carhill Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 I think a lot of timid men go overboard for one woman, without even being in a romantic relationship in real time yet, out of a sense of relief or perhaps laziness. But by jumping the gun in this way, by pre-maturely "over committing" to a relationship which exists more in fantasy than in reality, they are doing themselves a disfavor. Even if not timid, IMO focusing too much on one potential leaves the dynamic unbalanced, with the lady receiving all this attention and leaving her little room to proactively reciprocate and to 'want'. When one is surrounded by presents, there's little impetus to go out looking for them or to buy someone else a present, as one is too pre-occupied with their own satisfaction from all the generosity and good will being heaped upon them. I was definitely guilty of 'one-itis' when a virgin; less so once I became sexually active, and was well into multi/serial dating by the time I met my exW. I still limited intercourse partners but progressed sexual affection as part of the dating process. That was the determining factor, IME. Most of that happened back during the initial AID's scare and so many people, at least amongst the ladies I dated, were more concerned about such matters and the risks of intercourse. As knowledge and information flow improved, that dynamic subsided. Still, lots of sexual behaviors and affection could happen in a body-fluid-free environment. To me, that desire and affection was the difference between true heterosexual romance and the 'friend-zone'.
jobaba Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 That's not what gets you friend zoned. What gets you friend zoned is the woman not being attracted to you. There's nothing you can say or do to prevent this. If she's not sexually attracted to you, she will not want to date you. I don't know why so many guys have trouble understanding this. Guys, you wouldn't want to date a woman that you're not attracted to, so why should women want to date guys that they're not attracted to? That's definitely not true. For most women, it takes more than good looks to motivate her to hook up with a guy. Most women need some sort of emotional connection with the guy before they'd feel ready to hook up with him. They wouldn't be willing to hook up with a complete stranger just because he's hot. They'd just be insulted that the guy expected to hook up with them without even going on a single date. You totally just contradicted yourself here. First, you say that attraction is not a choice, and there's nothing you can do to change a woman's attraction to you. Then, you say, it's about more than looks and the woman has to get to know the guy first. A guy can always change his personality.
jobaba Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 If a woman is truly your friend, of course she likes you. Just not in a romantic way. You're her buddy. Actually, a woman who friend zones a guy is telling the guy that she doesn't want to date him. She might respect him, she might see him as a man, she just doesn't see him as a man that she wants to date. So basically you're saying that any woman who doesn't want to date you needs to be treated like crap? What next, you're going to hit a woman if she turns you down? Why don't you just respect her decision and walk away? And treating a woman like crap will not increase your chances of generating attraction. It will only make her dislike you more. She friend zoned you because she wasn't attracted to you. Treating her like crap won't change that. Believe it or not, women want to date a nice guy. They just want a nice guy who is also attractive. So if you're unattractive, you'll get friend zoned, it doesn't matter how nice or mean you are. Yeah, you're right. You just described all women to a T. The guys on this forum are so lucky to have you, what would they do without a man who understands women the way you do? They might go on believing that women actually have brains and the capacity for rational thought. They might even believe that women want to be treated with love and respect. Thank God you're here to set them straight! He's saying in an extreme way, "Do not invest any effort into a woman." Don't get to know her. Either they like you or they don't. Be cocky and upfront. Take rejection lightly and often and move on. You don't realize that you're both saying essentially the same thing ... that attraction is based on a non-mental, non-personal connection and it can't be changed.
Cypress25 Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 Then pray inform us, why is it that SO MANY women seem more than willing to do it when they barely know the man--including even on first dates--but so often, once they have the man "hooked," all of a sudden it's gag-worthy? I don't know any women who act like this. All the women I know are relationship-oriented and they won't get intimate with a guy until they've gone on a few dates and gotten to know him first. Maybe there are a few skanks out there, but most women aren't interested in hooking up with strangers. I think anyone who has actually been "out there" for any length of time would probably disagree. Only the guys who can't get laid will disagree. They don't want to admit that it's because they're unattractive or because they have no social skills, so they convince themselves that it's because they're nice. No, that's not the reason. There are plenty of jerks out there who have great success with women, but their success is not due to the fact that they're jerks. These guys are very good at pretending to be nice. They're charming and manipulative, and that disguises the fact that they're jerks deep down. If they blatantly acted like jerks upon meeting women, they would get rejected every time. Or they would attract women who have a history of trauma/abuse; these are the women who tolerate bad treatment from men, because their abusive past has scarred them for life. Healthy, emotionally stable women don't tolerate men who treat them like crap. These chicks are all putting up resistance to male approaches which just aren't aggressive enough. You just keep telling yourself that. The truth is, before you approached her, she spotted you across the room and immediately decided that you're unattractive. She's already friend zoned you in her mind. You've been mentally crossed off her list. No matter how you approach her, it won't matter. An unattractive, aggressive guy is still unattractive. You totally just contradicted yourself here. First, you say that attraction is not a choice, and there's nothing you can do to change a woman's attraction to you. Then, you say, it's about more than looks and the woman has to get to know the guy first. A guy can always change his personality. It's not a contradiction. Looks are important because sexual attraction is a requirement. But it's not the only requirement! Most women have higher standards than that. A woman doesn't have to get to know a guy in order to be sexually attracted to him. She could be attracted to him as soon as she sees him. But that doesn't necessarily mean she'll want to have sex with him. Do you understand the difference? Just because a guy is hot doesn't mean I'll go home with him. If he's hot AND he has a great personality AND a great sense of humor AND we get along really well AND he treats me with respect, then I might want to have sex with him. Just being hot is not enough. Sexual attraction can be instant, but an emotional connection takes time. And most women need BOTH. He's saying in an extreme way, "Do not invest any effort into a woman." Don't get to know her. Either they like you or they don't. Be cocky and upfront. Take rejection lightly and often and move on. This is fine for guys who are just looking for a one-night stand. They want immediate results, so they don't waste their time with women who won't give them instant gratification. But for guys who want more than a one-night stand, this would never work.
