If you don’t think I’m ‘for’ women’s freedom and independence, which originally what feminism was, then you haven’t read my book, Relationships 101 in which I demonstrate what societal norms castrate women and how to liberate them, and men, from this castration.

But of course what I assert and advocate is Freedom of OPPORTUNITY.

NOT freedom of outcome.

Tragically, the freedom that a lot of women who claim to be feminist is the freedom of outcome RATHER than the freedom of opportunity. They essentially want the same things men get as an outcome rather than the same freedoms men get. In other words,, they simply want the outcome without the responsibilities that those outcomes require.

Going back to the image, to illustrate this. she claims to want to be transactionally ‘even’ in the relationship. I say transactionally because she prefaces the behaviors with the word ‘if’ (IF he pays for lunch, I’ll pay for this other thing). While this is well-meaning, it’s often mistaken.

You don’t also know the relationship of the two individuals. We don’t know whether they’re parents and the arrangement of the responsibilities for child-rearing.

If the responsibility of child-rearing falls mostly to the mother and is also required to “pay” evenly in terms of finances, then what they want is an equality of OUTCOME without necessarily recognizing where the responsibilities lie.

In other words, there are other ways a woman is adequately equally responsible that has nothing to do with money (i.e. the mother staying home with the children while the father acquires resources, financially or otherwise, is an equality of responsibility that doesn’t require the equality of amount of spending money for each other).

Going back to the feminist movement which originally women’s desire for equality of opportunity (wanting the same opportunities men do along with the same responsibilities that come with those opportunities), for a lot of women that claim to be feminist mistaken it as the “equality of outcome” which they want the same things men have whether or not they take the same responsibilities they do.

So Here’s The Takeaway

You want equality of opportunity not equality of outcome.

You just want the same opportunities provided to anyone else, and gladly take on the responsibilities that go along with that.

So when it comes to who pays for the date, it’s a matter of recognizing a couple of things:

1. The “dating” model is an interview process.

One is an interviewer and one is the interviewee. And because this is the paradigm most people operate, the interviewee does what they can to ‘impress’ the interviewer, along with demonstrating resources and resourcefulness, i.e. paying for the date.

IF you see it that way, then that’s appropriate.

This is why I don’t follow the old dating model.

Instead, I meet friends and, as friends, discover where the relationship leads. It’ll either become more significant or less, depending on how we interact and interface with each other. Which leads us to #2.

2. The financial arrangement of any circumstance is based on the significance of the friendship.

If you were to go out with your friend, what arrangement do you have in terms of who pays? Do that!

It’s appropriate one friend pays since they’ve either taken on the arrangement or responsibility to or they just like paying, or they’ve considered themselves as host of the event just like hosting a party and providing the food and inviting friends.

Or it could also be like holding a potluck where a friend makes the arrangement that every party contributes to facilitating the event. In that case, and in terms of who pays, an arrangement can be made in advance as to how each party (even if it’s just two friends) will contribute to the event!

–

If you’d like to become more well-versed with communication and relationships management, consider the Great Relationships University online course. See a GRU Ambassador to help you get started or click here!