Friend Zone Quote

[CarnelianButterfly]

On the other hand, I have flat out just NOT been attracted to people whom looked like GQ models and had powerful jobs.

GQ guys look like paper dolls to me. They get such and such suit with tie and shirt, but no soul.

 

Power jobs mean no life beyond the working world. You want to make loads of money, you have to spend loads of time. I'd rather have hours and hours of time alone with my monetarily deficient lover.

[Batya33]

I too am like RayKay (indeed, my ex is short, balding and overweight, hmmm) - the GQ model type stopped appealing to me in my early 20s although I confess I had a poster of a teenaged John Stamos on my wall when I was 16. Sigh (this was before he married Rebecca). I am not attracted either to powerjobs. I am attracted to a man who is passionate about his career and has a strong work ethic - the financial stability is important because I only date people I would marry and have a family with and thereforeeee I strongly prefer that he be financially stable as I am.

[lifestream]

Even when I've had no women prospects, I STILL had women in "friend zone" whom I wouldn't think about having sex with. So what if I have single girl friends? In my case that really doesn't have much to do with it. I guess I may have a different spin on sexuality.

 

Simply put for myself, there must be something that transcends physical attraction. I'm not interested in instant gratification and I generally never have been. I want fulfillment.

 

As far as the friend issue, I think you can be slotted in a friend zone and never come out of it. But this is a generalization that I can't wholly endorse. I didn't sleep with my ex before we were official. We were friends attracted to each other. But I remember the first time I tried to kiss her, she turned away. I kept at it and eventually her walls came down and we became a couple.

 

I agree though, that first impressions are a big deal, and there is probably a window of opportunity you have. But women aren't light switches like men. Women are more like volume knobs. Women may not initially be attracted to a guy physically, but as time goes on she may be attracted to a guy because of his swagger or personality and STILL be able to have a sexual relationship with him. It's my opinion that it's how you carry yourself. A woman might think nothing of you the first time you meet, and yet you can turn her completely around with the right ingredients.

 

So what I'm saying is yes, the ladder theory is partially right. But it also depends on how long you're slotted into the "friends" category. You still have a chance to turn it around if you've JUST been slotted there, but the longer time goes on, the less likely you'll be able to have a sexual relationship with a woman.

 

But who knows, there are always deviations. My neighbours were friends for years until they thought to themselves. "You know...we'd make a good couple!"

[Reluctant Rebuilder]

Hey I wouldn't want to go against anyone's pie chart or scientific Internet web site quote, but I stand behind the spirit of my previous post. If you find yourself friend zoned and can't handle it, grow up a bit. Not all attractive guys who get dates are jerks, and the fault (if there is any) is not with the woman's choice.

[Altruist]

Attraction is not a choice. Its either she feels it for you or she doesn't. You just have to deal with it and stop crying foul if she friendzones you. The alpha male is capable of creating that attraction. It doesn't matter if he's rich or not. What matters most is that the alpha male exudes masculinity. Contrary to what the ladies are saying, the alpha male is the one that gets la*d while those that adopt the supposed ideals of what the ladies have said they want (sensitive guy, beta male, etc) stand and watch in agony. In the game of attraction its better to make a decision regarding what women want by observing their actions rather than what they say they want. My two cents.

[lifestream]

Attraction is not a choice. Its either she feels it for you or she doesn't. You just have to deal with it and stop crying foul if she friendzones you. The alpha male is capable of creating that attraction. It doesn't matter if he's rich or not. What matters most is that the alpha male exudes masculinity. Contrary to what the ladies are saying, the alpha male is the one that gets la*d while those that adopt the supposed ideals of what the ladies have said they want (sensitive guy, beta male, etc) stand and watch in agony. In the game of attraction its better to make a decision regarding what women want by observing their actions rather than what they say they want. My two cents.

 

That alpha male crap has been debunked my feminist theorists ages ago. Heck, I even read it was debunked in Men's Health!

