Recession Dinner Whoring

Today I received an email from a writer looking for a quote for an upcoming magazine article.

The topic was:

I am writing about 20 something women in Manhattan (and potentially some men) who to due the recession are now accepting dates with men who they would never have considered dating in the past, to get a free dinner/have a night on the town....these are intelligent and employed professionals, but with such uncertain futures they aren't going out and spending money anymore and to catch glimpses of what they used to be able to indulge in they are lowering "dating standards" and spending time with men they can't foresee any real future with. There have been several articles on how the dating world is changing due to the economic crisis but I haven't seen anything detailing this trend....the sect of women that I have been talking to are going out with the men that have little to offer them but money, something they never would have considered in the past. Lowering their standards, admitting that they are willing to spend an evening with a person they know lacks the qualities they are looking for, because they are willing to pick up the check. A full on lowering of standards, because in the end, being able to have the nice dinners and be in lavish settings is actually important to them.

What I would love from you would be a reaction to this...

Here was my reaction:

This isn't about a woman's need to lower her standards. This is about women who, due in great part to holding an ugly fashionista value system, is being ignored and passed over by the men they truly want to date.  If a woman was doing this AFTER the recession she was doing this - in one way or another - BEFORE the recession. Her shallow standards were already in place before the recession. The dearth of dates for these women exists not because of the economy, but because of their attitude. They might wish to blame the economic downturn for their empty dance card, but that's only because they don't want to own up to the fact that they are transparent golddiggers.

NYC Social/Professional Networking- MoxieintheCity.net
DON'T FORGET TO FRIEND REQUEST US ON FACEBOOK!

Please be sure to join our Free Twitter feed so you can get new articles, event news and dating/career tips & advice. Join our free Twitter feed articles & events http://twitter.com/Moxieinthecity

Got a dating related question? Want free advice from Moxie and dozens of other national and international singles? Ask Away. It’s Free! Look for Moxie’s response and feedback from others SUBMIT YOUR DATING ADVICE QUESTIONS HERE: http://moxieinthecity.net/ask-email.php

Comments

[badinfluencegirl]

hold on now, maybe a lot of these women are transparent gold diggers but maybe some of them have dated so many bums who count nickels when tipping and always split the cheque in their favour (seriously, i have salad and coffee, they have steak and four beers and want to 'split it down the middle because that's *fair* isn't it?') that they aren't willing to date poor anymore.

i'm certainly not.

i'm 38 years old, if you can't afford to buy me dinner you can't afford my life... and i don't mean you have to pay FOR my life, i mean you can't afford to accompany me in anything i do... and i'm not that well off but what i am is a not in debt, hot woman with standards.

if you live in mommy's basement? NEXT!

[Mr. Right]

The key is for the men to only date the women that they're REALLY interested in. That way, the cost of dinner won't matter.

[mzbadd2003]

Interesting and I agree with badinfluence girl.

The questions is.. are they doing this exclusively or sometimes?

[Stephanie]

You shouldn't overlook the young ones who go out with the older guys to get fancy dinners and gifts and essentially trade sex for it. Sounds suspiciously like legalized prostitution.

[Captain America]

Actually, if they are dating guys that they would not have dated before....maybe it IS for the free meal ticket and to get out.

Now, I'm all FOR Recession Dinner Manwhoring if I could just get some of these women to take me out to dinner ;-)

[Anonymous]

I agree with moxie that people looking for something for nothing were looking for a "free" meal long before the recession took hold.

Sad but true.

Sadly most of these women will be old and lonely...

[amie]

Recession or not, dating someone you're not interested in just for a free dinner is wrong and a waste of both of your time. If you go out with someone you are unsure of, it is only fair to offer to pay for your share. If the guy insists on paying, then what can you do, but I wouldn't go out with someone more than 2-3 times if I still wasn't sure I was interested. In eharmony, there's a question about instant chemistry vs. chemistry over time and I'm trying to give people more of a chance. I've always been one of those people that either it clicks right away for me or it doesn't, but I'm trying to see if chemistry can build in time. Meanwhile, the whole paying thing does make me feel uneasy, especially if I'm unsure if I'm interested in the person or not. I don't want to invite strangers over my place to get to know them and there's only so many free things you can do in November. It's a touchy thing, but I would say try to pick lunch or drinks, because although we want dates and eventually to meet the person we will settle down with, I don't think most women or myself want to be thought of as dinner whores.

