You are on page 1of 43


Who Pays for Dates? Following versus Challenging Conventional Gender Norms

Janet Lever Department of Sociology, California State University, Los Angeles

David A. Frederick Crean School of Health and Life Science, Chapman University

Rosanna Hertz Department of Sociology and Womens Studies, Wellesley College

Correspondence to Dr. Janet Lever, Department of Sociology, California State University, Los Angeles, 5151 State University Dr., Los Angeles, CA 90032.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Abstract Conventional notions of chivalry dictate that on a date, the man pays, whereas egalitarian ideals suggest gender should not determine who pays for the entertainment expenses. Here we examine the extent to which people embrace or reject these competing notions. Unmarried heterosexual participants (N = 17,607) completed a survey posted on and reported their behaviors and attitudes regarding who does and who should pay for dates. Consistent with conventional norms, most men (84 percent) and women (58 percent) reported that men pay for most expenses, even after dating for a while. Many women (39 percent) wished men would reject their offers to pay, and 44 percent of women were bothered when men expected women to help pay. Nearly half of men (44 percent) said they would stop dating a woman who never pays, and 64 percent of men believed that women should contribute to dating expenses. The majority of men (76 percent), however, reported feeling guilty accepting womens money. In terms of behavior, 4 in 10 men and women agreed that dating expenses were at least partially shared within the first month, and roughly three-fourths (74% of men, 83% of women) reported sharing expenses by six months. Associations of these behaviors and attitudes with age, income, and education were examined. These data tell us which people are resisting or conforming to conventional gender norms in one telling aspect of dating that historically was related to the males displaying benevolent sexism, dominance, and ability to fulfill breadwinner role during courtship.

Keywords: Dating, Doing Gender, Undoing Gender, Close Relationships, Gender Norms, Mate Preferences


There has been a dramatic convergence in mens and womens participation in the family and workplace over the past forty years. Despite this move toward equality, there appears to be considerable adherence to conventional gender norms. As Ridgeway (2011, p. 185) describes it, there is a cultural lag between our beliefs about gender and the changes in the material circumstances between men and women. As England (2010) notes, shifts towards gender equality in terms of how romantic relationships are organized have been particularly stagnant. Norms based on persisting gender stereotypes are still readily apparent in dating patterns in which the prescribed behaviors for heterosexual men and women differ substantially (Eaton & Rose, 2011; Grazian, 2007; Laner & Vetrone, 2000; Zelizer, 2005). Dating Norms Among Adults Recent studies of initiating intimate unions have put the spotlight on collegiate hooking up in which sexual encounters between casual acquaintances or strangers typically last just one night (Bogle, 2008; England, Shafer, & Fogarty, 2007). Dating, however, is not a thing of the past. This term is still widely used on college campuses today, typically after hanging out together long enough leads to dating (England, 2013). Bogle (2008) agrees that on campus the term dating is later after many hook ups lead to a couples defining themselves as boyfriend and girlfriend, but she notes that for many who never get that far, dating may be absent from their college years. Post-college, based on interviews with a small subsample of graduates, Bogle (2008) describes a reverse: formal dating replaces hooking up as is the way to get to know someone and young adults have money to spend and enjoy going somewhere on their planned dates.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES New technologies such as Internet dating enables people to get to know each other online and then plan a first date, but the vast majority of adult romantic relationships still start after men and women (regardless of their educational attainment) meet in physical locations such as the workplace, classes, bars, nightclubs, gyms, and friends parties and somehow express interest in getting to know one another better (see Gonzaga, 2011). According to the conventional dating norms, either person can be the first one to use body language or eye contact to signal potential interest in the other, but the man still has more responsibilities in getting them both to the dating stage. For example, the man may offer to buy a woman drinks at a bar or club and asks for a phone number that enables future contact. Then he makes the first call, text, or online message. If the woman shows interest, the man is the one who asks for a date by suggesting a place where the couple might go; usually, on that first planned encounter, he pays the bill for their entertainment (Bogle, 2008; Laner & Ventrone, 2000). The Importance of Examining Who Pays for Dates Here we examine the extent to which people reject or endorse one aspect of this conventional dating norm: men paying for dating expenses. When the check arrives at the table, the ensuing interaction provides important information about the extent to which people adhere to conventional norms, how the decision to pay or not pay is viewed by the dating partner, and whether peoples decisions to pay or not pay are consistent with their own attitudes about gender stereotypes and gender equality. Whereas most research on dating norms has been limited to small samples and college samples, here we use a large and diverse, sample of adults to investigate the extent to which these conventional gender norms are being endorsed or challenged.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES We focus on this one highly gender-stereotyped aspect of dating for several reasons. First, and most important, mens paying reflects their historical domination of financial resources within romantic relationships and reinforces the gender stereotype of male as provider. The extent to which each person rejects or endorses the assumption that the man will pay for everything, perhaps the deepest gender difference in the dating interaction, is then an excellent indicator of following or challenging the dictates of gender inequality in courtship. Second, focusing on this one aspect of social interaction is intriguing because it provides a rare case where the maintenance of status inequality and the maintenance of gender difference may be perceived as working together in womens favor, thus making females be the gender more likely to resist changing this age-old gendered pattern. The big picture of perpetuating male hegemony, as noted above, is abstract and less apparent than the immediate reward of saving money. Many women perceive being treated as the females advantage within the code of chivalry, and some women may even see mens paying as fair compensation for the well-known fact that men still earn more for their jobs. As Ridgeway (2011, p. 53) notes, most challenges to the persisting gender arrangements have come from women because they had more to immediately gain and less to lose; the maintenance of status inequality and gender difference more typically work together in mens favor. William J. Goode (1980) noted this pattern three decades earlier in his classic article Why Men Resist to help explain why ideologies favoring true equality have trouble taking hold. He makes the important point that when roles are in flux, people embrace changes that reduce their burdens but resist changes that reduce their privileges, and he saw the social changes of those times as more threatening to men. In her landmark book The Second Shift, Hochschild

WHO PAYS FOR DATES (1989) applies the same reasoning to explain why men who are willing to share the breadwinner role continue to resist full sharing of the parent and homemaker roles. When examining who pays for dates, we suggest we may find that rarer situation where women are particularly resistant to social change because it comes at a financial cost to them as they risk losing a perceived benefit of chivalry. The counterpart is that men may want this particular social change that reduces pressure on them to be sole or primary provider, and that preserves their limited resources for other financial needs and wants. Third, social and economic changes in the public sphere have been accompanied by social and economic changes in the domestic sphere (Ridgeway, 2011: Zelizer, 2005), so an interesting empirical question is whether the latter changes can also be observed earlier in heterosexual intimate relationships, namely in the early and/or later stages of dating and courtship. Conventional Gender Norms and Paying for Dates Chivalrous codes of behavior for men have historical roots. Conventionally, men had better educational and job opportunities, which led to higher wages, while women were denied these opportunities or were steered into lower paying careers. These factors resulted in mens having more income and womens relying on men to pay for dates and later provide for family expenses. The relative earning power of men and women, however, has been shifting. Although men earn more than women on average, the percentage of men and women in the paid labor force in the United States is roughly equal (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013). More women than men are receiving bachelors and master degrees (Becker, Hubbard, & Murphy, 2011), and most marriages (8 in 10) today are based on sharing the breadwinners burden (Galinsky, Aumann, & Bond, 2009). By 2006, among couples where both partners worked, 28 percent of

