"Now"? As far as I know, "pants" has meant "crap" in the British parts for a while now. No, really, it's a long time ago I first heard it in that context (and I did have to ask the person what they just said), it doesn't strike me as something new.
Countries separated by a common language I suppose.
But that's the term. The term developed as an expression of those "negative sexist connotations". Don't blame the forum. Blame language. That's how the term evolved.
Nowhere Man said:
It's like whats been said above. The term friend zone was coined to make a painful situation easier to bear. It's a term created to poke fun at a situation that can really be heart breaking in many cases. Nothing wrong with that.
Just because douchebags and misogynists use a word, doesn't mean we need to associate said word with them. If there was back-lash against words every time a douchebag co-opted their use their would be few words left in the english language.
Was not "friendzone" developed by such people to mean such things? AFAIK, it's not a concept which has developed a negative meaning over time, that's all it ever was.
What I most didn't understand about the phrase was what was wrong with having friends?
I don't believe a pre-requisite to being my friend also means you must be willing to have sex with me.
Having friends is a good thing, y'know?
I do not know where and how the term "friendzone" was coined, but many people seem quite adamant in that it was a negative-connotation expression to begin with. The earliest mention of it I remember is from Friends where Ross is supposedly the mayor of Rachel's friendzone. It looked humorous to me then, not negative/bigoted.
So, where did it actually come from?
Please no "LMGTFY" links, the reason I'm asking here is that there seem to be people who know it around and I prefer asking live people first, search engines second.
Just because douchebags and misogynists use a word, doesn't mean we need to associate said word with them. If there was back-lash against words every time a douchebag co-opted their use their would be few words left in the english language.
Was not "friendzone" developed by such people to mean such things? AFAIK, it's not a concept which has developed a negative meaning over time, that's all it ever was.
What I most didn't understand about the phrase was what was wrong with having friends?
I don't believe a pre-requisite to being my friend also means you must be willing to have sex with me.
Having friends is a good thing, y'know?
Again, its less the idea that having friends is bad, and more that unrequited love just generally sucks, and that it can be frustrating and confusing for you to have very strong feelings for someone and for them to really really like you as a friend but feel absolutely nothing romantic.
What I most didn't understand about the phrase was what was wrong with having friends?
I don't believe a pre-requisite to being my friend also means you must be willing to have sex with me.
Having friends is a good thing, y'know?
By extension, if you hold the view that it is a/the pre-requisite, then there's only one reason why you would want to associate with them. Which is something of a problem.
Surely you must be aware that many people believe nothing should be beyond the reach of comedy.
In any case:
The subject of the 1st joke is the friend zone itself, and perhaps the man/brother. The whole point of the joke is that the friend zone is played out to be some all-oppressing law.
It's not clear whether this woman is the man's sister, or a woman that just considers him a brother. Either way the man/brother responds to a reasonable and flattering statement with a clinically insane defiance, justifying his actions by saying that he's rebelling against the friendzone.
Plus, the only objection the woman/sister has to being raped is that "it's against friendzone protocol," that's not mocking the victim, that's mocking the friendzone. In this absurd world she cares more about friendzone protocol than she does about being raped (possibly by her brother).
The last panel is very sketchy, probably sexist. But one panel out of all those jokes....
Bad house guest behind door? Slam the door in their face, fuck them up more when they're down.
Face your fears, talk to a black person.
Masturbate, with bengay.
Some examples of other courage wolf jokes. Exaggerated, unrealistic, prejudiced. The subject of the joke is the advice itself, and the fact it's being given by a wolf. Most courage wolf jokes are tamer than this, but I guess the courage wolf we've listed we created before insanity wolf.
The subject of the 3rd joke is the creepy, stalker dude.
The 4th joke is the same as courage wolf, just with a different absurd character.
The 5th joke is the same as the 1st.
Mocking victims of rape (of both genders) is certainly sexist and in almost all cases immoral. But none of these jokes do that, they will only be interpreted that way by someone who is sexist, or people who think using such subject matter in comedy is inherently sexist, which it isn't.