[Miranda]

I co-sign with Amie. My snap judgements of instant chemistry often ended in disaster so I am in phase of trying to see if something builds over time. I did end up dating for two months a man who I initially wasn't attracted to but got to know better in a series of group settings then things clicked. One on one dinner/drink/lunch dates when you first meet someone are very pressured filled. Unfortunately, unless you have mutual friends or are in a situation where you can run into eachother frequently getting to know gradually over time is not likely. I did accept a few dinner dates with a guy I was not all that into hoping my feelings would change, but they didn't and when the last date ended I felt a little depressed.

[Ken]

Recession dinner whoring has been going on since well before the recession.

[stephanieb]

i want a "like" button for Mr. Right's comment.

[Pair of Andrew Jacksons]

Guys, in this tough recession we are in, we have to watch our wallets and carefully screen out women who are potential gold diggers over those who are truly looking for a date. I've learned and improved on this skill which has saved me a lot of money, time and energy. I've been more selective on whom I choose to go out with and know who to leave behind for someone else to handle. You have to learn to say in your mind that that "NO" really means NO.

A radio show host in LA named Tom Lekysis sets the rules of engagement. No more than $40 for dinner on a date; zero is optime. If you still really want to get a piece from her but don't want to splurge, then either a drink at a bar or coffee/dessert at a nice boutique would be sufficient enough.

[Anonymous]

On the other hand do you "take a risk"? A risk meaning; do you as a gentleman pay a little more, do a little more and if things work out with the women then your investment paid off, if they do not then you were a gentleman...Humm... what to do?

It's a double edged sword. A lot of this is objective and depends on how you size up your date. I NEVER pay a lot for a first date [I try not too], yet the other night I was so on to a date, then "I" decided I wanted to eat dinner, then I decided to absorbed an extra $45 bucks [my date offered to pay but I decided to pay 100% $85 with tip in a recession] which I could have accepted from my date. Now if everything works out great I will not regret it, but if I never see the women again then perhaps I might.

Yet life is FULL of calculated risks.

If a first date turned out to be your wife, you may in fact wish you had paid 100% and did not divide it up 50.50.

THAT'S LIFE! Crazy, unpredictable, assumptions turned on their at times.

[jules]

I think first dates should be short & inexpensive as well, I agree, weekday cocktails or coffee, home early for work tomorrow.

But To the poster "Pair of Andrew Jacksons" and abyone else who wants to quote Tom Leykis.... Or wants "get a piece from her but don't want to splurge" as you put it in such perfect grammar...

Leykis is an complete misogynist, I don't even think think he believes half the stuff he says on the air, it's a gimmick for ratings. This man says most women are whores (I am not exaggerating, he says this all the time) and advocates a manuever called a "Hail Mary" where if you accidentally get a woman pregnant, that you give her a lot of fake love & affection and convince her you will end up eventually married if only she'll get an abortion (that ideally she'll pay for) and then when the pregnancy is terminated, you dump her ass.

Nice guy eh?
Anyone who quotes Tom Ley kis has ZERO credibility, and he's an overweight slob to boot, he has no business judging anyone..

[Phil]

Jules,

I myself used to listen to Tom Leykis and he does send out a message to mostly men out there. He does bring up some good points with the dating game and I've used some of his advice at times. Although I don't agree with everything he says, Leykis does bring up a few sayings that you cannot argue with.

We're talking about recession dining whoring here and any woman who thinks this is the way to go certainly does not deserve any of my respect. I've also learned how to deal with these women and to avoid them at all costs.

[trouble]

I think this is why men should stick to low-cost or free activities for a first date...coffee, a walk around a park, lunch. Those activities are a perfectly acceptable first date, and men who don't want to be used for their money shouldn't make a point of talking about it until they've weeded out the obvious diggers.

