Female Friendzone?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Owyn_Merrilin:
This:

gmaverick019:
eh guys are usually more open/straight forward

Is a heck of a lot more accurate than this:

Colour-Scientist:

The friendzone is something you do to yourself. Usually when you pretend to care about someone as a friend so you can get in their pants.

TL;DR: Teenage guys are idiots when it comes to women. They need to be told things honestly and preferably in monosyllabic terms, not couched in innuendo in the hopes of not hurting their feelings.

i find this to be very true. throughout highschool this happened to me several times, especially because i didn't have an actual girlfriend until the last month or so of my highschool career. but in retrospect i was so not fucking slick, my attempts to get with a girl were so obvious it was just embarasing. but even when i just wanted freindship from a girl they would assume im trying to get in their pants, i guess cuz of how bad i was at this stuff. it was especially not helped by the fact that i never (and still to some degree) had any idea how to talk to women.

in times like this i would just flat out state how i felt, or even ask if they had any interest in talking to me at all (since i kept getting a lot of indirectly bad signals). teenage guys are bad for this, and teenage girls are bad at leading on because of the whole "let them down gently" thing. it's not really worse on any one side than the other, but in terms of the friendzone being worse for men than women i think it is definitely worse for men. it's easier for a woman to have plutonic love for man than it is vice versa, although time is a strange mistress and things will usually develop anyway.

i think the friendzone is not always a bad thing, in my case the friendzone was more of a reservation spot. my girlfriend said although we were good friends for many years, she was always waiting for the right time to be with me (she went through some weird phases when we were friends and apparently didnt want me to be a part of). but after a few bad boyfriends and twists and turns, we ended up together and have never been happier.

the friendzone is gender mutual, but tends to be harder on men than women. sometimes it is a mutually good thing that means the best end for you both.

I'm a woman with almost entirely male friends. So I've certainly had friends that I've fancied. The ones I really fancied, I started flirting with. The ones that flirted back turned into flings/relationships. The ones that showed no interest, I stayed just friends with.

I don't really see what the big deal is about having a friend you think is attractive, but who (for whatever reason) you're not going to end up in a relationship with. Unless, of course, the only reason you're hanging around with them is because you hope to sleep with them. In which case you should probably just give up and move on. Personally, I have no problem with eye-candy friends. ;)

Possible tip for the guys: In my experience, if I don't fancy a guy after a couple of hours of good conversation (i.e. long enough to get a first impression how smart/funny he is) then he's not my type. So if we have had enough time to become actual friends, and I'm still not responding to flirting, then I just don't fancy you!

Attraction happens (or doesn't) in the earliest stages of getting to know someone. Friendship takes longer.

(I will admit to being guilty of using the "you're too much like a brother to me" as an excuse when trying to let a friend down gently. I have also used "it's not you, it's me" when breaking up with a guy. So it's possible I'm an Evil Bitch, but I prefer "Not Good At Relationships".)

Jacco:
Goddamnit I hate this "friend zone" bullshit about it being about getting into someone's pants. FUCKING STOP ASSUMING THAT.

Yes, that is the case sometimes, but to just unequivocally make that statement is a gross misrepresentation of the entire issue. A friend zone can be anything and it is indeed a legit problem for some people.

As for the topic, yes. Girls get friend zoned all the time. Half the albums Taylor Swift puts out addresses that. It's just not as big of an issue for them normally because they don't have to go through the "first move" stuff. And there is always another guy waiting in reserve who would happily take her. So more often than not, they can settle instead of being outright rejected.

And I say this as a social psychology major.

"And there is always a different guy waiting in reserve" excuse me? That is as true for males as it is for females. If there really is some reserve sitting and waiting, he/she is most likely to never be noticed by the "friendzoned" because they are still stuck with the "friendzoner".

And yes, friendzone is indeed something you do to yourself. I was close to being completely friendzoned, but after actually understanding that he was never gonna go anywhere with our "friendship" igot pissed, raged about him, cried a lot and then i moved on. Yes i still remember him, but i am not reminded constantly of how much i would like to be with him and getting crushed everytime i am "just one of the guys".

So, yes . It happens to women, but i guess we are just not as loud about it. Mostly because we feel it as a horrible defeat and we do not like to dwell in those with all the feelin and period stuff we also have to focus on...

Ahri:

senordesol:
I can easily see (and have seen) both males and females in the 'friendzone'. Be it a problem with your looks, social graces, or confidence; it's real fucking easy to land yourself there and stick.

I wouldn't say that's a "friendzone", I'd say that's just an outright lack of confidence.

