Well, despite being indifferent to the "many" concepts of the so-called "Friend Zone", I still say that it only exist if you make it exist... Then again, it still depends on what you think the"Friend Zone" means to you, per se, so... *shrugs*
Poll: Do you believe the Friend Zone exists?
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I am not saying that people who are friends and then date are impossible or even unlikely; to me, the friendzone is simply a case of where the guy has confessed his feelings, been shot down, and rather than moving on or getting over those feelings believes that he simply has to keep trying, not give up and eventually she will decide to date him.Reasonable Atheist said:
That said, nearly every worthwhile relationship I had started as a relationship almost immediately. We're both nice people, we're both attracted to each other, why not?
And now we're probably getting married.
If you were friends with your girl before hand, fair dos. I'm glad your friendship evolved into something beautiful. But sometimes it doesn't go that way, shit gets toxic and the guy has never been told "If that's the case, get out of there". He's probably been told "You're a special person, you're correct in thinking you're perfect for her, so just KEEP trying." That's a bad attitude which is thrown at men ever since they are young.
Maybe all these folks complaining about the "friend zone" should consider why abusive, shitty men are considered more viable partners. Like, for all the lamentations about "soulless reptiles" and all that, you get that the super sensitive friendzone boys are actually *just as dangerous* as the "jocks" and are also as an added bonus really annoying, right?insaninater said:So women want naturally uncaring and selfish guys and then everyone wonders why domestic abuse happens
It's like those people who get eaten by their pet anacondas, i mean, what did you think was going to happen when you bought that soulless reptile into your life?
The vast majority of those who voice frustration at being in the "friendzone" are being turned away because the kind of entitled and spiteful man who would invent the concept in the first place is not attractive - let alone, you know, safe - for most women.
Domestic abuse happens, actually, for the exact same reason the "friendzone" happens - because men think that their feelings and their desires and their demands matter more than women's dignity and freedom, and they get angry and lash out when they're denied anything they might want.
I do think that there exists a state of relation between two people where one wants to be more while the other likes what they have and either does not want to risk losing what they have, or simply cannot think of the other person in a romantic way.
If you want to call that the friend zone, then sure, I think it's real.
If you want to call that the friend zone, then sure, I think it's real.
Everyone has their own definition of friend-zone. Some are pretty inoffensive, some reduce women to poker machines. There's a huge amount of baggage to the term.
My take is that the friend zone is real, but it's something you place yourself into. You put yourself there and there's no blame to be given to the other party.
The friendzone is the depression you get after being given the "You're such a nice guy" speech one too many times. It sucks and all but there's not really much to blame. Just get better with dealing with rejection.
My take is that the friend zone is real, but it's something you place yourself into. You put yourself there and there's no blame to be given to the other party.
The friendzone is the depression you get after being given the "You're such a nice guy" speech one too many times. It sucks and all but there's not really much to blame. Just get better with dealing with rejection.
I always thought of the friendzone as a new way of saying unrequited love especially since saying you love someone too early, and especially before you even date them, is supposedly bad/crazy/commitmenty and people needed a new term.
But lately ive been seeing nothing but scorn and hatred poured on the term by the internet. With any mere mention of the friend zone usually immediately replied with 'Women arent just machines that you put niceness in and get sex back out of'
It sucks to be rejected, and can easily happen that you get your hopes up when someone youve known and been getting along with through friends or a social venue for some months or reconnected with from a long time ago. The narrative in your head can be that you guys are flirting whilst hers is just that hes a cool that i enjoy hanging with.
A couple of years ago I asked a girl out for coffee and she came along, I didnt make the context datey enough I guess cause she just came because she liked talking to me. She wasnt interested in me romantically at all. That sucked but I had to deal with it. Id call that being in the friendzone.
But lately ive been seeing nothing but scorn and hatred poured on the term by the internet. With any mere mention of the friend zone usually immediately replied with 'Women arent just machines that you put niceness in and get sex back out of'
It sucks to be rejected, and can easily happen that you get your hopes up when someone youve known and been getting along with through friends or a social venue for some months or reconnected with from a long time ago. The narrative in your head can be that you guys are flirting whilst hers is just that hes a cool that i enjoy hanging with.
A couple of years ago I asked a girl out for coffee and she came along, I didnt make the context datey enough I guess cause she just came because she liked talking to me. She wasnt interested in me romantically at all. That sucked but I had to deal with it. Id call that being in the friendzone.
I always found the friend-zone as something people use to justify their jadedness at simply not being found attractive by someone they liked. It's rather selfish to only become friends with someone to at some point get serious, then blame the friend-zone because they didn't want the same thing.
