Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hm. Notice how transactional some of these concepts are. Offer made, offer rejected, counter-offer, counter-offer rejected, no deal. The question is...what exactly are the terms? They seem to be unclear sometimes. Also, some place more value on various components than others...which speaks to one's priorities.
A man may be seeking a relationship, including his heart. Makes the offer, makes himself vulnerable. Offer rejected by woman, counter offer of friendship extended. One reason he will likely view this counter-offer as unacceptable is that if he has offered himself and been rejected, he feels it is personal...she has declared him somehow unworthy goods, and that hurts. One does not cheerfully step into a friendship where such sting exists. Best to move on.
She MIGHT be such a user as the OP believes. But the more likely thing is that either she is trying not to be hurtful with her rejection because frankly, just because a woman LIKES a man, does not mean she wishes to be intimate with him (and hearts or no hearts, that is part of a relationship)...or maybe she has other reasons to do with herself that he doesn't know and she doesn't feel comfortable sharing. Whatever. But she was trying to be nice. OR (and this happens very often) she actually feels that her friendship, which would be part of a romantic relationship if there were one, is of greater value than just sex, and that she is in fact offering something worthwhile. When he says, I'd be willing to interact with you if I were getting sex out of it, but not as a friend, he is saying "your only value to me is sex, why would I even talk to you otherwise?" That, dear men, is offensive.
We may all be overreacting a little. Don't ya think?
I once saw some silly meme or comic online that stated that basically a woman's entire life is one long infomercial for "the D" being staged by practically every man around her. It's an overstatement, but there's a funny grain of truth there. And frankly, if a woman were to be intimate with every man that she liked as a person, you'd have some pretty nasty names to call her.
On the other side of the coin (as I always say...flip that coin, it's just as grimy on the other side) you have men who get into a thing with women, and the woman catches the feels and he doesn't, and he knows he's going to hurt her, but he strings her along and lets her think all is great while he enjoys her sexually for a bit, and then drops her as soon as he has had his fill of that pie, on to pursue the next slice. And in all of these scenarios, one can cast blame upon the player or the victim, at the end of the day though one can only affect one's own behavior and choices.
It's very bad when a man strings a woman along who he knows likes him, just so that he can get sex, isn't it? Naughty, naughty man. I wonder if maybe there are women who do the same thing, but for adulation and favors instead of sex. Naah, that can't be true. When women say let's just be friends, they all mean it.
I've been married for almost 20 years to a guy I dated a few times in high school and considered a friend. Then he moved. I had a boyfriend after that for several years, and my old friend would call me from time to time. We'd catch up and talk about our mutual friends. He had a few girlfriends too, and he'd tell me about them. It was purely platonic, except he told me once to call him if I ever broke up with my boyfriend. I did end up calling him a couple years later, then I went to see him, and it was like we had never been apart. I know some people are users and think they should be summarily ignored, but if you like somebody I see no reason to burn bridges.
It's very bad when a man strings a woman along who he knows likes him, just so that he can get sex, isn't it? Naughty, naughty man. I wonder if maybe there are women who do the same thing, but for adulation and favors instead of sex. Naah, that can't be true. When women say let's just be friends, they all mean it.
No.
"Stringing someone along" is what happens when someone purposely behaves in an ambiguous way, so they can keep giving the other party false hope while they continue to get what they want from that person. So yes, a guy who knows that a girl is hoping for more and he never says there won't be more while he uses her for sex... he's not a nice guy. And a girl who flirts and teases and acts interested in a guy who she knows she will never get seriously romantic with, in order get perks from him, is not a nice person either.
HOWEVER if a person (male OR female) makes it clear they are not interested, that is not ambiguous. If a guy tells a girl I AM NOT INTERESTED IN ANYTHING SERIOUS or a girl tells a guy I AM NOT INTERESTED IN YOU ROMANTICALLY, LET'S BE FRIENDS then it's not their fault if the other person refuses to deal with the reality of the words coming out of their mouth.
And that's why the "friendzone" thing is BS to me.
Don't want to be put in a position you don't like?
