Question about "friend zone".

[JesterRaiin]

No; I'm suggesting that romantic relationships must by definition be consensual. Moving a relationship in a direction that one of the participants does not want is not better for anyone.

Nope. Haven't you ever participated in successfull joint events with people practically dragged into cooperation ?

When someone is dragged into a sexual relationship they do not want, we call that "rape".

Just saying.

I said "joint events", you thought about "rape". Interesting. Iiiiiiiiiinteresting indeed.

You don't understand what a 'joint event' would be in a sexual relationship? Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinteresting.

I just don't think that it's the best choice of arguments. First thing that comes to mind after mentioning "joint operations" ? Rape ? I guess that's why "friend zone" was invented in first place.

You're pretty slow.

I hear that a lot. Be my guest, one more time doesn't make any difference.

It was more "Joint operations.... This is a thread about relationships... Joint operations + relationships...." Now what do you think that equals?

I'm not sure about the state of your mind but mine won't answer "rape" to that question :

Haven't you ever participated in successfull joint events with people practically dragged into cooperation ?

You keep missing the 'relationship' part. Probably deliberately.

Same thing applies to you. You deliberately try to prove - what ? - that it's ok to mix "joint operations" and "rape" ? Sorry, that disturbes me.

Glad that i'm neither responsible nor have to defend each and every possible association one may think about while reading my topic and listening to his/her own demons.

 

[Mordwyl]

If you become friends with someone solely because you want to get in their pants, you're doing it wrong and deserve ending up in the friend zone. Make your intentions clear from the start or at least as soon as possible. I've been on both sides of the problem and yes, just being straightforward can avoid a lot of drama.

 

[JesterRaiin]

It didn't occur to me earlier, however when i sobered up enough to remember my life it finnaly got me...

You're in the friend zone, so i guess there was this moment when she said "you're like my best friend, older/younger brother" or similar sh*t.

Question is (or rather questions are) : how could you agree ? Why didn't you protest ? Why haven't you proposed better, more adequate solution ?

Men who regularly end up in friend zones are used to being friendly and supportive, and essentially submissive, because that's what they believe women like, and that's how they like behaving around women. This could be for a number of reasons: upbringing, personality, environment, context, inexperience with women and so on.

The main thing is that they're probably used to doing it. It takes a spark of realisation to come to the conclusion that this (i.e. being submissive) is what is causing the problem, and to break out of that habit and stand up for yourself is a relatively hard thing to do for a person like that.

Most people who are in the friend zone lack the knowledge that submission is causing their problems and/or the bravery to stand up to their female 'friends'.

Does that answer your question?

Yes, that actually confirms my *cough* theory. Thanks.

No; I'm suggesting that romantic relationships must by definition be consensual. Moving a relationship in a direction that one of the participants does not want is not better for anyone.

Nope. Haven't you ever participated in successfull joint events with people practically dragged into cooperation ?

When someone is dragged into a sexual relationship they do not want, we call that "rape".

Just saying.

I said "joint events", you thought about "rape". Interesting. Iiiiiiiiiinteresting indeed.

You don't understand what a 'joint event' would be in a sexual relationship? Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinteresting.

I just don't think that it's the best choice of arguments. First thing that comes to mind after mentioning "joint operations" ? Rape ? I guess that's why "friend zone" was invented in first place.

You're pretty slow.

I hear that a lot. Be my guest, one more time doesn't make any difference.

It was more "Joint operations.... This is a thread about relationships... Joint operations + relationships...." Now what do you think that equals?

I'm not sure about the state of your mind but mine won't answer "rape" to that question :

Haven't you ever participated in successfull joint events with people practically dragged into cooperation ?

You keep missing the 'relationship' part. Probably deliberately.

Same thing applies to you. You deliberately try to prove - what ? - that it's ok to mix "joint operations" and "rape" ? Sorry, that disturbes me.

Glad that i'm neither responsible nor have to defend each and every possible association one may think about while reading my topic and listening to his/her own demons.

You clearly lack the capacity to make the step from 'sexual relationship' + 'joint operations' to 'sex'. I think it's a good thing you're in that 'friend zone', you're clearly not ready for anything more.

Ah, i understand now. You simply skipped the rest of our little discussion here. Uhhhh, buddy, that's not gonna work. You're talking to married man.
...who still is disturbed by suggestions that "joint operations", "relationship" and "rape" should share same sandbox. And that won't change.

 

[JesterRaiin]

No; I'm suggesting that romantic relationships must by definition be consensual. Moving a relationship in a direction that one of the participants does not want is not better for anyone.

Nope. Haven't you ever participated in successfull joint events with people practically dragged into cooperation ?

When someone is dragged into a sexual relationship they do not want, we call that "rape".

Just saying.

I said "joint events", you thought about "rape". Interesting. Iiiiiiiiiinteresting indeed.

