Chivalrous men don’t exist — it’s a hoax.
A few weeks ago, I took a well-deserved break from school. I went on a spontaneous first date and didn’t know who was going to “take the hit” for the check.
After we ordered dinner, we started chatting. Our jokes landed with each other, and there was a perfect amount of ‘tism in the air to sedate my insecurities. And yes, we talked about that: the political and economic state of the world. He hit the spot.
But I was barely two bites into my chicken quesadilla when my date quipped, “It’s on me.” By a man’s wink and nod, I was ready to relinquish my financial burden for a night — and in effect, relinquish my independence.
I appreciated the gesture, sincerely. On the inside, however, I felt the pit in my stomach crystallize. How did I really know that this was it? From the waiter, to my date, to the busboy passing by, to my assumptions of what kind of girl a guy really likes … it felt like they all knew something I didn’t.
The moment the check came, the waiter handed it to my date, observing me to see if I was pretty enough to get her meal paid for. The problem is, I only got to be a grown woman by virtue of being with a man — but he got to be a man in his own right.
The angel on my left shoulder told me, “A man who makes you split the bill is no man at all.” Meanwhile, the she-devil on my right warned me, “A man who pays for you expects much more in return.”
According to the cultural pendulum, men are supposed to be selfless knights, and women are supposed to be helpless princesses. Except no one genuinely is. Just because a man pays for your meal doesn’t mean he yearns for you. Sometimes it’s just a habit.
It just means that he’s paying because he’s a man, and that’s “just what men do.”
Additionally, watching grown women question their boyfriend’s “undying love” for them when they don’t offer to get the bill is getting a little weird. Splitting the check is actually not the enemy — it’s just a manifestation of gender roles, particularly men’s struggles with being emotionally vulnerable and making up for it with money.
Splitting the check doesn’t have to be about rejecting someone; it can be about showing up for your partners and being emotionally connected today. Telling your partner, “Let’s pool our money together as best we can,” can be a teamwork that makes the dream work moment.
Splitting the check can be about better bonding two people together, not dividing them. It’s about the principle of trust and mutual respect — sharing is caring. What could be a better love language?
For example, one can take care of the drinks and appetizers, and the other can take care of the main courses. It doesn’t have to be about paying for just yourself or splitting exactly down the middle. It’s about making sure the holistic financial burden is met with a force driven by love for one another; it’s about thoughtful intention, not just footing the bill.
More dubiously, if it’s all free — girl, that’s a yellow flag. More often than not, it comes with strings attached. Because one day it’s about taking care of his princess, and another day, he might gaslight you into thinking that you’re ungrateful for not giving in to him.
Let’s be honest: The problem here is the entitlement that comes from paying for the check while not explicitly communicating it. It’s insidious. And telling your friends to find a guy who will pay for her food is not sound advice; it just might end up being traumatizing.
We should trust that we can pay for our food and not emasculate or embarrass our date. We shouldn’t be responsible for whether a guy on a date feels masculine enough in the face of our Coach wallets. That’s the paradox of chivalry: Men can only be honorable, courageous and protective if women give up their own choices for them to play the part.
Generally, men are only chivalrous to women they perceive as desirable, showing how they’re not selfless creatures at all. It’s all a staged performance, and most of all, it can get in the way of figuring out what we truly want out of romantic relationships.
In fact, let’s even start getting comfortable with initiating relationships, because why the heck not? You have the rest of your life to experiment and become who you want to be.
I have no doubt in my mind that women who split the check can still linger in desire — no traditional gender roles required. And if that’s just not a possibility for you with your current boyfriend, I urge you to ask him, “Why not?”
Sidney Uy is a philosophy and sociology sophomore and opinion writer for The Battalion.
