BeyondtheClouds Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 I think some women use the friendzone for possibly one of two reasons: 1. they want to multidate, so to encourage guys to want to see them while they are open about dating others, they will claim to be only friends with that guy. 2. Women, like men, will use the "friendship" guise as way to spend time around someone whom they want to date. After the e-mails and text messages of the woman who was dating my b before we became exclusive, she told him that they were just friends and also mentioned that she was doing OLD. When it became clear that my bf no longer had any interest in dating her she: 1. Accused him of leading her on. 2. Told him that he should stop dating me, using information that he told her about me as reasons for dumping me. 3. Then mentioned that she had gone out twice with some guy who appeared to be really into her. She didn't want to lead him on if there were any chance between him (my future bf whom she had framed as a friend) and her. She had gone out with him, this other guy only twice by then....really only twice.......
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) But if the category "friends" does not necessarily exclude the category "lovers" then the very statement "just friends" makes no sense, and could certainly include "friends and lovers." Oh, wait....surely you aren't saying that "friends" by default includes lovers? When most people specify friends, they are by default speaking about platonic relationships. Like when your family asks if you and so-and-so are an item, and you say "no, she's just a friend", they understand that means not dating. They don't get confused because they know that, technically, a lover can also be a friend. That seems like a stretch to me. Edited April 10, 2012 by xxoo 1
dasein Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 I don't follow your logic at all. To me, it obviously does not include "friends and lovers" because she specified just friends. The statement, "just friends" says nothing inherent about whether sex or romance can occur or not within the bounds of the friendship because people are perfectly capable of having sex and romance with their friends and do every day. "Just friends" necessarily includes the meaning "not sex or romance" only in twisted, privileged unreason land.
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 The statement, "just friends" says nothing inherent about whether sex or romance can occur or not within the bounds of the friendship because people are perfectly capable of having sex and romance with their friends and do every day. "Just friends" necessarily includes the meaning "not sex or romance" only in twisted, privileged unreason land. It honestly never occurred to me that some men don't understand that "just friends" means "not lovers". I wonder if other men on LS see it the same way you do. I doubt that your reasoning is the standard of reason. We do have a commonly used term for friends that are also lovers, but not romantic partners: friends with benefits. That's different from "just friends". 1
ThaWholigan Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 The statement, "just friends" says nothing inherent about whether sex or romance can occur or not within the bounds of the friendship because people are perfectly capable of having sex and romance with their friends and do every day. "Just friends" necessarily includes the meaning "not sex or romance" only in twisted, privileged unreason land. It honestly never occurred to me that some men don't understand that "just friends" means "not lovers". I wonder if other men on LS see it the same way you do. I doubt that your reasoning is the standard of reason. We do have a commonly used term for friends that are also lovers, but not romantic partners: friends with benefits. That's different from "just friends". I think most girls say it with the meaning of "just friends", sometimes as a way of giving you hope so you'll orbit (ego), sometimes just because they are rather anxious about rejecting for various reasons. Either way, Dasein is somewhat correct in that naive guys will read very far into it and some girls who know the situation will very well allow him to do so instead of setting him straight. This has happened, I've seen it. Generally though, I understand if I'm being told by a girl she wants to be friends, that it's not a romantic thing. Unless she changes her mind, but seeing as it's her prerogative, after the fact, I no longer care. 1
dasein Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 I'm defining it that way because it's the definition found in most places that define things; it's not an actual word in the dictionary, sadly, but here's the Wikipedia definition: Yet the definition you proposed originally is much narrower than the broader definition you are wanting to pull off wiki now?! You don't feel one bit obliged to be consistent in discussion, do you? Logically, there has to be a difference between being friends (sincerely) and being in the friend zone or the term would not exist. Bigfoot, leprechaun, unicorn, chimera, griffon, angels, wendigo, werewolf, vampire, mummy, godzilla, loch ness monster, zombies... all of them very happy with that level of "analysis." "Let's be friends" does not, in and of itself, a friendship make, for sure. But it does lay the boundary down that nothing more will be possible. It does once men have learned to identify this very common type of female lie and not take women at their word. Before men learn to discern the lie, it's a needlessly confusing thing that women (mostly) say. Some use it sincerely ~5-10% and some don't. ~90% Even if it were only 50/50, how could any reasonable person argue that such a confusing statement should continue to be a legitimate way of rejecting someone in lieu of simple, honest alternatives? This does not match the phrasing of the sentence at all the way mine did. You lose the structure of the language, from which we derive the meaning. Linguistically, it's a bad analogy. My analogy was very clear. Sorry, no it sucked. Mine was much more apt.
