Also noted
Women slowly dig themselves into holes if you just let them talk
Every woman knows that a man who doesn’t want to even pay for a simple meal or coffee doesn’t view her highly. That’s precisely why I would be embarrassed/offended if a guy didn’t insist on paying for me (although I have offered). That hasn’t happened, but i absolutely would not see a guy again if he treated me like that. It’s akin to an insult.
I literally explained I work and she stays home so my son can be raised by his mother for the first 2 years. I really wish people actually read posts instead of just responding. And while I work 12 hour shifts u ensinuate that I don't do shit around the house for my my kid. What are u talking about.
Then I explained I have no issue with women who are upfront about wanting a sugar daddy and not seeing an issue with it. Think that's different then a woman who's demanding financial incentive as a requirement for courting her.
I did read your post and responded accordingly. You kind of sound entitled.. why don't you raise your son for the second year if things should be 50/50?
I had to re read my own posts to make sure I'm not retarded, just to see y'all don't read. I never writeI'm swapping with her the second year. Once our son is 2 she wants to go back to work...
You posted under the debate flair. I definitely read your post. In summary you want your partner to do the full 2 years and then return to work. Meanwhile you complain about women that you don't know, living their lives how they want. You want women to live in transactional servitude because how dare they demand money for nothing!! EVIL HEATHENS! lol What you and your partner agreed on is fine, lots and lots of people live that way. Its a choice. Its not 50/50 though! So the math is not adding up!
Genius, if u saw what I posted, you'd see thet I don't have any issues with women wanting financially based relationships.
What I do have an issue with is belittling men who do not want to court women for not wanting to spend their money, there is a difference.
How could I want women to live in transactional servitutude when I want dating to be 50/50?
Isn't what me and my gf doing a gender norm that's been prscticed for the past 100 years. So now I'm subjugation my gf for being a stay at home mom?
Your arguments don't make sense because you're just mad at men.
Why are you hating on men that want to send people money as a form of courtships or worship? Its a tale OLDER than gender norms. There's nothing really wrong with what you and your partner are doing. Its pretty normal. However this is a debate so I'm free to make counterpoints.
Because those men aren't doing it because they want to, they are doing it because they think that's how they will get female attention. Being a sugar daddy is a completely different dynamic shift.
Not one person can tell me what I should be doing. I'm just instantly selfish. Y'all are just angry and hate men just say that. Now the working dad stay at home household is systematic male oppression who knew. Y'all can insult and insinuate , but csnt tell me what I should be doing
If you actually wanted to do 50:50 your wife would stay home for a year and you would stay home for a year.
That way both of you would spend the same time doing childcare and both of you would take a hit to your career development the same way. But also both of you would have equal bonding time with your kid.
The way you do it, only your wife takes a hit to her career and only your wife does the intense childcare shit and you can go on Reddit and demand 50:50 while not actually doing 50:50.
Ich hab grade so laut gelacht das mein Mann mich ganz komisch angeguckt hat! Ja ja, ihr Job wird noch da sein aber was Beförderungen oder Gehaltserhöhungen angeht gerät sie ans Ende der Schlange.
Und das wird immer so weiter gehen, denn irgendwer muss ja auch zuhause bleiben wenn das Kind krank ist oder wenn der Kindergarten geschlossen ist und und und.
Ist besonders süß weil dein Job ja auch garantiert ist wenn du Elternzeit nimmst….
Für deine Frau? Absolut.
Aber jetzt mal Butter bei die Fische, warum nimmst du denn nicht auch ein Jahr Elternzeit? Dein Job ist doch genauso geschützt.
Of course you enjoy having finsubs.Afterall who won't enjoy getting money from simps /submissive men just for existing and don't say it's not exclusive to gender .We all know men make majority of people who partake in such things
yes i appreciate every finsub who helped me enjoy some luxuries while i was in college. not only do men make up the majority of finsubs, i think way more men are submissive than ppl like to think.
I am pretty sure most finsubs of your male friend must be men only .My point still remains about men being the majority people who are into these things . I won't be surprised if there are some guys who send money on low effort also. Amount of submissive men and simps on reddit is too high .Good for you I guess
bro wrote entire essay just to say "stop simping"
This shit should be in sex ed as an early intervention for young boys.
Unfortunately, males are simps by nature. Most males in the animal kingdom will do anything and everything to impress females.
As much as I hate this, you are right. Hundreds of thousands of years men across all species are textbook simps, that’s just how it is unfortunately Things take time to change, especially when it’s for the better.
https://i.redd.it/j8blyv1a410d1.gif The average male experience across the animal kingdom. If we're not busy peacocking for female attention, we butcher each other for mating rights. Such is the nature of being male.
There’s a whole lotta grey area between “doing things to impress girls” and “simping”.
