Then throw them out the window.
We're a progressive society. Things are much different than our grandparent's generation. Our cars are faster, our homes are bigger, women are soon to become the majority in the workforce, and more men stay home with their children than ever in history. One thing that still remains pretty consistent is date night.
According to Mailonline.com the new rules to the dating game seem pretty similar to the old rules of the dating game. The man buys dinner. The man who spends the most on dinner is the most likely to have sex. Women feel more obligated to have sex if the man spends a lot of money. Nothing new there. It's the dinner version of put out or get out.
Wait, I thought we were supposed to ask for expensive dinner so we could lie to ourselves about why we had sex. This is so confusing. All this "new" dating information is simply overloading my wee brain... Oh, please.
"Men now expect to sleep with a new partner on their third date - but women typically won't consider it until the fifth, according to an intriguing new study on dating in the 21st century." I'm not so sure what they found intriguing about that little bit of data. I was always under the impression that men expected sex sooner than women. Is this actually news?
Apparently people are spending more money on waxing and underwear when it comes to date night as well. That stands to reason. If a guy is going to lay down some serious moolah on sustenance hoping for some obligatory sex he wants to make the experience as appealing as possible. The woman is probably thinking the same thing. "Well, he did buy the expensive wine and I did, in fact, order the veal with scallops as an appetizer. I suppose the wax job and skimpy panties will serve a purpose tonight." You can almost hear the sigh... from both of them.
Ugh. Is it just me or does this all seem a bit too planned? I keep my garden tended because I never know when I'm going to get into a car accident. I think I can do without counting how much I spent on underwear and wax before I have my dinner. Let's be real. We're all going to wear those underwear more than once. Have you been to Victoria's Secret? For the cost of those underwear the guy might be seeing those in the rotation for a solid year, even after you've moved from lobster tail to Subway before the clothes come off.
Isn't it time to start thinking a bit more about the person you're with instead of quantifying every single effort or dollar you toss in either landing the sex or getting ready for it? Maybe then the sex can happen because you can't resist it and neither of you will feel obligated to pay or obligated to play. It's all sounding a bit like prostitution. For all their effort, I just walked away from this article feeling like we'd gone a few steps back in time. They could have simply said, "Men only want one thing. They are willing to pay for it. Women want to appear chaste and don't actually enjoy sex, but will put out for the right amount of money." I'm throwing a flag on this play and calling bullshit.
Now, back to making a list of all the restaurants I can't afford to go to without planning an obligatory sex date. Foleys, Minerva's, Parker's, CJ Calloway's... Just kidding! I could go by myself, but there wouldn't be any wine unless I just got the bottle of wine and ate free bread. Hmmm, not a bad plan either. I wouldn't even have to shave my legs.