zengirl Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Daesin, There is no point in discussing with someone who is more interested in insulting and quipping than in actual discussion. As such, I am done. 1
zengirl Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Daesin, Your made up statistics and fake definitions add nothing. My definition was very close to the Wikipedia definition I stated and I have made every attempt to be clear and communicative in this discussions, with you and others. There is no point in discussing with someone who is more interested in insulting and quipping than in actual discussion. Nothing in your last post was substantive. As such, I am done with your thoughts on this one and will only refer to others' posts and if you respond to any of my thoughts will not reply.
Fondue Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 If I am interested in a woman, make it known, and she even hints at just a "friendship," I immediately drop her. I do NOT make friends with women I am attracted to sexually. Either I have you, or I don't. Nothing else. I'm satisfied with either. Most men stick around and hope the woman will change. 99%, she will not. You'll just be like every other guy that's "friends" with her. Why the hell does any guy want to be friends with a woman he has sexual interest in, listens to her crap, "hangs out" with her, and watch her swoon over some other dude? If that's not masochism, I don't know what is. Whomever falls for this crap and actually commits to a friendship with a woman he is interested is less of a man and is a fool.
jobaba Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Why the hell does any guy want to be friends with a woman he has sexual interest in, listens to her crap, "hangs out" with her, and watch her swoon over some other dude? If that's not masochism, I don't know what is. Whomever falls for this crap and actually commits to a friendship with a woman he is interested is less of a man and is a fool. Feelings fade. I had some very strong feelings for my ex. They are gone. I could watch her make out with another man today and pretty much cheer it on. I'm pretty sure of it. Another friend I had strong feelings for, I hang out with her and her husband all the time. Never bothers me. I prefer to keep good people in my life if I can. But to each his own.
BeyondtheClouds Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 If I am interested in a woman, make it known, and she even hints at just a "friendship," I immediately drop her. I do NOT make friends with women I am attracted to sexually. Either I have you, or I don't. Nothing else. I'm satisfied with either. Most men stick around and hope the woman will change. 99%, she will not. You'll just be like every other guy that's "friends" with her. Why the hell does any guy want to be friends with a woman he has sexual interest in, listens to her crap, "hangs out" with her, and watch her swoon over some other dude? If that's not masochism, I don't know what is. Whomever falls for this crap and actually commits to a friendship with a woman he is interested is less of a man and is a fool. This is what I pointed out to my bf. How can you be just friends with a woman who not only wanted to date but who also told you to drop me. She invited us to a dinner party which my bf never mentioned to me. I think he knew it would be a problem if he had introduced us.
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Victory Daesin! It's got to be a lonely victory if you drive all the women away I'll never understand why, given a format like this for men and women to share perspective, people don't seem to even try to listen to the opposite sex. 3
dasein Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 It honestly never occurred to me that some men don't understand that "just friends" means "not lovers". I wonder if other men on LS see it the same way you do. I doubt that your reasoning is the standard of reason. Men on here think that a woman likes him if she looks at a clock near where he is sitting or says "hello." Is it really such a tough notion that people should be direct and straightforward in their intentions? Let's just be friends is objectionable on four different levels. Amazing so much wrongness and confusion can pack itself into four little words. 1. Friendship does not necessarily preclude romance or sex. In some cases, such as you -yourself- allude to, it can mean sex, but no romance (FWB). Instead of leaving the man to puzzle out what is being suggested by LJBF, whether that includes NSA/FWB or not, whether that includes romance or not, whether that includes even any reasonable definition of friendship or not, why not just NOT SAY IT?? to begin with. 2. What is being sought when the LJBF is dropped is almost never real friendship, but either a) a distorted lopsided relationship where things all go one way, or b) the absence of someone from one's life entirely. Are there exceptions? Sure, but not many. For the most part, a) and b) sum it up. That the LJBF dropper wants anything approximating real friendship, or that the recipient would be happily restricted as such, is such a ludicrous idea that they did a Seinfeld motif on it as part of the "bizarro world" episode. The Bizarro Jerry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 3. There is an inherent implication in LJBF that is callous, entitled and cake-eating, showing little concern for the feelings of the other person. Instead of merely parting company (which is ironically what real friends who cared for one another's feelings would actually do if one were attracted and the other not), "let's see if I can salvage anything... for me... out of this situation, and turn things to my advantage even in the act of rejecting someone," regardless of what effect that may have on the other person. Humane people do not try to turn an expression of affection to their advantage if the affection is not returned. 4. There is an inherent implication in LJBF that friendship (or whatever she is after) is the nobler base condition and that the full sexual relationship between a man and a woman is somehow less pure, that his seeking such demeans her in some way, that he is seeking to take something from her, That if he agrees to remove his sexual attraction from the equation a nobler, healthier relationship will be the result. All bogus notions from the past used to manipulate men and make men feel ashamed of their sexual desire for women, bogus then, bogus now. Complete hogwash, but implicit in LJBF. We do have a commonly used term for friends that are also lovers, but not romantic partners: friends with benefits. That's different from "just friends". Yep, adding even more layers of confusion to the inherent confusion of LJBF, and making my case that the lie should be entirely done away with.