From the way people describe the "friend zone" it sounds like getting rejected. Why is this a thing popping up on the internet as of late? You get rejected and you either stay friends or move on in life, this whining and bitching just makes you look like an entitled ass.
BoredRolePlayer said:
The reason the friendzoned sticks with the friendzonee is because the friendzoned has been told his whole life that as long as he sticks it out, as long as he becomes an EVEN BETTER FRIEND, she will eventually fall in love with him.RagingTiger said:
Think Ted and Robin from How I Met Your Mother. Think Ross and Rachel in the first few seasons of Friends. Think every single Rom-Com ever.
How often are we told "And it turned out the best guy was under her nose the entire time?"
In stories, a lot.
In real life, ehhh, maybe 50:50.
So people who get rejected don't hear rejection, they hear:
She hasn't yet realised my brilliance. I shall continue to hang around
Just wait for her to break up with her boyfriend (which I can speed up by pointing out his flaws) and she'll come to me
I'll get her a gift, then she'll realise how much I love her
I'll listen to her problems because she trusts me the most and it will lead to love
All of the above is simply a warped view of other messages men are told.
Quitters never win / Good things come to those who wait
Bad guys lose and the hero gets the girl
Girls like you buying shiny crap
Girls want a shoulder to cry on
Throw in a message of "Everyone should always be in love" and "True love always wins", add a dash of teenage hormones and then a gallon of "I don't understand the opposite gender", shake and put it into a large bottle labelled "Teenage self-centredness" and you come up with the attitude that leads to friendzoning.
Yes, this happens to girls too, but I am not a girl and don't presume to speak for them. It's probably similar though.
Yeah, kinda this.Fieldy409 said:
Also read this.ElMinotoro said:
Ummm....peruvianskys said:Maybe all these folks complaining about the "friend zone" should consider why abusive, shitty men are considered more viable partners. Like, for all the lamentations about "soulless reptiles" and all that, you get that the super sensitive friendzone boys are actually *just as dangerous* as the "jocks" and are also as an added bonus really annoying, right?insaninater said:So women want naturally uncaring and selfish guys and then everyone wonders why domestic abuse happens
It's like those people who get eaten by their pet anacondas, i mean, what did you think was going to happen when you bought that soulless reptile into your life?
The vast majority of those who voice frustration at being in the "friendzone" are being turned away because the kind of entitled and spiteful man who would invent the concept in the first place is not attractive - let alone, you know, safe - for most women.
Domestic abuse happens, actually, for the exact same reason the "friendzone" happens - because men think that their feelings and their desires and their demands matter more than women's dignity and freedom, and they get angry and lash out when they're denied anything they might want.
Yeah, domestic abuse happens both ways. There is some research to suggest that it's now somewhat 50:50 in genders abusing each other.
The way you wrote that... That's a very misandrist way of approaching the problem. I'd say that male to female domestic abuse is more:
Lack of anger control or healthy way to deal with emotions
An inability to leave the conversation
A power trip
And also, what you suggested.
It's a more complex issue than you present it. I don't want to pull out the special snowflake "Yeah, I was a victim" but I have suffered at the hands of an ex-girlfriend who crippled me emotionally and made me consider suicide for half a year before I could bring myself to leave her, and abuse is not so black and white as people say.
I'm a bit saddened by the prevalent sentiment expressed here, that "friendzoned" males are all entitled creeps and the women involved are by definition blameless.
I think there's a bit of an unpleasant, mostly unexamined and unchallenged whiff of misandry about the current "liberal" majority consensus. In the past there existed a paradigm where just about anything sexual a man did was excused and anything a woman did - or didn't - was free game for judgment. Obviously this was bad. Then Feminism happened, sexual liberation happened - but rather than completely deconstructing these restrictive sexual hang-ups and establishing a level playing ground, it seems we've simply shifted this archaic and prudish baggage onto men in a kind of neo-puritanism, and decided that it's now women's turn to be the sexually privileged group who are beyond reproach.
To use the much-reviled (but useful) hierarchical terms -
Alpha males who get out there and actively pursue sex with a large number of women are seen as fickle, exploitative, predatory. They're a vestigial remnant of a bygone age of entitled male sexual dominance. They're the frat boys, the bro-dudes, the peacocking misogynists who revel in objectifying women. There's no place for these cavemen in progressive, liberal society.
Beta males who try to charm one woman at a time? Eww, they're creeps, obsessives, practically stalkers. They pretend to be nice, but actually all they want is SEX (and possibly companionship, affection and love, but let's simplify it to SEX because that makes them sound more predatory). They think that being nice to women might help them secure a romantic relationship - doesn't it make you sick? And when they get rejected, some of these pouting manchildren have the nerve to display their emotions by being upset! Ha! Have you ever heard of anything so pathetic? Truly, these Schrodinger's Rapists deserve nothing but contempt.