I don't understand why people get so upset when they're rejected, though. Surely the other person is doing you a favour? They're saying "I'm sorry, I don't like you enough to date you" - and isn't that honesty better than being in a relationship based on lies, or where one party is much more invested in the relationship than the other?

I'm with the side that believes the "friendzone" is a myth people created so they don't have to accept that the girl/boy of their dreams just isn't into them.

A lack of confidence can result in being 'friendzoned'. Of course, the condition could use defining (at least on my end).

The 'Friendzone', I believe, if invoked truly (rather than over-dramatically as it often is) is a type depressive state (i.e. it can only be imposed on one's self, not by anyone else). It stems from either the knowledge or suspicion that no one wants to be with you, not even people who like spending time with you -- a variation on 'Forever Alone', or Unrequited Love, if you will.

The idea here being that if you have NO prospects, that no one of the opposite sex seems to want to have anything to do with you... and then 'She' has to come along -- She, who seems to like everything you like, who wants to talk about the things you want to talk about, who has no problem with your friends or interests. This might be the first time anyone has taken an honest-to-goodness interest in you and, wouldn't you know it, you start to develop feelings for her. Now imagine how emotionally crushing it is to know (either for a fact or in your heart) that she does not and will not ever feel the same way about you. Imagine the boiling resentment that bubbles up everytime she moans about how she can't find a 'nice guy' or a guy 'more like you'.

You can't tell me that state of being doesn't exist. I've lived it. And you can't tell me that it amounts to nothing more than simple 'rejection'. Rejection, if anything, is precisely what you're used to at that point. It's not a matter of taking a 'no' and moving on. There's nothing to move on to.

Now is any of this fair to your love interest? Nope! You're putting her on a pedastal, and elevating her power over your mental state in a fashion she never asked for! But, unfair as it is, the emotional investment and the depression that comes with it is real. Unfair and illogical though it may be, it is real. Because it has less to do with the person herself and more to do with the knowledge that you are inadequate. Undesireable. Good for nothing more than 'Friendship'. If this were Notre Dame, your name would be Quasimodo. That is the friendzone.

There seems to be some different notions on the definition of friendzone on here . As I see it, it's when you have a friend you fancy, Man/Woman/Whatever, and you ask them out and they reject you but still want to be friends. You'll still be friends but you know you'll never be anything more than that. And that's the friendzone, you will always be a friend in your relationship with this individual who you had/have feelings for.

OT: I am sure some girls have been friendzoned. There are bound to be men some where who have more than one girl who likes him. You can't pick everyone so someone is bound to be left out.

MetalMagpie:

Possible tip for the guys: In my experience, if I don't fancy a guy after a couple of hours of good conversation (i.e. long enough to get a first impression how smart/funny he is) then he's not my type. So if we have had enough time to become actual friends, and I'm still not responding to flirting, then I just don't fancy you!

Attraction happens (or doesn't) in the earliest stages of getting to know someone. Friendship takes longer.

It's well meant, but I wouldn't recommend this advice, except for as the keys to metalmagpie's heart.

As a whole the dating landscape is such a different experience based on gender, age, experience, looks and skills, that advice like this is usually not helpful. Especially since guys with little experience can have trouble seperating between a girl that's flirting vs. one that is not flirting. And if they have that experience, they wouldn't need the advice.

senordesol:

And you can't tell me that it amounts to nothing more than simple 'rejection'.

Who said rejection is simple to deal with?

senordesol:

Now is any of this fair to your love interest? Nope! You're putting her on a pedastal, and elevating her power over your mental state in a fashion she never asked for! But, unfair as it is, the emotional investment and the depression that comes with it is real. Unfair and illogical though it may be, it is real. Because it has less to do with the person herself and more to do with the knowledge that you are inadequate. Undesireable. Good for nothing more than 'Friendship'. If this were Notre Dame, your name would be Quasimodo. That is the friendzone.

yeah... been there, sometimes still am, but I've grown to get some perspective and not hold grudges, heck, I begrudge myself the most if anyone.

also, The Hunchback of Notre Dame is an awesome film, love you for that referance.

Sadly, I don't even really have any advice how to deal with it either, I myself try to distract myself in work or games but saying that out loud now doesn't really give me any consolidation, I realise.
maybe try growing a beard and pretend I don't care wether I'm single, that could help, the world needs more beards anyway.

Not helping is that a man always has to "prove himself", show yourself worthy of someone's affection in this scenario, and when they don't fancy you... well, it's your fault obviously, you fell short.

