Female Friendzone?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

ellieallegro:

Aramis Night:

I was going to post something else about the value of empathy, and the difference between self-respect and dignity vs. arrogance. Then i saw you mention you live in LA and i realized there would be no point. Sadly i've known too many people from their to even try to challenge this. I was actually starting to wonder if you were an ex of mine when you started going on in your attempt to debunk love as anything more than a choice to be decided on a whim. You actually made me feel bad for anyone who might one day love you. If my self-respect was based on looking down on others i would feel really good about myself thanks to you, but i don't.

Good, I'm glad we got that settled. Empathy as a valued commodity in LA... HA! Maybe if you are a therapist. I never said love was anything more than a choice to be decided on a whim. Dating someone who you are infatuated with, however, can be decided on a whim.

Therumancer got it right in describing the friendzone as a cultural shorthand for a relationship trope. Getting zoned has nothing to do with love. I think people are under the misconception (due to pop culture and general lack of life experience, no doubt) that laboring as a creepy friend stalker and being at someones beck and call in order to please them out of their pants only to turn around and shake your fist at the sky screaming why doesn't X love me when it doesn't work out.... I think we have all been infatuated with someone and fantasized about something that isn't there at one point in our lives but the realization that not all people are into you, some people are users and will screw with your emotions because they can and you shouldn't change yourself to fit anyone's ideal is a lesson that should be learned in high school/freshman year of college. If you aren't at that point in your life yet well have fun with that... it's one to grow on. However, if you are an adult and haven't learned that lesson by now then I'm sorry, the give a shit store is all sold out.

Imho, nice guy and gal predators/creepers (tm) follow what I like to call the "what's your type?" logic. It's where they ask one of the most inane questions in the history of human courtship. Soooooo.... what's your type? When what they really mean to say is how can I subtly manipulate you by changing my spots and appearing as something I'm not in order to be more attractive to you. This is what I call the date chimera. It's a great litmus test, for me personally, because if you were my type and you were into me as well, you wouldn't have to ask such a stupid question because we would already be naked. Just sayin.

Not everyone gets these kinds of lessons in high school. A lot of guys have no experience till after high school. In my freshman year of high school, i was fairly certain i would be alone forever(made peace with it). Didn't get proven wrong till junior year. I thought i was behind the curve compared to my peers. Turned out i wasn't. Most of my friends lost their virginity later in life. Didn't get my heart torn out from emotional manipulation till i was 19. Most of my friends were shocked and appalled at how i was treated, wasn't just a shock to me. When it would later happen to them, they would come to me on advice because i had been through it before them it turned out, yet again.

Not everyone has the fortune of having naked bodies just flying at them when they open their bedroom door. We don't all just want sex(sex included, sure). Some people want relationships that are beyond just a mercenary exchange of bodily fluids. The idea that someone can care about you enough to make you a priority is powerful. For some people it can even give their lives meaning. I've been alone. I don't mind it but i don't like myself very much. I respect myself, but that's about it.

Men suck at courtship and most of us expect to because we lack experience/instruction/direction. They expect to have to put in more work than just asking if a woman is interested. So they behave like a "Nice Guy" because they think that its the equivalent of putting in work and effort towards a relationship. The idea that it could be as easy as just asking a girl out doesn't make sense to us because nothing good in life comes that easy. We have it beaten into us about how we have to put in effort and work for everything. That nothing is going to just be given to us without us earning it. So when a guy finally gets up the nerve to ask if she has any interest, and she rebukes him and tells him to just be friends, he doubles down. he thinks that he hasn't yet earned it and he has to try harder. It becomes a cycle. Eventually it frustrates him and the next thing he knows, he's complaining about being friend zoned.

I just friendzoned a girl so yes, it definitely exists. Makes it awkward for a little bit though.

ellieallegro:

Sounds like you need to turn that frown upside down.

It's more of a "I've got a fish-hook in my eyebrow" kind of thing, really. But, what can I say, I understand some people can't be as awesome as I am ^^

Man, I'm terrible at this topic. I don't really understand "the friend zone." I'm a girl with almost entirely male friends and I'm called "just one of the guys" a lot. But I'm also married to one of those guys, so I think I'm disqualified...(?)

I think for me, the term is weird. If a person approaches me with a proposition to start a relationship and I decline, isn't that the end of my responsibility?

Aramis Night:

Not everyone gets these kinds of lessons in high school. A lot of guys have no experience till after high school.

What else is there to do in high school besides get this kind of experience... Granted, if you went to a private prep school then maybe I can see how your studies could take up your time but has high school really changed that much since the eighties? And you will notice I did mention the freshman year of college.

Aramis Night:

Men suck at courtship and most of us expect to because we lack experience/instruction/direction. They expect to have to put in more work than just asking if a woman is interested. So they behave like a "Nice Guy" because they think that its the equivalent of putting in work and effort towards a relationship. The idea that it could be as easy as just asking a girl out doesn't make sense to us because nothing good in life comes that easy. We have it beaten into us about how we have to put in effort and work for everything. That nothing is going to just be given to us without us earning it. So when a guy finally gets up the nerve to ask if she has any interest, and she rebukes him and tells him to just be friends, he doubles down. he thinks that he hasn't yet earned it and he has to try harder. It becomes a cycle. Eventually it frustrates him and the next thing he knows, he's complaining about being friend zoned.