WHO PAYS FOR DATES women out-earned their partners (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2013). Womens growing economic power has created the shift to seeing family breadwinner as a shared role; our related question is whether it has also shifted expectations about womens contributing to dating expenses? Despite these changing economic opportunities for men and women, gender ideologies may still prevail. Conventional notions of chivalry dictate that when a man and woman go out on a date, the man pays. Chivalry is the idea that men, to show they will cherish and protect women, engage in acts specifically for women that they may not do for other men; this includes acts like picking the woman up, doing all the driving, bringing flowers, opening the door, and paying for the date. Most important for our research question, one enduring chivalrous act sets up the man as the inviter and the woman as invitee, thus as the inviter the man bears more obligation to treat. Given the contradiction between adhering to gendered dating norms emphasizing differences between men and women and contemporary notions of gender equality and irrelevance, how many, and which, people are choosing to conform versus reject conventional dating norms? Social science literature provides reasons to expect most people would be slow to change, as well as rationales for why some people risk change and try to alter established conventions. Some women may enjoy being the recipients of chivalrous favors but they may pay a cost for what has been termed benevolent sexism (Glicke & Fiske, 2001). One cost according to Zelizer (2005, p. 115) is that in dating today single men still invite single women out for meals or entertainment, pick up the tab, and expect a degree of intimacy to prevail during the encounter. We do not think Zelizer means to imply that this expectation is true on the first or

WHO PAYS FOR DATES second date, but rather over the course of a few months, a mans always paying may set up a sense of entitlement that typically includes some degree of sexual contact. This reciprocal arrangement provides another incentive for men to continue to pay, even if dates are costly, whereas this implied reciprocity encourages women to change the pattern, even though it raises the monetary cost to them. Ridgeways (2011, p. 53) work, on the other hand, leads us to expect that most people will adhere to behavior consistent with gender stereotypes, because gender is so deeply embedded and provides a clear framework of cultural beliefs that defines who men and women are by differentiating them; that is, people have a vested interest in preserving the gender differences that tell us who we are and how each of us is expected to act in a given situation. For example, using this reasoning, men will find adhering to codes of chivalry rewarding because they are respecting tradition and gender difference while demonstrating that they know their manners and find their date a worthy recipient of the favors. Ridgeways contributions extend the groundbreaking work of West and Zimmerman (1987) who recognized the social construction of differences and conceptualized the achievement as doing gender. People may not always live up to normative conceptions of femininity or masculinity, but they know what they are and they engage in behavior at the risk of gender assessment; that is, people engage in interaction with an awareness of accountability or how they might look or be characterized (West & Zimmerman, 1987, p. 136). For example, in a first-date scenario when people are just getting to know each other, even if a man does not want to pay for everything, he might pay because failure to pay puts him at risk for being viewed as lacking economic resources or as being uninterested, unchivalrous, orworse yet--cheap. They may pay because they feel socially obligated to do so, and may feel

WHO PAYS FOR DATES guilty if they fail to live up to these gendered expectations. Besides, first-date scenarios are full of uncertainty for both parties, and gender conformity is higher in times of uncertainty (Ridgeway, 2011). Bogles (2008) interview data of 27 people in their mid- to late twenties are consistent with this safe scenario, but she found that in early dating they relied on the traditional formal script with a modern twist: Women offered to pay a share but expected their money to be refused, while men assumed women really wanted to be treated and expected to pay for everything themselves. Deviating from Traditional Gender Norms? But perhaps a broad empirical investigation of men and women across the age spectrum of daters will show that people are not playing it safe by relying on older scripts. It is possible that an examination of who pays for dates will reveal that the old gender norms are losing their currency. Risman (2009, p. 81) put out a clarion call for research that monitors where conventional gender stereotypes are loosening their hold, where the performers by their social actions may be undoing gender, as she calls it. That is, she called for researchers to be on the lookout for situations where gender is, if not irrelevant, then at least becoming significantly less relevant than it has been in our past. One important motive to actually share dating expenses fairly is because both men and women may want their personal actions to be consistent with their professed beliefs. By the mid-1990s a majority of Americans agreed with various statements in the General Social Survey used to measure beliefs in gender equality (Cotter, Hermsen. & Vanneman, 2011). For example, when the General Social Survey asked respondents to agree or disagree with this statement: "It is much better for everyone involved if the man is the achiever outside the home and the woman takes care of the home and family," only 34% disagreed in 1977 compared to 64% in 2010.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Apart from being judged masculine or feminine, one also risks being seen as a hypocrite to assert women are mens equals, then continue to behave as the givers or takers of special treatment that puts women on the pedestal while men act as providers. Studying Who Pays for Dates: Is There Movement Toward Gender Equality? Despite an extensive literature related to dating and mating preferences, almost nothing is known about modern attitudes towards who should pay for dates, and who actually does pay for dates. One exception is embedded in the Online College Social Life Survey that was collected 2005-2011 on 21 college campuses. One item asked respondents who paid on their most recent date; among those who had a date with someone of the other sex (N = 12,899), 63 percent said the man paid, 2 percent said the woman paid, 16 percent said no money had been spent, and 19 percent said that both paid (England, 2013). Two mass media polls conducted to examine attitudes regarding who should pay on a date offer perspective on this question over time. A 1985 Virginia Slims Poll (Roper Center, 2012) found 31 percent of women and 40 percent of men thought the man should pay, only 4 percent of women and men felt that each person should pay his/her own way, and 1 percent of women and men thought the woman should pay. The remaining 54 percent of women and 42 percent of men thought that whoever asked for the date should pay (who is, according to conventional expectations, typically the man). Seventeen years later, a 2002 Christian Science Monitor poll (Roper, 2012) found very similar patterns: the vast majority of people thought that either the man should pay or the person who asked for the date should pay. A few people thought the bill should be split (16 percent) and essentially no one (0 percent) thought that the woman should pay the full expenses. The scant data on both attitudes and behavior suggest that there is

WHO PAYS FOR DATES still widespread adherence to this part of conventional dating norms despite nearly fifty years of contemporary feminism. More change might have been apparent had the survey data assessed more varied aspects of each partys decisions to pay or offer to pay all, or part, of the expenses on the date. Understanding the nuances of any sensitive negotiations around payingespecially on early dateswould require a combination of research methods, ideally including conversational analysis, observational studies, and post-date interviews. These methods would have the advantages of being able to capture the behavior live and/or probe people for their thoughts and feelings shortly thereafter. They are limited, however, in the size and breadth of samples that can be collected and the number of variables that can be explored. We believe that quantitative methods can also be used to advance the study of some micro-scale social interactions with the notable benefit of their ability to collect reports of behaviors, attitudes, and feelings from significantly larger and more diverse samples of subjects. In our case, we use the survey method to gather information on peoples attitudes towards behaviors that have conventionally been gendered and their reports of how they have managed expenses in their dating relationships. These reports can be examined for consistency or inconsistency with conventional dating norms, as well as associations of these behaviors and attitudes with age, income, education and other variables of interest. By exploring volunteered narrative reports, we also learn something about daters inner conflicts and tensions, whether based on violations or protection of conventional paying etiquette. Because, as West and Zimmerman (1987) cautioned, people who stray from convention do so with an awareness of the inherent risks, we expect in a time of flux that many people have devised creative strategies to reconcile the desire to adhere to some notions of chivalry and