Friend zone happens cos you take to long to ask the girl out. After time you then worry if you did ask her out would you lose her as a friend? It becomes complicated. I think woman could leave hints if they like the guy but sometimes those signs are not obvious or not specific enough for guys to see them as a definite yes.

But then friends with women are fine and can lead you to meet their friends. Friend zone itself isnt a real thing, its a matter of choice or just not acting when you should of. As a person you chose whether to ask the girl out or not. If you dont then your friends.

Colour-Scientist:
I've fancied friends before but I've never considered myself as being in "the friendzone".
Either I asked them out and they said yes/no or I said nothing and was content with being friends.

The friendzone is something you do to yourself. Usually when you pretend to care about someone as a friend so you can get in their pants.

I don't think I've ever met a girl who had friend zoned themselves, I'm sure it happens though.

What she said. I have fancied friends and never said anything. This doesn't mean they "friendzoned" me, it means I decided I didn't want to risk being rejected - which I would have been because I knew their types and I was NOT it - and wanted to keep their friendship because that was more important to me than a hypothetical chance to get in their pants.

I'd also like to point to this video because it's a little relevant (but really I just like it):

In films there's always a chick in the friendzone, except by the end of the film she always leaves it because the rule of Hollywood is, guys have to get laid in every film

I don't believe in the friend zone because it sounds like a massive excuse at best, and a fundamental misunderstanding of how human relationships work at worst.

I'm gonna say for the most part no, cuz women don't believe the FriendZone exists. It seems to be a men specific phenomena labeled to describe the failing of having your brain say "we're friends" and your man bits saying "we should be pants friends too."

From experience it is something you can control, just gotta be straight forward in your actions from the beginning.

dunam:

senordesol:

And you can't tell me that it amounts to nothing more than simple 'rejection'.

Who said rejection is simple to deal with?

I sure as hell didn't. I said that the friendzone is more complex than the 'simple' rejection it is so oft dismissed as. I said that those who find themselves in the friendzone are well familiar with simple rejection's sting.

I see the issue here is that some seem to think that identifying with the friendzone is a simple inability to handle rejection. I argue that sentiment is not only false, but cruel. It's not a matter of thinking 'that bitch can't say no to me!' it's a matter of thinking 'great...I found ONE girl who likes the things I like, does the things I do, and will actually bother to give me the time of day...and I STILL can't make it happen.'

In gaming terms: the one is frustrated he can't get a perfect score, the other is frustrated he can't score at all.

Combustion Kevin:

senordesol:

Now is any of this fair to your love interest? Nope! You're putting her on a pedastal, and elevating her power over your mental state in a fashion she never asked for! But, unfair as it is, the emotional investment and the depression that comes with it is real. Unfair and illogical though it may be, it is real. Because it has less to do with the person herself and more to do with the knowledge that you are inadequate. Undesireable. Good for nothing more than 'Friendship'. If this were Notre Dame, your name would be Quasimodo. That is the friendzone.

yeah... been there, sometimes still am, but I've grown to get some perspective and not hold grudges, heck, I begrudge myself the most if anyone.

also, The Hunchback of Notre Dame is an awesome film, love you for that referance.

Sadly, I don't even really have any advice how to deal with it either, I myself try to distract myself in work or games but saying that out loud now doesn't really give me any consolidation, I realise.
maybe try growing a beard and pretend I don't care wether I'm single, that could help, the world needs more beards anyway.

Not helping is that a man always has to "prove himself", show yourself worthy of someone's affection in this scenario, and when they don't fancy you... well, it's your fault obviously, you fell short.

I know that feel, bro. Sometimes people get lucky, like I did...hell, sometimes it's hard for me to convince myself that I didn't somehow trick my wife into marrying me -- like she failed to answer my riddles or something.

I remember going through middle school and high school and half of college just fucking bereft. Unable to attract any interest at all no matter what I did. But I remember the friendzone most acutely of all. God, I had it bad for her. She just HAD to like the same nerdy things I liked, she just HAD to have me introduce her to videogames, and her hair just HAD to be red, didn't it?

Well...he know where this is going (rather: where it's not). But recalling that relationship and then hearing people suggest that the friendzone isn't real is just something that frustrates me to no end. Like you, I don't have any neat and tidy solutions for people going through it. I can't even promise that things will work out for you in that department someday. The best I can say is: try to focus on something else, enjoy all that free time and all your money.

But don't ever let anyone fucking tell you that what you're going through isn't real.

Lilani:
or separate yourself from her until you can get over it.