This is not necessarily a man thing on either front. Women can suck at courtship too, believe me I've dated a few before that were horrible at it (for me at least). I get that to some people it can seem like you just haven't put in enough effort but this can apply to both genders as well. "Oh you poor thing, you will never find a man looking/acting/doing that" Society constantly tells women they should spend tons of money, effort and time to act this way, go to the gym more, buy this dress, wear this makeup etc etc. Whatever.

This brings me full circle to my original point: Be upfront and honest with yourself and the people who you fancy (and only date those who do the same). Let's be honest, most people know right away if they find someone attractive and hey maybe something more with come out of it so why don't more people just put it out there at the start? If someone isn't interested, DON'T double-down. Find someone else.

It has been my experience that when a relationship starts off with a game (like chase me chase me, let's just be friends... and maybe more, I really like guys/girls who do this for me hint hint or some variation on that theme) then it sets a bad precedent because what happens when the games are over or they get tired and one party doesn't want to play anymore? Protip for you guys (and ladies) out there: Anybody who reads cosmo for more than the entertainment value or wants to be chased is just, pardon the profanity, fucking with you.

The whole friendzone thing is overplayed.

Wanna leave the zone? Ask him/her
He/She will either say yes, in which case YAAAYY or He/She will say no in which case not Yay but at least you know you're going nowhere

Don't have the balls to ask?
Then the whole situation is your own bloody fault and you got no one else to blame

Ive friendzoned girls for various reasons. Basically, in the dating world, most guys and most girls have different categories for who they will and will not date. Girls have "acceptable" and "unacceptable", guys have those 2 + "youll do for now" (this is not always the case, and some girls do this too). I'm more honest than that now, after really hurting a few girls, and the girls that would have been "youll do for now" for me once, are fwb, and I make sure they are aware I want nothing more than companionship from them, this is usually between relationships for me. Those girls I would considered "friendzoned" to me. Usually when a guy gets friendzoned its because hes unattractive in some way(this could be because hes a pussy or hasnt established himself as a sexual human being. I used to get friendzoned when I was younger, it sucks, its frustrating. Now I have a lot more self-respect and confidence, women take notice of that, and have never been friendzoned again... um. The End.

Draitheryn:
I'm more honest than that now, after really hurting a few girls, and the girls that would have been "youll do for now" for me once, are fwb, and I make sure they are aware I want nothing more than companionship from them, this is usually between relationships for me. Those girls I would considered "friendzoned" to me. Usually when a guy gets friendzoned its because hes unattractive in some way(this could be because hes a pussy or hasnt established himself as a sexual human being. I used to get friendzoned when I was younger, it sucks, its frustrating. Now I have a lot more self-respect and confidence, women take notice of that, and have never been friendzoned again... um. The End.

Ehh, this somehow does not compute. I mean, I get what you're saying, but how does the amount of sex you're getting have anything to do with

a) being romantically rejected/accepted
b) how much self-respect and confidence you have?

I mean, there is more than one way to skin a cat. Or live a life.

ellieallegro:

Aramis Night:

Not everyone gets these kinds of lessons in high school. A lot of guys have no experience till after high school.

What else is there to do in high school besides get this kind of experience... Granted, if you went to a private prep school then maybe I can see how your studies could take up your time but has high school really changed that much since the eighties? And you will notice I did mention the freshman year of college.

Aramis Night:

Men suck at courtship and most of us expect to because we lack experience/instruction/direction. They expect to have to put in more work than just asking if a woman is interested. So they behave like a "Nice Guy" because they think that its the equivalent of putting in work and effort towards a relationship. The idea that it could be as easy as just asking a girl out doesn't make sense to us because nothing good in life comes that easy. We have it beaten into us about how we have to put in effort and work for everything. That nothing is going to just be given to us without us earning it. So when a guy finally gets up the nerve to ask if she has any interest, and she rebukes him and tells him to just be friends, he doubles down. he thinks that he hasn't yet earned it and he has to try harder. It becomes a cycle. Eventually it frustrates him and the next thing he knows, he's complaining about being friend zoned.

This is not necessarily a man thing on either front. Women can suck at courtship too, believe me I've dated a few before that were horrible at it (for me at least). I get that to some people it can seem like you just haven't put in enough effort but this can apply to both genders as well. "Oh you poor thing, you will never find a man looking/acting/doing that" Society constantly tells women they should spend tons of money, effort and time to act this way, go to the gym more, buy this dress, wear this makeup etc etc. Whatever.

This brings me full circle to my original point: Be upfront and honest with yourself and the people who you fancy (and only date those who do the same). Let's be honest, most people know right away if they find someone attractive and hey maybe something more with come out of it so why don't more people just put it out there at the start? If someone isn't interested, DON'T double-down. Find someone else.

It has been my experience that when a relationship starts off with a game (like chase me chase me, let's just be friends... and maybe more, I really like guys/girls who do this for me hint hint or some variation on that theme) then it sets a bad precedent because what happens when the games are over or they get tired and one party doesn't want to play anymore? Protip for you guys (and ladies) out there: Anybody who reads cosmo for more than the entertainment value or wants to be chased is just, pardon the profanity, fucking with you.

Didn't realize that you meant college instead of high school. You do realize that most men don't go to college. Most of us do however at least get as far as high school. And not every guy has options in high school to get any such experience with. Most women seem to spend high school chasing after popular boys and not everyone gets to be popular in high school. I know i wasn't. I'm sure it's probably something women deal with as well when they are unpopular.

The difference in all the examples you describe for women sucking at courtship are all related to passive attractive qualities. Everything you mentioned women attempt to do to make themselves more attractive to get the guy they want also has the side effect of making themselves more attractive to not just that one guy but every guy. It actually helps them to cast a larger net. One the other hand, a man devoting himself to one women doesn't have that benefit. In fact it hurts men who behave like this by making them look contemptible and pathetic to other woman. It becomes an all or nothing tactic. And your right, it is a bad idea.