dasein Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 I'll never understand why, given a format like this for men and women to share perspective, people don't seem to even try to listen to the opposite sex. If I claimed that men who trick women into sex by promising a relationship with no intent of following through were not to blame for their lying because it's uncomfortable or embarrassing to get sex without lying, just how hard would you try to listen to the opposite sex? 1
ThaWholigan Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 If I claimed that men who trick women into sex by promising a relationship with no intent of following through were not to blame for their lying because it's uncomfortable or embarrassing to get sex without lying, just how hard would you try to listen to the opposite sex? Good question
zengirl Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 What I can say is Zengirl is often naive to the point of being obsurd and to watch her right she was done twice tickled me. It was victory! hahah My iPad betrayed me -- I didn't mean to double post. It posted once while I was writing apparently. *shrug* Happens. I can be called many things, but naive isn't one of them. I'm well aware of all the disingenuous things people do -- what I'm not is cynical enough to believe that most people do things with poor motives. It's people who were once naive that become that cynical. I was raised cynical and realized that optimism and examining situations more closely were better methods. 1
joystickd Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) Check this out: http://www.examiner.com/men-s-dating-advice-in-los-angeles/men-should-blame-themselves-when-relegated-to-the-dreaded-friend-zone Edited April 11, 2012 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
zengirl Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Just be clear from the mens side of the equation we see the womans view of "friendship" very naive and you are no exception to that in my view. Huh? I'm not sure what you mean "my view" of friendship. Personally, I don't keep orbiters (and any married woman that does has major issues) nor did I ever. Nor would I want to be friends with a man who wanted to date me. I'm merely suggesting that the act of doing so is not some kind of sinister plot, especially if the two people have already seemed to be friends previously (i.e. hung out and no romantic interest was ever expressed). At any rate, I'm married. I do have male friends, but I sincerely hope none of them are pining for me (I'd be very surprised if any of them were that naive and ridiculous themselves) and I doubt they are. fwiw, I think the FZ does require one participant to be naive -- at least -- and it's very often the woman, who doesn't realize until the man expresses interest (much later) what was happening. I am not naive and thus have never been in that situation, but I have seen it. I do not think we should confuse people who willfully lie with people who simply act out of their own naivete. For a guy though it will destroy him to believe in friendship the way you do. Are you saying it would destroy a man to believe men and women can be sincere friends? I'm confused on what of my views would destroy a man. I'm suggesting --- at every turn -- that a man avoid being in any kind of "friendship" with a woman he wants to date, unless as fishtaco summed up, he can turn that off and it would benefit him more long-term to build his social circle (even so, that's more friendly acquaintance level). I also think a lot of times people say, "Let's be friends," when they mean "Let's be friendly," not just in dating, but otherwise.
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 If I claimed that men who trick women into sex by promising a relationship with no intent of following through were not to blame for their lying because it's uncomfortable or embarrassing to get sex without lying, just how hard would you try to listen to the opposite sex? Women would be wise to listen to that, and understand that men have a strong drive to seek sex even if they have no interest in a relationship with you. I advise women to take note, and pay attention to a man's actions, not his words. As for being tricked, dog bites you once, shame on the dog. Dog bites you twice, shame on you. This is as true for women as it is for men. Enforce your own boundaries, and only engage in sex, or friendship, if you are ok with the terms as they are.
