Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.

Kudryavka

He doesn't pick up the tab. Does he value me?

126 posts in this topic
Just now, Seablue said:

I completely agree with the feeling, however, the specific sentence was; "he said he can be selfish".

I would think that "I can be selfish" =/= "I'm selfish", and the first option might just mean he's been accused of being selfish by some people who were actually the one trying to pressure him to do/buy something. So I think more context would be needed here ; hopefully the OP can put it in context.

If it was a straightforward "I'm selfish" then again, yes, definitely believe it and expect it.

As a generality with male INTJs, how often do they admit to being selfish?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Distance said:

As a generality with male INTJs, how often do they admit to being selfish?

I really wouldn't know about male INTJs and "as a generality". I know I would probably admit to the same thing - I know I can be selfish, although I don't like it and try not to be (unless it's entirely justified).

(Edit: selfish doesn't mean "cheap" here.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Seablue said:

I really wouldn't know about male INTJs and "as a generality". I know I would probably admit to the same thing - I know I can be selfish, although I don't like it and try not to be (unless it's entirely justified).

(Edit: selfish doesn't mean "cheap" here.)

It's an observable pattern on INTJf, that male INTJs have heavy ego defense mechanisms. For one to admit even the degree that the OP has posted during the dating phase, is something serious to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using gender as a basis for paying is reinforcing the idea that a woman giving her time, attention, and affection (or more) means she should deserve money or gifts in return while a man giving the same does not deserve anything extra in return. It's no wonder some men do expect sex, or at least something, in return. Both are as bad as each other.

 

In line with what Holli and others said, if someone wants to be treated equally and reap the benefits of that, they also need to accept the losses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, holdyourhead said:

Using gender as a basis for paying is reinforcing the idea that a woman giving her time, attention, and affection (or more) means she should deserve money or gifts in return while a man giving the same does not deserve anything extra in return. It's no wonder some men do expect sex, or at least something, in return. Both are as bad as each other.

 

In line with what Holli and others said, if someone wants to be treated equally and reap the benefits of that, they also need to accept the losses.

Yes, but you have no idea if OP's partner is the type of man who thinks like this and his justification for not paying is 'because equality'. IMO, people with this attitude tend to be more vocal about it, so if he did think this, OP would already know. And regardless of gender, it would be polite and make more sense for the person with a higher income to offer to pay at least sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, lor6 said:

And considering that he makes more money than her, gender aside, it should have occurred to him to bear more of the cost.

I don't buy into that theory. If they each get a $10 burger, why should he pay $12 and she only $8? They enjoyed the same meal. If she is struggling to pay for her own food then maybe she should order something cheaper or suggest they eat somewhere else.

20 minutes ago, Holli said:

No.  I would prefer assumed Dutch.  No matter who asks, the situation, or who it's with.  I don't think it's "romantic" to offer to pay.  I think it's shitty that someone is expected to pay for the meal of someone else, especially when they're labeled "cheap" if they do not.  I also HATE that women continue to encourage this tradition and shame men if they disagree with it.  No one should go on a date expecting that the other person should pay or offer to pay for the meal THEY consumed, especially when it's usually women benefiting from it.  It's so inconsiderate to that other person.  Both parties should be there to enjoy the company of the other.  Pay for yourself, don't have expectations of others, and questions like this won't have to arise.

If you want to offer to pay, great.  If you want to accept someone else's offer, great.  That there's this much being read into the practice, and what it means of the person, suggests that it shouldn't even exist at all.  Egalitarian approach should be the way to go.  No one should be attacking the characters of anyone else for promoting personal responsibility in this situation.  And people should be grateful for offers, not expect them or even think about why it isn't happening.

If he's not paying, maybe he just doesn't care what most women think ... and is actively fighting against entitled attitudes.  I think all men should band together and put a stop to the manipulative practices of women who insist that men pay for dates.

I agree with this. Paying for women's meals just perpetuates the idea that women can't fend for themselves or that their time needs to be purchased. Also, anyone expecting to eat without paying is much cheaper than someone who won't pay for someone else's meal.