But no one explains any of this to young men. Men assume women would respond the same way they would. The fact that boys are brought up to believe in the lack of social differences between the sexes doesn't help. A woman showing them that kind of devotion would be a dream for most men. It's misguided empathy. I don't see why we should blame them or mock them for it. Men just don't get any instruction on these matters growing up that doesn't come from cheesy, ridiculous sources.

Aramis Night:

Didn't realize that you meant college instead of high school. You do realize that most men don't go to college. Most of us do however at least get as far as high school.

Well, all I can say to that is their are more "traditional" opportunities available to men right out of high school. That is why more women are going to college, I agree, but that isn't an excuse. If you decide that you want to get a job instead of an education of any sort (including training in a trade or apprenticeship not just a run of the mill Bachelors degree) whatever your gender that that is on you. That isn't an excuse for lack of maturity or life experience.

Aramis Night:

Snip... a man devoting himself to one women doesn't have that benefit. In fact it hurts men who behave like this by making them look contemptible and pathetic to other woman. It becomes an all or nothing tactic. And your right, it is a bad idea.

But no one explains any of this to young men. Men assume women would respond the same way they would. The fact that boys are brought up to believe in the lack of social differences between the sexes doesn't help. A woman showing them that kind of devotion would be a dream for most men. It's misguided empathy. I don't see why we should blame them or mock them for it. Men just don't get any instruction on these matters growing up that doesn't come from cheesy, ridiculous sources.

Nobody is forcing men to be slavishly devoted to another without getting their affections returned; furthermore, nobody is forcing women to obsess about their weight and have umpteenth little bottles of half empty lipgloss in their bag either. Seriously, ladies, we need to break our goo collecting habit :) Not to get off topic...

Fear of rejection is not an excuse for a lack of experience and maturity at a certain age. Nobody explains this to young men you say? Men just don't get any instruction, you say? Nobody explains shit to ladies either. (Sarcasm meter reaching critical) You think there is some sort of grand gender conspiracy and that women get a super secret handbook on how to date and be in a relationship? Because mine got lost in the post.

People need to get out there, be rejected, collect some horrible dating stories like pokemon, live life. This is the only way to gain some f'ing perspective and maturity so that when you are ready to date someone who matters, you can cut through all the game playing bullshit. That is always my advice to people. If you put yourself out there and it works out great, if it doesn't then you lick your wounds, learn something and move on... it will just become another funny story you tell later in life anyway.

Most of my friends are male. I've never been attracted to them at any point so I've never asked them out and been rejected. I do believe the mystical "friendzone" is something a person puts themselves in to. If a girl just wants to be friends, be friends, be happy and stop bitching about it, or maybe you just shouldn't be friends with them, cut your losses and move on.

ellieallegro:

Well, all I can say to that is their are more "traditional" opportunities available to men right out of high school. That is why more women are going to college, I agree, but that isn't an excuse. If you decide that you want to get a job instead of an education of any sort (including training in a trade or apprenticeship not just a run of the mill Bachelors degree) whatever your gender that that is on you. That isn't an excuse for lack of maturity or life experience.

I'm sorry, what are you on about?

People need to get out there, be rejected, collect some horrible dating stories like pokemon, live life. This is the only way to gain some f'ing perspective and maturity so that when you are ready to date someone who matters, you can cut through all the game playing bullshit. That is always my advice to people. If you put yourself out there and it works out great, if it doesn't then you lick your wounds, learn something and move on... it will just become another funny story you tell later in life anyway.

Still, I'm sorry, what are you on about? Are you trying to say there's a "checklist" of things you need to do before you can get your "has lived a life" badge? That there's a "one right way" to live a life? Really, this comes across as incredibly presumptuous.

I never got the memo. What's with all this "need to" deal with the relationship stuff? Nobody "has to" and an eventual relationship is not a necessary prerequisite to living a fulfilling life. I mean, I'm 30, I'm single after having walked away from a 7 year relationship, and what can I say, I do suffer the frustrations of the human condition, but what the hell, who doesn't. Still I don't see myself "settling down" nor do I see myself starting a family, like, ever. But I also don't see myself going out of my way to catch quick flings, because I don't dig all this "sexual alpha male" hogwash. I've tried that, too. It was boring.

Just because you did it the way you did doesn't mean that's the best way nor does it mean other people have somehow "failed" at life should they have chosen something else. But as I said before, this all looks like some serious overcompensating to me. It comes across like "Yeah, I've lived the life, right!.....right?" That's the vibe I'm getting, you can tell me I'm wrong all you want, but you're simply not convincing me.

I tend to think of it like this:

The "friendzone" mostly only exists for gamers or nerds in general. Or, atleast, they're the ones that whine about it the most.

I think the reason is because of the higher amount of male gamers/nerds that tend to associate themselves as such openly. Most male gamers know very few girls who can classify themselves as "gamers" to the same extent as themselves. And even fewer that the male gamer finds instantly compatible Thus, seeing the "best possible partner", the male gamer will instantly go bonkers-horny for said female. Only because she is attractive and likes what he likes, ignoring all other factors that decides if two people can like eachother. Now, because the female gamer has more options due to having a larger pool of male gamers to choose from, the chance that she has the same feelings is slimmer. Meaning, more guys end up in the friendzone simply because of numbers.

