Stop Hating on the Sprinkle Sprinkle Girl—Her Dating Life Is None of Your Business

Some months ago, I threw out a question to a group of friends: On a date, should a guy send a car service? (#DatinginNewYork) The consensus was no, but it did roll into another question: “Should a guy pay for the date?” That received a muddled response, with one clear phrase emerging: “Sprinkle sprinkle.” Properly used in a sentence: “She’s a ‘sprinkle sprinkle’ girl.”

The catchphrase was popularized by social media creator Shera Seven, known for dispensing what is often considered controversial dating advice that emphasizes hypergamy or “marrying up.” She signs off on her videos by saying “sprinkle sprinkle,” a phrase that (in niche internet speak) has come to mean a specific type of woman, namely one who believes a man should hold the sole financial responsibility in a relationship. He should pay for dates, gifts—everything. According to Seven, if a woman is spending any of her own money, then something is wrong. Her dating advice is simple: attract a “provider,” then make sure he lives up to the name. (It should be noted, however, that Seven is strangely mum about her own romantic life.)

The amount of support Seven has received has baffled many and, at a glance, her message does seem anti-feminist with its focus on traditional gender roles. Seven doesn’t hold back, advising followers with adages like “A marriage is also a business decision,” “When you marry, it’s not for love,” and “How much should you contribute once you’re married? Zero dollars…or else you might as well just have a roommate. You are the prize!”

As a kid, I was fed a steady diet of Disney princess movies and lived in what would be described as a pretty “traditional” household. My mom stayed at home; my dad worked. But this was also the 2010s and the era of the “Girl Boss;” everyone around me seemed to be espousing the glory of the independent woman who didn’t need a man. As such, I have not emulated my upbringing in any way—I’m very single and pay my own bills, thank you very much. I recently hauled an entire couch up three flights of stairs and assembled it with my bare hands. That feels like the epitome of a strong, independent woman to me. And yet…I kind of want to be a “sprinkle sprinkle” girl.

It’s about the fact that many young men make so little effort. A “Provider” is somebody who is thinking about you, who is planning ahead for you, who is putting in the work and taking responsibility for his life.

After my friends’ informal discussion about gender roles, I took to my own Instagram and did a series of polls of my (mostly) late 20’s and early 30s friend-group. Interestingly, 69 percent of my respondents said that Prince Charming should exist and 52 percent believe that in today’s day and age, he’s still out there—despite much anecdotal evidence to the contrary. As for the financial component? 27 percent of my (highly educated, generally liberal) followers said, when going out, the guy should always pay, no questions asked.

This initially surprised me, but if I’m being *really* honest, I too like some of what the “sprinkle sprinkle” girl is proposing. Mainly, the idea that someone else is worrying about the money. After all, Gen Z’ers have an average of about $34,000 in debt and are facing an uncertain economy and rough job market. A little help in the dollar department is tempting, but it’s also about more than material things. (Though who doesn’t want a five-carat diamond engagement ring, two Lamborghinis and an afternoon at the Louis Vuitton boutique?)

It’s about the fact that many young men make so little effort. While I’m not saying this is the cause, I find it fascinating that 15 percent of men report having no close friends (not even enough effort for friendship), and that there's a new phenomenon of the “stay at home son,” men-children who are more than happy to let their mothers take care of them well into adulthood. Alternately, a “provider” is somebody who is thinking about you, who is planning ahead for you, who is putting in the work and taking responsibility for your life and his own.

But as appealing as this is, I have reservations. After all, there’s always some story on social media or through the grapevine of a woman dependent on her partner for everything—healthcare, income, retirement, a car and house—then losing it when they inevitably divorce. No one wants to look up one day and realize they’re in a Belle Burden situation, minus the law degree and trust fund to fall back on. All of which begs the question: Is being a “sprinkle sprinkle” girl bad? Is wanting to rely on someone else’s money disempowering? 

According to California State University professor and sex educator Dr. Tara Suwinyattichaiporn, women should naturally be empowered to make their own choices, whether that means being career-focused or building a home life. She does, however, caution that if you don’t have control of the purse strings, there should be what she calls an “out” plan.

“Historically, spousal violence and other controlling behaviors—like financial abuse and resource withholding—were more common because women relied on their spouses for money, leaving them with ‘no choice’ but to stay in toxic relationships,” she explains. “You're left with no money and no work experience. [The mentality should be] ‘I chose a partner who’s successful and is able to provide for us while I also work to pursue my dreams and aspirations.’ I don't think there's anything wrong with traditional relationships at all, provided there are small changes to safeguard the woman’s future, but I recommend really thinking it through and always having a plan.”

Surprisingly, after digging more deeply into Seven’s philosophy, I found that she and Dr. Tara actually have similar outlooks. Beyond her witty, shocking, rage-baiting sound bites, Seven’s doctrine is just pushback to the ways women experience dating and relationships today. In one video, Seven clarifies that while women should be empowered to work and earn money, they shouldn’t be obligated to spend that money on shared things in a relationship. (If one takes Dr. Tara’s advice, that’s money squirreled away for the “out” plan, if necessary.)

And this may be a defensive move. In an article for The Cut, writer Angelina Chapin examines the phenomenon by which breadwinning Gen Z women are “parenting” their boyfriends. “Women of this generation are more likely than in any other time in history to date a man who makes less than them.” And, somehow, Chapin says, the men are justifying their joblessness as “see[ing] striving for power as anti-feminist.”

That’s what Seven is preaching against. Her ideology is about finding guys who put in effort. (And, in her case, will buy you a Louis Vuitton Speedy if you ask.) Because when it comes down to it, most of us want somebody who acts like he wants to be in a relationship with us, and we aren’t here to be their caretaker. After all, if I wanted to be a parent, I’d have a baby. If I wanted to take care of a living being, I would get a gerbil. If I wanted to split the rent with someone, I’d get a roommate (I already have three!). All without sexual labor!

And if I’m being honest, part of me wants the princess treatment—to be celebrated with love and, OK, occasionally things. So yes, maybe I do want to be a “sprinkle sprinkle” girl sometimes. That doesn’t mean I’ll quit my job. But I will have standards, and they will be high.