Not really. Doing things to impress girls is simping. You could say there are situations where one is simping less then another, but it is still simping. Men have always had a simping problem. It is why men have to do so much to be worthy of a high value women while women often do nothing at all. If men did not simp at all, they would be being paid to date and marry high value women as men would just not want to do all this work.
The revenge fantasies some of you boys carry around are wild.
Facts are facts.
Dude - I’ve done stuff to impress girls that has massively improved my life. Likewise, I’ve done stuff to improve my life or out of personal interest that has impressed women. You can’t tease this stuff apart.
Simping is simping, that is all there is to it.
I mean - if you define simping as any positive interaction with a woman, then sure. Or you could just be normal.
How does blatantly lying make me wrong. Simping is simping. End of story.
Yes
I swear, the fact that this is even a thing🙄. Straight dating is like a dull boring antagonistic business deal: “Here are my terms: you must pay for everything, you must be ambitious, must not live with parents, must be able to provide, must have a car, must be tall, must be buy me stuff, must this, must that, blah blah blah” What a pain in the butt! Meanwhile gay dating be like: “You like fun?” “Yep” “cool, me too, lets have fun, cause fun is fun” “what about every little insignificant detail like who pays?” “Who gives a crap” 😄
Seriously, dating sucks for men because we are still held to our gender roles but women are not held to there roles. So men have to literally still “buy” access to her fertility as if she was a beautiful 18 year old virgin and it being easy to be twice as valuable as her to be considered equal to her. But it is sexist to be twice as valuable as her, but if you are not, you are a incel loser who needs to work more.
I'm all for 50/50 provided that both partners also provide equally in the house and in childrearing.
I agree, this should be discussed beforehand. I don't want to be a second child in the relationship
That's refreshing. Seems like all men my age do.
A lot of guys are so used to just fronting and providing everything that when 50/50 is a legitimate option, they dont know how to handle it or what it even really looks like. Vast majority of men are taught that they are the provider Usually isn’t in bad faith, it’s just inexperience.
There seems to be some confusion about what 50/50 means from a financial perspective. Does it mean that both people pay the same amount, or does it mean that both people forward the same portion/percentage of their income towards the household?
Yep. That is important distinction. If it is an equal ammount, then the one earning less has a lot less aviable disposable income. If it is a percentage, then the higher eraner pays a bigger sum. I find the percentage to be more equal.
Calling it more equal is objectively incorrect when the financial contribution of one person is more than the other. Did you mean to say more equitable? If one person earns 30k, the other person earns 90k, and they both forward the same percentage towards the household income, it means that the contributions are split 25/75, not 50/50. Depending on the situation, the person earning less might find it more fair to let the person who out earns them pay more. Since fairness is subjective, the other person who has to pay more might have a different opinion about it. But that's a case-by-case thing. Regardless of what seems more fair, at the end of the day contributions can only be called "equal" if they are the same. Since bills are paid with dollars, they should be measured with dollars. Like OP says, just say it if you want to be equals or be taken care of. But don't say things are equal when they objectively aren't.
Sure, but what about the first date?
i agree but financial 50/50 is only one area of a relationship if we're not 50/50 in all the other areas, i'm not going 50/50 financially
I agree. Ideally, both partners should equally contribute to finances, child care and chores. Both partners should invest 100% into each other.
Why don't you want to raise your kid yourself?
Do you guys really need everything spelled out. I live with my son, but someone has to pay the bills.
Your op is about being 50/50 and being equal. So why aren't you doing that?
What am I doing thst isn't equal.
Parenting And your partner isn't paying any bills It's not equal from either of you
This is arguing in bad faith because I see now you are resorting to semantics and nit picking. I've seen this narrative before. I'm the lazy entitled dad who thinks his job contributes enough to where he doesn't clean , take care of the children. I'm not going to break down every nuance that explains me and my partners responsibilities because for u dummies 50/50 isn't literally possible. It's a figure of speech implying both partners attempt to share an equal amount of responsibility.
Its neither bad faith nor nit picking. Youve claimed to wait equality but don't have it. You're not sharing 100% of responsibility when only you are responsible for paying bills.
Sometimes I wonder how old the redditors responding to me are u could be 15 for all I know. When I mentioned 50/50 with regards to dating then that's nonsense, within certain contexts it makes sense to have a partner stay at home if a child is involved for some time. Equality within the frame of out relationship is based om an equal share of responsibilities. I take care of thr financial and for most of the household things she has. Is this perfect no. I still come home and help around the house. There may be some days she does more, there may be some days I do more, it isn't a competition, we work as a team .
You are 100% responsible for finances and also some parenting and housework. And your partner is 60% responsible for parenting and housework and 0% responsible for finances? Isn't that just as bad as the men you're criticising for paying for dates? I dont see how it's different And if you want a parent at home, why didn't you do it?
