In scenes that would leave second-wave feminists pulling out their hair, the chronically-online young women of today are being open about the financial expectations they have of their spouses. Where splitting the bill and ‘paying your own way’ was once considered the epitome of feminist equality, some young women appear to be claiming progression can be found in men putting their hand in their pockets. But is this brazen mission for achieving financial parity a genuine step forward, or are we in danger of hurtling back to the ‘kept-woman’ of the 1950s (albeit in gifted Bottega Veneta shoes and sipping on cocktails at Sketch)?

On the surface, there appears to be a real superficiality to the TikToks, Instagram Reels and Tweets focusing solely on how – and why – women should expect luxury items and experiences from both potential suitors and long-term partners. It calls to mind the concept of ‘sugar daddies’ – whereby women offer their time and company in exchange for monetary offerings – but this is something different. These are women in, or seeking, romantic relationships.

Despite (some) effort from corporations and governments, the fact remains that women earn and save less money than men. With women earning on average 77% less than men, The UN predicts that, at the current rate, it will take 237 years for this gap to be closed.

Which is how increasingly, women are justifying their monetary expectations of men.

TikToker and model Kiera Breaugh sparked an online debate last year when she tore apart the idea that a 50/50 split of bills in a heteronormative relationship is indicative of ‘equality’ and claimed it was, instead, another example of the patriarchy in action:

“The fact that men expect women to pay 50/50 when women don't get 50% of anything. [Not] 50% of the money, 50% of the privilege, 50% of the safety… But pay. Pay equal amounts even though you don’t have equal rights”

This reflects a wider belief that women are claiming that when bills get split down the middle, and presents given of equal value, they’re getting the raw end of the deal. Is there some truth in this? Perhaps. There is, of course, the gender pay gap. But there also appears to be similar chasm in relationship expenditure that ultimately favours men – and could explain why some women are determined to right the wrong. Because whilst research suggests that generally, men outspend women on the actual dates, and on gifts on special occasions such as birthdays and Valentine’s Day (in the UK, on average men spend around £115 vs women’s £75), women appear to spend more day-to-day. Unpaid labour by women tops the bill at an estimated $10.9 trillion dollars, but there’s also the so-called pink tax, and the costs women incur with trying to stay safe (late night taxis etc).

And the cost-of-living crisis cannot be ignored, for women are more vulnerable to its impact. Legal and General’s 2022 research revealed that working women are only 14 days away from the breadline if they were to lose their income. This is far less than the average working man, who would be able to afford their household costs for 28 days. Which might go some way to explaining why, beneath the glossy guises of women expecting designer bags and tasting menus, there are also women relying on the more financially stable sex for their everyday necessities.

There are swathes of Tweets humorously suggesting “paying for your girl’s heating” this Valentine’s Day, but there have been further examples of women making ends meet via dating.

One such story came from McCall Brock, who took to TikTok to explain how she took men up on their offer of dates to not go hungry:

Brock received a decidedly mixed reaction, but a large section of women labelled it “a business decision” “a universal life hack” and “just being a genius”.

And this praise isn’t confined to individuals on social media. Dami Olonisakin, better known as Oloni, is a sex educator and relationship advisor with a combined 500K followers and a successful advice book, The Big O. She’s been a prominent proponent of women explicitly setting out their expectations for men to pay for dates, presents and occasions.

Not everyone subscribes to this view of creating financial equality by upping the expectations of male generosity. Ellen Lamont, a feminist sociologist, believes that by setting out with ‘traditional’ dating rituals – such as a woman’s time being ‘bought’ by a man – those who are seeking an egalitarian relationship will not find what they want. “When men and women endorsed these traditional gender roles early in a relationship, undoing those views in marriage was difficult” wrote Lamont in The Atlantic. She conducted a study which included those in LGBTQ+ relationships and noted that these offered a different partnership model. With less pre-existing rules, those in gay and lesbian relationships are writing their own script around who pays what, with Lamont noting that “the LGBTQ interviewees set up the expectations of equality from the outset of dating, not after it”.

This, it seems, is key: whatever side of the debate you fall on, it truly pays to be transparent about your financial needs and desires (and whether you believe in Valentine’s Day).

If a woman feels a Fendi bag is fair recompense for a lifetime of financial inequality that relationships cannot help but be infected by, then she has a right to request that of a romantic partner – but it’s worth checking that the expectation in return isn’t of a woman that wouldn’t be out of place in a Jane Austen novel.