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 I see you and your bicycle with the hearts wofting up from it. How cute. No ones driving all the women away. If you havn't noticed this place and every where you go is ripe full of women. If anything I find it rare to see large gatherings of men. Daesin was just giving his view which I myself don't totaly agree. What I can say is Zengirl is often naive to the point of being obsurd and to watch her right she was done twice tickled me. It was victory! hahah Of course I was being silly and fun. You liked my comment that was fun. If anything we are being drawn togather. So how old are you? I'm late 20's thats where I come from on this suposed "friends" and "girls" debate. I liked your comment because I interpreted it to be silly and fun! It was funny I am late 30s. I've had a couple male friends for over 20 years now. If we are not truly friends, I don't know what the hell is going on
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Question guys.... This is a thread asking why some men continually get stuck in the role of platonic friend when they want more. Women open up and explain what they feel and mean when they say "let's just be friends", trying to help the guys out. How does it help to argue with and insult the women explaining what they mean and feel? It is like when women ask why men do xyz, and then men explain, and then the women jump in to tell them that they are AWFUL for feeling that way. I hate when the women here do that. I hate it just as much when the men do it.
gaius Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 How does it help to argue with and insult the women explaining what they mean and feel? Because it gets the women talking to them. 2
dasein Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Guys put themselves into the "friend zone" by being (fake) friends with a woman they fear would reject them outright if they suggested a date. Generally, yes, it's true the woman would reject them for a date but she may want them for a friend or orbiter (the 2 are not the same - what you most commonly see in these situations are orbiters, but not always). fwiw Girls do this too, but what they more commonly do is put themselves in a FWB situation where they want more. The two are analogous really, and they work about equally well -- which is almost never. 'Using' friendship or sex to "catch" a relationship (or friendship to catch sex or sex to catch actual friendship) doesn't work the vast majority of the time and is an extremely stupid move. Now, there are situations where people truly ARE friends, and then one falls for the other, but that's not really the "friendzone" and those are actually, IMO, more likely to work out, because they more often tend to be mutual than the other kind. I've seen some men fool themselves (on this board in particular) into thinking this is what they do when instead they do the former. Usually this one only happens if one of the people were coupled up or truly unavailable when the friendship was formed, allowing it to be a sincere friendship. How does it help to argue with and insult the women explaining what they mean and feel? How does defining the thread topic dishonestly and narrowly in a biased way such as the above help? a definition that lays 100% of the blame on men as alternatively naive, deceptive or rudely persistent, and 0 blame on women for the very common LJBF lie? It is like when women ask why men do xyz, and then men explain, and then the women jump in to tell them that they are AWFUL for feeling that way. I hate when the women here do that. I hate it just as much when the men do it. If part of the male explanation involved making endless rationalizations and logical distortions in defense of lies that cause mass confusion that could and should be easily avoided, they deserve to be told they are "awful."
xxoo Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 Because it gets the women talking to them. Fair enough. 1
jobaba Posted April 10, 2012 Posted April 10, 2012 (edited) Question guys.... This is a thread asking why some men continually get stuck in the role of platonic friend when they want more. Women open up and explain what they feel and mean when they say "let's just be friends", trying to help the guys out. How does it help to argue with and insult the women explaining what they mean and feel? It is like when women ask why men do xyz, and then men explain, and then the women jump in to tell them that they are AWFUL for feeling that way. I hate when the women here do that. I hate it just as much when the men do it. If a woman truly and genuinely wants to be friends, and respects me, I'm totally on board with it. One of my best friends is a woman who previously rejected me. I can respect the fact that she has no physical attraction to me if she respects me as a person. She's loyal as a rock as a friend. However, there are women out there who will hold a patronizing friendship with you. In other words, if they don't find you attractive, they won't really be interested in having ANY kind of a relationship with you although they will pretend for the sake of 'feeling like a good person'. Such women don't really respect men they have no physical attraction to because they are not TRULY interested in having male friends. This is a lot of women. Men just have to do a better job of sniffing out the latter (unless they are like that too)... Edited April 10, 2012 by jobaba
Recommended Posts