Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: my partner was raised on perhaps the largest estate on the most prominent point of the richest island in the USA. But they say they are by no means to the manor born. Go figure.

Like I said prima donna. If the man was the higher income one he would not care one bit. Women keep score like this.

Not because women are cheap but because we were raised with gender roles : it’s shameful for a woman to pick up a tab at a restaurant for a man. It’s a sexual turn off for me. I can get expensive show tickets but he must pay for the meal at the show period

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

This sounds very unkind and ungenerous. I would not think well of someone who expected me to care less about my children’s financial future than they cared about their own children.

Not really - we don’t know the numbers. I can’t say from what Op wrote if he’s just cheap or actually stretched. It shouldn’t be his concern how she funds her kids, her interest on capital etc, and how much remains for her and and her kids.
If he was dating a poorer woman HE would be the one finding housing, travel etc. But he doesn’t want it.

In your definition, cheap means wants to spend an equal amount of cash as her? Sorry, no. You sound like another woman with gendered expectations, frankly. (And I say this as a woman).

There are a lot of women out there with those kinds of gendered expectations--anecdotally it seems to have increased again with the younger (late teens/early 20s) women than it was in my dating days (GenX).

And rightfully so . It allows these women to meet men who value non-monetary contributions to relationship just as monetary. And would value her unpaid labor organizing vacations, kids etc.
OP is taking her for granted

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: my partner was raised on perhaps the largest estate on the most prominent point of the richest island in the USA. But they say they are by no means to the manor born. Go figure.

oh fun, riddles!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

This sounds very unkind and ungenerous. I would not think well of someone who expected me to care less about my children’s financial future than they cared about their own children.

Not really - we don’t know the numbers. I can’t say from what Op wrote if he’s just cheap or actually stretched. It shouldn’t be his concern how she funds her kids, her interest on capital etc, and how much remains for her and and her kids.
If he was dating a poorer woman HE would be the one finding housing, travel etc. But he doesn’t want it.

In your definition, cheap means wants to spend an equal amount of cash as her? Sorry, no. You sound like another woman with gendered expectations, frankly. (And I say this as a woman).

There are a lot of women out there with those kinds of gendered expectations--anecdotally it seems to have increased again with the younger (late teens/early 20s) women than it was in my dating days (GenX).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

This sounds very unkind and ungenerous. I would not think well of someone who expected me to care less about my children’s financial future than they cared about their own children.

Not really - we don’t know the numbers. I can’t say from what Op wrote if he’s just cheap or actually stretched. It shouldn’t be his concern how she funds her kids, her interest on capital etc, and how much remains for her and and her kids.
If he was dating a poorer woman HE would be the one finding housing, travel etc. But he doesn’t want it.

In your definition, cheap means wants to spend an equal amount of cash as her? Sorry, no. You sound like another woman with gendered expectations, frankly. (And I say this as a woman).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t marry this prima Donna.

I don't think the partner is a prima Donna if they're paying OP's way through vacations and other expenses. They just want some fair play.

OP admits their lifestyle is significantly nicer because of this person's income. Are they willing to give that up?

He’s taking her using her travel points as granted. As if there is no monetary value while in fact some points are worth a lot. I’m a long term member of homeexchange - each point can be $1.5-2.5 if you convert into nightly cost at comparable properties.
His partner can take her kids and friends to enjoy the lifestyle on these points.

I personally see no value in such a man when she arranges free accommodations he can’t even organize a travel program and restaurants ? WTF

Go get a side gig, dude . Or date nurses or teachers not heiress from Martha Vinyard

Can you leave your children points? If not, no, it’s on the same playing field as cash. I wonder if she’s like the restaurant poster and has some serious gender expectations here that she won’t say flat out. That she must be courted. Yes, yes you haven’t revealed the genders but it’s clear the higher earning partner is a woman.

So if he thinks that dating someone at his level income is going to leave him better off financially and this is his main factor to be in relationship then he should date a teacher or a flower girl with cheaper taste

You seem to be working hard to make it OP’s fault.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

This sounds very unkind and ungenerous. I would not think well of someone who expected me to care less about my children’s financial future than they cared about their own children.

Not really - we don’t know the numbers. I can’t say from what Op wrote if he’s just cheap or actually stretched. It shouldn’t be his concern how she funds her kids, her interest on capital etc, and how much remains for her and and her kids.
If he was dating a poorer woman HE would be the one finding housing, travel etc. But he doesn’t want it.

In your definition, cheap means wants to spend an equal amount of cash as her? Sorry, no. You sound like another woman with gendered expectations, frankly. (And I say this as a woman).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t marry this prima Donna.

I don't think the partner is a prima Donna if they're paying OP's way through vacations and other expenses. They just want some fair play.

OP admits their lifestyle is significantly nicer because of this person's income. Are they willing to give that up?