*bzzzzzzzt* We're sorry, but that is *not* the correct answer.

You may have missed the whole way that one gets responded to -- if after being friends a while he approaches, gets rejected, and then separates himself from her because, well, he's hurt and needs a nonzero amount of time to get over it then he's *really* an asshole who was only ever her friend because he wanted in her pants and when that didn't happen he no longer had any reason to hang around -- don't you know how this works?

senordesol:

I sure as hell didn't. I said that the friendzone is more complex than the 'simple' rejection it is so oft dismissed as. I said that those who find themselves in the friendzone are well familiar with simple rejection's sting.

I see the issue here is that some seem to think that identifying with the friendzone is a simple inability to handle rejection. I argue that sentiment is not only false, but cruel. It's not a matter of thinking 'that bitch can't say no to me!' it's a matter of thinking 'great...I found ONE girl who likes the things I like, does the things I do, and will actually bother to give me the time of day...and I STILL can't make it happen.'

In gaming terms: the one is frustrated he can't get a perfect score, the other is frustrated he can't score at all.

If we'd compare it to gaming terms, I'd call it this:

One is frustrated that he couldn't get the x achievement. The other is frustrated he couldn't get the x achievement when he got so close and is still going on about it with the exact same strategy.

But I would never compare gaming to dating. That would be objectifying women.

I never really considered the friend-zone to be a big deal, I mean, I have asked out plenty of ladies, some have turned me down for one reason or another, but no big deal, more fish in the sea.

Its just that people may complain about being put in the friend-zone when there is the highly probable chance they were in there from the start, some people may have certain expectations/standards that you don't fill.

Not saying rejection doesn't hurt (it does) and asking outright can be daunting but if you must ask someone out, do it before someone else does, I have seen this happen.

Em I suppose but all this bullshit could be avoided and not be perpetuated if people were a bit more direct with what they meant and stopped using what they believe to be social nods to mean something else. A little less wink wink nudge nudge would stop this to a large degree.

Colour-Scientist:
The friendzone is something you do to yourself. Usually when you pretend to care about someone as a friend so you can get in their pants.

I disagree, though that can be the case.

I would also consider the friend-zone to be when someone flirts with someone just enough to keep them strung along without ever having intentions to enter into a romantic relationship with that person, they then use these poor fools as an ego-boost when they hit a rough patch or when a relationship ends, one day the person being strung along may get brave enough to ask the person stringing them along out at which point the person stringing them along will say they don't think of them that way.

It's happened to me and I've seen it happen to others, both male and female.

I suppose that might be why I get so angry when all the blame gets stuck on the friend-zoned party, I have no doubt sometimes the blame is on them but often enough the friend-zoner is also to blame; It's really a case-by-case basis and people paint it far too black and white.

OT:

I guess I'll say the story of the girl I knew who was friend-zoned, it won't be a long one since most of the story is identical to my second paragraph.

Essentially, she was completely in love with this guy who she went to school with and one day she had to move away, he dated other girls and she was always crushed when this happened but whenever he was single suddenly he'd suddenly acknowledge her existence again, she'd be happy and he'd get his little ego-boost and suddenly he was dating someone else again. Rinse and repeat.

I refuse to believe he was oblivious to this and I really dislike the guy for what he did to her, I think that if I wasn't there for her she might not be around today.

dunam:

senordesol:

I sure as hell didn't. I said that the friendzone is more complex than the 'simple' rejection it is so oft dismissed as. I said that those who find themselves in the friendzone are well familiar with simple rejection's sting.

I see the issue here is that some seem to think that identifying with the friendzone is a simple inability to handle rejection. I argue that sentiment is not only false, but cruel. It's not a matter of thinking 'that bitch can't say no to me!' it's a matter of thinking 'great...I found ONE girl who likes the things I like, does the things I do, and will actually bother to give me the time of day...and I STILL can't make it happen.'

In gaming terms: the one is frustrated he can't get a perfect score, the other is frustrated he can't score at all.

If we'd compare it to gaming terms, I'd call it this:

One is frustrated that he couldn't get the x achievement. The other is frustrated he couldn't get the x achievement when he got so close and is still going on about it with the exact same strategy.

But I would never compare gaming to dating. That would be objectifying women.

I don't think that's accurate. A lot of the responses on this thread are of the 'lots of fish in the sea' variety. I can't help but point out that thinking is flawed.

In terms of objectification, in a fashion you can't help but objectify your romantic interests in some fashion. That's simply how our brains work. Yes, you can like someone as a person, respect their views, opinions, and decisions as theirs -and theirs alone- to hold. But if you want them to feel something for you, that is -by definition- an objective.