[Crotch Rocket]

"This isn't about a woman's need to lower her standards. This is about women who, due in great part to holding an ugly fashionista value system, is being ignored and passed over by the men they truly want to date." No, it's not about that either. It's about the huge fraction of women that are gold-diggers and who're now simply having to dig a little deeper to find men willing to fund their meals and entertainment. While I can't speak for NYC, I can't say that the rate this happens here has increased at all in the last year or two; maybe more women are willing to admit to it, but that's about it.

"The dearth of dates for these women exists not because of the economy, but because of their attitude." Provided they have even halfway decent looks, there will be no dearth of dates for these women; they're just facing more intense competition for the better targets due to the economy and those men not having as much money to waste on gold-diggers these days, which has forced many of them to go after less-desirable men.

"maybe some of them have dated so many bums ... that they aren't willing to date poor anymore." The issue is not dating rich or poor; the issue is dating men that women know they're not interested in simply to get a free meal and entertainment. If you're actually interested in the rich guy, for some reason other than his money, more power to ya.

"i'm 38 years old, if you can't afford to buy me dinner you can't afford my life ... and i'm not that well off but what i am is a not in debt, hot woman with standards." No, what you are is an aging woman who feels entitled to a man who makes at least as much, if not more, money as her despite not having the qualities that such men are looking for--and that's why you're single.

"The key is for the men to only date the women that they're REALLY interested in. That way, the cost of dinner won't matter." You're totally missing the point. The men in this scenario are interested in these women; it's the women that aren't interested in the men but pretend to be to get free meals and entertainment. This is nothing new, which is why so many men are demand sex early on as proof of women's interest.

"You shouldn't overlook the young ones who go out with the older guys to get fancy dinners and gifts and essentially trade sex for it." aka sugar daddies/babies. That's hardly new; it's been going on for millenia and was the norm throughout history until the recent invention of romantic marriage, women's lib, etc.

"Sounds suspiciously like legalized prostitution." Legally, if she would have gotten the dinner/gifts even if she didn't put out, it's not prostitution. In any case, what's the difference between the "young ones" that do that and the women 10-20 years older doing the exact same thing, i.e. demanding a man pay for everything before they'll put out, besides waiting a few more dates?

"dating someone you're not interested in just for a free dinner is ... a waste of both of your time." It's a waste of his time and money, to be sure, but whether it's a waste of her time depends on how much the meal cost the guy and how much an hour or two of her time is worth. In most cases, it's a clear economic win for the woman.

"I don't think most women or myself want to be thought of as dinner whores." You and many other reasonable women, no, but there are tens of millions of women out there that think getting free meals, drinks, entertainment, etc. is their birthright simply because they have a vagina and can't see how there's anything wrong with that.

"I did accept a few dinner dates with a guy I was not all that into hoping my feelings would change, but they didn't and when the last date ended I felt a little depressed." And did you pay him back for all the money he spent on you while you knew you weren't into him, or at least split the check on the last date, when you knew you were giving up? If not, how does that make you look any different than other women who also aren't into him but accept the dates anyway just for the freebies? (I'm not saying you are one of those women, just that, from the outside, your behavior may look the same.)

[DatingDame]

Crotch Rocket...bitter, huh?

""The key is for the men to only date the women that they're REALLY interested in. That way, the cost of dinner won't matter." You're totally missing the point. The men in this scenario are interested in these women; it's the women that aren't interested in the men but pretend to be to get free meals and entertainment. This is nothing new, which is why so many men are demand sex early on as proof of women's interest."

You JUST PROVED to women why we shouldn't feel bad for accepting a meal/drinks from a man we might be interested in. How many times do you go out on the first few dates and know FOR SURE you are absolutely, 100% interested in a woman? How DARE you say that men DEMAND sex early on. To me that's forcing a woman to "prove" her interest on your terms, not hers, which is dangerously close to forcing a woman to have sex. And we all know what that is called. This just goes to show that you, like many men, are worthless and shallow and use women for sex (which in my mind is even WORSE than using a man for a free meal). How many times have you used a woman for sex? Taken something from her that is much more expensive than any meal?

Get off your high horse. Oh, and feel free to bring it.