WHO PAYS FOR DATES allegiance to sex differences with their modern gender egalitarian ideals. Are contemporary negotiations around who pays just a display of conventional masculinity and femininity performed in new garb, or are we really learning about an emergence of an array of acceptable ways to be a man and woman on a date? The Present Study Given the deep entrenchment of the norm that men should pay for dates, we expected to find many people following convention to some extent. Because of the incentives to change to more egalitarian behaviors described above, we expected to find some women and men daters of all ages, but especially younger ones not just paying lip service to gender equality but living up to its ideals by making gender irrelevant to who pays. In this article we present the results of the first large-scale survey that tries to refine our understanding of who pays for dates by including both survey and qualitative items. Our hope is that the answers to these questions can shed light on the extent to which people are reproducing versus reducing gender difference though these recurring dating interactions. Specifically, we examine the following research questions: 1) Who reports actually paying on dates; 2) Who should pay on dates according to men and women; 3) How do men feel when they do not pay for dates; and 4) Do people feel that paying for dates and sexual activity are connected? In answering these questions, we also examine whether important demographic characteristics namely age, education, and personal income are associated with these behaviors and attitudes. Method Participants

WHO PAYS FOR DATES The present study is based on secondary analyses of anonymous data collected via a survey posted on the popular website (named at the time of the study) for ten days in 2008. Market research on shows its 49 million unique monthly visitors is diverse in terms of age, income, and educational attainment (NBC News 2012). Internal web analytics data revealed that the overwhelming majority of the audience is in the United States (92%), followed by Canada and the United Kingdom (Nielsen, 2010); when we did our own analysis of zip codes of survey respondents from this website, we found that over 95% resided in the U.S. (although the proportion is likely higher because some participants did not provide zip codes). There is also substantial diversity in political orientation of people who use the site in terms of whether people identify as Conservative/Very Conservative (34%), Moderate (31%), or Liberal/Very Liberal (24%), and in terms of percentage idenfiying as Republican (31%) versus Democrat (33%) (Nielsen, 2010). An invitation to participate in a survey on attitudes towards finances, sex, and love appeared continually on the front page of the financial news section and periodically on the website homepage. All participants were provided with an opportunity to view the privacy agreement, and asked for their birth year; those under age 18 were dismissed as too young to participate. Participants were volunteers who received no compensation. To prevent the same individual from responding to the survey more than once, a software program denied multiple responses from any given computer. As consultants on this survey as well as previous ones posted on this news website, the authors have access to the anonymous data sets. Datasets garnered this way have been used to examine elements of body dissatisfaction (Author et al., 2006; 2007; 2009), attitudes toward female bosses (Author et al., 2011), and use of online dating and adult websites (Author et al.,

WHO PAYS FOR DATES 2011). For other studies that rely on Internet methods, see Skitka and Sargis (2006), Reimers (2007), and England and Bearak (2013). Given the broad-based appeal of the website-- it ranks among the top five most popular non-pornographic websites in the United States (NBC News 2012)it provided a demographically diverse sample and an opportunity to compare men and women who differed substantially on this studys variables of interest. Over 70,000 participants completed the survey, which focused on money issues in close relationships. In this paper we focus on the 17,067 unmarried and non-cohabitating heterosexual respondents (8549 men and 8518 women) between the ages of 18 and 65 who completed the items about dating and demographics. Because different questions had to be constructed for women and based on heterosexual dating norms, gay men and lesbians, as along with married and cohabitating participants, were directed towards a different set of questions. Demographics and Gender Attitudes Age. The mean age was 38 for men (SD = 12) and 35 for women (SD = 11). For some analyses, age categories were created: 18-25 (n = 3876; 23 percent), 26-35 (n = 5276; 31 percent), 36-45 (n = 3553; 21 percent), 46-55 (n = 3004; 17 percent), 56-65 (n = 1358; 8 percent). Relationship status. Participants were unmarried individuals who indicated they were not currently dating someone (n = 5264; 31 percent), were currently dating or seeing more than one person (n = 2046; 12 percent), or were dating or in a committed relationship with one person (n = 9757; 57 percent). For the individuals who were in a dating or committed relationship, the average relationship length was 2.2 years (SD =3.1). In terms of relationship length, 11 percent (n = 1057) of participants had been together for less than 6 months, 63 percent (n = 6178) for 6

WHO PAYS FOR DATES months to 2 years, 18 percent (n = 1710) from 3 to 5 years, and the remaining 8 percent (n = 812) for longer than 5 years. Education. Participants indicated whether they had less than high school education (n = 133; 1 percent), a high school diploma or GED (n = 983; 6 percent), an associates degree or some college (n = 5816; 34 percent), a four-year college degree (n = 5650; 33 percent), some post-graduate work (n = 1449; 8 percent), or a post-graduate degree (n = 3026; 18 percent). For regression analyses, these responses were coded 0-5. For other analyses, to facilitate presentation of the data, the educational groups were split into four groups that included high school degree or less, some college / associates degree, a four-year degree, or post-graduate work. Income. Individuals reported their yearly personal income as falling into one of fifteen income categories, with the minimum category being $0-$4,999 per year and the upper category being $200,000 or more. We also took the midpoint of the categories to create an interval scale for use in correlations (e.g. $50,000-$59,999 was coded as $55,000; the maximum category was coded as $250,000). A small subset of participants declined to report their income (n = 634; 4 percent). The median income range for men was $50,000-$59,999 (Mean = $70,000; SD = $49,000) and the median income range for women was $40,000-$49,999 (Mean = $51,000; SD = $36,000). For some analyses, the following income categories were created: $0-$30,000 (n = 3340; 20 percent), $30,001-$60,000 (n = 6823; 42 percent), $60,001-$100,000 (n = 4125; 25 percent), > $100,000 (n = 2145; 13 percent). Primary Outcome Measures of Interest: Paying for Dates Likert scale items. The eight questions asked of men are shown in Table 1 and the nine questions asked of women are shown in Table 2. Responses were provided on a 4-point Likert scale (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Agree, 4 = Strongly Agree). The questions

WHO PAYS FOR DATES assessed behaviors, attitudes and expectations relating to paying on dates, including who offers to pay and who usually pays, beliefs about who should pay, how women want men to respond when women offer to pay, how men feel both when the other person pays or never offers to pay, and whether or not men expect sex if they pay for dinner and whether women feel less pressured regarding sexual activity when they pay for themselves. To facilitate the presentation of the results, for some analyses we calculated the percentage of individuals who disagreed with the statements (scores of 1-2) versus the percentage who agreed (scores of 3-4); for regression analyses we used the full four point Likert-scales. Separating Conventional versus more Egalitarian Norm Endorsers Regarding Who Pays The items were not intended to measure one single construct, but instead to assess a wide variety of attitudes and behaviors related to paying for dates, and thus we present the results on an item by item basis. A few of the items assessed views that may be considered conventional or egalitarian views. Thus we constructed this typology to give a sense of what proportion of respondents held reasonably coherent conventional versus egalitarian positions, and what proportion revealed ambivalence regarding accepting versus confronting old gender norms. Men and women were asked different questions, and thus the percentages of men and women with conventional versus egalitarian views cannot be directly compared. Instead, we examine how these viewpoints vary across different demographic groups within each sex, and how they relate to other items, such as reports on who actually pays for dates. Male daters who answered all three of the following items in the conventional direction were labeled conventional norm endorsers (14 percent of sample): [After the first few dates, women should help pay expenses (Disagree)], [Id stop dating a woman who never offers to pay any of our expenses (Disagree)], and [It bothers me when a woman tries to pay the bill on dates