However, that sort of 'objectification' isn't wrong. My own wife didn't much care for me the first couple months she knew me. In that case, however, persistence won the day. However, persistence was my only choice to reference the metaphor: there were no other fish in my sea.

I'll accept that there may be things people who are 'in' the friendzone can do to get out, my argument -however- focuses on the notion *that* it exists.

Schadrach:

Lilani:
or separate yourself from her until you can get over it.

*bzzzzzzzt* We're sorry, but that is *not* the correct answer.

You may have missed the whole way that one gets responded to -- if after being friends a while he approaches, gets rejected, and then separates himself from her because, well, he's hurt and needs a nonzero amount of time to get over it then he's *really* an asshole who was only ever her friend because he wanted in her pants and when that didn't happen he no longer had any reason to hang around -- don't you know how this works?

In my experience, the kind of timid/awkward guys who can't be upfront enough to get the answers they want are usually not the same ilk whose first desire upon entering a relationship is to get in their partner's pants as soon as physically possible. Chances are if they're that timid and inexperienced they haven't even held hands or kissed before, so they've got quite a few steps to make before they're ready to hop in bed. So first and foremost, can we please stop conflating "getting in a relationship" with "getting in each other's pants?" It really makes a lot of unhelpful and often inaccurate assumptions about the people we're talking about and the situations they're in.

Secondly, yeah. This sort of stuff can make friendships messy, which is why it's so hard to figure out. The reason girls give vague answers is because they want to maintain the status quo. Though it's clear the guy does not have hostile intentions when giving romantic attention to a girl, if she doesn't want a relationship in a way he's holding their friendship hostage. She's pushed to the precipice of "Do I go out with this guy who I don't like to make him feel better?" and "Do I reject this guy and possibly lose and complicate what has up to this point been a great friendship?" And the same thing happens when a girl fancies a guy friend. And, in theory, the best way to deal with such a problem is to let them down as quietly as possible. Do it too quickly and the whole thing might break, making the bad feelings worse than they have to be. I'm not saying that's the best way to do it, just that that's the logic that's going through someone's head when they do something like that. They just want everything to go back to normal as soon and as painlessly as possible.

Plus, if they already have a well-established friendship, making the assumption that he/her just wanted to get in her/his pants should be a very difficult one. If two people are long-time friends, one of them confesses feelings, and then stays away for a while after the rejection, and the other is just immediately willing to assume that all of their previous experiences as friends was a sham, then it seems the friendship wasn't too solid to begin with.

I've seen a fair women complaining about it on Tumblr and on a few blogs supposedly dedicated to gender issues.

As with their male counterparts, they pretty much all come off as sexually entitled jerks who can't handle even polite rejection.

Lilani:

Secondly, yeah. This sort of stuff can make friendships messy, which is why it's so hard to figure out. The reason girls give vague answers is because they want to maintain the status quo. Though it's clear the guy does not have hostile intentions when giving romantic attention to a girl, if she doesn't want a relationship in a way he's holding their friendship hostage. She's pushed to the precipice of "Do I go out with this guy who I don't like to make him feel better?" and "Do I reject this guy and possibly lose and complicate what has up to this point been a great friendship?" And the same thing happens when a girl fancies a guy friend.

That's an incredibly selfish view. Just what entitles Person A to the friendship of Person B, or indeed, to the company of Person B? Why is Person B supposed to accept the status quo they are unhappy with while Person A can take Person B and the "friendship" for granted? Sometimes decisions need to be made. Sometimes people need to take a break from other people. And it's not a good trait to assume other people exist for your benefit and that you're automatically entitled to their time.

If the other person is hurt because, well they let themselves be vulnerable and took a hit, and decide they need some time to lick their wounds, who are you (the general you, not you specifically) to deny them that time? To make them out as a bad person because they need that time?

And, in theory, the best way to deal with such a problem is to let them down as quietly as possible. Do it too quickly and the whole thing might break, making the bad feelings worse than they have to be. I'm not saying that's the best way to do it, just that that's the logic that's going through someone's head when they do something like that. They just want everything to go back to normal as soon and as painlessly as possible.

As soon as painlessly as possible for themselves, yes. Because they're taking the friendship for granted, considering it the "default" situation, disregarding the fact that the other person might have an own mind and the right to make their own decisions.

"Letting people down gently" doesn't work in practice. It comes across as patronizing, as if Person A thinks so little of Person B to believe Person B can't handle a little truth. I'd sure have a hard time being friends with people who'd give me so little credit.