This is very easy to observe. Pick any group of friends that associate themselves as "gamers" or "nerds", the amount of males in the group will most likely outnumber the females, and ask around. You will probably find out that a couple of the male gamers/nerds have a crush on one of the girls. In some cases, there is only one girl in the group. The guys will then have crushes on the same girl. Because that's the only girl in their social circle.

You need an example? This is a real life one, no names for privacy: There's school with 3 different programmes. 2 of these are very close, and hang out with eachother a lot. In one of these 2 programmes, there are no girls. In the other one, there are 4, although 2 of them stay away from the rest. Out of the other 2, one is already with someone else. This leaves one girl between the two programmes who is A: availabe, B: attractive, and C: shares interests with most of the guys. As I soon found out, A LOT of the guys had a crush on this one girl. The girl however, liked none of them, because she has a larger pool of applicable males to choose from. This means the amount of friendzoned guys in this group is much larger than the amount of friendzoned girls. Extrapolate to the entire gaming community and you have your answer.

That depends a little, I think. I've always interpreted the friendzone as something that happens when you're kind of interested in someone, you start hanging out and you try to not make them think of you as only a friend, because that's how you get stuck there. And that's never happened to me. Actually, if I like someone they usually like me back, so no, I've never been in that 'nooo, now he only sees me as a friend, dammit!' situation.

That being said, guys should really be clearer on their intentions ^^; They complain about how girls give vague hints, but every time I've supposedly frinedzoned someone, I never even knew they were remotely interested. They never told me, and normal politeness really doesn't count as flirting in my book...
And one time I asked this guy out on a date, and then he gave me a present and I thought hey, he's into me! Then I never heard from him again all of a sudden and I figured I'd misread the intention the gift, until I got a boyfriend. Then, finally, he got pissed. Honestly, how was I supposed to guess his feelings..?

While the word "friendzone" usually makes my eyes roll, I can see where someone who uses it is coming from, and I don't know why it shouldn't apply to females also - we are quite capable of shooting ourselves in the foot too. Most of my life I have always been friends with the guys I fancy, and that got me nowhere. I could have stayed in that mode, which would have been a self-imposed "friendzone", and no one's fault but mine.

So, I then tried being subtle as a sledgehammer and that got me nowhere too. I was then told that guys "don't get subtle", so I tried being direct. That didn't work either. I think that avenue of life is just not meant for me, and I'm not going to mooch around blaming other people for it.

Girls dont get friendzoned as guys do. I friendzoned a couple of girls and they quickly found someone else to hook-up with.

Vegosiux:

Blah Blah... Snip

What's with all this "need to" deal with the relationship stuff? Nobody "has to" and an eventual relationship is not a necessary prerequisite to living a fulfilling life. I mean, I'm 30, I'm single after having walked away from a 7 year relationship, and what can I say, I do suffer the frustrations of the human condition, but what the hell, who doesn't. Still I don't see myself "settling down" nor do I see myself starting a family, like, ever. But I also don't see myself going out of my way to catch quick flings, because I don't dig all this "sexual alpha male" hogwash. I've tried that, too. It was boring.

Interesting stuff. Sounds to me like you are projecting your own need to validate your life choices, in this case, to be single. That's the vibe I'm getting. Never said you have to be in a relationship to be fulfilled nor did I go into any "alpha male" hogwash but thanks for sharing that you find it boring. I do as well.

Vegosiux:

Just because you did it the way you did doesn't mean that's the best way nor does it mean other people have somehow "failed" at life should they have chosen something else. But as I said before, this all looks like some serious overcompensating to me. It comes across like "Yeah, I've lived the life, right!.....right?" That's the vibe I'm getting, you can tell me I'm wrong all you want, but you're simply not convincing me.

Since this thread was about the self-constructed friend zone, I thought my contribution might offer another perspective as to why it's bullshit. Seems to me you are arguing that one can have a fulfilling life without a wealth of personal experiences (whether you share them with another person or not) that help you grow as a person and provide some maturity. If that is your opinion, well, good luck to you. I think you are wrong but that is the beauty of it: I don't have to convince you because you have already taken yourself out of the world that I choose to experience.

Charli:
Totally my own fault, and the 'friendzone' is a bunch of bullshit. If friendship is not enough for you. Act. Otherwise appreciate what you have.

But to be put into the friendzone, I would have thought one would have to act (i.e. confess their feelings to a person of interest) in the first place? What else can be done after that point?

OT: I don't see why the friendzone would be any different for women, us humans are all pretty similar. I can understand if it happens significantly less often for women though.

The friendzone does exist. I friendzoned 2 males in my life. The first one was a good guy, but I wasn't attracted to him and felt that he wanted a relationship because his family said it was time for him to have one. I did genuinely want to go on having him in my life, though. Ten years later, we are still friends. But apparently he carried a torch for me for quite a while, while still saying how great our friendship was.

The second one was a bad move on my part. I was hitting on him for 3 days, only to realise I wasn't really attracted to him once he started reciprocating. I thought I broke things off in time, but a few weeks later he said that he still had pretty strong feelings for me. He too was a really cool and good person and I wanted to stay friends, but it didn't work out at all.

Then there was the time a guy said he didn't want to ruin our friendship, when I manned up and told him I wanted to see him naked. We're married now.

Bara_no_Hime:

There's this weird myth that if you asked a girl out before you became friends, it would matter.

It doesn't.

If she would have dated you then, she would date you now (in most cases, obviously certain individuals may vary, but not to the insane degree some guys seem to think).

