Here, five guys reveal what they really think of "the reach"...
Guy #1: "The reach is transparent, yes, but necessary. It seems entitled to not make some gesture to help pay, even if the girl knows the guy won't actually take her up on it. It's just an awkward moment all around, though, and you can't escape it."
Guy #2: "I want her to do a blatantly ceremonial reach. The guy should always pay on the first date; it's part of the old-fashioned mating dance. I don't care about 'this economy'; the economy of romance hasn't changed."
See our tips: Places to Have Sex That Sound Sexy but Really Aren’t
Guy #3: "If the 'reach' is obviously insincere, then I consider it to be a bunch of B.S. and a telling sign that the girl isn't as straightforward as I'd like her to be. I'm very open and likely would have already told her that I was paying prior to the meal. If she balked at the idea and demanded to contribute half of the funds, then before the meal is the right time to make her stance known. After the meal is over, the only stance I want her in is...well...I'll stop there."
Guy #4: "I generally appreciate the reach. In certain minority cases the onus might fall on the woman to pay (like if she clearly asked the guy out), ergo the emergence of the lesser known 'male reach.' I would make the finer point that there's a noticeable difference between the more common 'reach' bluff and a bone fide 'reach' with a serious intention to split the check. Obviously, I give more credit for the latter."
Guy #5: "The reach for the check, I'm presuming we're discussing? I would never discourage other end of date 'reaches.' I appreciate the gesture, but do not mind at all if it's skipped on a first date. A lack of 'thank you' is a bit poor form, in my opinion, but also excusable--once. Two times with no acknowledgment is a deal breaker."
Ha, thanks, boys! Ladies, did any of these answers surprise you? Are you a tried-and-true reacher? Or do you prefer to just split the bill and call it a day?