It's also worth noting, that in my opinion all of these jokes are in very bad taste. But being in bad taste doesn't automatically make something sexist/misogynist. In any case, such sensitive subject matter should be handled more skillfully.
suasartes said:
Errr ... always? It was invented in the 90s. And it's not used to describe unrequited love, it's specifically used to describe A) some kind of mythical zone where women will only ever see a guy as a friend,
Mythical zone? in a physical? psychological? existential sense? I think you're confusing abstraction for the actual meaning.
suasartes said:
B) a cruelty practised upon men by selfish or ignorant women or C) all women are manipulative bitches they say they want a nice guy but they only date assholes and when there's a nice guy in their life they just use him as an emotional tampon and don't give him anything in return and women are evil bitches bitches blargleblarg... *incoherent*
Getting closer but not quite there. Unfortunately, seen as it's slang, I could only find one definition easily.
"In popular culture, the "friend zone" refers to a platonic relationship wherein one person wishes to enter into a romantic or sexual relationship, while the other does not."
It's as simple as that. Additional sentiments may frequently be associated with it, but they are not inherent.
suasartes said:
I don't condemn people who are dealing with unrequited love. I do, however, condemn people who use the term "friendzone" because it's a term that inherently blames the object of their "affection" (and I use that term very loosely) for refusing to date them.
If they really just accepted that what they were experiencing is unrequited love then they would call it unrequited love. Or just say "she doesn't like me back." "I've been friendzoned" or "I'm in the friendzone" is an attempt to make it sound like some kind of injustice has been carried out.
Nope, it's just another way of saying it. If they are dealing with the unrequited love poorly they might show a malicious or sexist side of themselves, but that doesn't come packaged with the friend zone.
The vitriolic way this forum approaches the whole friend zone thing gives me great amusement and many chuckles. There is nothing wrong with feeling sad
See, this is what people have a problem with: the accusatory way in which the term is used. Instead of just understanding that sometimes attraction just isn't mutual, "You've been friendzoned" (or, alternatively "that ***** put me in the friendzone") implies that it's a cruelty that's been enacted upon the rejectee, which is absolutely ludicrous. I've seen people genuinely argue that friendzoning is a form of domestic abuse (no, really).
I'm really tired of the negative sexist connotations people are trying to attach to either the word
What people are you talking about? The masses of people who use it in incredibly sexist rants? Because I'm pretty sure they're the ones to blame for it having gained so many sexist connotations. There's only so many times that people can make "put her in the rape zone" jokes or write lengthy polemics about how those dumb bitches don't know what's good for them and only want to date assholes, before the term starts to smell a bit bad.
"Been Friendzoned" doesn't necessarily imply injustice. Just that someone has decided that you are a friend and nothing more. And it makes sense for the other person (usually a girl, but as previously stated, I like my terms genderless.) to be described as doing it. They are the ones feeling that someone is only a friend. It need not be accusatory, just accurate.
What I most didn't understand about the phrase was what was wrong with having friends?
I don't believe a pre-requisite to being my friend also means you must be willing to have sex with me.
Having friends is a good thing, y'know?
I am sorry, but this is bullshit. Friendship and an intimate Relationship are two very different relationshsips, as every psychologist will tell you. If you are looking for a romantic relationship, and get a friend, that is not what you wanted, and you can rightfully be sad about not getting what you wanted.
It is also not a sense of false entitlement to assume that the actions you take in order to establish a relationship will result in a relationship. The Problem comes when the actions you take are not understood by the other party, mostly because the signals sent were wrong, and your assumption will be frustrated. While it is generally a bad idea to expect other people to reciprocate just because you did something for them, such expectations are a common problem and almost everyone has experienced them. Think of staying past office hours and expecting a raise or at least a thanks, and then just getting nothing. You have no right to demand anything, because it was your decision to work longer, but that doesn't mean you wont be frustrated when it happens.
All in all, reacting negatively to being "friendzoned" is perfectly normal and does not make you a mysogonist or otherwise bad person. Neither does using the word to describe the situation. The fact that the word ascribes the action to the person that does not reciprocrate your feelings also makes perfect sense in the context of the situation, since it was their decision, not yours.
No first base
No nookie
Nobody gonna tie me down
I'm a nice guy
Why don't she like me?
I'm bitter but I'm still hangin' round
Hey woman
(M I RITE GUISE)
How dare she think she's too good for me
What a tease
led me on
No restraining order can stop me....
(Yes, I know that was "Danger Zone" by Kenny Loggins, but I couldn't remember the meter or the song, so I substituted AC/DC)
I think the word friendzone represents nothing but the baggage that can come from unrequited love. It's a word describing something static, that a person will always see another as a friend, that is applied to relationships, something as fluid as water. Relationships can change so rapidly that the word seems almost meaningless.
Vegosiux said:
Angie7F said:
"Not interested i you"?