Author Wolf18 Posted November 5, 2011 Author Posted November 5, 2011 (edited) Cypress is one of the few honest women on here. Personality, in terms of romance, truly takes a back seat to your appearance. I can usually tell which guys going to get the girl just by taking a quick look at the potential suitors and their profession. I think Cypress you're burning all the girls however, who want to shift the blame for this on men, telling us it's our "personality" that holds back Some guys seem to think that kissing a girls ass will get them in, but no, sorry, the guy who doesn't care but looks better than you will always have her first. This is where they get the "Jerk" vs "Nice guy" paradigm from, but it's a lot simpler than even that. Edited November 5, 2011 by Wolf18
OnyxSnowfall Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 (edited) Now what could possibly be a deal-breaker in a romantic relationship that would NOT be a deal-breaker with a friend? I call b.s. on this. He probably did something that you perceived as portraying himself as too weak or emotionally vulnerable. Just like when soserious's FWB showed his human side. She completely lost all sexual attraction for him. You were attracted to the guy or there wouldn't have been romantic potential. That means you were sexually attracted. Then he did something (you won't tell us what but I'm sure it had something to do with a display of unmasculine emotion on his part) which turned you off sexually. If he had just acted like a complete a-hole rather than trying to treat you like a human being you would have jumped right in the sack with him. LMAO!!! Yes, because you know me and what I've come to like and dislike, right? It had NOTHING to do with weakness nor vulnerability --- if anything, the men that have turned me off are ones that have tried too hard to act like they don't have ANY such things... ugh. I'm under the firm impression every single person does, and a man that can own up to his is rather a sign of strength to me far beyond a man that denies it. Now --- usually it was because I determined our life values / interests, particularly in the realm of intimacy, were just too different. If a guy likes three-somes and I like monogamy, it's not going to work. Sorry. That doesn't mean I see him as a foul PERSON --- or that we didn't connect in some other area, but it does mean we're sexually incompatible. Another example was there was a guy who wasn't very touchy - didn't really liked being touched or touching others. He claimed that he liked sex, but not other kinds of physical affection --- ok, well, I like all types of physical affection. That's not going to work either. But we did come upon some interesting ideas regarding our artistic endeavors together. Or if a male's primary hobby is one I just do not enjoy at all (sitting around watching TV) --- that's not going to work either, but that doesn't mean there isn't some other topic or activity we could *occasionally* do together. God, do I really have to explain this? Career paths etc are important for me in my "screening" process as well... I don't have to know or be a part of a "friend's" intimate life details, per se... but with a lover, I will be SHARING those. I've been interested in a LTR -- I won't do casual hook-ups etc. i also call bullsh*t on that. in effect, you thought to yourself "how can i keep the attention that i want from this guy without having to deal with this issue that has arisen, because i don't want to have to take responsibility for dealing with anything myself." a normal rational person who has an issue with another person brings the issue up to that person and discusses it with them. trying to keep getting something from that person while assuming about the issue in question without discussing it with them is the very textbook definition of manipulative and dishonest. I'm not a normal rational person, duh But no, that's not what I thought. I thought "well we can mutually benefit one another here and here" --- most of the platonic relationships I attempted to maintain were ones that involved some creative and shared aspect or ones that involved a philosophical element ... and for the record, I *did* give back in those attempted friendships . Ideally they would have ceased sexual attraction and came to the same conclusions I did too. But, nope. Admittedly, I didn't always tell every guy why he got friend-zoned --- just the ones that fell a part and confessed their "love" etc... "why not?" --- the other ones, although some still made attempts to take it to something more, I just reminded that I wasn't romantically attracted to them. BECAUSE I CAN INDEED be initially attracted to someone and then have practicality / future concerns prevail over it and just shut it down. I've learned to be careful about who I "emotionally" invest in. (Also, when I was much younger, I did go through a phase where I kept a slew of admirers that I was never interested in lol. You don't have to tell me it was foul, I already know that .... in any case, those were different than being "sexually attracted" to someone first and then having it be killed and to never come back from the dead). AND finally. I haven't attempted to have a platonic male relationship for years now, because it was obvious it was a futile attempt. Whether men were taken or not they still wanted more when I didn't. I just straight-up reject strangers and don't get personally involved with other males (for instance, ones I've had to work with). I'm already in a relationship anyway Edited November 5, 2011 by OnyxSnowfall
AD1980 Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 I think part of why it hurts so much in the friend zone because a lot of times we have a connection with someone but because we lost the genetic lottery and shes not attracted to us it doesnt have a chance to go anywhere.. This is wash rinse repeat with all women we try to meet becaue of our looks.. Not blaming women everyone wants somebody they are attracted to but for some of us we keep striking out because of that fatal flaw and it hurts..
Recommended Posts