WHO PAYS FOR DATES (Agree)]. Male daters who answered with the reverse pattern were labeled egalitarian norm endorsers (28 percent). Men who sided with two of the three items in the conventional direction were conventional norm leaners (26 percent), whereas men siding in the reverse direction were egalitarian norm leaners (33 percent). Female daters who answered all three items in the conventional direction were labeled conventional norm endorsers (16 percent): [I ALWAYS offer to help pay, even on a first date (Disagree)], [It bothers me when men expect me to help pay for dates (Agree)], and/or [It bothers me when a man accepts my offer to pay for a dateId prefer that he reject my offer (Agree)]. Female daters who answered the reverse patterns were labeled egalitarian norm endorsers (30 percent). Females who sided with two of the three items in the conventional direction were labeled conventional norm leaners (25 percent), whereas women siding in the reverse directions were egalitarian norm leaners (29 percent). Reports of Sharing Expenses Reported sharing of dating expenses. In addition to the questions asked above, participants with a relationship partner answered the question About how long did you date before you started sharing expenses? Participants could indicate a specified time period before or after the first six months of their relationship when they started sharing, or whether one partner pays all of the expenses (see Figure 1). If one person always paid, participants could indicate whether they are fine with this arrangement or whether they would prefer to share expenses. Results for these items are reported only for individuals who have been with their partner for six months or longer. Volunteered Narrative Thoughts and Feelings About Dating and Who Pays

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Participants were also given the opportunity write a short paragraph-long narrative regarding their thoughts and feelings about paying for dates after completing the quantitative items. The women were asked the question Tell us how you relate to a man who never lets you pay for anything on a date vs. to a man who expects you to help pay. Do you believe the power dynamics shift when youre paying? Tell us how that changes things. Overall, 2091 women (25 percent) provided narratives, with the average length being 52 words. The men were asked the question Tell us how you get women to start paying on dates when they haven't offered or insisted, or why you prefer to pay for everything yourself. Are you willing to spend more money on a date (or cover all expenses yourself) when youre sure the evening will end with sex? Overall, 2057 men (24 percent) provided narratives, with the average length being 33 words. Due to the fact that only a subset of motivated participants provided the narratives, rather than systematically coding them using inductive techniques, we used the narratives only to help us better understand and illustrate the patterns in the survey results. After randomizing their order, we examined the first 2000 narratives to find responses that illustrated the patterns identified in the quantitative results; we present a small selection of these useful narratives in our discussion section. Results Overview of Data Analysis and Data Presentation Strategy We first present the overall percentage of men and women who agreed and disagreed with each statement related to paying for dates (Tables 1 and 2) as well as the percentage classified as Conventional, Egalitarian, or in-between Leaners (Table 3). The patterns identified in the percentages are then evaluated using regression analyses to examine the relative usefulness

WHO PAYS FOR DATES of personal characteristics (e.g., age) when predicting attitudes towards paying for dates when controlling for other variables (Table 4). The large sample size provided the power to detect even miniscule effects, leading us to set p < .001 as the criterion for statistical significance. Even with this more stringent criterion, however, Beta () values as small as .05 in linear regressions were statistically significant because of our large sample size. As a rough guide, we suggest that values of .10 or greater be considered potentially meaningful. Similarly, because even small differences between percentages were statistically significant, we suggest that differences of eight percentage points or greater be interpreted as potentially meaningful. Research Question 1: Who Reports Actually Paying on Dates Men, Women, or Both? As shown on Tables 1 and 2, almost all men (82 percent) and the majority of women (58 percent) agreed that even after dating for a while, the man ends up paying for most of a couples dating expenses. These patterns were consistent across different age, education, and income groups, although there was a tendency for men with higher incomes to report paying the dating expenses (see Tables 1 and 4). For people in relationships for six months or longer, about one-fourth of men and women say they shared expenses right from the start (see Figure 1). The majority agree that expenses did become shared some time within the first six months, although a third of the women state that sharing did not start until at least four months of dating. Even after six months, however, 28 percent of men say they always pay compared to only 3 percent of women. Women only partially confirm mens reports, however: only 14 percent of women (compared to the 28 percent of men) said that their partner still pays for all dating expenses after 6 months of dating. Of the men who always pay, 38 percent wish expenses were shared while the rest are fine with the

WHO PAYS FOR DATES arrangement; of the women who say their partner always pays, 36 percent wish expenses were shared and the rest are fine as is. Looking at people in relationships, using our typology, men and women with more egalitarian attitudes were the most likely to say they split expenses right from the start or within the first month of dating: egalitarian norm endorsers (58 percent; 58 percent), in contrast to egalitarian norm leaners (42 percent; 44 percent), conventional norm leaners (32 percent; 35 percent), and conventional norm endorsers (14 percent; 22 percent). For the most part, people in these categories demonstrated consistency between attitudes and behaviors. Table 3 shows sharing expenses is more about attitude than financial resources, as there is virtually no variation by income group. Research Question 2: Who Should Pay on Dates According to Men and Women? Although men and women agreed that men generally paid more of the expenses, overall, a slight majority of women claim they always offer to pay their share, even on a first date (57 percent; see Table 2). Older women were less likely to report always offering (Table 4; = -.17). But do women want their offers to be accepted or rejected? As shown on Table 2, nearly twofifths of women resent it when men do accept their money. Even among the women who say they always offer to pay, nearly one-third of these women (32 percent) said they would prefer that the man rejects their offers to pay, and one-third (34 percent) said they resent it when a man expects them to help pay. Overall, just over two-fifths feel bothered when they feel men expect them to help pay, and this was more true of older women than younger women (Table 4; = .12). Men are in a bit of a bind, however, because there is no clear path for men to follow: another two-fifths of women said they were bothered when men wont accept their offers to help

WHO PAYS FOR DATES pay for dates. The deviation from the conventional norm by almost half of the dating population creates ambiguity for men regarding whether or not to insist on paying the check. Do men expect to pay all expenses, or do they expect women to contribute? And how do they feel about the women who dont offer to share expenses? Overall, very few men could be described as true conventionalists: only 7 percent strongly disagreed with the idea that women should help pay expenses after the first few dates, with 36 percent strongly or somewhat disagreeing. Only 14 percent of men answered all three items in the conventional direction in our typology (Table 3). Approximately one-third of men reported that they were bothered when a woman tries to pay the bill on a date, and there was a weak association between education level and this attitude. Nearly all men who said this bothered them also reported that they would feel guilty if they did not pay for their dates (91 percent). In contrast to these conventionalists, a solid majority (64 percent) of men agreed that women should help pay. Age was weakly related to this belief (Table 4; = -.15), and the percentage strongly agreeing with this statement by age group were: 18-25 (21%), 26-35 (22%), 36-45 (16%), 46-55 (15%), and 56-65 (14%). Our most surprising finding is that nearly half (44 percent) of the men said that they would stop dating a woman who never offers to pay any expenses on a date (see Table 1). Older men, however, were less comfortable with this position (Table 4; = -.15), with only one-third of older men stating they would stop dating a woman who never paid, which is still a substantial minority of older men. This suggests that some men may be undoing gender in the sense that they expect some degree of financial contribution or at least the offer of financial contribution from their dates. This was especially true if their dates earn more: One-third of men (34 percent) were willing to say that women with a higher income should pay more of the expenses.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Research Question 3: How Do Men Feel When They Do Not Pay for Dates? Undoing gender, however, comes with emotional consequences for men. Many men feel guilty when violating the man should pay norm. Despite the fact that nearly two-thirds of men agreed that after the first few dates, women should help pay expenses, three-fourths of men agreed that they feel guilty when they dont pay the bill on dates, and this was generally true across age, income, and educational groups (Table 4; all s < . 07). Even among men who say that women should help pay for expenses, 72 percent of these men report feeling guilty when they do not pay. Similarly, among the men who say that they would stop dating a woman who never offers to pay any dating expenses, 71 percent report feeling guilty when women pay. Even the majority of men (64 percent) who we labelled egalitarian norm endorsers in our typology said they felt guilty when they dont pay; an even larger proportion of egalitarian norm leaners (74 percent), conventional norm leaners (81 percent), and conventional norm endorsers (92 percent) reported feeling guilty in these situations. Research Question 4: Do People Feel that Paying for Dates and Sexual Activity Are Connected? The implied reciprocity of physical intimacy for being treated described by Zelizer (2005) was mostly not endorsed by our respondents, especially not by the men. Only a minority of men and womenbut more women than men explicitly connected sex and paying for dates. As shown in Table 1, one in six men believed that women should engage in sexual activity if the man pays the bill on a date, with 18-25 year old men most likely to endorse this position (21 percent). Men who always pay for dates and wish expenses were shared, however, were twice as likely to expect sexual activity as men who always pay for dates and are okay with that arrangement (23% vs. 11%).