You don't understand what a 'joint event' would be in a sexual relationship? Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinteresting.

I just don't think that it's the best choice of arguments. First thing that comes to mind after mentioning "joint operations" ? Rape ? I guess that's why "friend zone" was invented in first place.

You're pretty slow.

I hear that a lot. Be my guest, one more time doesn't make any difference.

It was more "Joint operations.... This is a thread about relationships... Joint operations + relationships...." Now what do you think that equals?

I'm not sure about the state of your mind but mine won't answer "rape" to that question :

Haven't you ever participated in successfull joint events with people practically dragged into cooperation ?

You keep missing the 'relationship' part. Probably deliberately.

Same thing applies to you. You deliberately try to prove - what ? - that it's ok to mix "joint operations" and "rape" ? Sorry, that disturbes me.

Glad that i'm neither responsible nor have to defend each and every possible association one may think about while reading my topic and listening to his/her own demons.

You clearly lack the capacity to make the step from 'sexual relationship' + 'joint operations' to 'sex'. I think it's a good thing you're in that 'friend zone', you're clearly not ready for anything more.

Ah, i understand now. You simply skipped the rest of our little discussion here. Uhhhh, buddy, that's not gonna work. You're talking to married man.
...who still is disturbed by suggestions that "joint operations", "relationship" and "rape" should share same sandbox. And that won't change.

How thick do you have to try to be to not see that joint operations + relationship implies sex? And when you throw in forcing joint operations it's pretty obvious where it goes.

That's no thickness. That's being context sesitive instead of sailing away.
I'm not the biggest fan of applying Schopenhauer's, Eristic Dialectic in discussion, but to each his own i guess.

 

[Sexy Devil]

Well one of the reasons that I would like a person that way is that I find them exceptionally enjoyable to be around, so if I just put it out there and she says no then I really don't have an issue with just being friends/bros/what have you. I'm not going to try to change their mind because I understand that it's just pushy and annoying.

If you only remain friends with them after that because of some delusion that they're suddenly going to be attracted to you then it's time that you abandon ship on that friendship.

 

[Kizi]

Well, I became friends with the girl I like(d) out of complete coincidence. I always just hoped that the friendship would eventually evolve into something more, but so far, no good. [forever_alone.jpg]

 

[BluesHadal]

I'm almost certain that the "Friend Zone" as a negative concept was invented entirely by Nice Guys. If you think about the implications it's actually an incredibly sexist concept: "She doesn't want to fuck me, so why doesn't she just say she's not interested? It's not like she could possibly be at all interesting to me outside of having a vagina."

Conversely, every girl I've ever been attracted to, I'd much rather be just friends with them than be all "sex or GTFO". Then again maybe I'm just a freak for being attracted to girls who actually have personalities.

this is retarded. How do you try to date women? Outside of just outright flirting which not everyone does? by trying to get close to them. By talking to them, it's obviously a somewhat similar path to friendship.

I only came to know the term from the internet, and of course it was coined by some dudes but whether you want to use dumb terms, I can understand what its trying to say. Sometimes a person(male) will try to get close to another person(female). That isn't to get(or just) "laid" Like some else said, that's how you start a relationship. Trying to switch the label and say its all about getting laid just trying to paint the people that use it in a bad light. A weird defensive propaganda as reaction to the term, apparently because some think the term is insulting to women(first time I'm hearing this).

Is the friendship zone a negative insulting concept? I've never spent much time thinking about it or thinking of it as such. It doesn't sound like it though. It's just warning people that this happens and that you should move on. That's what I saw when I first heard of the term. This whole negative connotation seems to be people thinking that the term does something outside of saying sometimes girls look at you as just a friend, It doesn't.

I'm pretty sure guys can imagine dating most of their female friends, even if its not all that seriously, or sleeping with them with the possibility of giving a relationship a try. Are women the same? I don't really know. Whoever came up with the term doesn't seem to think so.

 

[chowderface]

Being someone's friend is a wonderful thing, not a demotion. And acting like being a woman's friend is the ultimate insult for a man paints men far too slutty.

Concept of "friend zone" as i understand it is all about "i wanted a girl but was rejected". This topic isn't about being friend with other gender. Sorry.

Actually Lilith is completely on topic. She's saying "the Friend Zone is bunk", and I'm inclined to agree.

I'm almost certain that the "Friend Zone" as a negative concept was invented entirely by Nice Guys.

It's possible. We - men - like to harness the unknown, to label things.

Missing the point, I feel. I'm saying that without Nice Guy Syndrome, we wouldn't have the "Friend Zone."

Well, I became friends with the girl I like(d) out of complete coincidence. I always just hoped that the friendship would eventually evolve into something more, but so far, no good. [forever_alone.jpg]

Fuck, son, ask her to go steady. If you just wait for it it'll never come. Waiting is how Nice Guys do it, and trust me: When Nice Guy is capitalized you DON'T want someone calling you that.

