Indianapolis resident Amanda Burnett, 23, had a dinner date with a man she didn’t relate to very well. What she ate is pictured above: it’s not exactly Le Cirq, but he paid the tab.
She decided to stop answering his texts, cutting off contact with him. A few weeks later, he sent her this, an invoice for the cost of her meal and drinks…
…followed by this text…
Amanda posted the invoice to two of her social media accounts, writing, a picture of the invoice on both her social media accounts, and added, “A guy just mailed me a bill for our dinner a few weeks ago because I didn’t text him back… I can’t make this shit up.”
To her amazement, we are told, much of the social media reaction was negative towards her.
I don’t understand the sympathy at all. As is usual with these private exchanges turned viral social media controversies, both parties are probably jerks. However, the underlying assumption of the guy’s “invoice,” whether it was intended as tongue in cheek or not (I assume it was) is that the social gesture of paying for one’s companion’s meal in a social engagement is an implicit quid pro quo. No man who assumes this is any higher than sus domesticus on the hierarchy of the animal kingdom. It’s not a contract. The man (or woman, as the case may be) isn’t paying for company, gratitude, a long term relationship, a chance at a long-term relationship, or, heaven forbid, sex. It’s called a gift. It’s called “being genteel.” It’s called manners. Nothing that occurs after this gift cancels it or changes its nature.
The presentation of the invoice characterizes the evening not as a date, but as a transaction. What an asshole.
To Amanda’s credit, she did not publish this creep’s name on social media, so a group on feminist web-shaming trolls didn’t resolve to destroy his life. Many of her critics assumed that she cut her bad date off without texting him why: we don’t know that, and it doesn’t matter. The invoice is disrespectful and insulting.
Source: Daily Mail