WHO PAYS FOR DATES For women, about one-third agreed with the statement when I help pay, I feel less pressured to engage in sexual activity, and there was a strong association between older age and feeling this reduced pressure (Table 4; = .17). Only 22 percent of women 18-25 reported that paying reduced their pressure to be sexual, but this percentage climbed across the age groups, culminating in nearly half of women (46 percent) ages 56-65 reporting this reduced pressure. Among the women who disagreed with our single-item statement, alas, we could not distinguish between those who felt no pressure, even when treated, and those who felt pressure to be intimate, even when they helped pay. Discussion Illustrating Differing Viewpoints in Their Own Words One job of a discussion section is to help interpret results, in this case data from a largescale survey. The quantitative results revealed that there was substantial variation in whether people held to conventional norms, went egalitarian, or tried to find some middle ground. Here we provide quotations from participants, not as new data, but rather as aids to help us elaborate the complexity in the negotiations around who pays, to illustrate the diversity of opinions, and to highlight the sometimes internal contradictions some people have regarding their egalitarian attitudes but also beliefs that men should pay on a date. The Womens Narratives Illustrating conventional views. Some women did not endorse egalitarian gender norms at all, seeing it as the mans responsibility to pay and preferring a man who pays because it says something about his values, his ability to provide for his family, and his worthiness as a partner. For example, a 59-year-old woman said, A man who pays for everything sends a message that he can take care of me, even if I'm perfectly capable of taking care of myself, and a 29-year-old

WHO PAYS FOR DATES stated, a man who never lets you pay for anything on a date was raised with conventional values, and it makes me feel special or that he thinks I'm worth it. The social costs for men can be high if they fail to pay for dates, for some women judged mens masculinity, desirability, and character negatively. A 42-year-old woman reached a harsh judgment, If a man expects me to pay, then hes not a real man, and a 33-year-old admitted, If I have to pay I typically wont go out with him again. One 25-year-old woman explained why she still expects chivalry despite changing economic roles of men and women: Although we live in a world where it is no longer the norm for men to make the only income or even for men to make the bigger income, paying is a display of chivalry. Women want to be taken care of. Many women want the man to decide where to go, they want the man to choose the wine... because in today's world women have more power more often. They want the opportunity to not have power and the safest place to do this is in a relationship, with someone you trust. Illustrating egalitarian views. On the other hand, some women endorsed less conventional notions. They expressed that sharing expenses made them feel more equal. As a 26-year-old stated, I think if you expect equality in your relationship, then there should be equality when paying for dates. A 28-year-old asserted I think that there is an undeniable power shift when a woman pays or offers to pay. As a woman, I am making a clear statement that I am not dependent upon his generosity and therefore not dependent upon him. Some, like this 23year-old woman, said they felt more respected by their dates when they paid: When a man lets me pay or help pay I feel that he respects me and understands that I work hard for my money. When a man does not allow me to ever pay or help pay, I feel that he looks at me as someone who is beneath him.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES For some of these women, it was simply a matter of fairness. As one 24-year-old explained, We usually split the cost or pay every other time. That's how I believe it should be - why should he have to pay when we are both enjoying it? It is a shared experience so it should be entirely shared, unless one partner is treating the other for a special occasion. Other women felt that it was a way of demonstrating their desirability to men and their ability to contribute as a financial partner to the relationship. A 24-year-old said, It shows a man you're financially independent when the woman pays or offers to pay. In today's world, some men are looking for a partner who makes her own money, while some are still more old-fashioned and like being the providers. For me, I feel like I'm showing him I can make it on my own but can also take care of him. Women were also wary of men who insisted on paying the date, seeing that as a red flag that he might be too controlling. This 56-year-old expressed the sentiment: The man who assumes the role of paying for everything dominates the relationship and feels a sense of entitlement. He also reminds you of all the nice things he's done and how you are beholden to him. Illustrating a mix of conventional and egalitarian views. There was some recognition of the contradiction between modern values and reliance on the conventional dating norms. A 33-year-old confessed, If on a first date a man expected me to help pay, though I claim to be a liberal and independent, Id be lying if I said I wouldnt be put off. One way of mixing conventional values and the changing role of women in society was to expect men to pay more, but to still be willing to chip in. A 42-year-old explained, Maybe it's reverse sexism, but I feel uncomfortable with a man who expects me to help pay at the very beginning. After we have been dating a short time, I am happy to pick up the tab half of the time, but not at first. Illustrating attitudes regarding sex and paying for dates. Some women clearly linked money and sexual intimacy. Interestingly, this explains why some women choose to pay for

WHO PAYS FOR DATES dates, while others choose not to pay. Some women viewed sex as mens reward for paying. As one 23-year-old emphatically stated, I should never have to pay for anything. He is getting this piece of ass! This 23-year-old agreed, If I have to pay, what-so-ever for a meal on a date, I will not be putting out. In contrast, other women reporting paying for dates to avoid the pressure to be sexual on a date. A 43-year-old declared, A man who always pays, always expects sex. If I pay, then I'm off the hook. The Mens Narratives Men reported on why they prefer to pay for everything themselves or how they get women to start paying on dates when they haven't offered. They were also asked if they are willing to spend more money on a date (or cover all expenses themselves) if they think the evening will end with sex. Illustrating attitudes regarding sex and paying for dates. The quantitative results indicated that the vast majority of men do not expect sex when they pay for dates, and used strong words to express this. A 31-year-old stated, I never expect anything in return for paying for everything, except that she be kind and respectful and appreciative. A 44-year-old said, She gets dinner whether or not I get dessert. A 58-year-old said, I enjoy a good time and taking care of my date whether we end up in bed or not, while a 33-year-old sharply disagreed with our association: I dont spend more in order to get sex. I want a partner, not a whore. Table 1 showed that one in six men, however, did believe paying on dates entitled them to sex, and some men, like this 38-year-old, admitted that they would spend more when sex seems assured: I will spend a whole paycheck if Im sure the evening will end with sex. Illustrating conventional views. Men expressed why they wanted to pay for their dates, and much of had to do with chivalry and the culturally transmitted norms they believed they had