Don't put yourself their.
It's really that simple.
I value a good friend as much as anything, but if someone comes to me with a confession they want more than friendship and I just do not feel the same about them I am not going to pretend that things are the same between us and just forget about it.
Things have changed, you cannot ignore this and act like its nothing, This is why so many choose to string people along in the end.
admitting your feelings DOES change everything within a friendship. If you are to not say anything nobody has to behave like anything else is happening.
Speak no evil, hear no evil, see no evil
Last edited by rego00123; 09-18-2015 at 12:30 PM..
"Stringing someone along" is what happens when someone purposely behaves in an ambiguous way, so they can keep giving the other party false hope while they continue to get what they want from that person. So yes, a guy who knows that a girl is hoping for more and he never says there won't be more while he uses her for sex... he's not a nice guy. And a girl who flirts and teases and acts interested in a guy who she knows she will never get seriously romantic with, in order get perks from him, is not a nice person either.
HOWEVER if a person (male OR female) makes it clear they are not interested, that is not ambiguous. If a guy tells a girl I AM NOT INTERESTED IN ANYTHING SERIOUS or a girl tells a guy I AM NOT INTERESTED IN YOU ROMANTICALLY, LET'S BE FRIENDS then it's not their fault if the other person refuses to deal with the reality of the words coming out of their mouth.
And that's why the "friendzone" thing is BS to me.
Own your own sheyt.
When a woman says let's just be friends, and then does the following...
1) Does not engage in any friend-like activities with her new so called friend, but only...
2) ...requests his company whenever she feels unwanted / undesireable / needs an ego boost
3) Interacts with him solely / mainly when she needs a favor
...then she is nasty piece of work who is deliberately and knowingly manipulating that man. Her words may say "let's just be friends", but her actions say "you are nothing but lackey to me, and someone to use when my ego needs a boost". That's the real message, at least that's what she's really thinking, while giving him a different impression.
And THAT, my dear, is why the friendzone is indeed bull****. I said it before and I'll say it again. There's a world of difference between friendship and friendzone. The friendZONE is real, and it's not a friendship. It's a manipulation of someone's vulnerability.
It happens to women too by the way, but seeing as men are by and large the pursuers (and therefore, statistically the majority of the rejected), it happens to them waaaaay more. When women have it done to them, the guy is a jerk. When men have it done to them, well, different story, as we know.
You know how women so often ask "what does this mean? what does that mean? What's he trying to say?" Well, men sometimes ask themselves such questions too, and if a woman is being ambiguous, she is leading him on. Her ambiguity is in the fact that her WORDS say one thing, while her ACTIONS give him hope. If he does a few more favors then maybe she'll see what a great guy I am. If I console her after Chad Thundercock dumps her, maybe that will open her eyes.
It's very bad when a man strings a woman along who he knows likes him, just so that he can get sex, isn't it? Naughty, naughty man. I wonder if maybe there are women who do the same thing, but for adulation and favors instead of sex. Naah, that can't be true. When women say let's just be friends, they all mean it.
Often enough, they do mean it. But when it comes to planning to hang out like "friends" are supposed to, sometimes we get held up by the knowledge that the guy actually wanted more, and we'd rather not act in such a manner that gets his hopes up. As I believe I mentioned in my post, SOME people are users. Some aren't. Honestly, I think that most people are basically decent and would rather not hurt others. I choose to be optimistic about the human race, overall. But....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinawina
No.
"Stringing someone along" is what happens when someone purposely behaves in an ambiguous way, so they can keep giving the other party false hope while they continue to get what they want from that person. So yes, a guy who knows that a girl is hoping for more and he never says there won't be more while he uses her for sex... he's not a nice guy. And a girl who flirts and teases and acts interested in a guy who she knows she will never get seriously romantic with, in order get perks from him, is not a nice person either.
HOWEVER if a person (male OR female) makes it clear they are not interested, that is not ambiguous. If a guy tells a girl I AM NOT INTERESTED IN ANYTHING SERIOUS or a girl tells a guy I AM NOT INTERESTED IN YOU ROMANTICALLY, LET'S BE FRIENDS then it's not their fault if the other person refuses to deal with the reality of the words coming out of their mouth.