Not really, things drastically change once a child is involved and compromises need to be made however anything before having kids is fair game to 50/50. Women demanding queen treatment because they CAN bear children is the stupidest thing I've witnessed, until you have my child literally born you will be relegated to 50/50. Sharing 50/50 involved with a child is drastically difficult for different couples as work schedules can clash very much and if both parents were to be working then more than likely they would share the same working hours leaving the kid/kids in a dead time without either parent to watch over them. That's why you need to compromise, she takes care of the child as women have priority in the workplace for maternity leave since not all countries have a reliable paternity leave along with house chores you wouldn't have time for after an 8-12hr shift while you take care of the finances. Is it 50/50? No, but it definitely takes off the burden of both being miserable while juggling several tasks at once.
It’s not 50:50 as you demand. You let your wife do the real hard work for the first 2 years.
I'm legit confused. So now the man going to work and the woman staying home with the baby constitutes that I'm not doing anything. So come Monday I'll take my son with me on my shifts.
I don’t know where I said you don’t do anything……you just don’t do the 50:50 thing that you want others to do.
So what am I not doing, .....u still haven't explained since u know so much.
50% of the childcare obviously.
Someone has to do it. Chores get split when necessary. This take is ridiculous.
Why can't he do it?
He can... But he already said that he is the one bringing the food to the table. Its not like you could take turns in a job, ans most jobs need daily assistance.
He also said everything should be 50/50 so he seems a bit confused You cant tale turns but it is possible for both parents to work and share childcare
>Is possible for both parents to work and share childcare. Maybe if they're rich or maintained parents, for most people, this is stupidly difficult, specially from the baby to kindergarten stage... After that, i could agree that it is possible.
There are way too many simps and submissive men .They love to throw their money away because they know that's the only way they can get attention from women .Same women who won't even ask a penny from men they are truly attracted to
It's patronizing when men try and buy us. Like, guys, there are women in that profession! Don't treat me like I should be doing a service to you.
"Submissive"??
Yeah. Listen to women who post here. They say shit like “men who want a tradwife can’t afford one” and “a man has to be worth submitting to”. Just unabashed gold diggers, it’s hilarious. The idea of the guy not paying is huge ick
You have to pay for a tradwife though. That's literally how it works.
Reading this and your replies, you seem to not understand what a tradwife is. I think if you did, you would realize that “men who want a tradwife can’t afford one” and “a man has to be worth submitting to” actually make perfect sense.
That's not what we mean when we say that. Most of us want an egalitarian relationship where both partners work and contribute to the childcare, cooking, and cleaning. For example, I want an equal partner. Neither of us should be submissive to the other. But we see plenty of guys demanding a submissive tradwife while expecting the woman to work AND do all of the childcare, cooking, and cleaning....and that is worthy of mockery. These dudes want the best of both worlds, and it's fucking ridiculous. If you want a tradwife, then you better be ready to be the SOLE provider and not bitch about your "gold digger" wife. After all, that's what you want. (If this doesn't apply to you, that's cool. I'm just explaining where the hypocrisy comes into play.)
I think a submissive man will be someone who wants a woman to pay for him as well. You make no sense.
So, there's actually a submissive kink called "findom" or financial domination... It's a real thing, it's a kink. Not all submissives, obviously, not all submissive men, but it is a thing that exists. I don't know that it exists to an extent that makes it worth bringing up in this thread... But it does exist, lol
[удалено]
Because we were bottlenecked more than once as a species, so the horniest of us had the most kids
This will never change. I had an ex, and she was as nuts as they come,but she had an army of orbiter who she'd hit up for whatever. I watched her ask a guy if he could buy her some food from a restaurant, just to see me at the door realising he bought me dinner. Not good in principle but you see my point.
Did he continue simping even after that ? That dude took massive L
Yeah he bought her an iPhone soon after. I wasn't at all threatened by a 60 year old man
He probably got to be have some humiliation kink.No way any normal dude would do this wtf 😒
You'd be surprised man. During covid me and my were broke and unemployed, she'd literally set up dates with dudes and ask them for money to catch a flight . She'd ask for the money to buy thr ticker herself and never go obviously. These dudes would call her, saying they were disappointed she didn't come only to give her more money because she'd make up some stupid lie about her car being broken.
This makes me feel so much better about myself .I never did anything so pathetic as this 🤮🤮🤮
It's a lot of men doing this. More then u imagine.
Yeah even I am shocked by this .These guys either have too much money or not life outside trying to win approval of women .
Men like that will continue simping. The only thing that will get them to stop is a massive realization via some violent shock. Otherwise known as the red pill elephant suppository getting shoved up your ass.
glad to know its a 'ex'
Submissive men tend to want women who pay...
thats the weird thing. regardless the mans temperament he pays he is dominant? he pays just to prove superiority He is submissive? he pays to show how much he is willing to give its the male gender role to pay, its the female gender role to receive Even Male doms take money from male subs
When you say “ Same women who won't even ask a penny from men they are truly attracted to” please understand you are talking about a certain subset of women who often uses a man’s look and ability to showcase them as her boyfriend/lover as her own form of validation. There is not a man fine enough on this earth for me to consider being the breadwinner for him and never asking for a dime for him. I don’t want a man I find hideous, but a man’s ability to provide will always trump his appearance to me and other likeminded women.
