In an ironic way, you made a case AGAINST paying for dates - especially for those 'average' men that your comment is tendered at.
By paying for dates and by not being a 'cheapskate', he risks ending up with a woman who doesn't like him enough to tolerate dates where he doesn't pay. The winning move is not to pay, so that he ends up with women who like him enough, regardless of his apparent average-ness, not to care about whether he pays for dates or not.
Of course, the latter type of women threaten the pool of provider that you so expect of 'average' men - so of course, shaming such women is in order. A daddy's girl is more likely to expect men to pay, since she expects men to pamper her just like her daddy did. An insecure woman is more likely to expect average men to pay tribute for her company by paying for dates, so that she is assured that she is worthy enough for men to pay for her company. So your claim that only 'daddy's girls' or 'women with low self esteem' would go for men who don't pay for dates, doesn't really fly and seems to be a mixed case of projection and trying to dissuade men from going for women who don't have the same expections of them as you do. A vieled ploy against a culture where men do not pay for dates.