Well, I'm female (a lesbian), and there has been girls/women I fell for who gave me the 'let's just be friends' answer.

Never considered this to be 'friendzoning', just, you know, rejection because they didn't feel the same for whatever reason.

Ickorus:

Colour-Scientist:
The friendzone is something you do to yourself. Usually when you pretend to care about someone as a friend so you can get in their pants.

I disagree, though that can be the case.

I would also consider the friend-zone to be when someone flirts with someone just enough to keep them strung along without ever having intentions to enter into a romantic relationship with that person, they then use these poor fools as an ego-boost when they hit a rough patch or when a relationship ends, one day the person being strung along may get brave enough to ask the person stringing them along out at which point the person stringing them along will say they don't think of them that way.

People can misread the gestures of others, though, and project their own feelings into their behaviour.
I say this as a someone who has apparently 'misled' several guys by simply being nice to them and talking with them about shared interests.
Because that's apparently 'flirting'...

Vegosiux:
That's an incredibly selfish view. Just what entitles Person A to the friendship of Person B, or indeed, to the company of Person B? Why is Person B supposed to accept the status quo they are unhappy with while Person A can take Person B and the "friendship" for granted? Sometimes decisions need to be made. Sometimes people need to take a break from other people. And it's not a good trait to assume other people exist for your benefit and that you're automatically entitled to their time.

If the other person is hurt because, well they let themselves be vulnerable and took a hit, and decide they need some time to lick their wounds, who are you (the general you, not you specifically) to deny them that time? To make them out as a bad person because they need that time?

I put in a little edit after I wrote this, but I guess it just missed your quoting of me. In it, I said it may not be the right thing to do, but that's what's going through their head at the time. And I think when people are friends, they are both entitled to each other's friendship, that's sort of how it works. So when one's desire in that relationship changes and the other's doesn't, then yeah. There's going to be resistance, and neither of them is going to want to admit that things are changing in a way that is irrevocable.

And I'm a bit baffled by your bringing up the "denying the time to lick the wounds" thing here. I wasn't talking about that there, I was talking about the situation in general. I didn't address the whole "you're an asshole for licking your wounds" thing until the last.

As soon as as painlessly possible for themselves, yes. Because they're taking the friendship for granted, considering it the "default" situation, disregarding the fact that the other person might have an own mind and the right to make their own decisions.

"Letting people down gently" doesn't work in practice. It comes across as patronizing, as if Person A thinks so little of Person B to believe Person B can't handle a little truth. I'd sure have a hard time being friends with people who'd give me so little credit.

Can I just make this clear again, before I get another tirade like this? I'm not saying it's fair. I'm not saying it's right. I'm not saying it should happen.

But it does, because that's just how people work. Yes, it's selfish to try and maintain a status quo someone else doesn't want. But that's what people do when they're cornered--they act selfishly. They look out for number one and convince themselves that in the process they're looking after number two as well. So yes, it's selfish. It's selfish, it's selfish, it's selfish. Selfish. Just as selfish as the guys who refuse to get over a girl because they've convinced themselves that they are the only one who can make her happy.

And before you lay into that last sentence, I'm going to clarify what I mean by that. I was referring to a totally different type of friendzone situation than what we were just discussing. I'm not saying guys who like female friends are automatically selfish. I am, however, saying guys who exhibit almost stalker-like behavior because their feelings have been cornered (remember that? being cornered? makes people selfish?). Selfishness can come from all sides. And please, before you tell me again that I'm saying letting people down lightly is fair or should happen and that it's right to vilify someone for "licking their wounds" or whatever, read the last paragraph I wrote before. Actually, I'll just copy it again.

Plus, if they already have a well-established friendship, making the assumption that he/her just wanted to get in her/his pants should be a very difficult one. If two people are long-time friends, one of them confesses feelings, and then stays away for a while after the rejection, and the other is just immediately willing to assume that all of their previous experiences as friends was a sham, then it seems the friendship wasn't too solid to begin with.

People don't work the way they should. It's sad, but true. And unfortunately we just have to learn to deal with this. Shouting at each other over the Internet about whether or not these things should happen is not going to change the fact that they will happen, and the best we can do is share this knowledge and deal with the situations when they arise.

I've had a guy say he loved me in private and then was all like 'let's just be friends' and when I was upset his mates acted like I was this crazy bitch that had no right to feel that way...

That was right after I got out of an abusive relationship.

I know how to pick em.