And the Omega males, the Bronies and Warhammer nerds and computer geeks? Well, they're the worst. They've long given up on forming a relationship with a female, at least outside of their anime figurines. What losers! What sad specimen resigns himself to celibacy? Point and laugh, people; point and laugh.
See what I mean? Whatever a guy does, society has a belittling epithet to throw at him. Is the same true for women? Not in our new, progressive paradigm: it's her body, her choice; slut-shaming is hate-speech; you don't want to be called a misogynist, do you?
Perhaps we should cut guys a break, especially the ones who have done nothing more than have a crush on a girl, dared to hope, and been disappointed? And let's not forget that in some circles, it's almost standard operating procedure for a spurned woman to character-assassinate the guy who turned her down, warn other girls off him by spreading rumours, and even physically assaulting him or damaging his property if she feels sufficiently aggrieved (now who's "entitled"?). Meh. Couldn't we all stand to have a little more empathy?
And, like I said in my previous post: women, don't string guys along. If they're clearly into you but you don't feel the same about them, let them down gently. Exploiting them for favours, money, car rides, one-sided emotional support, etc, makes you not much of a "real friend" yourself.
I think there's a bit of an unpleasant, mostly unexamined and unchallenged whiff of misandry about the current "liberal" majority consensus. In the past there existed a paradigm where just about anything sexual a man did was excused and anything a woman did - or didn't - was free game for judgment. Obviously this was bad. Then Feminism happened, sexual liberation happened - but rather than completely deconstructing these restrictive sexual hang-ups and establishing a level playing ground, it seems we've simply shifted this archaic and prudish baggage onto men in a kind of neo-puritanism, and decided that it's now women's turn to be the sexually privileged group who are beyond reproach.
To use the much-reviled (but useful) hierarchical terms -
Alpha males who get out there and actively pursue sex with a large number of women are seen as fickle, exploitative, predatory. They're a vestigial remnant of a bygone age of entitled male sexual dominance. They're the frat boys, the bro-dudes, the peacocking misogynists who revel in objectifying women. There's no place for these cavemen in progressive, liberal society.
Beta males who try to charm one woman at a time? Eww, they're creeps, obsessives, practically stalkers. They pretend to be nice, but actually all they want is SEX (and possibly companionship, affection and love, but let's simplify it to SEX because that makes them sound more predatory). They think that being nice to women might help them secure a romantic relationship - doesn't it make you sick? And when they get rejected, some of these pouting manchildren have the nerve to display their emotions by being upset! Ha! Have you ever heard of anything so pathetic? Truly, these Schrodinger's Rapists deserve nothing but contempt.
And the Omega males, the Bronies and Warhammer nerds and computer geeks? Well, they're the worst. They've long given up on forming a relationship with a female, at least outside of their anime figurines. What losers! What sad specimen resigns himself to celibacy? Point and laugh, people; point and laugh.
See what I mean? Whatever a guy does, society has a belittling epithet to throw at him. Is the same true for women? Not in our new, progressive paradigm: it's her body, her choice; slut-shaming is hate-speech; you don't want to be called a misogynist, do you?
Perhaps we should cut guys a break, especially the ones who have done nothing more than have a crush on a girl, dared to hope, and been disappointed? And let's not forget that in some circles, it's almost standard operating procedure for a spurned woman to character-assassinate the guy who turned her down, warn other girls off him by spreading rumours, and even physically assaulting him or damaging his property if she feels sufficiently aggrieved (now who's "entitled"?). Meh. Couldn't we all stand to have a little more empathy?
And, like I said in my previous post: women, don't string guys along. If they're clearly into you but you don't feel the same about them, let them down gently. Exploiting them for favours, money, car rides, one-sided emotional support, etc, makes you not much of a "real friend" yourself.
Love isn't easy. Sometimes you like someone and they don't like you back. Or if you're on the flip side, sometimes someone likes you and you cant like them back, even if you may want to.
We don't get to choose who we love. So in that sense, the friendzone does exist.
But the idea that you're entitled to someones love because you were nice to them is not only selfish but completely ridiculous. People don't choose who they're attracted to, romantically or sexually, so the concept of entitlement really doesn't fit anywhere into the situation.
We don't get to choose who we love. So in that sense, the friendzone does exist.
