The internet really is the gift that keeps on giving. It is where we are informed, entertained and in today’s case encouraged to question our convictions.
As I was scrolling down my Instagram timeline, I found this interesting Facebook post that Baller Alert had shared. Now, I don’t know if this woman is a real person or not; but it doesn’t matter, the discussion that followed this status update, is the takeaway.
See what she had to say below.
My first thought: Now, what part of the game is this? And I assumed that others would share a similar opinion. And most did. But there were a good handful of people who tended to agree with this woman. They thought that taking a woman away from her child, just so she can offer you some companionship for a night warranted a brotha coming up off some money for a sitter.
An interesting argument…except no woman should go on a date due to obligation. You go out with a man because you hope that you’ll have a good time with him. The expectation is that you’ll both benefit by being in each other’s company. In essence, he’s not paying for your time like an employer would an employee, he’s paying for the experience of sharing time with you. If you don’t want to go, a simple “no thank you” and not “Are you going to pay to take care of my kids?” will do.
While I appreciate men who pay for most dates, I also believe that the first ones should be relatively inexpensive. I’m talking coffee, walks in the park, drinks at the bar etc. You never know when the chemistry is going to be off. I’m not a man; but as a person who values money, I imagine that it would suck to find that not only do you not like the person you’ve made time for, but insult would be added to injury when you dropped $200 on a wack date. And now you want him to pay for childcare too? I don’t even like you?! And I’ve never met your kid.
The notion is ridiculous.
Your child is not a potential suitor’s responsibility, especially financially speaking. Again, there is no pressure to say yes to a man’s request to go out, so if you don’t think he’s worth the headache of getting a sitter, then decline.
A part of me feels like this was the woman’s real intention anyway. To dissuade that man in pursuing her further because she knew he would object to paying for a babysitter…because who does that?
Apparently, according to one of my co-workers, she’s heard of people who have done just that. They pay for a babysitter because the assumption is that services will be exchanged for that coin. I’m talking sex, for those who didn’t catch that.
But that sounds a helluva lot like prostitution, don’t it? I pay for your sitter, so you can bust it open? How romantic.
What I found particularly interesting was the mention of the father of homegirl’s child. She mentioned him as an attempt to brag about their shared standards. But actually, he just came off looking ridiculous as well.
Why in the world would you, as the father of the child who needs watching, be so quick to invite another man to pay for that? You want a stranger providing for your child? If she wanted to brag, she should have mentioned how the father of her child volunteered, with a quickness, to either watch their kid or at least come up off some money (maybe half) so she could find and pay for a quality sitter. After all, it’s his child who is in need. He wouldn’t be required to since a date is not an emergency, but it would be nice for a father to take this type of initiative.
Instead, he chose to rag another man for not taking responsibility for his child. And she cosigned that.
We’re living in some interesting times. While some of us women are out here fighting for equality, you have women who want men to do everything. He’s got to ask you out, pick you up, pay for dinner, take you home and now pay your a babysitter to watch a child he has no ties to, biological or otherwise. Cold world.
That’s just my opinion though. Do you believe a man should pay for a woman’s childcare if he plans on taking her out? Why or why not?