I’m too lazy to write a real post today, so I thought I’d point you all to a pretty decent analysis of the dreaded “friend zone” by Foz Meadows on goodreads.
Here she is addressing the “Nice Guys” of the world:
[S]omewhere along the line, you’ve got it into your head that if you’re romantically interested in a girl who sees you only as a friend, her failure to reciprocate your feelings is just that: a failing. That because you’re nice and treat her well, she therefore owes you at least one opportunity to present yourself as a viable sexual candidate, even if she’s already made it clear that this isn’t what she wants. That because she legitimately enjoys a friendship that you find painful (and which you’re under no obligation to continue), she is using you. That if a man wants more than friendship with a woman, then the friendship itself doesn’t even attain the status of a consolation prize, but is instead viewed as hell: a punishment to be endured because, so long as he thinks she owes him that golden opportunity, he is bound to persist in an association that hurts him – not because he cares about the friendship, but because he feels he’s invested too much kindness not to stick around for the (surely inevitable, albeit delayed) payoff.
Seriously, Nice Guys, if you think of your friendship with a woman as a means to an end, or some kind of purgatory, then it’s not really a friendship, and you’re doing both yourself and your crush a disservice by persisting in it. (I learned this lesson myself the hard way, a long time before there were helpful internet posts explaining to me why Nice Guying was a recipe for crappiness all around.)
Speaking of learning: I also learned from Foz Meadows’ post that there is a Wikipedia entry for “friend zone,” complete with advice on how dudes can avoid getting “friendzoned” in the first place.
Several advisers urged men, during the initial dates, to touch women physically in appropriate places such as elbows or shoulders as a means of increasing the sexual tension. … Adviser Ali Binazir agrees, and suggested for the man to be a “little bit dangerous”, not in a violent sense, but “with a bit of an edge to them”, and be unpredictable and feel “comfortable in their skin as sexual beings.”
Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia … for Your Penis*.
Also: Here is the official Friend Zone anthem, “Consolation Prize” by Orange Juice. Lyrics here.
—
* Hetero cis penis only.
Le John: In addendum, one time my gf got drunk and mounted me while I was asleep. That’s rape right? </i
Maybe. Depends on the relationship. I have partners who have said, "if you want to start something while I'm asleep, go ahead."
That's consent. If I start something, and said partner wakes, and says stop, it's still not rape. If I don't stop, it's rape.
Hersehele: If you pretend friendship after being rejected, you’ve earned the “jerk” label. It’s better to openly walk away. That’s what Pecunium did, and that’s not what makes him a jerk
Yup, it was US taxpayer dollars that paid for my becoming a professional jerk.
Fembot: @ Pecunium
You have been treated badly by women in the past and yet you are not a misogynist? What is your secret?
Not all women are like that?
I like people, and women are people?
I’m not stupid?
A mix of all of those?
Clipped comment:
Schoenberg was fine, IMO, before he got into atonal music. He did some symphonic works, and other minor pieces. They weren’t great, but they didn’t make me want to pour boiling lead in my ears to stop the pain.
Not gonna lie, I’ve had someone else tell me they felt homicidal towards an ex and it freaked me right out. If you’re going to feel that way about someone, they need to have like, actually attacked you or held your kids hostage or something.
pecunium:
That’s the one. And that’s the point I was getting at, too.
RE: MollyRen
Eurgh. I admit to having a brief period of homicidal rage regarding my rapist… but I knew that (A) actually doing it would achieve absolutely nothing good for him, me, or anyone, (B) I did not have the temperament to do it, and (C) IT WAS NOT THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
Also, I was a hemisphere away, so it seemed pretty safe to experience the anger knowing all the while that I would never act on it. And after y’know, a couple spurts of it, I calmed down, realized the fantasies were more about punishment and anger than actually wanting to do anything with them, and let it go.
That said, I kept my mouth shut about it because it was NOT my crowning glory. At all.
Molly: Not my best times. It wasn’t persistent.
Her way of ending things wasn’t good, and for financial reasons I was stuck sharing a residence which was too small, for about 6 weeks; it was during that time, when she was being emotionally abusive, and I was an emotional wreck.
I don’t blame you if you think I was reacting out of proportion. I knew it was out of proportion. I was also sort of stuck; and isolated from any of my friends (none of whom were closer than about 400 miles away. I had no car, was underemployed, etc.
Bad times, all around.
You’d do well to stop thinking of those two concepts as mutually exclusive.
Also, plenty of non-manipulative non-jerks can and do benefit from therapy, “radical” or otherwise.
“manipulative jerk who needs radical attitude correction therapy.”
Is that a real thing? And I mean a real medical thing that happens today. Because it sounds more like brainwashing, as it seems to me that very few people would seek help on the motive that they are jerks. Unless, I guess, being jerks make their life miserable.