Its not all the difficult really. lol
Ugg, the above irks me so much. I've told someone before that, "I was not interested in a relationship right now." It's a fairly clear statement. It means the answer is no right now because of situations that you have no say in, but you may pursue at a later date if you are still interested. I gave this answer to a man that asked me out once. I wasn't aware that he saw me in that light, though it was moot anyways since I had just been through a break up and wasn't interested in dating just then. Six months later, he expressed interest again and I accepted. We are married and have been together for ten years now. All three statements are: perfectly clear, definitive statements, and could be used to mean something entirely different. That's the beauty, or hell, of language.
This is literally what I'm going through right now.
I had always seen the friend zone as a bitchy way of saying the same thing, but obviously the definition has evolved into something far worse.
It's why I don't use it.
I've experience something worse.
"I think of you as a brother".
I've been... brotherzoned.
(But in all seriousness, I think people need to ease up on both the useage of friendzone and the attacks against those who use it. A lot of people that use it aren't thinking "wah, wah, I'm entitled to sex, why and I not getting it on with this girl I find physically attractive, woe is me", they're thinking of the definition of unrequited love and just feel weird using the term "love" because maybe they don't feel that they love them yet, but that they could. BUT, the term still leaves a bad taste in my mouth, because it always implies permanence, a "fuck it, I give up" attitude, so even though I think people should be allowed to use it without being attacked every time for it, I won't use it myself.
Also, girls can be friendzoned to. Why does nobody ever specify that?)
Ugg, the above irks me so much. I've told someone before that, "I was not interested in a relationship right now." It's a fairly clear statement. It means the answer is no right now because of situations that you have no say in, but you may pursue at a later date if you are still interested. I gave this answer to a man that asked me out once. I wasn't aware that he saw me in that light, though it was moot anyways since I had just been through a break up and wasn't interested in dating just then. Six months later, he expressed interest again and I accepted. We are married and have been together for ten years now. All three statements are: perfectly clear, definitive statements, and could be used to mean something entirely different. That's the beauty, or hell, of language.
What I was getting at is that if you mean "no", don't say "not right now". But if you mean "not right now" then it's perfectly okay to say "not right now". If you're really not sure yourself, fair enough, you actually weren't sure, but in that case you will accept the fact that they might still make a move later or try and stick around until you're ready and you won't fault them for that. ("you" here is the general "whoever is reading this", not you personally).
I only take issue with it if it's a way to "let them down gently" as they say.
Zachary Amaranth said:
Of course, sometimes people really aren't ready for a relationship.
I think the word friendzone represents nothing but the baggage that can come from unrequited love. It's a word describing something static, that a person will always see another as a friend, that is applied to relationships, something as fluid as water. Relationships can change so rapidly that the word seems almost meaningless.
Vegosiux said:
Angie7F said:
"Not interested i you"?
Its not all the difficult really. lol
Ugg, the above irks me so much. I've told someone before that, "I was not interested in a relationship right now." It's a fairly clear statement. It means the answer is no right now because of situations that you have no say in, but you may pursue at a later date if you are still interested. I gave this answer to a man that asked me out once. I wasn't aware that he saw me in that light, though it was moot anyways since I had just been through a break up and wasn't interested in dating just then. Six months later, he expressed interest again and I accepted. We are married and have been together for ten years now. All three statements are: perfectly clear, definitive statements, and could be used to mean something entirely different. That's the beauty, or hell, of language.
Its just frustrating when "I'm not ready for a relationship" is used to "let someone down easily" since it implies that you would be interested in a relationship with them, just not right now. It can result in miscommunication and more pain later on if it isn't used honestly.
Edit: ninjaed...
Due to societal norms/expectations arising from gender roles, women are far less likely to engage in elaborate courtship behavior that can result in miscommunications and/or a sense of entitlement to some kind of return on investment.
PS - Sorry about your unrequited love, champ. Believe me, we've all been there. =\
I don't condemn people who are dealing with unrequited love. I do, however, condemn people who use the term "friendzone" because it's a term that inherently blames the object of their "affection" (and I use that term very loosely) for refusing to date them.
Yes! That is exactly the problem with that so-called 'friendzone'. It's funny, I don't I've ever come across a woman saying she's been friendzoned (and, believe it or not, we definitely do experience unrequited love from time to time)so, that adds to the weird, creepy vibe the word has.
rasputin0009 said:
Also, this is for the guys who need to wakeup and the girls who need the lulz: http://www.explosm.net/comics/3167/
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