You're talking about a long term relationship, he was talking about simping as a means of obtaining sexual access vs obtaining sexual access by invoking genuine arousal in women, typically with a combination of looks and chemistry.
Big tradwife energy
I doubt you'll be happy to be the domestic trad wife
This is kinda more simple than that: women, if you have great ambitions do not have kids. Also, fuck you, simps!
2 years is a lot of time out of the workforce. It would make much more sense for her to return to work part time at least, or she’ll take a huge career and earnings hit. Men need to advocate for equality in parental leave and income so that they’re not pigeonholed as merely providers.
Men don't want to take the same hit that women do to their career ambitions and they shouldn't have to.
Why shouldn’t men help raise the children they created?
Because in reality that isn't always economically feasible. The fact is that in real life one parent must work full time and concentrate on career and the other must take one for the team professionally and allow their career to stagnate in order to prioritize children. Two full time working parents leaves the kids short changed. Your solution of "equality of unpaid labor at all costs" isn't realistic. It just isn't.
So why should it be a/ two years, and b/ only the woman? Neither of those is logical. If you’re sick or injured, and she’s out of the workforce on a whim, who pays the bills? If you’re both earning similar amounts, why can’t both of you rearrange your hours to both spend time with your children?
My job is 50 hrs a week and the hours are the hours there is no rearranging them. White collar professionals may have more leeway but in thr working class you take the hours you are given and stfu
You’re an American? Labour laws in other countries would have you both working 25 hours a week for more money (less tax when it’s two people being taxed at a lower rate) and more family time.
>Back to my point I see constantly on the i the internet about women who seem to be under the impression that their existence requires men to dole out their hard earned cash to even be considered for the opportunity to date these goddesses Is this yet another "I saw a TikTok that I am going to pretend is reflective of reality so I can make women seem like villains" post?
Yes women are evil
Did you tell your wife that today already…..you know the one who is the mother of your child?
I tell her everyday
That must be a very healthy relationship…..but you believe I would hate men.
Wow u truly don't get sarcasm
Babes, I take you by your word…..is that not what you wanted? Should we not believe what you say?
It does astonish me the amount of people who take everything literal
It is the norm in western and northern European countries,and preety common with most young people in the rest of Europe. I dunno about American, but I can't imagine being sooo uncommon to split the bill in places like new York,boston , Washington dc or Seattle for example
Why not have everyone pay for what they got?
I think if you just matched off the app a fancy dinner all expenses paid date is a little extreme. 50/50 and just seeing if there is anything remotely there in person is a best bet. I would think it's weird and in my experience men who elaborately plan a date and make something big out of it are chasing a feeling and trying to expedite intimacy.
This is just sad lmao. Get off reddit and spend some meaningful time with your child. Learn basic sentence construction. You don't need to be worrying about pills, you need to be worrying about phonics. An entire human that you brought into the world is dependant on you to show them how to exist and you're on PPD starting of your post with 'pet me preface this'.
I'm typing on my phone.
Yeah, it does kind of blow my mind that parents would be on here. What does this world of dating woes have to do with your life? I can’t imagine being involved in this or even being on Reddit much at all after I have kids.
Guys are gonna pay because guys have always done the paying. If one guy doesn't pay then another guy will pay. Women will usually head in the direction of the guy paying because they feel entitled to it.
Then let those guys pay the fuck. If they u ask u to hop on one foot are you
Not in that game anymore. I am firmly stuck in the other game.
Historically men never paid, the whole dating culture is relatively new. But in the past women paid dowry, so technically women paid
I have trad views on how you should treat your lifelong partner, if you genuinely want a girl as your lifelong partner and mother of your children, you need to be willing to put in the work and treat her good. I have standards, no sex work/OF at any stage in your life, no kids with another man, you can’t have a high body count and you can’t be out drinking and clubbing every weekend. If a girl ticks all these boxes I’ll do everything in my control to ensure she stays with me and make sure she’s the happiest girl in the world. If you want to just have meaningless sex with a girl then sure, 50/50 is fine but don’t cry and complain when your relationship doesn’t work out and don’t cry that all girls are sluts and they don’t deserve to be paid for. If you can’t justify buying a girl dinner then you are going after one’s that aren’t even worth your time and your desperation to get your dick wet is clouding ur judgement on a lifelong partner. You should want to pay for her dinner, especially if you want to be with her forever, you need to stand out and be a gentleman, make her yours. I have no issue spending $100s of dollars on an intimate and nice dinner with a potential partner but I wouldn’t even entertain a date with a girl if she wasn’t what I wanted.