*peers around the blog to see if the Mocking Misogyny sign was replaced by ‘dating therapy for men who are unable to grasp women are people and seem to want some magical mystical method of getting sex'”
And, wow, definitely TMI there John boy.
Oops, hit post too soon.
Meant to say “you all are a lot nicer about this than I’d ever be.”
Even if I hadn’t gotten p at 3:30 am to catch an early flight to Chicago and then driven all the way to Michigan for a conference.
SorryIlliathana, was a little too early to get my snark on.
At first he just sounded confused…it wasn’t til later I realized the cascade fail of his internal thinking.
“*peers around the blog to see if the Mocking Misogyny sign was replaced by ‘dating therapy for men who are unable to grasp women are people and seem to want some magical mystical method of getting sex’”
And, wow, definitely TMI there John boy.”
I’d say I fully grasp most things now, for sure. This site definitely averted most misogynist tendencies I’ve ever harboured. The whole resenting not having sex after large elaborate gestures thing, is a matter of attitude that I have to change/ am changing. Though when I’m in a relationship where: ” I’ll have sex with you if you do this thing for me” Is also commonplace, sex does get devalued somewhat.
I’ll try to tone down future posts also. 🙂
Might be real in MRA land where all therapists are evil feminist overlords, but not in the real world.
Narcissists, the closest diagnosis I can think of to “being a jerk”, are really not inclined to seek help even if being a jerk is making their life miserable — then it’s either how everyone is out to get them, or that they’re in therapy for the resulting depression, not the underlying personality disorder. That’s a note from my psych major, not an attempt to Dx the MRAs.
@Le John — yeah we really don’t need all the details of your sex life, less sharing would be more good. Also, you can reply to “I’ll have sex with you if you do this thing for me” with “I’ll do that thing for you, you don’t have to give me sex in return” — and maybe try seeing the motives behind offering sex as payment for your favors, that’s still the vending machine analogy. Reread this comment by CassandraSays, namely:
(emphasis mine)
Hi John. It might be more useful to think less of it as devaluing sex as devaluing the person. I know that you changed the scenario a bit to “I’ll have sex with you if you do this thing for me.” but really that does not necc devalue sex or anyone. If the person saying that knows that is something you enjoy, and they’re offering because they enjoy it, and want you to look forward to something, it’s more playful than anything. If there’s a sexual problem in the relationship where it’s a bargaining chip and not a mutual endeavor outside of that, then… that’s a problem. I’d say that the scenes here of entitlement and resentment that turn a person into an object without their own set of feelings desires and circumstances is a problem and the second scenario you propose would depend on some factors, and again, I think ‘sex being devalued’ as a concept is problematic.
Interesting posts. You’re not the only male that manboobz has switched on lightbulbs for. 🙂
“Consider that if your experience (like many women’s) had been one in which you were constantly propositioned for sex by people who you weren’t at all interested in, and expected to give it as a sort of reward for good behavior, your feelings might be very different, and you might be far more inclined to turn it down.”
I agree with that. But does it ever turn into blatant manipulation?
Le John, how’s “you don’t want to have sex with me tonight then I must be a terrible ugly person no one will ever love” sound as manipulation? (That ex turned out to be rapetastic, so I’m far too sure that “no” was lost on this one)
QFT, it’s one thing if it’s just playing around, my previous post excluded that option and was assuming it was a bargaining chip but a joke.
but? brain wtf is that? that should say “and was assuming it was a bargaining chip not a joke.”
Le John, why the need to focus on someone elses potential manipulation? Especially right after being shown your manipulation?
WellLe John, how’s “you don’t want to have sex with me tonight then I must be a terrible ugly person no one will ever love” sound as manipulation? (That ex turned out to be rapetastic, so I’m far too sure that “no” was lost on this one).
Sounds pretty manipulately to Le John, and I’m sorry he turned out to be rapetastic.
But.
Sometimes, I work out in front of her, talk to other females have a laugh, etc. I know these have a strong influence on the late night procedings.
Sometimes I do it on purpose, other times I don’t.
Was your ex, in total despair when he said it or, being a conniving little rat?
Is there a difference?
Please drop the “females” thing. Women are women, not subhumans or animals. You’re broadcasting misogynist every time you use female as reference to women.
I’m sorry. I’m fairly comfortable with the term males, and never thought it would be any different for women. To qualify I also feel uncomfortable using the term women, because I’m quite young, and so is she.- I don’t quite feel old enough to use the term.
Wow, feminists sure do make a lot of stupid assumptions.
There are so many ways to refer to women and girls, girlfriends ect than female. We aren’t animals. Find a word like ladyfriend or something and use it please.
Jesus! Are you also stuck using the N word to refer to Black people too?