While I think virtually all of the "friend zone" talk by guys is whining and/or a sense of ridiculous male entitlement which simultaneously devalues the very person they claim to have affection for. I think it's worth pointing out that the assertion above that initiating a romantic relationship early on is irrelevant to it's success is quite possibly untrue.

There is a significant amount of evidence to suggest that when people (men and women) encounter something that they don't know how to evaluate we draw on various, and somewhat irrational methods of assigning a value. Once this evaluation is set, subsequent evaluations will be made *relative* to the initial one. i.e. if the first price you see for a product is $1000 and the second is $200. You will consider the second price to be a good deal - even if it is the nominal price for the product.

Point being is that the belief that establishing yourself as a candidate for a romantic relationship to a particular person early on might have a significantly positive effect on successfully having a relationship with that person isn't unreasonable.

sarkeizen:
While I think virtually all of the "friend zone" talk by guys is whining and/or a sense of ridiculous male entitlement which simultaneously devalues the very person they claim to have affection for. I think it's worth pointing out that the assertion above that initiating a romantic relationship early on is irrelevant to it's success is quite possibly untrue.

Point being is that the belief that establishing yourself as a candidate for a romantic relationship to a particular person early on might have a significantly positive effect on successfully having a relationship with that person isn't unreasonable.

You speak from a theoretical standpoint. You are considering the possibility.

I speak from an experiential standpoint. I am speaking about actual events that have happened. I spoke in my own experience, and in the experiences of those I've asked. A fairly small data pool, true, which is why I put in a notation that individuals may vary.

Yes, it is possible that there is an effect in some cases. However, since no women I've asked (in person) has EVER said it makes a difference for them (and it doesn't for me), I can extrapolate that time rarely makes a difference without other mitigating factors. My small data pool says that 0% of women consider getting to know someone a detriment to the future possibility of a relationship. I assume that some do care, just because of individuality, but obviously not most - not enough to make it a recognizable trend.

However, female friends of mine have used "I just want to be friends" as a polite way to say "sorry, you're too unattractive (or other negative opinion) for me to date." I think that polite let down is where the "friend zone myth" comes from.

It's because, as my biology professor puts it: females are choosy about males and males compete for the attention of the females.

Lots of species of animal are like this.

Bara_no_Hime:

You speak from a theoretical standpoint. You are considering the possibility.

Not entirely and I'm not speaking any more theoretically you are. I'm speaking as someone who has read a fair amount of research on the subject of human value judgments.

I speak from an experiential standpoint. I am speaking about actual events that have happened.

...and you appear to think your opinion is both a) accurate and b) generalizable. Which is no more theoretical than what I stated. I'm extending reasonably well-controlled research on the way humans evaluate things to a domain that has not been researched. You are extending a poorly constructed experiment (your poll) to be the general case.

So I'm not sure where you get off considering your belief to be more reflective of reality than mine.

However, since no women I've asked (in person) has EVER said it makes a difference for them (and it doesn't for me), I can extrapolate that time rarely makes a difference without other mitigating factors.

There are three pretty naive assumptions you're making.

i) Just because you *think* it doesn't matter to you - doesn't mean it doesn't matter to you.
ii) Just because *people say* it doesn't matter to them doesn't mean it doesn't matter to them.
iii) Just because you think the group you talked to is randomized enough to be representative - doesn't mean it is**

The only way your conclusions are valid are if all THREE never happen. However if that were the case then all sociologists and social psychologists would need to do is ask a few of ther friends things like:

"Hey, would you be willing to speak up with a correct answer even though it was contrary to what everyone in your class thinks?"
"Would you electrocute someone just because someone in a lab coat told you to?"

...and yet, somehow not only have such things been studied but the answer was found to be counter-intuitive. That is to say, people WILL generally electrocute people when asked by someone in a lab coat (Milgram Experiment) and people generally WILL conform to a group opinion (Asch Conformity Experiment).

To bad your way doesn't work. Applying for grants is a PITA. :D

**Also even if your sample is well-randomized the confidence with which we can state that it's representative (or the percentage of the population it represents at some fixed probability) is bounded by the sample-size.

sarkeizen:
Not entirely and I'm not speaking any more theoretically you are. I'm speaking as someone who has read a fair amount of research on the subject of human value judgments.

First off, you didn't actually mention that you were talking about actual research you read. Your previous post sounded like baseless musing on the subject. Which is fine - this is an internet forum. I was just pointing out that I have actual experience with the subject.

Secondly, I also pointed out that my observations were from a very small pool and did not really constitute a large enough sample base - but it did have a fairly significant tendency.

I don't really think your somewhat hostile (at least in sections) response was really called for.

ellieallegro:

Aramis Night:

Didn't realize that you meant college instead of high school. You do realize that most men don't go to college. Most of us do however at least get as far as high school.

Well, all I can say to that is their are more "traditional" opportunities available to men right out of high school. That is why more women are going to college, I agree, but that isn't an excuse. If you decide that you want to get a job instead of an education of any sort (including training in a trade or apprenticeship not just a run of the mill Bachelors degree) whatever your gender that that is on you. That isn't an excuse for lack of maturity or life experience.

Aramis Night:

Snip... a man devoting himself to one women doesn't have that benefit. In fact it hurts men who behave like this by making them look contemptible and pathetic to other woman. It becomes an all or nothing tactic. And your right, it is a bad idea.

But no one explains any of this to young men. Men assume women would respond the same way they would. The fact that boys are brought up to believe in the lack of social differences between the sexes doesn't help. A woman showing them that kind of devotion would be a dream for most men. It's misguided empathy. I don't see why we should blame them or mock them for it. Men just don't get any instruction on these matters growing up that doesn't come from cheesy, ridiculous sources.