 

I don't believe that confidence and assertiveness are male characteristics. The dichotomy makes absolutely no sense. But it is clear, women would rather have someone who's together, who can carry a conversation, who is cocky and funny and a little bit of a tease. That's initial attraction. But you have to ease your way in and be a little sensitive sometimes, you can't just be an emotional train-wreck or needy! There's a big difference between being astute and being needy. But at the same time women can be fulfilled only for so long by characteristics of initial attraction. It has to build.

Women do want a sensitive, understanding guy, but only once they're in a deep relationship. You can't have it right off the bat.

 

A guy can be ugly and live with his parents and still get all the girls. Alpha male who has everything materially but nothing in terms of personality won't get much of a second glance.

[Juha]

Alpha male will get the first look and oppotunity because of what he has and how he acts...

 

Big mucle guys get first looks and chances from most women... It is primal instinct nothing you can do to change it...

 

Basically what I was trying to say was when someone is attracted to someoine they just feel it, can't always explain it...

 

ANd women do act on emotion while men don't... Not all most...This is a proven fact...

[CarnelianButterfly]

Alpha male will get the first look and oppotunity because of what he has and how he acts...

Really, when I look at them I'm revolted....

ANd women do act on emotion while men don't... Not all most...This is a proven fact...

Whose your source, where are they published, what credentials do they have, what was the sample size, what was the sample diversity, what's the distribution, how do you quantify an act as being emotional or logical, how do you separate the total reasoning and causality of an action, what does most mean?

 

Answer those questions, site your sources, and then I might take your fact seriously, until then; it’s not a fact, its speculation.

[Batya33]

Alpha male will get the first look and oppotunity because of what he has and how he acts...

 

Big mucle guys get first looks and chances from most women... It is primal instinct nothing you can do to change it...

 

Basically what I was trying to say was when someone is attracted to someoine they just feel it, can't always explain it...

 

ANd women do act on emotion while men don't... Not all most...This is a proven fact...

 

Because we are human, even primal instincts - if you were right, which I doubt you are - do not necesarily lead to action. We all can get angry instinctively if someone pushes us even by accident, but it doesn't mean we're going to react to that feeling. Same thing with being attracted to another person - we may feel attracted but not act for a variety of reasons including discovering, on talking to the person, that they are no longer attractive to us.

 

As far as your baseless opinions on whether "men" or "women" act on emotions or otherwise I am confident you won't have a meaningful response to Carnelian Butterfly. I suppose you also believe then that all "crimes of passion" perpetrated by men are all misnamed, yes?

 

Most people, if they acted purely on emotion would not be employed or be able to achieve academic degrees which require thinking before acting or speaking. Last time I checked, women make up a significant percentage of the workforce and of those who have academic degrees, including in the science, math, engineering, law, history, etc etc..

[mylastwords23]

Damn Strait

[CarnelianButterfly]

Damn Strait

Having trouble passing in a channal or sound?

[Luke Skywalker]

Because we are human, even primal instincts - if you were right, which I doubt you are - do not necesarily lead to action. We all can get angry instinctively if someone pushes us even by accident, but it doesn't mean we're going to react to that feeling. Same thing with being attracted to another person - we may feel attracted but not act for a variety of reasons including discovering, on talking to the person, that they are no longer attractive to us.

 

But that again you are acting on feelings, the premise being, you no longer feel attracted to them. It's not a debate on if or when feelings of attraction changes, it's an idea that actions are predicated on feelings of attraction.

You just contradicted your point.

 

If you didn't act on feelings then you'd act whether you are attracted or not attracted, not just if you are attracted.

 

As far as your baseless opinions on whether "men" or "women" act on emotions or otherwise I am confident you won't have a meaningful response to Carnelian Butterfly. I suppose you also believe then that all "crimes of passion" perpetrated by men are all misnamed, yes?