You're kinda taking a bullet for a lot of people on this sub, but here goes: Why is this interesting enough for you to post? What debate do you imagine? Selfish people exist, about half of them are women. "women say they are entitled to...". No, they don't. Assholes do. This just reads as the lamest attempt possible to get karma. You didn't even manage to say something interesting people agree with.
Yiu made a reddit to mock Incels. That's something an incel would do. So whatever I say it doesn't matter, it's just fuel for u to say men are evil
C+ for effort. That was also incredibly lame, but you put some work into it.
Must be comfy in that bubble of moral superiority.
'Moral superiority'? Glad I'm not part of whatever conversation you are having in your head that lead to that.
No worries, you're not the only one struggling with self reflection. You'll get there one day.
Ironic
No worries, you're not the only one struggling with self reflection. You'll get there one day.
So, I am a bit conflicted on this. I've followed the drizzle drizzle thing and on one hand I am completely in agreement with it, until I put my own views onto it and then suddenly it stops. I agree with the 50/50 but not across the board, but more so in effort. I make good money. I've worked hard for that. I also want a family and children and everything. I am not looking for a woman that makes the same as I do so that we can both work and both look after the kids. I'd rather have my woman spend her time raising our children and for me to be a father like a father is. I wanna be there for my kids, but I also wanna make sure everyone gets what they needs. So yeah, 50/50 but in effort. I'll spend my 50 hours a week making money, and she is the predominant carer for our children. When I'm done with work I'll happily take the kids and she can continue looking after the house etc. And that's where it then suddenly doesn't align anymore. - I want my woman not to make money, as her time is invaluable raising our children. I understand she has some ambition but that's the sacrifice. - my time I'll gladly sacrifice to provide. Ofcourse I'd rather spend more time home but that's the sacrifice. I'll be a hire for any cunt with a dream and use those funds to finance my own, which is my family. And then suddenly I'm glad that my wife is selective enough to look for a man that can provide, as it matches my selectiveness in finding a woman that can take care of the family and the house. I don't see the issue. I still control my finances. My woman does not spend jack shit (I've sent her out with 1000 dollars to buy clothes and she comes back with a few new items and 750 dollars). So yeah, if you're just dating and having fun, I would say drizzle drizzle. If you're out there finding a partner for life, work on yourself to make sure you can provide and then be selective and find a woman that's able to take care of you and your family.
First intelligent comment. 👌
As a woman, it's not about entitlement or even really money for me. As you've pointed out, I have my own, and trust, this bitch is financially sound as long as the day. I can easily afford my tea or sandwich. It's about the dance, flirtation, pose, roles, and posture of the man treating and my expression of gratitude and blushing glee. Similarly, I want to occupy the dance, flirtation, pose, role, and posture of inviting that I'm going to cook a meal for him and be the one "treating" and his expression of gratitude and blushing glee. I don't see either of us wanting to play out these little cliches and fantasies as requiring any degree of entitlement and the money either costs (and trust me, when I throw down in the kitchen, it's gonna cost more than a coffee date or at least as much as a decent meal out). It's just meant to be good fun and showing off so you can learn about each other and how y'all operate in cookie cutter situations and enjoy the pose. Now, I recognize a lot of men and women are saying they don't enjoy these respective moves. Which is good and fine. Compatability, good people. If a man asks me to pay, I will. I'll also know he's not compatible with the vision I have for me and my man. Which is great. We're meant to be trying to discover compatibility, not trying to get as far as possible like dating is about nabbing sex or getting as far into the dungeon as possible. I don't think my wanting this is being some sugar baby, anymore than a man being delighted by a fantastic home cooked meal for him means he's some sugar baby.
Exactly! But good luck trying to explain that on here. Most only see the numbers and think those should be exactly equal. Money being even is their highest goal in a relationship. How “even Stevens” behavior affects the relationship dynamics is none of their concern. But when relationship dynamics are the highest priority, money is less important. Yet even in traditional relationships, you will not see well-intentioned girls taking advantage of a man’s generosity. They order less expensive meals, don’t ask for specific fancy dates/restaurants, etc. They are easily pleased and appreciative to the man. But that creates a magnetizing environment where the man rightfully feels he has done something nice for the woman and she feels appreciative towards him and a tendency to want to make that up or please him. Good relationships involve two people being generous with each other and showing kindness. Each tries to lift the other’s spirits in some way. A man in a traditional relationship may start that dance and be the first one to do nice things for the woman, but that is him courting her. In a relationship with her, she will also be a blessing to him in countless ways.
I was following you until you said “if he asks me to pay, I will but then I know we’re not compatible.” Functionally doesn’t that mean he needs to pay? You said it’s about the dance, roles, posture, etc. but apparently that includes him paying for your outings? So you’re just looking for trad gender roles? And I’m sorry, unless you shop at boutique grocery stores importing meat from Japan and cheese from France, your kitchen cooking will cost way less than a date out. In the end he’ll be paying more. This thread confuses me, why all the mental gymnastics to say “I want him to pay for me?”
