Can we talk about the "friend zone" and "nice guys" for a moment?

cobra_ky

New member
Nov 20, 2008
1,643
0
0
Lyri said:
cobra_ky said:
It is OK to be heartbroken. It is OK to feel bad when you get turned down. It is not OK to blame the person who turned you down, because you aren't entitled to a romantic relationship with them.
I didn't say it was ok, I just said that people get crazy & emotional when heartbroken & rejected. Shit happens basically.

No, it certainly isn't male-exclusive, but it's predominantly men who complain about things like that and invent concepts like the "friendzone" to describe it.
Women eat icecream and cry to chick flicks, apparently. Of course they complain about it, just not with the same name but the rose is just as sweet.

If you make friends with anyone based solely on physical attraction to them, then you're a terrible friend.
How do you think you try and pull on nights out? Sorry but if you think that then you're pretty sheltered. I know women because of finding them attractive on nights out, couple of them I have a tonne in common with. There's nothing wrong with it, if you're sole intention is to just fuck someone and be done with it THEN you're a shitty friend.

This only happens when you invest your entire emotional well-being in a romantic relationship with a person. Don't take rejection so personally; people generally only find themselves attracted to a tiny subset of the general population, so don't be surprised if you happen not to fall into that category for a particular person. Women aren't aren't a puzzle to be solved; there's no "optimal strategy" that's going to bag you any girl you want. Through no fault of your own, you simply have absolutely no shot with the vast majority of women in the world, so try not to let it get you down so much when one of them turns you down.
Of course people emotionally invest themselves towards other people, it would be terrible of you not to do that if you were looking for a romantic relationship with someone. I wouldn't even consider dating my fiance if she wasn't at least a little emotionally invested when we met.
Some people handle rejection well & others get pretty stung by it, a friend of mine is one of those guys who doesn't meet a whole lot of women as he has a very "guy like" social life and he works a tonne.
He gets hit really, really hard by rejection and emotionally invests himself way too hard way to early, sometimes it's a fault but sometimes it's right. It depends on the people involved.
Had to edit my sloppy, sloppy tags and I also realised I had no actual post outside of the quote, so this is just filler text.
OK, but we're not talking about people getting emotional here, we're talking about a specific pattern of behavior, where guys get close to women, develop a bond of trust with them, then abandon them and complain about what bitches they are once it becomes clear they aren't going to be romantically involved.

Yes, you absolutely should be "at least a little emotionally invested" (but that's also true of friendships, too) but no matter how much rejection hurts, nothing really gives you the right to take it out on others.
 

tobyornottoby

New member
Jan 2, 2008
517
0
0
Hagi said:
tobyornottoby said:
Hagi said:
Then even though she turned you down because it was too soon she starts dating someone else who it's apparently not too soon for. You got angry.
Here's where I'm saying she might have said that just to be sensitive to his feelings, rather than it being The Truth.
Either way, it's a genuine reason to get angry.

In that case she'd be lying to him and essentially judging him incapable of handling his own feelings. Can't say I'll blame someone for getting a bit angry when treated like that.

Of course, not a reason to break off all contact or do even worse things. But definitely reason to get angry.
This happens all the time. Women do it even moreso than men. There's a lot of indirect speech floating around. Very few people speak their minds all the time.

Understanding things like this mean you don't have to angry about things that are essentially miscommunication.

(He had a reason to get angry, being rejected and all. But I don't see those words as an unavoidable reason to get angry)
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,741
0
0
tobyornottoby said:
Hagi said:
tobyornottoby said:
Hagi said:
Then even though she turned you down because it was too soon she starts dating someone else who it's apparently not too soon for. You got angry.
Here's where I'm saying she might have said that just to be sensitive to his feelings, rather than it being The Truth.
Either way, it's a genuine reason to get angry.

In that case she'd be lying to him and essentially judging him incapable of handling his own feelings. Can't say I'll blame someone for getting a bit angry when treated like that.

Of course, not a reason to break off all contact or do even worse things. But definitely reason to get angry.
This happens all the time. Women do it even moreso than men. There's a lot of indirect speech floating around. Very few people speak their minds all the time.

Understanding things like this mean you don't have to angry about things that are essentially miscommunication.

(He had a reason to get angry, being rejected and all. But I don't see those words as an unavoidable reason to get angry)
Except it's not miscommunication. She's outright lying to him.

"I'm not ready for it" Directly implies that at a later time you possibly would be ready for it. Leaving the other with false hope and rendering him incapable of moving on.

"I'm sorry, I'm just not interested." is hardly speaking your mind. It's just giving someone who's your friend a clear and direct answer so that person may be able to move on.

The only person's feelings you're sparing when you say "I'm not ready" when you mean "No" are your own. And you're doing that at the cost of giving the other false hope. In the end the other will end up even more disappointed. You just don't have to deal with feeling bad for turning someone down (a general you by the way, not you personally :p).
 

Phlakes

+15 Dagger of Socks
Mar 25, 2010
4,282
0
0
I know I'm 16 pages late, but it looks like you don't entirely get what it is. It's not about being rejected and cutting off the friendship. Not at all. It's not about them being a hypocrite. You say we wrongfully make ourselves out to be victims but then you wrongfully make us out to be antagonists. Don't assume people's intentions. That's never a good things.

And you know what? I was friendzoned hard. All the cliches and everything, including "I wish I could find a guy like you". And I stuck with her, for several years. Then we had a relationship. And it was wonderful. Too young for it to last, though, but it worked.
 

Lyri

New member
Dec 8, 2008
2,660
0
0
cobra_ky said:
OK, but we're not talking about people getting emotional here, we're talking about a specific pattern of behavior, where guys get close to women, develop a bond of trust with them, then abandon them and complain about what bitches they are once it becomes clear they aren't going to be romantically involved.

Yes, you absolutely should be "at least a little emotionally invested" (but that's also true of friendships, too) but no matter how much rejection hurts, nothing really gives you the right to take it out on others.
Why do you think that pattern of behaviour happens? They're emotionally attached to you more than are willing to reciprocate.
After a while of course they'll ditch them, no offence but some people just can't handle seeing someone they like with someone else and it's kind of sad you're not getting that.
Unfortunately both people in the scenario are hurting but for very different reasons, you can't just say "you shouldn't be an asshole because she's a female friend".

If you have a problem with your feelings towards a friend of yours then you have to make that decision and so does she, can you both handle one person having feelings in the friendship? If you can't then you get the hell out of dodge and don't stick your head in the sand and let it continue.

I never said it gives you the right to take it out on others, emotions make you do it anyway.

Phlakes said:
I know I'm 16 pages late, but it looks like you don't entirely get what it is. It's not about being rejected and cutting off the friendship. Not at all. It's not about them being a hypocrite. You say we wrongfully make ourselves out to be victims but then you wrongfully make us out to be antagonists. Don't assume people's intentions. That's never a good things.

And you know what? I was friendzoned hard. All the cliches and everything, including "I wish I could find a guy like you". And I stuck with her, for several years. Then we had a relationship. And it was wonderful. Too young for it to last, though, but it worked.
Good for you buddy, we've all been there at one time or another just depends how you are with handling it.
 

tehroc

New member
Jul 6, 2009
1,293
0
0
No one wants to be treated as an intellectual whore, OP do you enjoy being treated as a sexual whore?

It's a little more then being friend-zoned. Men complain when they go beyond just regular friendships and are being used as confidants to all her problems, her intellectual whore. Men with unrequited love don't want to listen to the woman complain about a boyfriend who doesn't listen to her.
 

Insanely Asinine

New member
Sep 7, 2010
73
0
0
museofdoom said:
Since this is a predominantly male community, I figured talking about this here would result in the most interesting feedback. And I suppose I'm in the mood for a little controversy.

So you become friends with a female, and you really like her in that way. You spend time with her, you're kind to her, and you're always doing her favors. Eventually you pluck up the courage to confess your attraction and then GASP! she doesn't like you that way, and wants to stay friends!
<----This is where it ends. No crying, no whining, just disappointment and then of course moving on to other interests to keep myself occupied. Nothing more. Nothing less.
 

Aprilgold

New member
Apr 1, 2011
1,995
0
0
tobyornottoby said:
Aprilgold said:
And we come to the great circle of truth about this. Theres a tails to every head, and a paint for every color. Just because "Friend Zone Whining" makes you seem like you felt entitled to sex, it is more or less because of the heart break. You just wanted it so badly and working up that courage takes a long time only to have yourself rejected. Of course its also the ultimate dick move to say that "I like your personality, but you yourself can go die in a tar-pit" or something to that degree.
Why? looks matter to a lot of people. She appreciates you as a friend, no dying in tar-pits required. If this is brought in a tactical manner, there's nothing dickish about it.
Because it shows that she will only date you or others for their looks, not for their personalities which is as shallow as saying that you will only date the biggest hunk at school. Saying that your not my type is better then saying that you are my type but you look like shit.
 

teh_v

New member
Jun 29, 2008
127
0
0
Hagi said:
tobyornottoby said:
Hagi said:
tobyornottoby said:
Hagi said:
Then even though she turned you down because it was too soon she starts dating someone else who it's apparently not too soon for. You got angry.
Here's where I'm saying she might have said that just to be sensitive to his feelings, rather than it being The Truth.
Either way, it's a genuine reason to get angry.

In that case she'd be lying to him and essentially judging him incapable of handling his own feelings. Can't say I'll blame someone for getting a bit angry when treated like that.

Of course, not a reason to break off all contact or do even worse things. But definitely reason to get angry.
This happens all the time. Women do it even moreso than men. There's a lot of indirect speech floating around. Very few people speak their minds all the time.

Understanding things like this mean you don't have to angry about things that are essentially miscommunication.

(He had a reason to get angry, being rejected and all. But I don't see those words as an unavoidable reason to get angry)
Except it's not miscommunication. She's outright lying to him.

"I'm not ready for it" Directly implies that at a later time you possibly would be ready for it. Leaving the other with false hope and rendering him incapable of moving on.

"I'm sorry, I'm just not interested." is hardly speaking your mind. It's just giving someone who's your friend a clear and direct answer so that person may be able to move on.

The only person's feelings you're sparing when you say "I'm not ready" when you mean "No" are your own. And you're doing that at the cost of giving the other false hope. In the end the other will end up even more disappointed. You just don't have to deal with feeling bad for turning someone down (a general you by the way, not you personally :p).
Thanks for the comments. I feel a little bit better about the whole thing just from hearing other people perspectives and Tobyonottoby I think is closer to the truth because she did say she wasn't interested but she wasn't sure if she wasn't interested because she was coming out a relationship or what. Overall I feel better. I think I'm gonna extend the olive branch again and see what happens. I do miss her friendship and our conversations. Kinda the reason I fell for her. I'm just glad being friends with someone then developing feeling for them doesn't put you in that "nice guy" category.
 

Char-Nobyl

New member
May 8, 2009
784
0
0
artanis_neravar said:
Yes, it is, while they are fun people to be around I am not attracted to any of them physically. If I was physically attracted to them then I might consider a romantic relationship with them.
...alright then. Ever hear someone say (often in the context of a divorce case) that two people were great as friends, but terrible as spouses? Is it so alien a concept for you that people can like one another in ways that aren't compatible with romance? If someone considers someone else to be 'like a sibling,' they have zero of the things that evolution uses to prevent them from inbreeding had they been actual siblings [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westermarck_effect].

artanis_neravar said:
Physical attraction is a major part of any attraction, if you aren't attracted to someone then the relationship will never work, so yes physical attraction plays a very big part in who I am willing to date.
Well, I don't see any point in trying to convince you that relationships are a lot more than sex. Seems like you're pretty set in the opposite belief.

artanis_neravar said:
And before anyone tries to call me shallow, it works the other way to, if I find a girl physically attractive, but don't like her personality then I won't date her.
For future reference, that statement holds about as much water as saying, "I hate the Chinese, but before anyone tries to call me racist, I don't have any problem with Mexicans."
 

Char-Nobyl

New member
May 8, 2009
784
0
0
Nieroshai said:
I will supplement your point via my example. I am painfully friendzone-prone, coupled with my family-troubles-related depression. That being said, I won my fiancee by being her best friend and showing that a relationship with me would be rewarding emotionally, etc etc saving you a wall of text. I would not, however, call myself very physically attractive. I am short and slightly overweight, and have a permanent cough from chemical lung damage. My lack of aattractiveness did not matter in thhe slightest in the face of everything else I could do. After many failures and despite my shortcomings, I am an example of what most Nice Guys wish would work with women. What is sad is that emotional happiness does not seem to be on the minds of most women. To note, I became more attractive to her as her feelings for me grew, since personal aesthetics change with emotions. As already subjective as attractiveness is, it definitely isn't set in stone for the beholder either.

CAPTCHA: sick puppy
SOLVEmedia, I am offend
Well said. And mine was "Know your rights." I'm more than a bit confused about their theme right now.
 

artanis_neravar

New member
Apr 18, 2011
2,560
0
0
Char-Nobyl said:
artanis_neravar said:
Yes, it is, while they are fun people to be around I am not attracted to any of them physically. If I was physically attracted to them then I might consider a romantic relationship with them.
...alright then. Ever hear someone say (often in the context of a divorce case) that two people were great as friends, but terrible as spouses? Is it so alien a concept for you that people can like one another in ways that aren't compatible with romance? If someone considers someone else to be 'like a sibling,' they have zero of the things that evolution uses to prevent them from inbreeding had they been actual siblings [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westermarck_effect].
"a hypothetical psychological effect" are the first words used to describe the Westermarck effect. It also goes on to say that it effects people who "live in close domestic proximity during the first few years of their lives". So the effect doesn't apply to this case.

Now to clarify

...hang on a second. Doesn't that just mean she's lying when she says she wishes she could "find a guy like you"?

Is it so alien a concept for you that people can like one another in ways that aren't compatible with romance?

These seem to contradict each other.
Statement 1 - If she is looking for someone like you who isn't you she is lying

Statement 2 - It's possible for someone to like someone in a none romantic way

Doesn't 2 imply that she wasn't lying in 1?


artanis_neravar said:
Physical attraction is a major part of any attraction, if you aren't attracted to someone then the relationship will never work, so yes physical attraction plays a very big part in who I am willing to date.
Well, I don't see any point in trying to convince you that relationships are a lot more than sex. Seems like you're pretty set in the opposite belief.
Did I ever say that? No, all I said is that a romantic relationship can not work without physical attraction, just like they can not work without emotional attraction. If you are going to deliberately misconstrued everything I say what's the point in even trying to argue with me?

[quote
artanis_neravar said:
And before anyone tries to call me shallow, it works the other way to, if I find a girl physically attractive, but don't like her personality then I won't date her.
For future reference, that statement holds about as much water as saying, "I hate the Chinese, but before anyone tries to call me racist, I don't have any problem with Mexicans."[/quote]For future reference, yes it does.
Shallow - Judging a person based strictly on looks, not factoring in their personality whatsoever.

I do not judge based solely on looks, I judge based on looks, personality, and mentality, among other things, therefore calling me shallow would be incorrect.
 

Char-Nobyl

New member
May 8, 2009
784
0
0
artanis_neravar said:
"a hypothetical psychological effect" are the first words used to describe the Westermarck effect. It also goes on to say that it effects people who "live in close domestic proximity during the first few years of their lives". So the effect doesn't apply to this case.
No shit, Sherlock. I outright said that, to quote myself, " If someone considers someone else to be 'like a sibling,' they have zero of the things that evolution uses to prevent them from inbreeding had they been actual siblings."

In other words, someone can regard someone else in the same way they hold a brother or sister, and they didn't need to be raised with one another for it to happen. That was my point, which you somehow missed.

artanis_neravar said:
These seem to contradict each other.
Statement 1 - If she is looking for someone like you who isn't you she is lying

Statement 2 - It's possible for someone to like someone in a none romantic way

Doesn't 2 imply that she wasn't lying in 1?
Alright. I'll go through what you summarized as 'Statement 1.'

Let's say you have two guys, A and B. Guy A is average looking: far from ugly, but he doesn't turn many heads when he walks in a room. Normal, in other words.

Guy B is the positive extreme: he's very good looking, but also an exact replica in terms of personality, interests, etc to Guy A.

Now let's say the girl from the scenario (X) meets A, likes him "as a friend," and ultimately rejects his advances, and wishes that her future boyfriends will be "like him." She then meets B who, as I said, is exactly like A in every respect except is also extremely good-looking, and the two begin a relationship.

So yes. In the hypothetical scenario, the girl is lying. If A and B are identical in every way except looks, then she is only rejecting A because she thinks she can find someone better looking. She doesn't see him 'like a brother,' because B is identical in terms of personality to A.

If she's telling the truth, of course, then we get the delightful implication that she doesn't mind sex with her non-familial sibling, provided he's good looking enough. But let's not get into that, hm?

Clarification of 'Statement 2'

Two people are very good friends for a long time. They strike up a relationship, and get married. Some time after marriage, they discover that the relationship between spouses isn't nearly the same as a relationship between friends, and they get a divorce. Despite the end of their marriage, they remain friends, because they had been good friends for a long time.

For a personal example (inadmissible in a court of law, but w/e), a friend of mine has this happen with his parents. They certainly found each other 'attractive' enough to have two kids together, and the divorce proceedings were pretty cordial. Their split was because they (to put it a bit simply) didn't love each other as spouses ought to. They might have been great friends, and found one another attractive enough to produce children together, but those two things didn't add up to 'love.'

Clarification of 1&2's "contradiction"
In Statement 1, it all comes down to personality: A and B are identical, but B is better looking, so he gets the girl when she rejects A. Thus, in the most ideal situation as set by her statement, if she wants "someone like (A)," then it means that she's rejecting him solely because she thinks she can find a version of him that is identical but better looking.

In Statement 2, it comes down to the difference between 'friends' and 'lovers.' Have you ever noticed how similar children look to their parents? Check a wedding album: you'll probably find that with the right haircut and clothing, you're a dead-ringer for whichever of your parents shared your gender. It's even common advice to get a decent idea of what your significant other will look like in 30 years by looking at their parent.

So let's give another hypothetical scenario: a husband and a wife have a daughter at age, let's say 25. And let's say that the parents age very well (they continue to look younger than they are) while the daughter grows up fairly quickly (she looks older than she is). So, at age 20, she looks very much like her mother does at age 45.

Now the husband/father comes into play. He's got two women in his house, both of whom he loves with all his heart. Yet one of them he regularly has sex with, and he'd likely attack you for suggesting that he would like having sex with the other.

Answer me this totally-not-leading question: do you think that past a certain age, all parents are holding back the urge to have sex with their children? Or do you think that it's possible to like or even love someone without regard for their physical appearance?

artanis_neravar said:
Did I ever say that? No, all I said is that a romantic relationship can not work without physical attraction, just like they can not work without emotional attraction. If you are going to deliberately misconstrued everything I say what's the point in even trying to argue with me?
...then what did you mean, pray tell, when you said that "if you aren't [physically] attracted to someone then the relationship will never work"? Because having 'physical attraction' to someone is a fancy way of saying (to put it in the plainest terms possible) that you want to have sex with them. I literally can't think of anything else it can describe. Nobody has ever gotten into an intense internal debate because they like someone a lot, but that person just doesn't turn them on.

There's a reason why succubi are never depicted as very plain women who seduce men with their great personalities.

artanis_neravar said:
For future reference, yes it does.
Shallow - Judging a person based strictly on looks, not factoring in their personality whatsoever.

I do not judge based solely on looks, I judge based on looks, personality, and mentality, among other things, therefore calling me shallow would be incorrect.
Really? Because in that situation we've been discussing, A and B are internally identical. The only factor you can judge them by is their looks.

Actually, scratch that: A has also been a dependable friend for an indeterminate amount of time, while B was still just a hypothetical ideal. So in other words, you're throwing out the entire history you had with A because B seems a lot like him personality-wise, and he's better looking. Nice.
 

tobyornottoby

New member
Jan 2, 2008
517
0
0
Aprilgold said:
tobyornottoby said:
Aprilgold said:
And we come to the great circle of truth about this. Theres a tails to every head, and a paint for every color. Just because "Friend Zone Whining" makes you seem like you felt entitled to sex, it is more or less because of the heart break. You just wanted it so badly and working up that courage takes a long time only to have yourself rejected. Of course its also the ultimate dick move to say that "I like your personality, but you yourself can go die in a tar-pit" or something to that degree.
Why? looks matter to a lot of people. She appreciates you as a friend, no dying in tar-pits required. If this is brought in a tactical manner, there's nothing dickish about it.
Because it shows that she will only date you or others for their looks, not for their personalities which is as shallow as saying that you will only date the biggest hunk at school. Saying that your not my type is better then saying that you are my type but you look like shit.
A cow is an animal, an animal isn't a cow. Saying you don't want to date someone who has the personality but not the looks is not saying you would date someone who has the looks but not the personality, 'only dating for looks'.

Also, say someone is actually that shallow. Is it a dick move to be honest and true to yourself?
 

blackrave

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,020
0
0
tobyornottoby said:
Aprilgold said:
tobyornottoby said:
Aprilgold said:
And we come to the great circle of truth about this. Theres a tails to every head, and a paint for every color. Just because "Friend Zone Whining" makes you seem like you felt entitled to sex, it is more or less because of the heart break. You just wanted it so badly and working up that courage takes a long time only to have yourself rejected. Of course its also the ultimate dick move to say that "I like your personality, but you yourself can go die in a tar-pit" or something to that degree.
Why? looks matter to a lot of people. She appreciates you as a friend, no dying in tar-pits required. If this is brought in a tactical manner, there's nothing dickish about it.
Because it shows that she will only date you or others for their looks, not for their personalities which is as shallow as saying that you will only date the biggest hunk at school. Saying that your not my type is better then saying that you are my type but you look like shit.
A cow is an animal, an animal isn't a cow. Saying you don't want to date someone who has the personality but not the looks is not saying you would date someone who has the looks but not the personality.
But this is exactly like that
It seems that girls needs extensive experience to tell difference between pretense and sincerity.
So pretty face can easily pretend for a night or two, to get you into bed.
Is he shallow? Sure. But that doesn't matter because he's pretty and spew some romantic bullshit.
 

tobyornottoby

New member
Jan 2, 2008
517
0
0
tehroc said:
It's a little more then being friend-zoned. Men complain when they go beyond just regular friendships and are being used as confidants to all her problems, her intellectual whore.
Also known as 'close friends' or perhaps even 'BFFs'. But I guess only to those who are genuinely nice.
 

tobyornottoby

New member
Jan 2, 2008
517
0
0
teh_v said:
Thanks for the comments. I feel a little bit better about the whole thing just from hearing other people perspectives and Tobyonottoby I think is closer to the truth because she did say she wasn't interested but she wasn't sure if she wasn't interested because she was coming out a relationship or what. Overall I feel better. I think I'm gonna extend the olive branch again and see what happens. I do miss her friendship and our conversations. Kinda the reason I fell for her. I'm just glad being friends with someone then developing feeling for them doesn't put you in that "nice guy" category.
Yeah it's just like how playing a game doesn't make you a gamer. It's your mindset and the choices that you make that determine that. Kinda like what Dumbledore says.

I hope you can become friends again =)
 

tobyornottoby

New member
Jan 2, 2008
517
0
0
Hagi said:
Except it's not miscommunication. She's outright lying to him.

"I'm not ready for it" Directly implies that at a later time you possibly would be ready for it. Leaving the other with false hope and rendering him incapable of moving on.