Nobody is forcing men to be slavishly devoted to another without getting their affections returned; furthermore, nobody is forcing women to obsess about their weight and have umpteenth little bottles of half empty lipgloss in their bag either. Seriously, ladies, we need to break our goo collecting habit :) Not to get off topic...

Fear of rejection is not an excuse for a lack of experience and maturity at a certain age. Nobody explains this to young men you say? Men just don't get any instruction, you say? Nobody explains shit to ladies either. (Sarcasm meter reaching critical) You think there is some sort of grand gender conspiracy and that women get a super secret handbook on how to date and be in a relationship? Because mine got lost in the post.

People need to get out there, be rejected, collect some horrible dating stories like pokemon, live life. This is the only way to gain some f'ing perspective and maturity so that when you are ready to date someone who matters, you can cut through all the game playing bullshit. That is always my advice to people. If you put yourself out there and it works out great, if it doesn't then you lick your wounds, learn something and move on... it will just become another funny story you tell later in life anyway.

More "traditional" opportunities for men outside of high school? Guess that explains why men seem to be having so much trouble with being unemployed to the point of being 90+% of the homeless, not that college is the big mitigator people like to think it is. Seems many college grads are making it out on the streets too.

More women are going to college now because there is a lot more funding available for them to go to college from parents, government, or charities/foundations. Plus the fact that education methods are heavily slanted towards female learning methods makes it easier for them to get better grades. Meanwhile the boys are being medicated so they can sit still and not do anything that might get them arrested since damn near everything is illegal now that doesn't involve sitting on your ass all day. Kid's can't even have recess now. And even if they do, they are so limited in how they are even allowed to play, no wonder they are too apathetic to care about something as trivial as grades.

What does maturity have to do with fear of rejection? or experience? Today is the 19 year anniversary of the start of my first relationship. In that 19 yrs i have had about a dozen serious relationships and i have probably spent a total of 1 and a half years of that time single. I have plenty of life experience with relationships. I still fear rejection to the point where i have never asked a woman out. Does this negate my maturity? If that's true then by that standard most women are immature since its not often that women will take that initiative either.

And yes, women do have instruction on how to relate to the opposite gender. It starts when they start playing house and continues all the way to when they are buying those cosmo mags you mentioned. It may be bad advice, but its at least something, and its a whole lot more than what guys get. Is there even a mainstream parallel for men to cosmo?

Without going into a lengthy explanation, I will say that I am a female who has been "friend-zoned" if I'm understanding the definition appropriately.

Hell, I had a crush on a male friend of mine for three years, and told him on at least one occasion that I would be willing to be in a romantic relationship with him, but he declined and stated that he just wanted to be friends. That's friend-zoning, right? Seems to be how guys describe it.

And, OP, I think there are generally more males on the Escapist forums that complain about relationships, etc. than there are females, so perhaps that could account for your observation of a disproportionate friend-zone ratio.

Bara_no_Hime:

First off, you didn't actually mention that you were talking about actual research you read. Your previous post sounded like baseless musing on the subject.

I did say that there is "a significant amount of evidence to suggest...". I don't know in what world that's "baseless musing" but where I come from we think it polite to at least ask a follow up question like "What evidence are you talking about?" before dismissing it as such.

Bara_no_Hime:

I was just pointing out that I have actual experience with the subject.

...and I'm just pointing out that experience isn't a good thing to generalize with. It may at times be useful, expedient or necessary but it's rarely "good" for generalizing a contentious issue.

Bara_no_Hime:

Secondly, I also pointed out that my observations were from a very small pool and did not really constitute a large enough sample base - but it did have a fairly significant tendency.

Either you thought your experience was sufficient to be the general case (or have significant likelihood to be the general case) or you didn't. If the the former then my rebuttal still stands, if the later then I don't understand why you bothered mentioning it. Perhaps you should have phrased it in considerably less strong terms. Your original (and follow-up) post left very little room for error on your part.

Also your terminology is kind of muddy. If your sample data is unrandomized then how is there any tendency to speak of (as far as the general case goes) and what possible measure of significance would apply?

I don't really think your somewhat hostile (at least in sections) response was really called for.

What? You just said you dismissed my position as "baseless musing" out-of-hand and I'm the one who's acting hostile? Do you not think that "baseless musing" qualifies as even a somewhat hostile term?

All of your posts on this subject come off as pretty arrogant - even by internet standards. You dismiss opinions which are contrary to your own. You seem to be claiming (now) that you knew your sample was small and poorly done** but still assumed it trumped the contrary position and you relegated any contrary experience to edge cases. All for an experience which, if you thought about it is probably impossible to have a control case for (i.e. you can't meet the same person for the first time twice)

If anything, what you are interpreting as hostility is a mildly stern correction to the needlessly arrogant tone and content of your posts.

**Also for the record sample size isn't everything. Randomization is equally if not more important. For example a T-Distribution can be used to produce a meaningful result for even small samples if the dataset is right.

sarkeizen:
**snip**

I notice you removed the comment about me backpedaling (which I still have in my inbox). Went back and read my original post, did you?

I believe in what I have observed. I have observed something. Someone else's observations may vary - which I admitted - but mine have been consistent. The Friend Zone rules are fictional.

You have other evidence? Fine. Sharing it is what this thread is about. I had no intention of criticizing anyone else's evidence. But YOU replied to ME. You didn't provide evidence and when I commented that your ideas did not conform to my experimental data, you yelled at me about "research".

