Words: 709
Imagine yourself in your ideal first date; you are dining, having the time of your life and the check suddenly appears on your table; to whom does it correspond? Adair Lara, the author of Who’s Cheap, states as her thesis that men should be the ones who pay everything in order to jut out their generosity. She mentions different points of view that I agree upon, but her summarizing statement mentioned above did not persuade me. Generosity should reflect in both sexes, setting aside the stinginess. Adair Lara establishes that the idea of men paying for things derives from previous generations where women had to depend on their spouse’s salary.
She points out two different types of men; the generous type and the stingy type. She believes that stinginess is a flaw that prevents men from rendering their money to rendering their affection. This type of man is a “skinflint” and a “cheap man”. On the contrary, there can also exist men who result to be excessively generous. Sometimes the stinginess may reflect on the feminine side causing men difficulties to satisfy and impress them. As advice, she states that during a date, one should not pay matter to how the man should behave.
But according to her personal thoughts, she believes that if she offers to split the expenses, the man will come to realize that it is his duty and obligation to pay the total cost himself, as a sign of his generosity. I agree with the author when she says, “And besides, there’s just something appealing about generosity,” but not in the terms she is referring to. She is talking about men buying something for women, but I would like to make a correction by stating that generosity is a characteristic that should be developed by both.
Men don’t always have to buy us women things to symbolize their feelings. A gesture isn’t always made through money, it is a special detail that can be given with no preference of what sex provides it. For example, my family lives with an economical crisis at hand. My stepmother doesn’t have to buy my father anything in order to show him generosity. By a single fragment dictated by her heart, through a warmth hug, or by a simple kiss, she transmits her feelings; and the greatest gift is not one you can buy, but those that are created by the heart.
Throughout her closing paragraphs, she mentions that the way to make a guy end up paying for the check is to offer to pay half. I would have to disagree with this because not all men are as generous as they may appear. The “offering trick” may work on some occasions, but in others it could be taken serious. What would happen if you didn’t have the cash to pay? How would you feel if you find out that your date is sacrificing everything just to impress you? One of the things we do not have in mind is the economical situations that our date could be suffering from, and our own stinginess can affect them even more.
This is why I would also have to disagree with the statement, “… he is likely to dole out his feelings as parsimoniously as his dollars”. The person may not have the money, as well as he or she may not have the sufficient experience to express their feelings. Money shouldn’t matter when it comes to a date. There should be no specific preference of what sex should pay the bill, as long as they have accepted that their generosity relies equally on both sides.
You don’t necessarily have to go out on a date that involves cash payments, a simple walk in the park can be equivalently romantic. The author, in my point of view, is being quite stingy herself because she is approving that it’s a man’s responsibility to always pay for the woman’s wants and needs. But a stingy man is a truthful person who doesn’t have to falsely impress somebody by being someone they are not; they are simply expressing their honest personality. We should always keep in mind that money can’t buy love.