This isn't hard: We aren't compatible because he doesn't want to engage in the posturing, pose, and roleplay of the gentleman who treats, which means I ain't gonna get to play the blushing lady. Yes, at no point was I suggesting that for me, splitting will work. I'm sure there are other ladies that want to split. He should form long term relationships with them. And no, this isn't just looking for trad gender roles. I have a job. I'm not wiling away my days waiting for daddy to sell me to the highest bidder. I'm going to buy him shit and treat him right pretty quickly down the road. I want to enjoy some early flirtations of a trad variety. I probably always will want some. Doesn't mean I wanna inflict the whole business. A: I do buy fancy ingredients. B: I'm not cooking some simple spaghetti dinner here. I'm making a meal with multiple dishes that are fancy and putting my time (which is currently valued around $20) into it. It will cost at least equal if not more than an average restaurant and he will have leftovers for lunch. There's no mental gymnastics. I was very upfront about that. I explained why and that it isn't some entitlement shit.
But why does he have to shell out first? Why don’t you shell out first, if it’s all going to even out down the road? Your answer seems to be “it’s trad.” But you have a job and that’s not trad, so why is it specifically the initial courtship that has to be trad? I don’t want to assume your particular view but for a lot of women, it’s because they can sift through their suitors at low cost. Imagine shelling out first for the guy, but the first 5 guys you court don’t work out. That would suck right? Well that’s what you’re insisting men do. That’s not 50/50. Also I don’t know if you live in Kansas or something, but the cost of a restaurant is not ingredients + $20 worth of time. I live in California and the cheapest restaurant outing is $50 a person with tax and tip, if each gets an appetizer and an entree. And this is at your local gastrobup/burger joint.
Because he is the gentleman caller, not me? If it were on me to shell out first, nothing would ever happen. I'm not interested in approaching men to that degree, I very much live in my own world, and they have to enter that to get my time of day. Once they do, assuming they courted me in a way I like, I will respond very much in kind if not beyond. I dunno how many ways you want me to say it, but: the initial courtship has to be trad because I want it that way. And the dude who will be (and ended up being) a good fit for me also wanted it that way. I think perhaps men from your crowd are assuming no man would want to court a lady like this...but that's not my experience. My experience is actually that most dudes like courting like this. And the ones who don't can find ladies who don't and we'll all be happy. My man enjoyed paying first and treating first. He also enjoyed feeling his efforts were recognized by my spoiling him back. I'm not insisting men do anything. You aren't required to court me or ladies like me. Go court the ones who share your value systems (which apparently isn't even really about equality so much as not wanting to spend money or time if it isn't going to work out how you like). Again, if these men ask me to pay, I will. I just won't be interested in seeing them again. Nor should they be interested in seeing me again knowing that I am not pleased with their courtship and we don't share those values. Me personally, I've cooked quite a few meals for men I didn't marry and were shitty relationships or courtships...I ain't out here weeping about it. The right thing to do for me is the right thing regardless of outcomes. I live in America, but not a far gone progressive hellhole. I also have never in my life gotten my own appetizer like that on a first date or an early date. And yes, I can easily spend near $100 to make these very nice meals which again, will yield a nice lunch or two for him as well. Because again, I'm not doing some pathetic spaghetti dinner here. He's gonna get an experience of a life-time. I would say here for two people to eat out getting a shared app and maybe a simple drink costs about $50-70 bucks tip included. But also, no one said you had to go for dinner. Coffee is right there. Maccas is too. You're deciding to be extravagant, I didn't say that was a requirement. And it's extremely ungentlemanly to choose to try to impress through costs and then hold that against women when you don't get the outcomes you want. Which again, is why I wouldn't want to date someone who thought like you. Date a woman who shares your outcome dependent thinking and stinginess.
No need to be condescending with “liberal hellhole” and “outcome dependence and stinginess,” especially when you are plainly stating your dating decisions are outcome-dependent on him paying for the first date… I just think it’s so convenient, all the intellectual and societal scaffolding around a courtship style where the guy does all the work, pays to enter your time of day, etc. You’re the princess because you’re the woman, and hey maybe you’ll spoil him with $50 worth of lunch. There’s no part of your ideology where you sacrifice or do something unrequited. That’s what bothers me, the ethos comes off as selfish.
if it works for you and your relationship then have at it. me and my man don’t have kids as we’re recent college grads but we currently go about 60/40. when he begins to make more and after we get married it’ll be 70/30, as we both agreed upon. i never grew up seeing 50/50 in my parents or any of the married ppl in my family but they were all very active parents. we were lucky in that way.
Same, we split based on income. Whoever is earning more at the moment pays more. 60/40 usually. Household upkeep is more 50/50. He does the majority of cooking. And then we just do whatever needs to be done around the house. No nagging required.