 

He's referring to the dating world and friendzoned phenominon. Basically, people who get friendzoned or that complain about women passing them up as serious romantic/sexual material will complain that an object of affection is rude for not returning their call, returning their emails, saying they see them as a friend while complaining to them or someone else about how some other jerk is mistreating them while they cant get a kiss in edgewise.

 

It's all referring to how some party is treating another party, and which party is treating the other party based on emotions, and which party is treating the other party based on mind-thought-rationalisation.

 

Does a guy care about kissing or having sex with someone to have to be in a relationship with them first or to have strong feelings for them like a woman does - of course not, it's likely different for a woman to have to be romanced and have these 'feelings' before they can 'open up' so to speak.

 

That is why the man has to be in charge, 'cause if he leaves it up to the woman, it will either fall apart, or she'll have no limitations on how much she walks over the guy.

 

Most people, if they acted purely on emotion would not be employed or be able to achieve academic degrees which require thinking before acting or speaking. Last time I checked, women make up a significant percentage of the workforce and of those who have academic degrees, including in the science, math, engineering, law, history, etc etc..

 

Sure, but dating is different from academics. Friendzone is referring to a dating phenominon - or rather an attraction phenomion (dont know why this thread isn't on the attraction and flirting section).

 

Again, a guy's frustration to most girls they get friendzoned from is they are not acting rationally or logically with them with their expectations (i.e. having a great connection or even chemistry but unable to see anything sexual after investing time and energy, etc...)

[CarnelianButterfly]

That is why the man has to be in charge, 'cause if he leaves it up to the woman, it will either fall apart, or she'll have no limitations on how much she walks over the guy.

How many relationships have you been in Luke?

If you don't contribute to a relationship or you totally control a relationship it will fail. No one is in charge, it is partnership, both parties give and take, working together and being considerate and loving. You try to control that and manipulate it and you destroy the real meaning of a loving relationship.

 

Again, a guy's frustration to most girls they get friendzoned from is they are not acting rationally or logically with them with their expectations (i.e. having a great connection or even chemistry but unable to see anything sexual after investing time and energy, etc...)

How is wanting to have sex with any woman around logical? How is that not just a primal lust or emotion? You're not being driven by a higher function to do that, your basic hormonal urges are in control. That's not logic, thats being emotional, because lust thats a huge emotion.

 

How is it rational to sleep with someone you don't want to have sex with? How is compromising your own preferences so some guy doesn't feel rejected benefit you?

 

So a stalker invests time and energy into harassing a woman, by your logic she's being an emotional and illogical woman for rejecting him say with a restraining order. Or is a restraining order just a weird womanly way of saying "I love you", because woman certainly don't have a clue about what's going on inside their heads.

[CarnelianButterfly]

It's all referring to how some party is treating another party, and which party is treating the other party based on emotions, and which party is treating the other party based on mind-thought-rationalisation.

By the way, how is it rational to for a guy to continue to bug a woman that doesn't want him?

 

If he was rational, he'd say to himself "hmm, she's not interested, I should find someone who is". Instead the guys emotions get hurt when he's repeatedly rejected and repeatedly putting himself in the position to get rejected because she has already said NO. How is that logical, how is operating at a higher level of thought?

[Luke Skywalker]

By the way, how is it rational to for a guy to continue to bug a woman that doesn't want him?

 

Because it's hard to differentiate between a challenge and being hard to get with a genuine rejection. Most of these 'friendzone' scams, as I'd call them for what they are, would make it appear, that the girl is not ready for a relationship NOW, for some temporary reason, but may be ready later and continue giving a guy some hope that there could be something.

 

Women who dont want guys usually dont say they dont want them, they make nice excuses and BS like the one above to make them feel there is a chance, but they have to be patient, wait, then maybe something will occur.

 

At the heart of this is where the friendzone think is that something 'could' happen later, while in reality the girl has already written off the possibility of relationship.

 

If he was rational, he'd say to himself "hmm, she's not interested, I should find someone who is".