As a guy who has a large amount of female friends I will say this much:

I have friends that I would date if they showed interest
I have friends that I wouldn't date even if they showed interest

I don't think I have friends that I wouldn't date simply because we're friends. In fact I would rather go out with some of my friends instead of meeting a complete stranger and trying to start a relationship with someone I hardly know.

And, just because I WOULD date some them, doesn't mean I'm just friends with them to get in their pants.

Hell, I've told my best friend "I wish I could meet someone like your wife", several times. To the point that it's an inside joke that I'm secretly plotting to get him out of the picture. That doesn't mean I want his wife specifically, I meant more personality wise.

senordesol:

dunam:

senordesol:

And you can't tell me that it amounts to nothing more than simple 'rejection'.

Who said rejection is simple to deal with?

I sure as hell didn't. I said that the friendzone is more complex than the 'simple' rejection it is so oft dismissed as. I said that those who find themselves in the friendzone are well familiar with simple rejection's sting.

I see the issue here is that some seem to think that identifying with the friendzone is a simple inability to handle rejection. I argue that sentiment is not only false, but cruel. It's not a matter of thinking 'that bitch can't say no to me!' it's a matter of thinking 'great...I found ONE girl who likes the things I like, does the things I do, and will actually bother to give me the time of day...and I STILL can't make it happen.'

In gaming terms: the one is frustrated he can't get a perfect score, the other is frustrated he can't score at all.

More like, both failed and one is just taking it harder. There's nothing different about the rejection except the reaction, at least in your statement of the difference. And perhaps frequency. But in neither case does the rejection itself change.

Schadrach:

Lilani:
or separate yourself from her until you can get over it.

*bzzzzzzzt* We're sorry, but that is *not* the correct answer.

You may have missed the whole way that one gets responded to -- if after being friends a while he approaches, gets rejected, and then separates himself from her because, well, he's hurt and needs a nonzero amount of time to get over it then he's *really* an asshole who was only ever her friend because he wanted in her pants and when that didn't happen he no longer had any reason to hang around -- don't you know how this works?

What both of you said is 100% true. Speaking from "an on-going current event in my life" experienced point of view. But the whole catch is this: You simply have to not care whether or not her or her other friends see you as an asshole now. People can think all you wanted to do was get in her pants, but as long as you know differently, what else matters?

And to the people claiming the friendzone doesn't exist... just shut up.

JellySlimerMan:

senordesol:

Jacco:
Goddamnit I hate this "friend zone" bullshit about it being about getting into someone's pants. FUCKING STOP ASSUMING THAT.

Yes, that is the case sometimes, but to just unequivocally make that statement is a gross misrepresentation of the entire issue. A friend zone can be anything and it is indeed a legit problem for some people.

As for the topic, yes. Girls get friend zoned all the time. Half the albums Taylor Swift puts out addresses that. It's just not as big of an issue for them normally because they don't have to go through the "first move" stuff. And there is always another guy waiting in reserve who would happily take her. So more often than not, they can settle instead of being outright rejected.

And I say this as a social psychology major.

Don't you think that's a bit of a generalization?

I will say, though, that I agree in that I don't understand the outright hostility taken toward people in the 'friendzone'. I've been in the friendzone. Alot. It sucks. And had nothing to do with sex.

Is it really so inconceivable that you'd like someone as a person so much, that you'd like to know them better as a potential mate? Is the frustration and angst that stems from the knowledge or the fear that making a move might push them away forever really so unrelatable? Is the notion that someone could be so socially awkward and lacking in confidence (or looks) that the idea of seeking out other prospects is too daunting really so foreign?

I can easily see (and have seen) both males and females in the 'friendzone'. Be it a problem with your looks, social graces, or confidence; it's real fucking easy to land yourself there and stick.

Perhaps this will help you understand why everyone thinks that "a guy bring your friend = backstabber son of a bitch"

I'm not sure I understand your post, but I do appreciate the video. It concisely makes most of the points I've been trying to. (A man who is in love with a woman is not a predator, nor feeling 'entitled' just because he feels frustration at being rebuffed. He is clearly working for her affections, he is clearly trying very hard to win her over -not because he wants to rub his bits against her bits- but because he genuinely likes her as a person and as a potential mate. For one to be so invested, and to be so spurned, is not a myth. It may be pitiable. It may be pathetic. But it is not a myth)

I don't like the term friendzoned, however it is the best word for it that I can think of.
I have been friendzoned in the past and I have done it myself to a few male friends, you just have to be open and honest to avoid hurting both parties feelings and their friendship, the longer it goes on un-adressed the worse it gets for whoever has the crush.