OP, I think you should either vocalize your expectations of this guy or stop judging him by those unspoken expectations. If you want something for nothing then you should be able to tell him that to his face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it not more a form of genorisity which falls back on character trait which the OP values, aside from all traditions. I can really appreciate gentlemenness. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, lor6 said:

Yes, but you have no idea if OP's partner is the type of man who thinks like this and his justification for not paying is 'because equality'. IMO, people with this attitude tend to be more vocal about it, so if he did think this, OP would already know. And regardless of gender, it would be polite and make more sense for the person with a higher income to offer to pay at least sometimes.

But as I said before, didn't the OP say she has also never offered to pay for him and so is guilty of the same thing he is being criticised for? I'm all for generosity, though it has to go both ways.

 

You may be right about those people being more vocal. I can't say for sure. Personally, I would have thought in a supposedly equal society, it would not need to be said. I don't think I'm particularly vocal about it in everyday life, but it would probably get brought up in conversations admittedly at some point or another.

Edited by holdyourhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lor6 said:

That's possible, but I think that if he were this^ type of person, it would be pretty obvious and OP wouldn't need to ask the question. This^ attitude is fairly rare among both men and women, so it's unlikely to be the case.

You'd think it would be obvious, but it's not something that I talk about IRL.  I don't think anyone I know (outside of my boyfriend, because he knows everything about me, and this forum) would have any idea how I feel about this topic or what my opinion would be in regards to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, EPMD said:

I don't buy into that theory. If they each get a $10 burger, why should he pay $12 and she only $8? 

It's called courtesy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, holdyourhead said:

Using gender as a basis for paying is reinforcing the idea that a woman giving her time, attention, and affection (or more) means she should deserve money or gifts in return while a man giving the same does not deserve anything extra in return. It's no wonder some men do expect sex, or at least something, in return. Both are as bad as each other.

While I agree with your initial point, no, both are not "as bad as each other". The fact that some men expect sex in return for whatever "favor" they offered is part of rape culture, and can cause rapes or instances of sexual coercion or, more accurately, be used to justify them, to excuse them. A woman expecting money or gifts from her partner does not have the same ramifications. (And it is a slippery slope to say that "it's no wonder" those men expect sex - as in, we shouldn't blame them for it?)

Yes, the goal is gender equality. But no, you can't equate each bad behavior men have to some bad behavior females have, and just label them as "basically the same" or "just as bad" for the sake of being equalitarian. Not when the behaviour you are describing are actually very different in how frequently they happen and/or how dire their consequences are. (Another example would be bringing up how terrible "false rape accusations" are when rape is discussed.) That doesn't fight sexism, it reinforces it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EPMD said:

OP, I think you should either vocalize your expectations of this guy or stop judging him by those unspoken expectations. If you want something for nothing then you should be able to tell him that to his face.

I do agree with this. But then usually it is nice to do the back and forth. Maybe you could start the tradition by treating him first. But that's basically the same as going Dutch, but then in a more "generous" form :p Actually, I think you should just talk to your bf about it. If you're already at the point of loving each other communicating about something like this should be fine. Then you can simply express what's on your mind, blow off the steam, get reassurance and solve the issue for yourself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, holdyourhead said:

 

But as I said before, didn't the OP say she has also never offered to pay for him and so is guilty of the same thing he is being criticised for?

 

You may be right about those people being more vocal. I can't say for sure. Personally, I would have thought in a supposedly equal society, it would not need to be said. I don't think I'm particularly vocal about it in everyday life, but it would probably get brought up in conversations admittedly at some point or another.

From the perspective of someone with a more traditional mindset, no, she is not guilty of the same thing. Our society is equal from a legal standpoint, but socially it's still very traditional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Holli said:

 Both parties should be there to enjoy the company of the other. 

 

This could also be used to describe a platonic friendship. If people are dating long-term, Dutch seems reasonable. But if a guy/girl offers to take a guy/girl out to eat on a first date, the person who gave the invitation is responsible for paying. Unless the invitee insists otherwise.

