This comment kind of seems 40 years out of date? Or maybe it's different in other places?
It is pretty predictable to pay for a date here, go look at toxic relationship comment sections or even Clubhouse and you’ll see many people denigrating men if they are not paying for a date
The cishet male experience requires guessing which framework the woman present at the time is following and never being wrong. Paying for a food item can either be expected or offensive. It’s never benign like when your male colleague or friend drives across town to see you and you pay for the meal because its nice they went out of their way. With many women right now its not factoring in that it isn't a gendered action even if they are claiming that splitting is their form of equality when equality can mean treating the person that went out their way as well.
Maybe future generations will sort this out.
In the mean time, the world is being run by a lot of folks who are my age and older. And I think this general paradigm still is the crux of the issue.
Women still on average make less than men. Multimillionaire women, like Janet Jackson, can still marry up because men in her league are billionaires.
That's true, but as I understand it, it's not because of discrimination but because of different choices.
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Men-Earn-More-Startling/dp/154275...
Historically, teachers made relatively good pay and were respected. That was when it was a mostly male profession. That changed when it became a mostly female profession.
Conversely, programing was originally a more female dominated profession and not well paid nor respected. Now it is a male profession and very well paid.
Humans tend to pay men better for the same work. We come up with myriad explanations for the phenomenon but it's stubbornly persistent.
I think it's more complicated than "Women just entirely voluntarily choose something else."
It's neither. It's a reason, an explanation.
> I think it's more complicated than "Women just entirely voluntarily choose something else."
From what I understand, the research shows that isn't the case. Basically all of the earning gap is explained by choices, not discrimination.
> Historically, teachers made relatively good pay and were respected. That was when it was a mostly male profession. That changed when it became a mostly female profession.
Correlation is not causation though. I know you know that, but just stating it for others that are reading this.
The alternative explanation can be this:
Societal expectations is that the resource provision is core to male value. This can be observed on the disproportionate impact of wealth on relationship attractiveness between the genders [1], men generally benefit more from status than women, and women tend to benefit more from attractiveness than men [2].-
With incentives like this, I find it unsurprising that men are more likely to chase status. It's also a cleaner model, with clearer causal lines than "society is built around paying women less".
Citation needed on this one, particularly on the "same work" section. It's my understanding that studies that followed up on the initial gender wage gap studies found that the intial gap shrinks drastically once the data was controlled for type of work (the same work assumption you made), as well as for the number of hours worked across a given time period.
I generally will end a date if the bill isn't split at least for the first few dates. As a result, I had nothing but trouble to the point of swearing off dating until a chance encounter in the real world introduced me to my current girlfriend.