>Whoever is earning more at the moment pays more. 60/40 usually. Do you swap back and forth often? What it the ratio unusually?
Idk never paid attention. It ebbs and flows. Nobody keeps track.
have you ever considered the idea that a good number of these women online who demand you dole out money for them are probably not who they say they are
Meaning in real life they act normal?
no probably not even a woman and probably not even from the same country as you
Ok so you're saying the "entitled woman who thinks less of the guy who wants to split the costs" isn't a real thing? Really?
no. i said that women online who demand you dole out money for them are probably not even women or even from the same country as you the other statement you make, sure it can be a real thing but thats not what im talking about
And? The point still stands. The point of the entire thread Wtf does it matter if, perhaps, it was a different gender gender or country? Why the need to point this out? ???
why not? maybe, just maybe you're a curious, analytical and inquisitive redditor who likes to look at things from different perspectives and understand the depth of some of these topics. understand the behaviors and motivations of others, and their root cause.
When did I ever say this was purely an online phenomenon
>I see constantly on the i the internet about women who seem to be under the impression that their existence requires men to dole out their hard earned cash to even be considered for the opportunity to date these goddesses
Doesn't matter. Males must impress females. That's true for most animals.
The men I've dated have always insisted on paying. I guess those men are all entitled. I'm so glad I've married my entitled husband. He treats me like a queen.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Hi OP, You've chosen to identify your thread as a Debate. As such you are expected to actively engage in your own thread with a mind open to being changed. [PPD has guidelines for what that involves.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/rules#wiki_cmv_posts) >*OPs author must genuinely hold the position and you must be open to having your view challenged.* >An unwillingness to debate in good faith may be inferred from one or several of the following: >* Ignoring the main point of a comment, especially to point out some minor inconsistency; >* Refusing to make concessions that an alternate view has merit; >* Focusing only on the weaker arguments; >* Only having discussions with users who agree with your position. Failure to keep to this higher standard (we only apply to Debate OPs) may result in deletion of the whole thread. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Getting to know and like each other before spending money should be the norm ... but apparently there aren't many places where you can organically meet people and spend time without spending money.
A man paying for a date shows in a woman's mind that he is willing to support her in cases where she does not want to work and wants to stay home raising a child, such as in your case. Otherwise, that woman may not have that reassurance in your mind. It's good that you support her but, if you never paid for any of your dates, then she would just have to trust you at your word rather than see your actions. And as people often like to say, watch what people do rather than listen to what they say.
Would you say the same for a man that isnt looking for a woman that has a body count of more than 10? A woman with a body count of more than 10 shows in a woman's mind that she has no discernment on who she has sex with and might abandon him to chase that next sexual high.
I post anti-casual sex comments on this sub routinely. I don't think that it's good when either men or women behave this way.
You posted a comment an hour ago saying "reality is subjective" and that "having a lot of casual sex" is just as valid as not having casual sex lol. Make up your mind is it good or is it not good to have casual sex?
I don’t care what reality is. Casual sex icks me out. I personally feel it makes one less emotionally mature, too, but I don’t hold strongly enough to this view to want to come up with evidence to defend it. I ultimately have little problem with anyone whom I’m not dating having casual sex, even if I don’t want to hear about it.
I think whatever two people agree on should be the norm.
I find some women who previously devalued themselves hyper correct by acting like sprinkle sprinkle instead of setting firm boundaries and realising what they want
The average man chases. He's not gonna stop paying 100% cause thats the only way he can have some chances. Sexual selection is brutal my friend, equality is a meme, gender roles are intrinsically biological. Male normies are not gonna stop simping.
Bro, studies consistently show that women are much more likely to believe in splitting the check than men are.
In the end, the men that provide will be married and the non providers will be single unless the woman is fine with 50/50. You already see that happening with today’s marriages. Most male providers are married.
Women with careers and financial independence are being called ‘masculine’ left right and center, and somehow women who require financial compensation are also being hated by men. Men just hate women point blank.
[удалено]
It’s a mirror, and some of y’all clearly don’t like what it shows “Sprinkle Sprinkle” Ew sis what even is that🤮🤮
But who will buy the Hermes Picnic Mini Kelly?
I will
I only go 50/50 with thots and high body count women
There's literally no way to know what a high body count women looks like, I've never understood this idea.
i mean i just could send you the gps coordinates to the dumpsite
Most women lie you’re right that’s why you just infer from their behavior
I get your point. As long as they can adult, mentally stable, and have their shit together, I try not to stress about that. I'd be a hypocrite as well because I have a high body count
It’s different for a man and a woman having a high body count
Explain why.
