Friends With Benefits: Socially perpetuated Myth or viable lifestyle?

[Lucidity]

Since becoming involved with a beautiful lady after 15 years of being alone, I've found that the dating/social scene seems to be more accepting of certain activities that were frowned upon just a few years ago. The activity/lifestyle I want to address is the "Friends with Benefits"(FWB) approach to intimacy.

 

I'm really having a hard time wrapping my head around how two people can be friends, yet share themselves physically as a means of maintaining a certain level of attachment, and without actually being oficially committed to the other person.

 

Is this as widespread of an activity as it seems to be, and does it have its merits/upsides/downsides?

 

Is there any difference between FWB and say, a female having a "sugar daddy", or a male having a "sugar momma"? I know those terms indicate "money" as the benefit, but which gender places the emphasis more on the sex, or more on the money? Can the "benefits" be anything the couple wants them to be?

 

The entire concept of FWB is foreign to me, as I cannot fathom how people can separate their hearts and emotions from intimate sexual activity and not have it develope into something much deeper after repeated contact.

 

Anyone have any firsthand experience with this, or insights as to why it has become so widespread in practice?

[itsthethoughtthatcounts]

Some people just like the idea of being able to have regular sex with someone but not have to be tied to a relationship, so there is no commitment or anyone to answer to.

 

They can be fantastic when they remain just friends with benefits but when one starts having feelings then it really messes things up (i speak from experience here).

 

Some people are able to separate emotion from the physical as to some the act of sex is simple that, a physical pleasure and nothing more.

[Shylight]

 

The entire concept of FWB is foreign to me, as I cannot fathom how people can separate their hearts and emotions from intimate sexual activity and not have it develope into something much deeper after repeated contact.

 

Anyone have any firsthand experience with this, or insights as to why it has become so widespread in practice?

 

 

I cannot tell you why it's become a widespread practice, but I will share with you my experience in FWB relationship. If you want more details than I provide you can PM me, or read my recent threads.

 

In my experience, I started sleeping with a guy I liked in hopes he would get into a relationship with me, and I continued seeing him even after I multiple upon multiple signs that a relationship with him would not work out. Almost always 1 party of the other (usually the female) will develope feelings for the other. Exactly what happens with me, I stuck it out in hopes it would go into something further and when it didn't, I became depressed. I just very recently broke it off with my lover.

[Stay_home]

Friends with benefits works out for those who still want to "get it in" without all the drama and attachment of a serious relationship. It's a pure sexual relationship with no strings attached. I think if you have two willing participants, why not, as long as they both have an understanding let them go at it. Some people, that's all they really want is just the sex. For others, they want something real but finding something stable doesn't come out on the block that often. FWBs always end up with somebody getting their feelings hurt. Never been my style, either.

[Squiggy]

My experience, FWB complicates things. Even tho at the start, things are running smoothly, having sex with no strings attached, but somehow I ended up getting sucked into a relationship that I didn't want. Maybe it wasn't really FWB but got played? Who knows.

 

I agree with the poster above me, always somebody ends up feeling hurt. And I think it can come back to haunt you as well...

[Crazyaboutdogs]

In a FWB, usually the woman kids herself with the rationale "I have needs", "I am not interested in a relationship". Then over time she can't actually separate the emotions from the sex like she thought she could and that's when she starts over-analyzing everything her sex partner says and does in the hopes that it means he may actually care more for her and want a relationship. For the man, the thought process is typically like this "oh goody, I get sex on demand, when I want and I don't have to have the trouble of wooing and pretending just to get into a woman's pants...here it is handed to me on a silver platter, no effort necessary and I don't even have to fork out any money like I would on a date or if I hired a hooker." Of course then he is eventually stunned when the woman starts making more demands and treats it like a relationship rather than casual sex.

 

In the case of the sugar daddy/sugar momma the older person gets the "prestige" of having some young thing on their arm while the younger person gets monetary perks: money, trips, gifts. It is not about love, it is a relationship of convenience.

[SocialStigma]

FWB is pretty much the norm at my university town. It's widespread here because everyone is young and horny haha, they all want to be single and free and make the most out of their youth etc. Much more rare to see people in long term relationships here.

 

Personally I've never wanted to partake in it because I have no desire to do anything physical with someone I don't have feelings for. And if I fooled around with a guy I had feelings for but he didn't want a relationship then it would just end up in heartbreak for me.

[Batya33]

I think threads like these perpetuate the myth that FWB is anything more than a euphemism. It's simply a eupehmistic, shorthand way for people to describe that they are having sexual intercourse with someone they are not in a relationship with, not dating, casually or otherwise - they simply meet up when they are both horny to have intercourse and if there is chatting or sharing a meal or watching a movie after or before, that activity is not the focus - the focus is meeting to have intercourse.

 

Typically the two people are not friends and typically one person (usually the man) tells the other person that he/she wants to have sex but with no strings attached and as part of the "convincing" calls it FWB because to say "I just want to have intercourse with you and then be free to go home and not have to call you until the next time I am horny" probably wouldn't work on someone who was hoping for more in even the smallest way and might be seen as crass or sounding too much like he/she was looking for an escort/prostitute.

 

There are some people who are in between relationships and don't want to be in a relationship who already are close friends with someone else, and they decide that since they are both alone and get horny sometimes, when they do they will get together and have intercourse. That gives credibility to the "friends" part but the "benefits" part is still a euphemism and if those people choose to describe it that way it simply reflects some level of discomfort with meeting up just to have intercourse.

 

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with two consenting single adults having intercourse but trying to whitewash it with that silly acronym seems kind of hypocritical. I also think it's patronizing to women to tell them not to get involved in an arrangement like that - if a woman is honest with herself about her expectations and is willing to risk pregnancy and STDs in order to have an orgasm, it's a free country. Not all women get emotionally attached through sex.

[arcadefire]

I don't think it can work out unless both parties know what the boundaries are and know they won't get attached. The latter is harder to predict. I have seen it work for one friend, and for another, end up disastrously. I never tried it myself nor want to. I think it's more trouble than the "benefits" you get from it.

 

I don't think it has become more widespread. In fact, back in the 60s, those "free love" cults and all were doing this far more widespread (with the combination of a very dangerous drug, LSD) than what I believe the media is portraying the younger generation to be doing now.