WHO PAYS FOR DATES learned. This 31-year-old explained, I was raised a gentleman. My father always told me you treat the woman like a princess and you take care of her. A 19-year-old stated, I usually tend to pay for everything myself because I believe in chivalry, which makes me part of a dying breed. In addition, some men paid as a way to demonstrate their desirability as a partner and because it feels good to adhere to the norm because of what it communicates to the dating partner. A 34year-old said, I prefer to pay because it shows your date that you are financially secure. A 29year-old added this insight, I prefer to pay for everything because it makes me feel good about myself because I make decent money and it makes me appreciate how hard I have worked to earn the money I make, and I hope that the woman appreciates that too. Illustrating egalitarian views. Some men suggested that getting women to share the bill from the outset has not been a problem for them. As one 38-year-old put it, All of the women I have dated were always very interested in demonstrating that they could and would help pay. A 27-year-old was more succinct: Just date feminists. What happens when women dont pay? As we learned from our survey item, this was a potential deal breaker for nearly half the men. These two men, ages 31 and 32, said, If she can't even offer then I don't want to be with someone that cheap and I don't try and get them to pay for anything. If she can't figure it out on her own, she's too self-entitled, too self-centered and too dense to be worth dating so I figure out a way to end it. Illustrating a mix of conventional and egalitarian views. The quantitative results suggested that many men held a mix of conventional and egalitarian viewpoints. On the one hand, some men wanted women to contribute to expenses so they did not feel like they were dating a princess, freeloader, or gold digger. Men with these mixed views wanted to pay for dates at first and demonstrate they are chivalrous, but then expect women to begin sharing the

WHO PAYS FOR DATES expenses once a dating relationship has been established. As one 25-year-old said it, Im fine with paying for the first few dates. However, if the relationships are supposed to be 50/50 then each partner is expected to invest in the partnership financially. Some men arranged to take care of expenses at first in order to signal their desirability and serious potential as a partner, but then to expected some degree of sharing. Heres the reasoning of this 34-year-old: On the first few dates I usually expect to pay for everything because I think it shows strong dependable commitment. Then if everything works out I expect my partner to take some responsibility. Some men tailored their expectations based on relative income, but, as this 20-year-old makes clear, gender expectations trump economics: It would depend on the situation too. If I make much more than she does (example: I make $59k and she makes $28k), I would never ask due to the financial imbalance. But if I made $59k and she made $100k, I would still pay, but expect her to help. Men had a wide variety of strategies to communicate that they expected women to help share in the expenses, from passive waiting and silent hopes, I would never ask her to pay, only hope she would offer (age 40), to scaling back of expenses, I make it no secret that I cant afford to always pay. She'll notice when we spend less and less at places or don't go out altogether. Usually that's when she'll ante up (age 25). Others, like this 49-year-old, try subtle hints: I will make some comments about how the price of things keep going up and hope she takes the hint. Some men, like this 28-year-old, were more explicit about their expectations: I would just casually say, let's split the bill. Limitations and Strengths This survey provides a unique look at how men and women navigate the business of who should pay for dates. The study, however, is not without limitations, but also has strengths.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Although our sample was unusually large and geographically diverse, it was not nationally representative. Given that access to the Internet has grown remarkably in the last decade, the opportunity to participate in surveys such as this one is available to 95% of those between ages 18 and 29, 87% of those 30 to 49, 78% of those 50-64, and 42% of those 65 and older (U.S. Census Bureau 2012). Internet samples, including ours, tend to include relatively better educated and higher income participants than the national population. This is probably less of a concern in this case given that income and education were generally related to attitudes and behavior. Further, Internet samples tend to be more diverse with respect to gender, age, socioeconomic status and geographic region than non-probability samples generated by many traditional data-gathering methods (Gosling, Vazire, Srivastava, and John 2004). The unusually large size of our sample allowed us to the statistical power to explore many variables of interest. For a detailed discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of Internet research, see Fraley (2007). Due to sharp restraints on the length of the survey there were no data on traits such as political orientation, race/ethnicity, and religiosity; and because the sponsors main focus was on financial arrangements of couples who reside together, we were restricted to a short number of items for daters. Lamentably, there was no space to explore variations in sharing expenses (e.g. going Dutch versus alternating treating versus the woman pays the servers tip when the man pays the restaurant bill, etc.), nor to learn more about the coincidence, or irrelevance, of the start of splitting expenses with declarations of dating exclusivity. Still, relative to some previous studies that relied on single items, we were able to assess various aspects of this dating interaction through multiple items measuring different attitudes and behaviors related to paying for dates.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Further limiting our understanding nuances involved in sharing expenses, women in this survey were asked if they help pay, signaling to them that paying is still seen by many as mens primary responsibility. That phrasing for the item was selected by those with editorial control both because its how they perceived women really talk about this subject and also because they feared that if an item were worded, for example, I always offer to pay, even on a first date, there would be confusion about whether women were being asked if they were paying all expenses on a date or just a fair share. Their insistence on the help pay version of our items demonstrates how engrained these attitudes are. Try reversing any of our items, such as asking a woman to agree or disagree with the statement, If I pay the bill, I think a man should engage in some sexual activity in return, and the ludicrous exercise drives home the point that we needed different questions for the sexes due to deeply entrenched gender standards in dating. Finally, we are limited by only having reports of what people say they do with no way to judge their accuracy. Surveys provide valuable information about reported attitudes and behaviors, but observing actual behavior in the real world would add another dimension. Indepth interviews shortly after the paying for date interaction, conversational analysis, and ethnomethodogical approaches would be useful in helping our understanding of how people really think and talk about this issue and how the social interactions unfold. Concluding Comments on Reported Changes: Undoing Gender or Token Gestures? Our data suggest there has been significant movement away from a monolithic cultural norm for dating and towards a more variable set of strategies and interactions. The data presented here support the notion that many peoples behaviors across age, income, and educational variations are disrupting old gendered assumptions about who pays, and in that respect those people seem to be attempting to undo gender, using Rismans (2009) definition.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Changing these behaviors both reflect and reinforce changing social norms. The more women contribute and the more men ask or expect them to help pay, the greater the breakdown of old assumptions. It is clearly no longer mens exclusive responsibility to pay for dates. Only 14% of men were consistent conventional norm endorsers who believe paying for everything is still the mans responsibility. A solid majority of men (64%) said they expect some degree of financial contribution. Albeit fewer, but still a majority of women (56%) said they are not bothered by mens expectations to share expenses. The flipside of that statisticthe 44% of women who admitted they are bothered when men expect them to payreveals resistance to social change. That is, even among those who are willing to contribute, a substantial proportion of women indicated that they preferred to choose whether or not to help pay. Choice, while generally desirable, is only consistent with egalitarian ideology in this circumstance if both men and women get to choose whether or not to pay dating expenses, and that is obviously not the case. Consistent with Goodes point, our findings indicated that many women are resisting a change that is associated with loss of a female privilege: 6 in 10 women said men pay more (and 8 in 10 men agree), even after dating a while, and one third of the women in relationships admitted waiting 4 to 6 months or longer before sharing expenses. More research is needed to explore the paradox of many womens support of ideals of equality while expecting men to pay more on dates. Our narratives suggest some women are looking for cues of a mans interest in a relationship while others are testing a mans prowess as future providers (perhaps especially those women who plan to take time out of the work force in their child-bearing years). Many women just declare they enjoy the spoils of chivalry. Appreciating the benefits and rituals of