 

[Combustion Kevin]

Well one of the reasons that I would like a person that way is that I find them exceptionally enjoyable to be around, so if I just put it out there and she says no then I really don't have an issue with just being friends/bros/what have you. I'm not going to try to change their mind because I understand that it's just pushy and annoying.

If you only remain friends with them after that because of some delusion that they're suddenly going to be attracted to you then it's time that you abandon ship on that friendship.

thank you, good sir.

basicly, I think that a romantic relationship should hold the same criteria (probably more) as friendship, if you can't hang around and have fun as friends in the first place, how the fuck do you expect to maintain a relationship?

that they aren't romanticly interested in you is no reason to stop being friends, hell, none of the guys I hang around with are attracted to me (presumably, but that is of little importance).

women are people too, and can be just as fun to hang around with as men.
there is no need for this "no sex, no contact" bullshit, there is more to a person than just that and it'd be damn shallow to ignore it.

 

[Hugga_Bear]

There's no such thing as the "friend zone". I'd write something up, but BonsaiK has already said it better than I ever could:

Yes it's possible to be friends with someone but the idea of a "Friend Zone" that you're allocated to after a certain time period of knowing somebody is total fantasy, thought up by bored, lonely, misogynist keyboard jockeys who can't deal with the simple fact that men and women aren't really all that different when it comes to this particular point. They're looking for something to shift the blame for their failures on (because it couldn't possibly be that girls just don't like them much, oh gosh no) so they create this bullshit theory instead of acknowledging the harsh truth: that they never had a chance because she just didn't like them in the first place. Anything but take personal responsibility for their life and actions, hey.

This this a thousand times this. The friend zone just doesn't exist, you are their friend because they want nothing more from you, not because you were just too slow off the bat or because you're "Too Nice"tm.
No. That just doesn't happen. Girls DO like nice guys, odds are if you're the type bitching about being a Nice Guy(tm) and being in the friend zone then you're simply not a nice guy.

I'll leave it with these which better exemplify my view:
http://xkcd.com/513/
http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrskhrpOs21qcz3izo1_500.png

 

[Kurokami]

It didn't occur to me earlier, however when i sobered up enough to remember my life it finnaly got me...

You're in the friend zone, so i guess there was this moment when she said "you're like my best friend, older/younger brother" or similar sh*t.

Question is (or rather questions are) : how could you agree ? Why didn't you protest ? Why haven't you proposed better, more adequate solution ?

http://stickerish.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/JackiechanBlackSS.png

"You're like a brother to me!" she would say, "Mmhm... I hear you, but on the other hand... Sex?" I would suggest in counter, "Sex" she would agree.

Whatever works for you, but that's generally a position reserved for people too chickenshit/skeptical about asking the person out (AKA me). The genius idea of having them ask them out isn't exactly reserved for the moment wherein the person's already decided you're gonna be the one handing them out at their marriage.

 

[smithy_2045]

There's no such thing as the "friend zone". I'd write something up, but BonsaiK has already said it better than I ever could:

Yes it's possible to be friends with someone but the idea of a "Friend Zone" that you're allocated to after a certain time period of knowing somebody is total fantasy, thought up by bored, lonely, misogynist keyboard jockeys who can't deal with the simple fact that men and women aren't really all that different when it comes to this particular point. They're looking for something to shift the blame for their failures on (because it couldn't possibly be that girls just don't like them much, oh gosh no) so they create this bullshit theory instead of acknowledging the harsh truth: that they never had a chance because she just didn't like them in the first place. Anything but take personal responsibility for their life and actions, hey.

Quoting because it bears repeating. It only exists in your own mind if you let it.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Actually it's pretty clear where the point is here. It's stupid to compare forcing 'joint operations' to a relationship for pretty blatant reasons that you choose to ignore.

My circuss, my monkeys. Not your thing ? Don't buy tickets next time. Simple as that.

 

[JesterRaiin]

Actually it's pretty clear where the point is here. It's stupid to compare forcing 'joint operations' to a relationship for pretty blatant reasons that you choose to ignore.

My circuss, my monkeys. Not your thing ? Don't buy tickets next time. Simple as that.

Ok, you're not capable of understanding that your analogy sucked and this being your thread doesn't make it any less stupid of an analogy. Well that's sad.

Jezu Chryste na stelażu...
Could you explain what you mean by "joint event" ? C'mon, indulge me.

 

[BabyRaptor]

Speaking as someone who broke out of the friend zone with someone who swore they'd keep everyone they ever met there, and was *very* adamant about it until I came along...

Leave it the hell alone.

You're generally there for a reason, and rarely does breaking it work out.