Edited by GrayGhost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Supposedly equal society is the right term. Most of the time men still make more money than women in the same job. That said, it is what OP feels that's most important, not roles and traditions. She has a problem with him never spending money on her. Two solutions: change expectation or talk it out. She is opting for the first by turning to the forum. Is it working out, OP? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How much anyone makes shouldn't make any difference of who should pay more or less, unless one of the individuals insists on exceeding the financial abilities of the other. Then they should be the ones who pay or at minimum, subsidize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, GrayGhost said:

This could also be used to describe a platonic friendship. If people are dating long-term, Dutch seems reasonable. But if a guy/girl offers to take a guy/girl out to eat, the person who gave the invitation is responsible for paying. Unless the invitee insists otherwise.

That doesn't make any sense at all.  Platonic friends are those who don't want to have sexual or romantic relations with one another.  Paying for meals has nothing to do with someone's sexual and/or romantic interest.  The difference between platonic friends and those who are on a date is the desire for something more.  It has nothing to do with who is paying.

 
 
...... added to this post 5 minutes later:
 
21 minutes ago, EPMD said:

I don't buy into that theory. If they each get a $10 burger, why should he pay $12 and she only $8? They enjoyed the same meal. If she is struggling to pay for her own food then maybe she should order something cheaper or suggest they eat somewhere else.

If someone invited me on a date and I couldn't afford to eat there, then I would say so and suggest something more affordable - or free.  I would never accept a date if I couldn't pay for my own meal.  If they insisted we go to that particular place and insisted on paying for my meal (since I couldn't) in response, that's fine.

I like to eat out and I know my boyfriend can't afford to eat out as much as I can ... so I pay for the majority of our meals and I also encourage him to get whatever he wants.  I do it because it's the price for having what I want, which also includes my relationship.  But I also know that he'd be just fine eating cheap meals at home and often even suggests that we should eat out less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Holli said:

Paying for meals has nothing to do with someone's sexual and/or romantic interest.

This depends on cultural context as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MissJ said:

This depends on cultural context as well. 

Sure, but I wasn't including cultural norms/traditions in my statement.  I'm talking outside of cultural norms.  Their response was from my comment that "Both parties should be there to enjoy the company of the other."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30/01/2017 at 7:19 PM, Seablue said:

While I agree with your initial point, no, both are not "as bad as each other". The fact that some men expect sex in return for whatever "favor" they offered is part of rape culture, and can cause rapes or instances of sexual coercion or, more accurately, be used to justify them, to excuse them. A woman expecting money or gifts from her partner does not have the same ramifications. (And it is a slippery slope to say that "it's no wonder" those men expect sex - as in, we shouldn't blame them for it?)

I thought twice about posting that, for this reason.

 

In terms of expecting something that there should be no entitlement to, that part is the same. Yes, the major difference is in what is being expected, and certainly what it could lead to happening. Both are expectations which there should be no entitlement to, but I do agree one is more dangerous and for that reason would retract my statement that they are as bad as each other.

 

My use of the phrase "it's no wonder" I feel is apt, though maybe a bad choice nonetheless due to the connotations. It was meant just to emphasise how many people feel that if they give something they expect something in return. I don't necessarily agree with it, but many people feel that way. So when accepting it is a common sentiment, it is then not surprising that if you have a large number of people who feel they are entitled to something from others, you will have a large corresponding number of people who feel they are entitled to something in return.

 

Personally, I think it is better to give cautiously initially, until you know for certain that someone isn't only out for what they can get. If you get burned by being too generous to all, so be it. You can't force or expect someone to give something back if they don't want to do so.

 

A fairer comparison than money for sex would be money both ways, certainly. If someone (a man) pays for things for someone else (a woman) but gets nothing paid back in return, they may feel that have the "right" to take it back, i.e. steal from them. It would be wrong nonetheless, but using the same mentality of jumping from 'expecting' sex in return to 'taking' it, without being as grevious as rape.

 

I'm not sure the point I'm trying to make. Just describing how some people would think about this.

Edited by holdyourhead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Seablue said:

I completely agree with the feeling, however, the specific sentence was; "he said he can be selfish".