 

For reasons stated above. It's very rational. Lots of women do play hard to get or play cat-and-mouse type of games. It's hard to know if a woman is playing something or is genuinely not interested.

 

Instead the guys emotions get hurt when he's repeatedly rejected and repeatedly putting himself in the position to get rejected because she has already said NO. How is that logical, how is operating at a higher level of thought?

 

Well, guys dont usually play cat-and-mouse or hard to get games with women and it's usually the other way around unless they are a player or something. A guy has to show the interest, do all the initating and take all the risks, a woman doesn't say no she's not interested, she usually sends mixed messages.

[Batya33]

"Well, guys dont usually play cat-and-mouse or hard to get games with women and it's usually the other way around unless they are a player or something. A guy has to show the interest, do all the initating and take all the risks, a woman doesn't say no she's not interested, she usually sends mixed messages."

 

 

That's your experience. Sounds like from what you've posted you have very limited experience. If you have to do all the initiating and take all the risks, chances are the woman is just not that into you. A woman who is will respond to your overtures positively (thus lessening the risk)and will do at least some of the initiating in the beginning such as "get together - that would be great - I'm free Saturday, are you?"

 

My guess is you get mixed messages because your approach is probably awkward and/or off putting, so the woman is not clear at all on where you're coming from. Have you ever tried to establish rapport where the woman seemed like she was very comfortable talking with you and the conversation flowed naturally? How often does that happen for you in person?

[CarnelianButterfly]

So if you don't like being played with why do you still put yourself through it. Go find a woman that doesn't play games.

 

Guys that are friendzoned are sad, they don't have any self respect, because if they did they'd move on.

 

You can only be played with if you let them, you have to respond to their games for them to be play. They play, you walk. Plain and simple. If you don't its only your fault for any hardship or rejection you continue to get.

 

The friendzone wouldn't exist if guys just got over themselves and realized they aren't wanted by a girl, they would see rejection as rejection and Move On.

[Luke Skywalker]

I dont see casual sex, or any type of 'light' sex as being emotionally involving, I'd consider the concept to be masturbation with a partner rather than true love-making or sex.

 

 

 

That's the thing. Most guys do will not shut out the possibility of sex with most women around. I've never came accross anyone that I may not unconsciously or subconsciously would like to have sex with somewhere in the back of my mind so I dont think that is the case - except obviously family.

 

Compromising my own preferences so some guys doesn't feel rejected? What guy? I'm hetrosexual.

 

 

 

I think you are taking an extreme example to raise an issue and that's a desperate way to argue or make a point.

 

I stand by the post I said before. Women are ambigious and not straight-forward. They will leave a ray of hope or something, because if a guy really knew there was no chance of sex or relationship now or down the line, and they were attracted to the girl and she knew it, then that is what this is about.

[Luke Skywalker]

So if you don't like being played with why do you still put yourself through it. Go find a woman that doesn't play games.

 

Guys that are friendzoned are sad, they don't have any self respect, because if they did they'd move on.

 

You can only be played with if you let them, you have to respond to their games for them to be play. They play, you walk. Plain and simple. If you don't its only your fault for any hardship or rejection you continue to get.

 

The friendzone wouldn't exist if guys just got over themselves and realized they aren't wanted by a girl, they would see rejection as rejection and Move On.

 

 

You are right. No argument there.

[CarnelianButterfly]

I think you are taking an extreme example to raise an issue and that's a desperate way to argue or make a point.

And how is that any different from how you argued rape allegations are false, with one extreme example. You point a finger and 3 are pointing right back at you.

[CarnelianButterfly]

When I'm in control of the date it tends to go more smoothly, that's just my experience.

So your vast experience reflects all of humanity? How many woman have you dated, are they all diverse and differ such that they are a good cross sectional representation of all of women? The women you picked could be poorly organized or just not really cared about the date from the start, but you see it as how all dates need to be controlled.