But the idea that you're entitled to someones love because you were nice to them is not only selfish but completely ridiculous. People don't choose who they're attracted to, romantically or sexually, so the concept of entitlement really doesn't fit anywhere into the situation.
It honestly sounds like the person who was "Friendzoned" has a problem of getting over it. I get rejection is hard, I've been rejected a lot of times in college. But I didn't act like the world was over and held a burning torch for each one, I just moved on with my life. It's not really healthy to let that control you either, you have to hit a point to where you realize it isn't the end of the world. I just don't understand the need to just have your world be controlled by something you don't have control over.Leon Declis said:
I think it's that a lot of the more vocal people who complain about this seem to think it's their right to get something out of being nice. Which comes off as trying to be mulipultive to get what you want, something my old girlfriend told me a few weeks ago was that she had a hard time believing people would do nice things without something in return (In reference to how I don't like the idea of people feeling they "owe" me something just cause I do something for them). I do get what your saying about the "Omega Nerd" thing, I remember my mother telling me if I ever have a girl in my car that I shouldn't play my J-Rock. I told her, if she can't at least tolerate (not like) my music why should I even bother? I say that because I enjoy music and I don't feel like someone should tell me what I should play in my car when I wouldn't do that to them. Only time I ever suggested something was when asked, outside of that it's driver's choice (Hell I try to be accommodating and make a play list that everyone can enjoy). Hell my apartment is full of different figures (MLP, Disney Infinity, Panty and Stocking, Zelda, Final Fantasy, I plan on adding a Yuki Nagato Figure next month), but it's my apartment and I pay the rent so if the person has issue with that they can walk. I just don't like the idea of having to change everything (I know there has to be some give, both sides have to compromise) about myself to please someone.Batou667 said:
"Number of Days since the Last Friend-Zone Thread: 45 0."
It exists in the sense that someone may want to bang a friend who doesn't feel the same way, but that's where the definition ends for me. Using the phrase un-ironically is tacky as fuck.
It exists in the sense that someone may want to bang a friend who doesn't feel the same way, but that's where the definition ends for me. Using the phrase un-ironically is tacky as fuck.
That's my point; the correct thing to do is to get over it, but men are told to both "Man up" but also "Don't give up"; "Get over her" but "Quitters never win"; "If you were going to, you would have" but "Good things come to those who wait"; "Move on" but "If you don't stay friends, you're a bad person".BoredRolePlayer said:
I am glad I am not a teenager anymore, but men are given a thousand different, conflicting messages and it messes with the head.
I think the problem is people take to much stock into what others are telling them then. There is a line between taking advice to form an thought and doing what are told is right. What your saying sounds more like not thinking for yourself.Leon Declis said:
Does it exist? Heck yes, it does, thought I think most people have the wrong of it.
The "Friendzone" isn't "I've been Jane's friend for two years but she's not interested in me."
It's
"I'm not into Jack romantically, but I know he likes me. So, if I flirt with him and make him believe he has a shot at me I can get him to do anything." Basically, all the responsibilities of being in a relationship without any of the wholesome, fulfilling intimacy.
The difference being that in the first situation, Jane simply doesn't want to be in a relationship with Jack. She wants to stay friends. In the second, Jane still doesn't want to be in a relationship with Jack, but she intentionally uses Jack's feelings for her to control him.
And yes, that sort of thing does happen. I've seen girls do it. I've seen guys do it. People are manipulative. People are selfish. Some people are just scared of being alone. I'm not saying that everyone who claims they were "friendzoned" was actually in that sort of situation, nor am I giving any sort of value to the entitled masses who can't take "no" for an answer (which is a different matter entirely), but friendzoning does exist. People do it, and it can seriously screw up someone who is stuck in that sort of situation for a long time.
The "Friendzone" isn't "I've been Jane's friend for two years but she's not interested in me."
It's
"I'm not into Jack romantically, but I know he likes me. So, if I flirt with him and make him believe he has a shot at me I can get him to do anything." Basically, all the responsibilities of being in a relationship without any of the wholesome, fulfilling intimacy.
The difference being that in the first situation, Jane simply doesn't want to be in a relationship with Jack. She wants to stay friends. In the second, Jane still doesn't want to be in a relationship with Jack, but she intentionally uses Jack's feelings for her to control him.
And yes, that sort of thing does happen. I've seen girls do it. I've seen guys do it. People are manipulative. People are selfish. Some people are just scared of being alone. I'm not saying that everyone who claims they were "friendzoned" was actually in that sort of situation, nor am I giving any sort of value to the entitled masses who can't take "no" for an answer (which is a different matter entirely), but friendzoning does exist. People do it, and it can seriously screw up someone who is stuck in that sort of situation for a long time.