WHO PAYS FOR DATES benevolent sexism is one reason some women are slow to endorse change, but there is a price to be paid for being placed on a pedestal. Benevolent sexism may not be harmful immediately, but research has shown that it may provide justification to continue with more directly harmful hostile forms of sexism (Glicke & Fiske, 2001). Many men seem to enjoy their part in chivalrous scripts, too. Our dataespecially the qualitative narratives volunteeredmade clear that many men still enjoy treating in the early stages of dating. Chivalry benefits men then because the early stages of dating are fraught with uncertainties and ambiguities, and the men seem more at risk of being ill judged than the women. When he doesnt know a woman well, a man cannot distinguish between the woman who would be offended if he takes the money she offers and the woman who would be offended if he refuses it. Sadly, our data confirm that often the same women hold these conflicting views, so what is the man to do to insure a good impression? When there is no clear path to followa situation that may be far more stressful on the man than the womanthe safest strategy is to follow conventional gender rules, regardless of whether he actually endorses the underlying norms (Ridgeway, 2011). And many men are willing to continue to pay a larger share of a couples dating expenses, even after a relationship has progressed, because it is a display of masculinity that is expected and underscores gender difference that both parties are likely to appreciate (Ridgeway, 2011). As our one narrative vividly showed, gender can even trump relative economic means as a predictor of who pays: some men may want to pay more even when she earns more (although a third of men thought that women should contribute more if she earns more). While many men want to demonstrate their romantic interest or commitment and/or their financial ability to pay, the narratives also made clear that who pays is a sensitive issue for men, too. They dont want

WHO PAYS FOR DATES to feel used by women, and they dont want to think they are dating a hypocrite who espouses one set of values while displaying another. Most important, in an era when men and women share breadwinning responsibilities in the home, men can use this aspect of dating interactions to screen out women whose behavior suggests they wont hold up their end of the bargain if the relationship progresses. For nearly half the men in this sample a womans failure to ever offer to pay was a deal breaker for these modern men. That, to us, is one of the most interesting statistics to emerge from our study. Imagine the scenario: If a man wants to break off a relationship for this reason, he is unlikely to announce why he has stopped calling and texting, he just stops or gives some other flimsy excuse. That leaves the abandoned woman left to ponder if he met someone new or if it was something personal about her that he did not like. It is highly unlikely that she would ever guess it related to her failure to pay up. We have asked our students and friends, and have yet to encounter a single woman who ever got this feedback herself, or ever heard about the pattern as it affected someone she knew, so we get the impression that this finding of ours will be somewhat of a wake-up call. In this single telling finding about dating and paying interactions, we see evidence of a sea change. Bigger sea changes would have to be linked to a deeper breakdown of gender as the primary cultural frame that coordinates our social relationships, as Ridgeway (2011) persuasively shows still guides us. For example, we have seen no data that parallels ours that suggest that now the risk inherent in asking for a date is also a shared responsibility. As the two mass media polls cited showed, people believe either the man should pay or the person who asked for the date should pay. As long as these two chivalrous behaviors, asking and paying, are linked, and as long as men are expected to perform the asking, there will be social and internal pressures on

WHO PAYS FOR DATES men to pay more. On a broader scale yet, gender disparities in pay and domestic responsibilities are slow to change, and are consistent with the current pattern of mens paying more on dates. Why should women pay 50 percent if they dont earn the same or if they wont reap the benefits of a partner who does 50 percent of the housework? So we are far from a conclusion that gender is irrelevant in determining who pays, but Risman (2009) is willing to consider gender is to some extent being undone where it is becoming less relevant. With this lesser standard in mind, we believe that our data clearly show that this part of gender standards is being undone by many people. The answer to one of our research questions is clear: The social and economic changes in the domestic sphere do start before a couple moves in together; in addition to shifting families to see breadwinner as a shared role, expectations have also shifted regarding womens contribution to dating expenses. Remember, fully a quarter of daters in relationships reported that they started sharing expenses right from the start and four in ten were doing so after the first few dates, where insecurities may have led to reliance on tradition. Which people are undoing gender in this way? Across age groups, there were few differences, but some of the items suggested possible generational change. Younger men were more likely to state that they would stop dating a woman who never offered to pay for expenses, and younger women were more likely to offer to help pay. Overall, men ages 26-35 were most likely to endorse egalitarian ideals, as were men with a college degree or higher. Similarly, women ages 18-35 and women with college degrees or higher were most likely to endorse these ideals. The weak association between education and income and paying behaviors is not that surprising. Women of all ages and across social strata are entrenched in the labor force,

WHO PAYS FOR DATES underlying the force for this change, while at the same time the deeply embedded ideals about gender are a resilient mass cultural framework that slows it down. In the context of these competing forces, where impetus for change seems to be winning, its interesting to note that many mens willingness to absorb the price of early dates and more than half the costs later on keeps chivalry alive, gender roles distinct, and some privileges for both sexes intact. Consistent with Zelizers (2005) general premise that a new combination of intimacy and economic activity is evolving, the data we have presented here suggest that the deep-rooted courtship ritual around who pays is also changing along with the transformation of the material and social power of women and men. Even in the delicate financial interactions within the realm of early dating, a new age appears to be here.


References Becker, G. S., Hubbard, W. H. J., & Murphy, K. M. (2010). Explaining the worldwide boom in higher education of women. Journal of Human Capital, 3, 203-241. Bogle, K. A. (2008). Hooking up: Sex, dating, and relationships on campus. New York. NY: New York University Press. Cotter, D. A., Hermsen, J. M., & Vanneman, R. (2011). End of the gender revolution? Gender role attitudes from 1977 to 2008. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 259-89. Deutsch, F. M. (2007). Undoing gender. Gender & Society, 21, 106-127. Eaton, A. A., & Rose, S. (2011). Has dating become more egalitarian? A 35 year review using Sex Roles. Sex Roles, 64, 843-862. England, P. (2010). The gender revolution: Uneven and stalled. Gender and Society, 24, 149-66. England, P., & Bearak, J. (2013). Is There a War of the Sexes in College? Gender, Meanings, and Casual Sex. Paper prepared for presentation at the Population Association of America, New Orleans, 11-13 April. England, P., Shafer, E. F., & Fogarty, A. C. K. (2007). Hooking up and forming romantic relationships on todays college campuses. In M. Kimmel (Ed.), The Gendered Society Reader (pp. 531-547). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Fraley, R. C. (2007). Using the Internet for personality research: What can be done, how to do it, and some concerns. In R. W. Robins, R. C. Fraley, & R. F. Krueger (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in personality psychology (pp. 130-148). New York: Guilford

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Author et al., 2006; Author et al., 2007 Author et al., 2009 Galinsky, E., Aumann, K., & Bond, J. T. (2009). Times are changing: Gender and generation at work and home. New York, NY: Families and Work Institute. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109118. Gonzaga, G. (2011). How you meet your spouse matters. Summary of findings of study conducted by Opinion Research Corporation International. Retrieved Sept. 13, 2011 from Goode, W. J. (1980). Why men resist. Dissent, 27, 181-193. Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93-104. Grazian, D. (2007). On the make: The hustle of urban life. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Author et al, 2011; Author et al, 2011 Laner, M. R., & Ventrone, N. A. (2000). Dating scripts revisited. Journal of Family Issues, 21, 488-500. Author et al, 2009 NBC News. 2012. Media Kit. New York, NY: Retrieved June 13, 2012 Nielsen. 2010. Plan Profiling: Ominiture Data from December, 2010. Personal communication