I would think that "I can be selfish" =/= "I'm selfish", and the first option might just mean he's been accused of being selfish by some people who were actually the ones trying to pressure him to do/buy something. Or that he's aware of a shortcoming that he's trying to change. Hopefully the OP can put it in context.

If it was a straightforward "I'm selfish" then again, yes, definitely believe it and expect it.

Unfortunately I don't remember what the exact words chosen were.  I do know he openly says "I am a mean person."  This is always in response to his teasing me, I'll tease back by saying "Mean!" and he will reply "I am a mean person."  There was one time where his teasing actually hurt my feelings and I told him he was right, he is mean.  Initially he said, "I'm surprised it took you that long to realize that."  But later he apologized for hurting my feelings and said he should have known better with the joke.

1 hour ago, Swamp Yankee said:

 Just because he lacks social grace does not mean he'll automatically turn a blind eye if your own lack of social grace ends up hurting his feelings somehow.

You have a point, I can confirm from several past experiences with other people.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kudryavka

Why would he pay for your meals too?

Paying for something =/= love.

He's spending his time with you, said he loves you, and treats you with respect (otherwise why would you be with him)? You haven't said anything about questioning his intentions, worried about his feeling etc.

What more do you want?

There's no cause for concern just because he's not victim to outdated social expectations of men. (You already said you're fine with that so what's the issue?)

Are you just looking for even more validation or is there really a concern here?

I'm thinking it's the first one.

 

All humans are selfish.

Edited by poizon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, lor6 said:

From the perspective of someone with a more traditional mindset, no, she is not guilty of the same thing. Our society is equal from a legal standpoint, but socially it's still very traditional.

I guess so. It is not something I've personally experienced, only witnessed with older generations or other cultures. Most younger people here do not have that traditional mindset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Distance said:

It's an observable pattern on INTJf, that male INTJs have heavy ego defense mechanisms. For one to admit even the degree that the OP has posted during the dating phase, is something serious to consider.

Could you elaborate?  Is it bad that he admitted this?  I would have thought honesty is a good sign.  I don't expect perfect in a relationship, I do need a high degree of honesty.
 

47 minutes ago, lor6 said:

Yes, but you have no idea if OP's partner is the type of man who thinks like this and his justification for not paying is 'because equality'. IMO, people with this attitude tend to be more vocal about it, so if he did think this, OP would already know.

He definitely leans to the left politically-speaking and has made statements that suggest he could hold this attitude, but he is not overt about it.

50 minutes ago, EPMD said:

OP, I think you should either vocalize your expectations of this guy or stop judging him by those unspoken expectations. If you want something for nothing then you should be able to tell him that to his face.

I think you misunderstood my intention for posting.  I don't want something for nothing.  I am trying to figure out if this is a normal and healthy way for a relationship to be.  If it is, then I'm fine with it. 

37 minutes ago, MissJ said:

Supposedly equal society is the right term. Most of the time men still make more money than women in the same job. That said, it is what OP feels that's most important, not roles and traditions. She has a problem with him never spending money on her. Two solutions: change expectation or talk it out. She is opting for the first by turning to the forum. Is it working out, OP? 

Seablue's point on beneficial sexism certainly helped me reframe things.

17 minutes ago, holdyourhead said:

Personally, I think it is better to give cautiously initially, until you know for certain that someone isn't only out for what they can get. If you get burned by being too generous to all, so be it. You can't force or expect someone to give something back if they don't want to do so.

This is basically how I feel, in fact this whole thread was started by my thoughts on what I want to get him for Valentine's Day.  The gift is $50 and I'm going to feel like an idiot if he neglects to do much for me.  But I love him and I want to give it to him.  Yet I worry that I'm just a bleeding heart and I'm going to look back on this situation and feel stupid. 

I think though, that I want to give it to him anyway and try not to expect much in return.  That way at least I can say that I acted according to my heart and gave it my best shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Kudryavka said:

Could you elaborate?  Is it bad that he admitted this?  I would have thought honesty is a good sign.  I don't expect perfect in a relationship, I do need a high degree of honesty.

It's not bad, if you don't subjectively perceive selfishness as bad.  But it is something that you will need to accept about him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now