 

I dont see casual sex, or any type of 'light' sex as being emotionally involving, I'd consider the concept to be masturbation with a partner rather than true love-making or sex

Mutaul masturbation doesn't involve penetration, sex does. If a penis is inserted any where it is sex, yes that includes the mouth.

 

Women are ambigious and not straight-forward.

And how would you feel if she told you "I don't like you, go away", you would probably say she's confused or doesn't know what she wants or she doesn't know what her likes are or hasn't seen the real you or is just being difficult because of yaddayaddayadda.

[lifestream]

Honestly Luke, I doubt any of the girls here find your argumentation very attractive at all. There's one thing about making a point, there's another about jamming it down other people's throats. I think most women would see this as insecurity, so you're really not helping your cause.

 

I think women generally don't want to come off as * * * * *es, so they have to let guys down as light as they can. Unfortunately us guys are dense when it comes to body language and signals that many women seem to have a knack for. Most people really don't want to tell another person to * * * * off.

 

The problem with the friendzoned guy is he comes off as needy and clingy. Who wants that? I've been in relationships where I've LOST attraction because of clingyness, even though almost everything else was there. I remember a girl was chasing me for ages and for some reason the attraction simply wasn't there. I can't explain it. It's plain and simple. This isn't just a one way street in regards to women's dealings with men.

 

If there is a lot of chemistry there, I don't believe most guys would be friendzoned. It would generally defy the laws of attraction. Chemistry IS Attraction. But it has to be more than just one type of chemistry (emotional, intellectual, spiritual etc). If a spark is there, something else is likely to ignite.

 

This is starting to get very tedious. Stop publicly sulking.

[Night Pumpkin]

To the original poster:

 

I find that women can't seem to have a relationship and have friendship in that relationship at the same time. If you want to attract a girl, you can't be friends with her. That sucks. I wish it weren't that way, but it is that way. There is one girl you are friends with, and another who are you are not friends with but her falls head over heels. Don't try to figure it out. Women can't be figured out.

[Pegasus]

To OP from my experience:

 

1) There was a girl I had interest in (more than friends) but we kept as friends - one day I told her what I feel and she withdrawn away. Never actually hang out with her after that

 

2) I was a friend with a girl for 1,5 years. We never had any "more than friends" ideas but chemistry was there, we just didn't act on it. After 1,5 years....things just went "relationship" way out of the blue. We were together for 3,5 years and I asked to marry me.

 

3) I am a friend with a girl I don't really like beyond friendship. She felt the same. At one point in time she changed her feelings and told me that. We're just friends and we both agreed that it is the best thing to stay just friends (not that I think being "just friend" is a bad thing. Not at all)

 

4) A friend of a friend(3) - I don't really know if we are friends or what. Chemistry is there, we always flirt when we see eachother or over the phone. I'm always first to her if she has to choose between two people to meet for coffee. I told her that I like her more than a friend. She told me that she is very scared because she was burnt before (that is the truth) so we are still at flirting phase and we enjoy to talk and meet for coffee,theather,....

 

It does not mean that if you are a friend with a woman that it can't grow to something more. But, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO. There is no rule it should. If you can't be just friend with a girl, then it is your problem. I have some female friends that would not be interesting in more than friends ever...

[Nappy]

My question for guys is this...

 

If you truly care for another girl that you are just friends with....Does that mean it can easily turn into love?

 

I mean care so much about her that the things going on in her life excite you and truly make you giddy. Should the things that stop you disappear....Does that love happen that much easier and deeper?

 

And not just that....But can you love a female friend without it being anything more than a friendly love?

 

It seems that guys always have a female on their list of dateable people....So would this type of a friendship confuse you in terms of your own feelings and not the other persons?

 

Also, do you find patterns in the type of people you choose as female friends. I personally get along with an array of people. But if you find yourself always choosing a similar quality in all the girls you become friends with, such as true and constant wit.....Does this become a quality you are attracted to and look for in women for relationships?