WHO PAYS FOR DATES with market analyst from on December 30, 2010. Reimers, S. (2007). The BBC internet study: General methodology. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 147-161. Risman, B. J. (2009). From doing to undoing: Gender as we know it. Gender & Society, 23, 81-84. Roper Center for Public Opinion Research (2012). TIPP/Investors Business Daily/Christian Science Monitor Poll. Obtained via personal communication as a professional courtesy by the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. Skitka, L. J., & Sargis, E. G. (2006). The internet as psychological laboratory. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 529-55. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2013. Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age. Retrieved January 9th, 2013 from U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2013. Women who earn more than their husbands, 1987-2011. Retrieved January 9th, 2013 from U. S. Census Bureau. 2012. Digital Nation: Expanding Internet Usage. Washington DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved on June 15, 2012 from df West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1, 125-151. Zelizer, V. A. (2005). The purchase of intimacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Table 1. Mens Reported Behaviors and Attitudes towards Paying on Dates
Even after Ive dated a woman for a while, I usually end up paying for most of our dating expenses % 82 Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 Education High school Some college College graduate Post-graduate Income 0-30K 31-60K 61-100K > 100K Sharing Expenses Right from start After about month 1-6+ months I pay: OK I pay: Wish shared 80 81 82 84 84 21 18 14 12 12 65 68 63 61 59 34 36 33 34 33 47 53 42 37 30 39 31 35 35 36 81 74 74 74 74 If I pay the bill, I think that a woman should engage in some sexual activity in return % 16 After the first few dates, women should help pay expenses % 64 If a woman makes more money than I do, then she should pay more of our expenses % 34 Id stop dating a woman who never offers to pay any of our expenses % 44 It bothers me when a woman tries to pay the bill on a date % 35 I feel guilty if I dont pay the bill on dates % 76


83 82 82 81

18 17 16 13

54 61 67 67

22 32 35 39

34 39 48 47

44 39 31 31

76 77 77 71

76 80 83 87

20 17 15 13

66 66 65 59

37 32 34 36

45 44 45 43

37 34 32 35

76 75 75 77

59 74 84 97 99

9 17 16 10 22

74 76 66 26 79

38 38 37 25 43

54 59 49 16 44

21 24 32 56 28

62 72 76 88 78

Table 1 Note. Percentages for sharing expenses variable include only participants who have been together for 6+ months.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Table 2. Womens Reported Behaviors and Attitudes towards Paying on Dates
Even after Ive dated a man for a while, he usually ends up paying for most of our dating expenses % 58 Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 Education High school Some college College graduate Post-graduate Income < 45K 45-90K 91-150K > 150K Sharing Expenses Right from start After about month 2-6+ months Man pays: OK Man pays: Wish shared 61 59 53 48 30 30 36 33 57 56 57 60 36 31 29 31 54 51 49 48 39 39 38 39 44 43 45 44 43 39 39 36 55 54 60 63 67 22 29 34 43 46 63 63 53 48 38 35 31 28 33 32 52 49 49 55 60 37 39 40 40 46 39 42 45 50 54 44 38 37 39 40 When I help pay, I feel less pressure to engage in sexual activity % 32 I always offer to help pay, even on a first date % 57 I think that I should pay if I make more money than the man I am dating % 32 I think my date should pay if he makes more money than I do % 51 It bothers me when a man accepts my offer to help pay for a date. Id prefer that he reject my offer % 39 It bothers me when men expect me to help pay for dates % 44 It bothers me when men wont accept my money to help pay for dates % 40


61 63 57 50

30 33 29 33

52 54 58 60

26 31 32 35

49 50 52 52

44 40 38 36

50 46 43 40

38 60 61 61

37 51 61 96 89

27 25 23 27 25

75 58 51 28 59

39 33 32 27 38

42 49 52 73 48

24 35 38 63 26

26 35 43 73 35

49 43 37 20 65

Table 2 Note. Percentages for sharing expenses variable include only participants who have been together for 6+ months.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Table 3. Percentage of Men and Women with Traditional versus Egalitarian Attitudes Towards Paying for Dates
Traditional % 14 Age 18-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-65 Education High school Some college College graduate Post-graduate Income < 45K 45-90K 91-150K > 150K Sharing Expenses Right from start After about month 1-3 months 4-6 months 6+ Months I / Man pays: OK I / Man pays: Wish shared 14 14 13 16 26 25 25 27 32 33 33 31 28 28 29 26 16 16 16 15 25 24 26 23 29 29 27 32 30 31 31 30 14 12 15 17 17 26 22 26 27 32 33 33 33 32 31 27 33 26 24 20 12 14 17 20 31 23 25 26 27 22 31 28 29 28 26 34 33 28 25 21 Men Traditional Egalitarian Leaning Leaning % % 26 32 Egalitarian % 28 Traditional % 16 Women Traditional Egalitarian Leaning Leaning % % 25 29 Egalitarian % 30


21 17 12 12

30 29 23 24

33 31 33 33

16 23 32 31

18 17 16 14

29 25 25 22

29 30 28 29

24 28 31 35

7 7 9 10 10 40 8

19 17 22 27 31 40 18

33 33 36 34 34 16 45

41 43 33 28 25 4 29

5 9 10 15 19 5 14

16 23 27 25 26 26 34

29 38 34 34 30 20 28

50 30 29 26 25 49 24

Table 3 Note. Percentages for sharing expenses variable include only participants who have been together for 6+ months.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Table 4. Regression Analyses with Demographics Predicting Attitudes about Paying for Dates. Mens Responses
Even after Ive dated a woman for a while, I usually end up paying for most of our dating expenses If I pay the bill, I think that a woman should engage in some sexual activity in return After the first few dates, women should help pay expenses If a woman makes more money than I do, then she should pay more of our expenses Id stop dating a woman who never offers to pay any of our expenses It bothers me when a woman tries to pay the bill on a date I feel guilty if I dont pay the bill on dates

Age Education Income Adj. R2 Model F

.01 -.06 .12 .01 38.78

Even after Ive dated a man for a while, he usually ends up paying for most of our dating expenses

-.09 -.04 -.02 .01 29.97

When I help pay, I feel less pressure to engage in sexual activity

-.07 .10 -.06 .02 48.63

I always offer to help pay, even on a first date

-.03 -.15 .10 .09 -.01 .00 .01 .03 30.35 84.85 Womens Responses
I think that I should pay if I make more money than the man I am dating I think my date should pay if he makes more money than I do

-.01 -.09 .02 .01 22.91

It bothers me when a man accepts my offer to help pay for a date. Id prefer that he reject my offer

-.05 -.06 .04 .01 15.45

It bothers me when men expect me to help pay for dates It bothers me when men wont accept my money to help pay for dates

Age .10 .17 -.17 -.02 .05 .05 .12 -.03 Education -.09 .02 .05 .08 .03 -.04 -.06 .01 Income -.07 -.01 .03 -.01 -.04 .00 -.01 -.02 Adj. R2 .02 .03 .03 .01 .00 .00 .02 .00 Model F 67.24 82.40 89.27 17.77 8.29 11.99 49.71 3.30 Table 4 Note. Positive beta values indicate that individuals who were older, were more educated, had a higher income, and had more traditional attitudes toward gender were more likely to agree with the statement in the column. All beta () values that were .05 or greater were significant at the p < .001 level. All F values for the overall regression models were significant at the p < .001 level except for the last item for women (it bothers me when men wont accept my money to help pay for dates). The degrees of freedom for all mens items were (4, 8250) and were (4, 8173) for all womens items.

WHO PAYS FOR DATES Figure 1. Mens and Womens Reports of Whether they Share Expenses on Dates and When they Started Sharing for People Dating for 6 Months or Longer.

You might also like