This morning Kelly Ripa went on a diatribe of unknown origin concerning men paying for a woman's meal and its connection to "chivalry" and, for some reason, childbirth. I think her argument was, approximately, that women think chivalry is dead, so men should prove them wrong by paying for their dinner; the fact that women give birth exempts them from having to buy the food they eat.
I'm thinking this could be a pretty good racket for me, if I play my cards right. What if a guy pays for my dinners, but then I don't have any babies? Ha! I would have fooled him. I would have a million, deliciously free hamburgers down my gullet and what would he have? Nothing at all.
Ripa ridiculously asserts that paying for a woman's food is evidence of a man being a "gentleman" and claims she and her husband are raising their sons to be chivalrous ATMs. But this kind of argument is antithetical to women's equal treatment. Sure, it makes sense on a first date for the person who extended the invitation to pick up that tab, if they want to, but it doesn't have to be that way. And it's certainly not offensive to me if the guy I'm out with doesn't want to shell out for my steak.
I have enough money to pay for my dinner. I have enough money to pay for your dinner, too. It's bad for women in general when we expect men to pay for us all the time; it is ultimately an assertion that women are less capable of paying because they're less capable of earning. And that's not true.
You can watch the depressing video here.