He’s taking her using her travel points as granted. As if there is no monetary value while in fact some points are worth a lot. I’m a long term member of homeexchange - each point can be $1.5-2.5 if you convert into nightly cost at comparable properties.
His partner can take her kids and friends to enjoy the lifestyle on these points.

I personally see no value in such a man when she arranges free accommodations he can’t even organize a travel program and restaurants ? WTF

Go get a side gig, dude . Or date nurses or teachers not heiress from Martha Vinyard

Can you leave your children points? If not, no, it’s on the same playing field as cash. I wonder if she’s like the restaurant poster and has some serious gender expectations here that she won’t say flat out. That she must be courted. Yes, yes you haven’t revealed the genders but it’s clear the higher earning partner is a woman.

So if he thinks that dating someone at his level income is going to leave him better off financially and this is his main factor to be in relationship then he should date a teacher or a flower girl with cheaper taste

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t marry this prima Donna.

I don't think the partner is a prima Donna if they're paying OP's way through vacations and other expenses. They just want some fair play.

OP admits their lifestyle is significantly nicer because of this person's income. Are they willing to give that up?

He’s taking her using her travel points as granted. As if there is no monetary value while in fact some points are worth a lot. I’m a long term member of homeexchange - each point can be $1.5-2.5 if you convert into nightly cost at comparable properties.
His partner can take her kids and friends to enjoy the lifestyle on these points.

I personally see no value in such a man when she arranges free accommodations he can’t even organize a travel program and restaurants ? WTF

Go get a side gig, dude . Or date nurses or teachers not heiress from Martha Vinyard

Can you leave your children points? If not, no, it’s on the same playing field as cash. I wonder if she’s like the restaurant poster and has some serious gender expectations here that she won’t say flat out. That she must be courted. Yes, yes you haven’t revealed the genders but it’s clear the higher earning partner is a woman.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

This sounds very unkind and ungenerous. I would not think well of someone who expected me to care less about my children’s financial future than they cared about their own children.

Not really - we don’t know the numbers. I can’t say from what Op wrote if he’s just cheap or actually stretched. It shouldn’t be his concern how she funds her kids, her interest on capital etc, and how much remains for her and and her kids.
If he was dating a poorer woman HE would be the one finding housing, travel etc. But he doesn’t want it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t marry this prima Donna.

I don't think the partner is a prima Donna if they're paying OP's way through vacations and other expenses. They just want some fair play.

OP admits their lifestyle is significantly nicer because of this person's income. Are they willing to give that up?

He’s taking her using her travel points as granted. As if there is no monetary value while in fact some points are worth a lot. I’m a long term member of homeexchange - each point can be $1.5-2.5 if you convert into nightly cost at comparable properties.
His partner can take her kids and friends to enjoy the lifestyle on these points.

I personally see no value in such a man when she arranges free accommodations he can’t even organize a travel program and restaurants ? WTF

Go get a side gig, dude . Or date nurses or teachers not heiress from Martha Vinyard

Can you leave your children points? If not, no, it’s on the same playing field as cash. I wonder if she’s like the restaurant poster and has some serious gender expectations here that she won’t say flat out. That she must be courted. Yes, yes you haven’t revealed the genders but it’s clear the higher earning partner is a woman.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

This sounds very unkind and ungenerous. I would not think well of someone who expected me to care less about my children’s financial future than they cared about their own children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??

As stated their kids have no financial worries. And they’re not cheap as a rule. Much more spendy than I am. That doesn’t mean they want to split expenses in proportion to their relative wealth/income. I think they believe I should rearrange my finances to free up cash to spend on us, and that I should spend more freely because it’s quite unlikely that I will literally tun out of money. But that’s easy for them to say, making it a point to never dip into their capital.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since you know it's an issue, on her bday, anniversary, Valentine's Day, whenever you should offer to pay. You are not married and she wants to be romanced. There is nothing wrong with that. You could ask her what the root of her concern is. It might be worth the convo. I expect she is over the limitation of your income and doesn't want to finance you any more.

I always pay 100% for these except once when there were two VD meals and I put one on the joint card. VD day is for both partners, amirite? And where did I reveal our sexes?

LOL you didn’t reveal your sexes but any man who earned more than his partner and expected to be treated all the time would be kicked to the curb immediately, so it was obvious. I’m a woman and I’d kick her to the curb too but I’ve always believed in equality

To be fair, my partner certainly doesn’t want/expect to be treated all the time; they just are clearly not loving/respecting the 50/50 imposed by the joint card. BTW, my partner is half a decade older than me and has inherited a lot of money, something that will happen to me too but on a different schedule because of the age difference.

5 years is peanuts.

You already are treating them since it’s such a larger % of your after tax earnings, than there’s, going into the joint account.

Are they just cheap or have lots of kids and grandkids to fund still??