When I offered you not one but two olive branches, suggesting that perhaps we simply agree to disagree, you called me arrogant.

Well, if you want arrogant, then here we go. Talking to you about this is no longer worth my time or attention. Welcome to my ignore list.

Goodbye.

ellieallegro:

Since this thread was about the self-constructed friend zone, I thought my contribution might offer another perspective as to why it's bullshit. Seems to me you are arguing that one can have a fulfilling life without a wealth of personal experiences (whether you share them with another person or not) that help you grow as a person and provide some maturity. If that is your opinion, well, good luck to you. I think you are wrong but that is the beauty of it: I don't have to convince you because you have already taken yourself out of the world that I choose to experience.

Seems to me you're assuming there's nothing to experience outside the world you chose to experience.

And of course you'll be getting the vibe that everyone who chose a different path than you is covering for their own insecurities, I mean, that was obvious from the first post you made in the thread.

bojackx:

Charli:
Totally my own fault, and the 'friendzone' is a bunch of bullshit. If friendship is not enough for you. Act. Otherwise appreciate what you have.

But to be put into the friendzone, I would have thought one would have to act (i.e. confess their feelings to a person of interest) in the first place? What else can be done after that point?

OT: I don't see why the friendzone would be any different for women, us humans are all pretty similar. I can understand if it happens significantly less often for women though.

I find that alot of men (to a lesser extent women but I guess myself is a prime example if you need it) that claim to have been 'friend zoned' have only done things that one could interpret as acts of friendship. Women can be just as uncertain/dense and oblivious or uninterested sexually/romantically as men.

And they continue to 'act friendly' in the unspoken implications that they are owed a relationship deeper at the end of this ...penance? offering? Without asking the girl/guy if they DO want to be in a relationship pointblank and without pussyfooting around the issue by trying to make the other pick up on it. And then when they don't get it, they whine about being in the friendzone or their friends make the same knee jerk 'haha' you're in the 'friendzone' hooting.

I have never confessed outwardly, I have dropped one or two hints. None were picked up. That's what the internet perceives as this dumb 'friendzone' malarkey. Otherwise the tension is dissipated and you make the call to either remain friends or see less of each other for a while over hurt feelings. I was a gigantic ninny, and probably could have landed a boyfriend out of it if I'd even tried. I didn't.

Understand a little better now? I notice you didn't quote the part where I loosely outlined and implied this. But this term is dumb and shouldn't exist, you are either friends (implying two parties involved here and not one belittling the other with terms that make it sound like they're some kind of caged bird and abused wretch in this deal) or you are in a relationship, or you have tried to make something more of it, failed, and now you are either friends or not friends.

It makes it sound like being a friend is some kind of sad obligation. Insulting to the term friendship and relieves cowardly people of any blame by turning it around on their person whom they have/had affection for. "YOU FRIENDZONED ME", well cry yourself a river, you have a friend, what a horrible thing.

I value my friends. Alot. Infact if I was to choose a trait to glorify myself on some kind of personality quiz, it would be loyalty to my friends. And this kind of degradation of it by making it sound like some kind of slur for a guy being used by a girl or vice ver ca makes me roll my eyes all the way to the moon in a basketball.

You're a friend. There is no zone. Kindly wear your 'I was too scared of ruining a good thing' badge with pride.

But that good thing is still good, I still like being friends with people even if I have had feelings for them at some point, you can work past it with time.

ellieallegro:

People need to get out there, be rejected, collect some horrible dating stories like pokemon, live life. This is the only way to gain some f'ing perspective and maturity so that when you are ready to date someone who matters, you can cut through all the game playing bullshit. That is always my advice to people. If you put yourself out there and it works out great, if it doesn't then you lick your wounds, learn something and move on... it will just become another funny story you tell later in life anyway.

Hold up. You seriously tell me you can't understand why someone would be scared shitless by dating? Like, who the fuck does that, in either college or high school? Most of my peers, whether they're popular, douchebags, jicks, nerds, whatever got together with people they alreday knew as friends or acquaintances. No one's gone on dates that were officially set and so on. And, yes, I am 18 years old and my peers are teenagers, but that's exactly it - no one does that kind of stuff when they're our age, so official dating later on is made even more implausible. I'm shy when ONE person I don't know shows up when I'm hanging out with friends, how the fuck will I go on a date with a complete stranger?

Vladimir Stamenov:

ellieallegro:

People need to get out there, be rejected, collect some horrible dating stories like pokemon, live life. This is the only way to gain some f'ing perspective and maturity so that when you are ready to date someone who matters, you can cut through all the game playing bullshit. That is always my advice to people. If you put yourself out there and it works out great, if it doesn't then you lick your wounds, learn something and move on... it will just become another funny story you tell later in life anyway.

Hold up. You seriously tell me you can't understand why someone would be scared shitless by dating? Like, who the fuck does that, in either college or high school? Most of my peers, whether they're popular, douchebags, jicks, nerds, whatever got together with people they alreday knew as friends or acquaintances. No one's gone on dates that were officially set and so on. And, yes, I am 18 years old and my peers are teenagers, but that's exactly it - no one does that kind of stuff when they're our age, so official dating later on is made even more implausible. I'm shy when ONE person I don't know shows up when I'm hanging out with friends, how the fuck will I go on a date with a complete stranger?