And that's why the "friendzone" thing is BS to me.
Own your own sheyt.
This is a great post. Nails it. And to be perfectly honest, I do believe that there is a social construct where women have undue pressure to generally reject sex, and be super choosy, and be hard to get, selective, etc. and a social norm that it is OK for men to "play the game" with any tactics they find to work, to get sex. I don't know how many times, especially in my youth, a man told me he loved me, and anything else I wanted to hear, to get laid. And it was my fault for being conned, for being a sucker. Not his fault. He was just doing like the male animal do. "Hate the game, not the player" as they say.
Flip the coin. Is it fair that it's so assumed that men want sex with no emotional attachment? I know so many men who sincerely wish to be loved. This "game" has placed pressure on women to be wary and to EXPECT low intentions of men. Even in the context of this conversation, I felt it necessary to pull apart the various motivations involved...one may assume a man is unhappy he's "friendzoned" because he wanted "more" and more was sex. What if "more" was love? These social constructs, while often unfortunately true, do create disadvantages for people, especially when they want something different than what is assumed.
She MIGHT be such a user as the OP believes. But the more likely thing is that either she is trying not to be hurtful with her rejection because frankly, just because a woman LIKES a man, does not mean she wishes to be intimate with him (and hearts or no hearts, that is part of a relationship)...or maybe she has other reasons to do with herself that he doesn't know and she doesn't feel comfortable sharing. Whatever. But she was trying to be nice. OR (and this happens very often) she actually feels that her friendship, which would be part of a romantic relationship if there were one, is of greater value than just sex, and that she is in fact offering something worthwhile. When he says, I'd be willing to interact with you if I were getting sex out of it, but not as a friend, he is saying "your only value to me is sex, why would I even talk to you otherwise?" That, dear men, is offensive.
Good post. This, in particular, is so true. It IS offensive, and it can be quite hurtful.
No, you said you had no romantic feelings for any of your female friends, so there is no "depends."
And there is also no "probably" based on your earlier statements. You would cut off ANY woman who rejects you, friend or not. Now you are changing your story and seem to be applying a different standard to women. I suspect you would be rather pissed off if your female friend rejected your friendship because you did not share her feelings.
Bingo!
These "friendzone" discussions are typically one-sided. Men are allowed to determine which women they're willing to have platonic friendships with (vs. which women they choose for sexual/romantic partners), but that's different!
When a woman says let's just be friends, and then does the following...
1) Does not engage in any friend-like activities with her new so called friend, but only...
2) ...requests his company whenever she feels unwanted / undesireable / needs an ego boost
3) Interacts with him solely / mainly when she needs a favor
...then she is nasty piece of work who is deliberately and knowingly manipulating that man. Her words may say "let's just be friends", but her actions say "you are nothing but lackey to me, and someone to use when my ego needs a boost". That's the real message, at least that's what she's really thinking, while giving him a different impression.
And THAT, my dear, is why the friendzone is indeed bull****. I said it before and I'll say it again. There's a world of difference between friendship and friendzone. The friendZONE is real, and it's not a friendship. It's a manipulation of someone's vulnerability.
It happens to women too by the way, but seeing as men are by and large the pursuers (and therefore, statistically the majority of the rejected), it happens to them waaaaay more. When women have it done to them, the guy is a jerk. When men have it done to them, well, different story, as we know.
You know how women so often ask "what does this mean? what does that mean? What's he trying to say?" Well, men sometimes ask themselves such questions too, and if a woman is being ambiguous, she is leading him on. Her ambiguity is in the fact that her WORDS say one thing, while her ACTIONS give him hope. If he does a few more favors then maybe she'll see what a great guy I am. If I console her after Chad Thundercock dumps her, maybe that will open her eyes.
They know what they're doing.
We got your point.
So stop taking her calls. Don't "interact" with her. It's not rocket science. If "you're" in the friendZONE, "you" ALLOW "yourself" to stay there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