It can be a thin line with friendships when it comes to feelings, you can go through so much together and due to events in life depend on one another in tough times. Which we can misinterpret as being in love.

When I was very depressed and in a horrible situation my best mate and I both started to have stronger feelings for one another, when voiced how we felt we decided to give it a go and after one week realised our friendship was more important than a relationship together, it simply wouldn't work.
We both regret the impulse, however we both rejoice that we didn't cling on to those feelings in an effort to make life "perfect", in reality it wouldn't have been and it would of ruined a 12 year friendship beyond repair.

...

I apologize if this doesn't quite make sense, my brain didn't want to work with my fingers, also how many times can I say the word friend in one post. o.O

I was friend-zoned with my wife for about 3 years before we finally settled things and got together. It was basically a mesh of her being "a cockblock" (her words) and me not wanting to alienate someone who was probably my best friend at the time. I think "friend-zone" is just a loaded word for two people who like each other but are at different places in their lives.

Lilani:

Lilani:
or separate yourself from her until you can get over it.

Plus, if they already have a well-established friendship, making the assumption that he/her just wanted to get in her/his pants should be a very difficult one. If two people are long-time friends, one of them confesses feelings, and then stays away for a while after the rejection, and the other is just immediately willing to assume that all of their previous experiences as friends was a sham, then it seems the friendship wasn't too solid to begin with.

I've witnessed similar things to this before, among some friends in high-school who were rejected. In most cases the rejector would become self-conscious and the friendship would dissolve because of the asker avoiding them.

Specifically avoiding another person can have a marked negative effect on them, as they may feel guilty for doing something "wrong", even though there was nothing wrong with what they did, or they may feel that there is something wrong with themselves that is causing the person to avoid them.

Dijkstra:

More like, both failed and one is just taking it harder. There's nothing different about the rejection except the reaction, at least in your statement of the difference. And perhaps frequency. But in neither case does the rejection itself change.

True. And I'm not suggesting that the rejection, in itself, is so incredibly different. But that the circumstances of its occurrence are different. Again, I have previously stated that the 'friendzone' is a self-imposed depressive state. One that stems from an inability to meet romantic needs with those of whom you have the most in common.

I further posit that those susceptible to this are not necessarily strangers to rejection -that, indeed, it is likely that they are quite used to rejection. The word that gets thrown around here too casually, however, is 'entitlement' used in the negative to suggest that people are expecting something that they never had the right to expect. I think that's inaccurate in this context.

Those who are truly 'friendzoned' do not go in to the relationship 'expecting' it to wind up in a romantic fashion. They hope for it, they work for it, they pine for it, and even obsess over it; but an 'entitlement' to it is generally not expected. The fact is: the one is simply more emotionally invested than the other. The fact that they would be considered unsuitable as a mate no matter what they do is a looming prospect (and, often, an outright fact) and that knowledge is painful.

It is one thing to be familiar with someone in passing and to then take a shot and to have that shot fall short. It is quite another to feel a deep emotional connection with someone, someone who brightens your day just for being in it, someone who occupies the fore-front of your mind, and to then attempt to share that connection with that person, and then to have those affections spurned, AND THEN to be left bereft, heartbroken, and so terribly alone with each passing day with them a loud and ever-present reminder that you will NEVER mean to them what they mean to you.

Yes, in both cases, a simple rejection is being issued, but the nature of that rejection with regard to the emotional, personal, and material investment to one of those parties is so completely and inescapably crushing that it deserves its own label.

Vegosiux:
Oh, this thread again. Predictable responses, by now I suppose my powers of clairvoyance have developed to the point that I pretty much know what exactly specific people are going to say.

I'll just repeat my tired old mantra. Communication is key. People, just be straight and honest with each other, and you're going to avoid so many mishaps, you'll look back and laugh at how silly you used to be.

If you want to go steady with someone, ask them. If they tell you no, deal with it.

And; likely most importantly, mind; if you told someone no, remember you're not entitled to the kind of relationship you want either (after all, you just told them they're not entitled to the kind of relationship they want), so don't label them a jackass if they opt to walk away fully after they got a negative answer - you deal with it, too.

There's grounds for thinking of them as a jackass for not being a good friend while having claimed to be a friend, it seems easy enough. If they were a real friend beforehand they should remain friends after not getting what they wanted. Want some time away? Okay, makes sense. Not being friends? Then it looks like a case of them being a false friend. They're friends only on the contingency of getting a date. Not really a friend.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked