In defence of the 'Friendzoned'

[Daveman]

Yeah, the whole "so you think just because you're nice you are owed sex?" line never really rang true with me. It's not that you're pretending to be her friend either. Often the issue is you're such good friends that you fear giving up that side of the relationship because you tried to change the nature of it. Not to mention how other friends of hers are going to react. The fear of being ostracised from potentially a whole friendship group is pretty bad. I don't think it's necessarily rejection that is the fear, but more the loss of friendship. That's certainly how I've felt about it, just not wanting to fuck up a good thing.

Sure, that's a very real thing, but it's not the friendzone.

That's what I've always associated with the friendzone. I think that's what a lot of people would associate with the friendzone. So I don't think people leaping on somebody who claims to be "in the friendzone" as being sexist or whiny pussys is particularly helpful.

 

[Psychobabble]

There is no such thing as friendzoned . People need to man up and stop being afraid of rejection. Ask a girl out . 50/50 chance she says yes . If she says no , move on. How is this so hard? I swear i have never heard so much "friendzone" talk, than on this site . Guys are turning into wimps.

Personally I feel the whole issue exists because of all the deep seated cultural guilt kids get fed about how sex and sexual feelings are naughty, so when they become consenting adults many find the concept of "casual sex" alien. In their heads they have been programmed by parents, religious establishments, and heck, even tons of childhood stories, television and movies, that sex always has to involve deep and meaningful feelings or it's something cheap and dirty.

 

[Cowabungaa]

I just don't get the...well...the claims that the 'Friendzone' doesn't exist.

For far as I can tell, it's just modern parlance for the phrase 'unrequiteded love'. You care about someone, you're happy when you're around them, you miss them when they're gone, you make excusses to spend as much time as possible with them; you want to take it further, but they don't. So far as they're concerned; you're a friend and nothing more.

I see nothing predatory or dehumanizing about being sad and frustrated about that.

This is what it means to most of us. Then some assholes decided to use it as an accusation, and that's apparently reason enough to eject the term wholesale on the say-so of people who think they can alter reality if they're just offended hard enough.

Pretty much.

Unrequited love becomes the 'friendzone' when douchebags think they're somehow entitled to romantic affection, as if someone couldn't reject them 'because they're such nice guys.'

In which they're totally wrong. There's nothing wrong about being frustrated by unrequited love, but thinking that a girl should love you is plain idiotic. There's never any kind of obligation just because you're nice.

 

[-Ezio-]

There is no such thing as friendzoned . People need to man up and stop being afraid of rejection. Ask a girl out . 50/50 chance she says yes . If she says no , move on. How is this so hard? I swear i have never heard so much "friendzone" talk, than on this site . Guys are turning into wimps.

certain people (such as people with social anxiety ect.) have great difficulty expressing their feelings. telling these people to just "man up and do it" is like telling someone with depression to "get over it". it just doesn't work that way.


the friendzone might have been something like this once years ago. but the definition has changed to the current douchebag related one and there's no going back now.

 

[Rattja]

I would just like to point out that it does not allways have to do with sex.

A simple thing like snuggling on the couch while watching a movie or listening to music is something you just can't do (in most cases).

Being a friend, and being more than a friend is to very different things. And is way more than a matter of having sex or not.

 

[Arkenangel]

I personally wish the term friendzone to go away. If a person ever complains about me putting them in there, they can fuck right off.

Why? I find it highly disrespectful. To coin Jim Sterling's analogy, I am not a slot machine which you put nice behaviors into and get sex out. I am a human being. Spending time with me in a platonic sense isn't some consolation prize; the universe hasn't cheated you out of some inalienable right. I expect my lovers to first and foremost like me as a person.

Now, in the case of me being oblivious towards someone's affections - and they getting genuinely hurt by that - I do feel like an asshole. At the same time, I've had this happen to me before and the recipient hasn't whined - they've been hurt yes, but they've also accepted that I wasn't interested, and moved on. That's the principle difference, does the person still feel entitled to more than what (I've made clear) is on the table?

To be frank, I have met several guys who act extremely nice to me right up to the point they realize sex isn't going to happen anytime soon. Then they mysteriously vanish. Ho-hum.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

So, instead of it being the fault of the object of one's affection, it's the whole Universe that is making one a victim? Sorry, that doesn't sound like any less of loser talk.

Of course it's loser talk. It's whiny. It's feeling bad for yourself. And people, collectively, do it all the time regarding practically everything in life. It's pretty damn human to succumb to such feelings every once in a while. It's only a problem when a person refuses to let it go and move on. That can sometimes be the case with someone stuck in the friendzone, but again, circumstances differ. Context matters.

"I'm cursed!" "If I didn't have bad luck, I'd have no luck at all!" "This just isn't my night." All statements that discharge personal responsibility to some extent, and none of them indicate to me a tremendous weakness of character. Sometimes it's just a self-effacing comment pointing out a person's unfortunate circumstances. Whoops, I used the word unfortunate. Am I a loser?

I'm not going to claim to know what people were thinking when they say these things. It's entirely possible that they weren't consciously thinking about how the way they phrase their disappointment sounds or what it implies about what their saying, nor did they wish to say or imply that someone was at fault for their unhappiness.

But that's still the implication coming across. It's still using passive grammar to imply one is being acted upon rather than clearly express what happened. That's how people will read it. Better to just not be ambiguous if you can avoid it. People know the problems with the term "friendzone". The Internet has been discussing it for a while. To continue to use it, knowing the way people take it, well, one just can't do that and then demand they be free of criticism.

The internet's social justice echo chamber is not, believe it or not, a perfect reflection of the real world. Everyone I know and talk to on a regular basis, male and female alike, uses "friendzone" without implications of entitlement or blame assignment.

If used strictly as a location ("I'm in the friendzone"), there's really no actor and subsequently no possible misinterpretation. If used as a verb via passive voice, with no actor given, I'll grant there can be room for confusion. That's where context comes into play. Angry, horny, spoiled fratboy speaking with acidic frustration about a girl who spurned his advances? Probably not okay. Decent dude seemingly disappointed and hurt by his situation? Harmless lamentation.

If it seems like I'm taking a stand on this, it's not because the phrase in question is somehow sacred to me. I don't use it. I don't really care whether or not other people use it. I just don't think it's fair to accuse people who use the term innocently of being entitled, date-rapey douche bags who think of women purely as outlets for sex. I know popular opinion plays a role in defining language, but that's a two-way street. Some people want to turn "friendzone" into a completely unacceptable, offensive, gender-charged no-no. I'm opposing that notion because I don't believe it is intellectually honest.

We might have to agree to disagree.

 

[Nickolai77]

I think it's important to distinguish between "being friendzoned" and being in a situation of unrequited love. The two are very different in the sense that the former implies the girl in question is somehow at fault whilst the latter simply means ones feelings for a girl arn't returned.

The trouble is we don't have as simple, modern word or term to describe being in a situation of "unrequited love". Which, i'd say, probably happens to most guys at least once in their lives. So many guy's have been using terms such as "friendzoned" to mean something different to what the term suggests for lack of a better word to describe their situation.

My advice to other guys would be to avoid using terms such as friendzoned on the internet next time you're lamenting how one of your female friends doesn't feel the same way about you. This is because your view on the situation could be misunderstood by people may think you believe she's somehow obligated to have feelings for you. Using terms such as "she doesn't feel the same way" are a lot more precise and accurate and won't lead to anyone throwing insults at you.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I totally agree. The problem is, by reconstruing the problem into a form that makes it the other person's fault, someone who doesn't know how to articulate their feelings absolves themself of the need to learn better. Instead of facing the fact that some people aren't attracted to them, they construct a notion that people not being attracted is an active thing other people of the world do to them. In effect, instead of facing their problem and dealing with it, they re-construct the problem into one where they are a victim. The friendzone is, in the purest sense of the word, loser talk. It teaches people to be losers. I suspect once the loser lesson is well learned, that's when the not shaving and fedora stuff starts creeping in.

This for me is the crux of the argument. See the phrasing behind the word "friendzone" determines entirely if i offer sympathy or a less than friendly "get over it". If someone says to me, and they have before "I've put myself in the friendzone" I'm extremely likely to want to listen to their story and try and help. The person recognises their lack of action or overt romantic gestures has misconstrued their emotions. They recognise the problem is on their end. This is where id offer support and try and help the person understand that you really do need to have a sink or swim moment and face rejection. Rejection doesnt kill you and it doesnt make you less of a person. Society as a whole has put a pretty negative stigma on being rejected by a girl/boy, a lot of modern culture implies an inherent cruelty in being rejected and honestly yes serving your feelings up on a plate gives the other person a big opportunity to crush them mercilessly. Its important to remind them that if they like this person romantically being honest about something they could be mean about shows a level of trust you should have if this person is worthy of your affection. Above all it acknowledges that yes, they have issues, but its their job to work on them.

Then theres "I've BEEN friendzoned" which will never ever invoke my sympathy at all. The word been implies something has been done TOO this person and assumes victimhood. It is loser talk and it is trying to shift the burden of self improvement onto other people. "I'm doing everything right, THEY are not appreciating it" is a strategy doomed to failure. Its important to be critical of yourself if you have any hope in hell of becoming a well adjusted adult. This attitude, if allowed to flourish in teenagers, will just grow stupid man children who cant recognise their own faults and fears as things that THEY need to work on and defeat.

The best thing you can do to remove the friendzone is encourage rejection as weird as that sounds. Dont be cruel to people who have been rejected. Give them a pat on the back for trying if they are your friend and give them some advice for next time. Remove the stigma society has for actually trying something and not being a passive blame shifting douche.

 

[Realitycrash]

What do you think? Is the friendzone an unfortunate label applied to those wrestling with romantic expression? Or is it simply a refuge invented by the possessive, who seek to validate their inability to secure their prize?

Both, of course. As always, the picture is gray.
However, actively complaining about being 'in the friendzone' is to me rather counter-productive. He/she doesn't want you. Accept it and move on.

I personally wish the term friendzone to go away. If a person ever complains about me putting them in there, they can fuck right off.

Why? I find it highly disrespectful. To coin Jim Sterling's analogy, I am not a slot machine which you put nice behaviors into and get sex out. I am a human being. Spending time with me in a platonic sense isn't some consolation prize; the universe hasn't cheated you out of some inalienable right. I expect my lovers to first and foremost like me as a person.

As someone who has 'friendzoned' quite a few lately, I understand you. However, they aren't necessarily complaining due to entitlement. They might just really like you and wish you would reconsider.

However, what I utterly despise about the 'bad' people using the 'friendzone' is when they argue that you MUST like them for they are such lovely, nice, funny, educated, whatever people, and the fact that you are only dating X girl is because she is 'pretty'. Every single them, I wonder if they would be interested in ME if they didn't find me physically attractive.
It's like their logic works like this: "He doesn't find me attractive, but since I am all these other traits, that shouldn't matter.'
Uh, no. I get to decide what I find enjoyable about my partners, and like it or not, physical attraction kinda is a big part of it. It is for almost everyone.
So If I don't find you attractive, don't guilt me by saying I only date 'shallow' people, simply because you yourself aren't attractive. Because I used to be heavily overweight, and I'm damn sure you wouldn't be even looking twice at me back then.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

I personally wish the term friendzone to go away. If a person ever complains about me putting them in there, they can fuck right off.

So long as someone is using the term in an accusatory fashion, I agree. Otherwise, what word would you use to describe such a person's situation? Why would this new word not generate the same negative connotations if used in an accusatory fashion? Kind of a futile and repetitive cycle there.

Now, in the case of me being oblivious towards someone's affections - and they getting genuinely hurt by that - I do feel like an asshole. At the same time, I've had this happen to me before and the recipient hasn't whined - they've been hurt yes, but they've also accepted that I wasn't interested, and moved on. That's the principle difference, does the person still feel entitled to more than what (I've made clear) is on the table?

Isn't there a line between feeling entitled to something and wishing you could have it? Wanting things to be a certain way, and feeling disappointment when they aren't, isn't immoral. It's human. If you linger on it, or blame others excessively/incorrectly, or allow it to color your entire world, then it becomes a problem. But the person dealing with unrequited love can't switch off his/her affection any more than his/her desired can switch it on.

Maybe that's why I argue this term so passionately. On some level, it feels like we're being highly critical of people for feeling what they feel. If it turns aggressive and becomes accusatory, by all means, demonize. But if it's just a heartbroken guy or gal describing his or her less-than-ideal circumstances, lay off.

To be frank, I have met several guys who act extremely nice to me right up to the point they realize sex isn't going to happen anytime soon. Then they mysteriously vanish. Ho-hum.

These guys fall into two very distinct categories.

Some of them were being nice to you because they wanted sex from you. They are obviously lame, and you are better off without them hanging around.

The second group was nice to you because they genuinely liked you and developed romantic feelings for you, and they vanished when you didn't reciprocate those feelings because it was painful to be around you. You really can't fault this group for their behavior. The heart wants what the heart wants. You couldn't snap your fingers and magically become attracted to them, right? Well they couldn't snap their fingers and do the opposite either. It takes time and space to get over someone, even if the attraction was one-sided.

What would you have them do? Maintain the friendship while suffering in silence? Seeing to one's own mental and emotional well-being is, imo, a true inalienable right. I wouldn't criticize someone for doing so even if it means the end of what I thought was a lovely platonic friendship. I think it would be very selfish.

I think it's important to distinguish between "being friendzoned" and being in a situation of unrequited love. The two are very different in the sense that the former implies the girl in question is somehow at fault whilst the latter simply means ones feelings for a girl arn't returned.

The trouble is we don't have as simple, modern word or term to describe being in a situation of "unrequited love". Which, i'd say, probably happens to most guys at least once in their lives. So many guy's have been using terms such as "friendzoned" to mean something different to what the term suggests for lack of a better word to describe their situation.

My advice to other guys would be to avoid using terms such as friendzoned on the internet next time you're lamenting how one of your female friends doesn't feel the same way about you. This is because your view on the situation could be misunderstood by people may think you believe she's somehow obligated to have feelings for you. Using terms such as "she doesn't feel the same way" are a lot more precise and accurate and won't lead to anyone throwing insults at you.

Or you could use the word as a significant portion of the population understands it and ignore the crusaders constantly looking for a fight anywhere they can find it - even when they know perfectly well what you're talking about. Again, defining language through consensus is a two-way street. If a bunch of people want to say "no, it means this", a bunch of other people are perfectly free to say "the fuck it does".

 

[McKinsey]

To be clear from the start, I AM NOT defending the 'Frat Boy' rape culture

What-what-what? While "frat boy" is a rather derogatory term to describe a person, I can at least understand what kind of people you're trying to feel superior to. What the hell is "frat boy rape culture"? Do you even know what "rape" means?

More often than not, a person who describes themselves as 'friendzoned' (and does not meet the rather unsavoury condition above) is often quickly slotted into a very unpleasant stereotype; fedora wearing, unshaven, entitled, middle class white male

Are you joking? Fedora-wearing unshaven white dudes are the ones who actually DO get laid on a regular basis. "Friendzone" is a word used by socially awkward pimply nerds who've never spent much time around girls, don't know how to talk to them or how to read their emotions and thus can't differentiate between when a girl is really into them or is just being friendly.

Dude, seriously, get your facts straight and stop trying to distort the reality, bro.

 

[WolfThomas]

There is no such thing as friendzoned . People need to man up and stop being afraid of rejection. Ask a girl out . 50/50 chance she says yes . If she says no , move on. How is this so hard? I swear i have never heard so much "friendzone" talk, than on this site . Guys are turning into wimps.

Completely agree with the sentiment. But...

ARGH! That's not how statistics/odds works!

Sorry I'm a pedant. Just because there are two discreet outcomes, doesn't mean there's an even 50% chance she'll say yes. More likely it'll swerve to highly probable or highly improbably depending on the situation.

But yes you're correct there's only two outcomes. She says yes or no. And you latter won't kill you.

 

[generals3]

Nope, that's not being "friendzoned". That's simply unrequited attraction. What is sinister is transforming the simple statement "She (/he) is not attracted to me" into an active and intentional notion through grammatical manipulation: "She (/he) friendzoned me." That's sinister, because the implication is it's her fault she's not attracted to you. She did it to you, so it's her fault.

How is there an implication "it's her fault". It's no different from saying "she rejected me". That phrase also has the other person as the one doing the action of rejecting. One could also state there is an implication it's "her fault". Does that mean we can't say someone rejected you anymore? The friendzone often just refers to a specific type of rejection. One which involves (good) friends.

 

[Thaluikhain]

To be clear from the start, I AM NOT defending the 'Frat Boy' rape culture

What-what-what? While "frat boy" is a rather derogatory term to describe a person, I can at least understand what kind of people you're trying to feel superior to. What the hell is "frat boy rape culture"? Do you even know what "rape" means?

Are you saying that you don't think rape culture is a problem for frat boys, or that you don't know what it is?

 

[ForumSafari]

I personally wish the term friendzone to go away. If a person ever complains about me putting them in there, they can fuck right off.

Why? I find it highly disrespectful. To coin Jim Sterling's analogy, I am not a slot machine which you put nice behaviors into and get sex out. I am a human being. Spending time with me in a platonic sense isn't some consolation prize; the universe hasn't cheated you out of some inalienable right. I expect my lovers to first and foremost like me as a person.

That's not what the word means though. The term refers to when a person fancies another person but are considered nothing more than a friend. It's nothing to do with 'vagina slot-machine' (protip: if romance were just sex Romeo could have bought a whore and that have been the end of it)and it has everything to do with different people wanting different things.

If you're going to blame it on anything I'd start with the Disney assumption that all you have to do is be a great person and people will suddenly notice you and the insane fear of confrontation that leads people to not shoot others down cleanly.

EDIT: Can't state that enough; I don't ask people out on the basis of how likely I am to get to fuck them and I've always found it slightly depressing how many women online seem to think that's how guys work. It's almost never about sex and more out of general attraction and affection. Just to reiterate; sex isn't that big a deal to all of the men I know, it doesn't rule us like that.