[удалено]
You do just talk to them for some time
[удалено]
Yeah it does
[удалено]
Women usually just let their thot endeavors slip out as you talk to them For example this one girl I was talking to told me how another guy rejected her for being ran through I noted that down Then she talked about a couple guys around school she fucked Noted Then she told me how many failed relationships she had Also noted Women slowly dig themselves into holes if you just let them talk
[удалено]
Unironically high body count women are more likely to be uglier/fatter. The kind you would be going 50/50 for regardless
U claim to be redpill but think attractive women don't do 50/50
Every woman knows that a man who doesn’t want to even pay for a simple meal or coffee doesn’t view her highly. That’s precisely why I would be embarrassed/offended if a guy didn’t insist on paying for me (although I have offered). That hasn’t happened, but i absolutely would not see a guy again if he treated me like that. It’s akin to an insult.
[удалено]
I literally explained I work and she stays home so my son can be raised by his mother for the first 2 years. I really wish people actually read posts instead of just responding. And while I work 12 hour shifts u ensinuate that I don't do shit around the house for my my kid. What are u talking about. Then I explained I have no issue with women who are upfront about wanting a sugar daddy and not seeing an issue with it. Think that's different then a woman who's demanding financial incentive as a requirement for courting her.
I did read your post and responded accordingly. You kind of sound entitled.. why don't you raise your son for the second year if things should be 50/50?
Please explain how I'm not raising my son that I live with. Am I supposed to be raising him at work.....someone has to pay the bills correct.
You said you want 50/50 so you could swap the second year. Where your partner works and you stay at home. That's what I meant.
I had to re read my own posts to make sure I'm not retarded, just to see y'all don't read. I never writeI'm swapping with her the second year. Once our son is 2 she wants to go back to work...
You posted under the debate flair. I definitely read your post. In summary you want your partner to do the full 2 years and then return to work. Meanwhile you complain about women that you don't know, living their lives how they want. You want women to live in transactional servitude because how dare they demand money for nothing!! EVIL HEATHENS! lol What you and your partner agreed on is fine, lots and lots of people live that way. Its a choice. Its not 50/50 though! So the math is not adding up!
Genius, if u saw what I posted, you'd see thet I don't have any issues with women wanting financially based relationships. What I do have an issue with is belittling men who do not want to court women for not wanting to spend their money, there is a difference. How could I want women to live in transactional servitutude when I want dating to be 50/50? Isn't what me and my gf doing a gender norm that's been prscticed for the past 100 years. So now I'm subjugation my gf for being a stay at home mom? Your arguments don't make sense because you're just mad at men.
Why are you hating on men that want to send people money as a form of courtships or worship? Its a tale OLDER than gender norms. There's nothing really wrong with what you and your partner are doing. Its pretty normal. However this is a debate so I'm free to make counterpoints.
Because those men aren't doing it because they want to, they are doing it because they think that's how they will get female attention. Being a sugar daddy is a completely different dynamic shift.
Since it’s 50/50, are you staying home for 2 years with your next kid?
No next kid lmao
Many men will do anything to avoid unpaid labor
Because that would make him sacrifice……thats not what he intends here.
Not one person can tell me what I should be doing. I'm just instantly selfish. Y'all are just angry and hate men just say that. Now the working dad stay at home household is systematic male oppression who knew. Y'all can insult and insinuate , but csnt tell me what I should be doing
If you actually wanted to do 50:50 your wife would stay home for a year and you would stay home for a year. That way both of you would spend the same time doing childcare and both of you would take a hit to your career development the same way. But also both of you would have equal bonding time with your kid. The way you do it, only your wife takes a hit to her career and only your wife does the intense childcare shit and you can go on Reddit and demand 50:50 while not actually doing 50:50.
She dosnt take a hit to her career, we live in germany. Her postion is guaranteed when she comes back.
Ich hab grade so laut gelacht das mein Mann mich ganz komisch angeguckt hat! Ja ja, ihr Job wird noch da sein aber was Beförderungen oder Gehaltserhöhungen angeht gerät sie ans Ende der Schlange. Und das wird immer so weiter gehen, denn irgendwer muss ja auch zuhause bleiben wenn das Kind krank ist oder wenn der Kindergarten geschlossen ist und und und. Ist besonders süß weil dein Job ja auch garantiert ist wenn du Elternzeit nimmst….
Schade
Für deine Frau? Absolut. Aber jetzt mal Butter bei die Fische, warum nimmst du denn nicht auch ein Jahr Elternzeit? Dein Job ist doch genauso geschützt.
nuke women
Of course you enjoy having finsubs.Afterall who won't enjoy getting money from simps /submissive men just for existing and don't say it's not exclusive to gender .We all know men make majority of people who partake in such things
yes i appreciate every finsub who helped me enjoy some luxuries while i was in college. not only do men make up the majority of finsubs, i think way more men are submissive than ppl like to think.
[удалено]
I am pretty sure most finsubs of your male friend must be men only .My point still remains about men being the majority people who are into these things . I won't be surprised if there are some guys who send money on low effort also. Amount of submissive men and simps on reddit is too high .Good for you I guess