I went to an all-girl's school, all the boyfriends (for the sake of argument; no "relationship" lasted more than a few weeks) I had during that time therefore were guys I knew, but did not consider friends. However, all of those failed "relationships" turned in to friendships. Fair enough, my peers were in a situation most people are not, but the friends I had who went to mixed sex schools seemed to follow the same formula: You date a person you know but are not friends with. That's how some, granted not all, teenagers learn to date which they then apply to dating in later life which can and, at least amongst my friends, does lead to going on formal dates with virtual strangers.

The more people you meet in life and the more situations you end up in, the less shy you can become. I have anxiety disorder which gets the best of me sometimes, but my shyness has decreased over the years so as a personal example it is possible. I'm not saying it absolutely will get easier as you get older, but it certainly can.

Stasisesque:

The more people you meet in life and the more situations you end up in, the less shy you can become. I have anxiety disorder which gets the best of me sometimes, but my shyness has decreased over the years so as a personal example it is possible. I'm not saying it absolutely will get easier as you get older, but it certainly can.

It does get easier when you get older, but for different reasons - people tend to stop caring as much about relationships for the sake of being in a relationship. At 16, when all your peers are dating, and you're single, it's the end of the world. At 35 when all your peers are married with children and you're single...well, no biggie. No need to go through the phonebook in hopes you'll stumble upon something that will stick.

Vegosiux:

Stasisesque:

The more people you meet in life and the more situations you end up in, the less shy you can become. I have anxiety disorder which gets the best of me sometimes, but my shyness has decreased over the years so as a personal example it is possible. I'm not saying it absolutely will get easier as you get older, but it certainly can.

It does get easier when you get older, but for different reasons - people tend to stop caring as much about relationships for the sake of being in a relationship. At 16, when all your peers are dating, and you're single, it's the end of the world. At 35 when all your peers are married with children and you're single...well, no biggie. No need to go through the phonebook in hopes you'll stumble upon something that will stick.

I was talking about shyness outside of dating, yes it applies to the dating world but I was taking it as a separate thing and addressing it that way.

As for relationships, I don't know, most of my friends are married and it does bring out the desperation in some of my single friends. Biological clock and all that, there is a deadline on marriage and children for some people. True relationships lose their social status symbolism but I cannot agree that people care less as they get older, they care for different reasons.

Bara_no_Hime:

sarkeizen:
**snip**

I notice you removed the comment about me backpedaling (which I still have in my inbox). Went back and read my original post, did you?

Not exactly, I reread your most current post and decided that you still haven't really admitted you approached the problem poorly. Sure glad you're here to keep me honest. :)

I believe in what I have observed. I have observed something.

That's not really the issue. What is, is your interpretation of what you have observed. To wit:

The Friend Zone rules are fictional.

I don't know exactly why you've suddenly jumped back to a far more vague term but if the "Friend Zone rules" include our discussion about announcing yourself as a romantic candidate sooner rather than later - and sooner having an advantage in success. Then my points stand,

i) You have presented no compelling reason that what you observed is actually the thing in question. Observing that someone you refuse to date early on is still someone you won't date later on is not sufficient to make your point that the timing doesn't matter. People unwittingly make incorrect value judgments every day. For example if you ask people to arrange a group of objects in order of quality the majority of people will do so even if there is no difference. Not only that but people will post hoc rationalize their decisions ("Oh this one is shinier","I like the texture of this one"). So just because you think it doesn't matter to you doesn't mean it doesn't matter to you.

ii) You have presented no compelling reason that your observations are the general case.

I'm all for following the data but if you don't assign a rational level of confidence to your data - which you don't appear to have - then what's the difference between what you do and some bigot from the sticks? At least some of them formed their beliefs about women, minorities, etc... from what they observed too. The only thing that makes one position rational and the other irrational is the level of confidence we are willing to put above what the data can reasonably explain. The more you think a small dataset explains the less rational you are being.

You have other evidence? Fine. Sharing it is what this thread is about. I had no intention of criticizing anyone else's evidence.

I don't understand how you can, in one sentence relegate something someone says to "baseless musing" and then make the above claim in another.

You didn't provide evidence and when I commented that your ideas did not conform to my experimental data

I did actually, what I provided you was a taste of how data is evaluated by a variety of fields. For example if you were to check Sackett's Handbook of Evidence Based Medicine you would see that what you have done is at best "C" class evidence (and I'd call that being rather generous). You want to say "It's just my opinion"? Fine. If you want to claim that your rather poor research can be generalized. Math says no.

you yelled at me about "research".

All of a sudden I was yelling? Ever think you're being just a little manipulative here?

When I offered you not one but two olive branches, suggesting that perhaps we simply agree to disagree

Of course you were being ever so gracious by calling what I said: "baseless musing". Even in this post you seem to imply that you still consider yourself right. That's not much of an olive branch when faced with a pretty clear picture that whatever data you have is pretty poor in quality.

Try to see this from my side. Suppose you had said that you *observed* that women were intellectually inferior to men. Should I "agree to disagree" with you there? Why not? Well, for one there's a wealth of information that says otherwise. Now ask yourself what if I didn't have a that information demonstrating intellectual equality between women and men, for example lets say it was the year 1820 instead of 2013. Should we just "agree to disagree" then too? I'd say no.

, you called me arrogant.

And so you appeared, by definition in fact. When you let your opinions ride significantly beyond the evidence what else is there driving your confidence but ego? How is that not arrogance?

Well, if you want arrogant, then here we go. Talking to you about this is no longer worth my time or attention. Welcome to my ignore list.

I'm sorry being corrected like this makes you think that's a reasonable response but I don't really consider anything I've said improper or disproportionate. You are always welcome to return to the discussion should you choose to.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here