"I'm sorry, I'm just not interested." is hardly speaking your mind. It's just giving someone who's your friend a clear and direct answer so that person may be able to move on.
But women are masters of ambiguous and indirect speech (to avoid hurt feelings and confrontation). It's a big part of how they communicate, and unless you live in a 1984-world, how language in general works. There are a lot of things said everyday that require interpretation rather than using the literal meaning.

EDIT: it's also a cultural thing. A lot of asian cultures are much more indirect in such regards.
 

Jimbo1212

New member
Aug 13, 2009
676
0
0
museofdoom said:
Since this is a predominantly male community, I figured talking about this here would result in the most interesting feedback. And I suppose I'm in the mood for a little controversy.

So you become friends with a female, and you really like her in that way. You spend time with her, you're kind to her, and you're always doing her favors. Eventually you pluck up the courage to confess your attraction and then GASP! she doesn't like you that way, and wants to stay friends! So now you go to all your buddies and cry that you were "friend zoned". Oh my goodness how dare that biotch not have any romantic feelings towards you!! You weren't a jerk to her so you were entitled to a relationship with her! And since your plans to get a little action were in vain, you cease being friends with the girl. And now the girl is left without a friend, and the knowledge that you were only friends with her in hopes of getting in her pants.

Do you realize how ridiculous whining about being "friend zoned" is? And that if you really wanna be a nice guy, that you should be nice to girls even if you don't want in their pants?

Also, when a girl says "I wish I could find a guy like you" but they don't want you, think of it this way: (stealing the metaphor from a friend of mine) Say you are out shopping and you want to buy a red pair of shoes. You get to the shoe store and find a nice pair of red shoes, but that particular pair of shoes isn't exactly suited to your taste so you continue looking and maybe you end up getting a pair of shoes completely different to what you were originally looking for. So when a girl says, "I wish I could find a guy like you" it means she likes your qualities, but isn't attracted to you. This does not make her a hypocrite, or a *****. So please stop whining and making yourselves out to be a victim of some heinous crime because the girl you like doesn't like you.

Sorry for the little rant, I've just seen too many "friend zone" related memes and rage comics recently. 0___0
True, but you forget some major problems:

a) The guy is friend zoned because he bends over backwards and is desperate. No girl likes this.
b) The girl friend zones him because the girl is immature and thinks that you dated guys you have just met, not friends.
c) The "I wish I could find a guy like you" is again down to being immature. The girl likes the guy, but wants the "bad guy" even though he will inevitably shit on her and leave her to be a mess. I have seen this dozens of times and heard girls refer to stupid things such as "boyfriend material" Vs " Marriage material".
 

Hagi

New member
Apr 10, 2011
2,741
0
0
tobyornottoby said:
Hagi said:
Except it's not miscommunication. She's outright lying to him.

"I'm not ready for it" Directly implies that at a later time you possibly would be ready for it. Leaving the other with false hope and rendering him incapable of moving on.

"I'm sorry, I'm just not interested." is hardly speaking your mind. It's just giving someone who's your friend a clear and direct answer so that person may be able to move on.
But women are masters of ambiguous and indirect speech (to avoid hurt feelings and confrontation). It's a big part of how they communicate, and unless you live in a 1984-world, how language in general works. There are a lot of things said everyday that require interpretation rather than using the literal meaning.
I'm not saying it doesn't happen. I'm not even saying you should take thing literally.

But I am saying that it's perfectly reasonable to get angry when someone, woman or not, is so ambiguous and indirect on so important a topic.

There are times when it's better to be more direct and unambiguous, like rejection. Being indirect at such a time will hurt those you're rejecting in the long run.

It doesn't make those who are ambiguous at such time bad people or anything like that, just normal people. But getting angry over that doesn't make you a bad person either, just a normal one.

If you're always direct then sometimes you'll anger someone. If you're always indirect then sometimes you'll anger someone. Just a part of life. There's very few social geniuses who always know when to be direct or indirect and never anger people.