Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

how to avoid being used?

Page 4 of 5 [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

edgewaters
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,427
Location: Ontario

29 May 2012, 7:22 pm

Kurgan wrote:
The polygamy in Islamic culture would have worked just fine if men and women had equal rights.


Not for everyone.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,155
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

29 May 2012, 7:47 pm

Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:

You can't really use a consenting adult for sex...


Sure you can if they are after a relationship and you pretend to be interested in that aspect and not just the sex, the girl or guy may be tricked into thinking you're actually interested in him/her and not just the sex so they will have sex thinking that. Then not be so happy about it later when they realize what the real intentions were.


You're still getting exactly what you put out. I've been "used" for sex as well, it's not as bad as some girls say it is (except for when the girl tries to get pregnant); I got exactly what I gave to the girls who've "used" me: sex.


Really because if I remember right, I was not looking for a f*** buddy, I don't think you can judge how bad or not bad something like that is for someone else. I don't like getting used period regardless of why or whatever justification they can pull out of their ass.


_________________
Metal never dies. \m/


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,155
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

29 May 2012, 7:49 pm

Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
See this is what I've always suspected.

This is the equivalent of the "Friend-zone" but for women..

Both of them are nebulous status's that only exist because one party is either to oblivious or to hopeful to see that the other party is taking advantage of them in some way for a period of time. Some people will catch on right away, and move on. Others will take a long time to catch on, and then be more hurt by the revelation.

Both of these phenomena are equally bad because it means you are being taken advantage of in some way, while the other party is maintaining the facade that an actual relationship is always just around the bend.


I'd say the platonic friend zone is worse. At least a girl in the f.ck buddy zone gets to sleep with and have fun with someone she's sexually attracted to. A guy in the "friend zone" only gets downgraded to her asexual little girlfriend and ungratefully gets her problems dumped onto him.


oh real fun sleeping with someone who doesn't actually give a damn about you :roll: , but that's just my perspective...I don't even enjoy that activity.


_________________
Metal never dies. \m/


rabbittss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Dec 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,348

29 May 2012, 7:51 pm

Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
If we're talking about pair-bonding in most other primates, it involves friends with benefits without any commitment or obligations.


Wrong.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~phyl/anthro/mating.html

And again, you're not understanding what pair-bonding is. Pair-bonding occurs in FWB.


You're still missing my point that relationships the way they are today are unnatural. Furthermore, your article states that only 20% of all human societies have traditionally been monoamous.

There are many forms of pair-bonding. Long term pair-bonding isn't natural in humans and all the obligations and expectations that go with sex in humans are the most unnatural parts.


Our hominid ancestors have been demi-monogamous (not completely) since about 1.5 million years ago, before the rise of homo sapiens. The last time we weren't, we were Australopithecus.


That's bull.

Most native American trives for instance practiced polygamy well into the 18th century and the Bible speaks warmly of it.

Monogamy became widespread in Europe after the expansion of the Roman empire (notice how the new testament avoids mentioning polygamy, whereas a lot of important persons in the old testament were indeed polygamous). This was because of economical reasons. There are really no reliable records stating that monogamy existed at all before until 3500 B.C. in Egypt.


We are neither Native American tribes nor ancient Hebrews.. what we are, in the west, are the inheritors of Roman culture.. so it stands to reason that Roman marriage customs would also be something which we inherited.

Oddly enough, there have been studies undertaken to explain the link between Polygamy and Suicide bombers in the middle east. The young men know there is no hope of them ever starting familys, due to the older more established men having multiple wives, so they are more open to the idea of blowing themselves up in the hopes of getting plenty of wives in paradise.

Just because SOME cultures practiced polygamy, at SOME point in time.. doesn't mean those of us living in the modern world should follow suit.


The polygamy in Islamic culture would have worked just fine if men and women had equal rights.


Sure, if you practiced ritual male infanticide to make sure there were 5+ women for every male.. kind of like the Jeffs sect does in Utah.. except they don't kill the boys as babies, they just chuck them out of town when they turn 18 to fend for themselves.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

29 May 2012, 7:55 pm

rabbittss wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
If we're talking about pair-bonding in most other primates, it involves friends with benefits without any commitment or obligations.


Wrong.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~phyl/anthro/mating.html

And again, you're not understanding what pair-bonding is. Pair-bonding occurs in FWB.


You're still missing my point that relationships the way they are today are unnatural. Furthermore, your article states that only 20% of all human societies have traditionally been monoamous.

There are many forms of pair-bonding. Long term pair-bonding isn't natural in humans and all the obligations and expectations that go with sex in humans are the most unnatural parts.


Our hominid ancestors have been demi-monogamous (not completely) since about 1.5 million years ago, before the rise of homo sapiens. The last time we weren't, we were Australopithecus.


That's bull.

Most native American trives for instance practiced polygamy well into the 18th century and the Bible speaks warmly of it.

Monogamy became widespread in Europe after the expansion of the Roman empire (notice how the new testament avoids mentioning polygamy, whereas a lot of important persons in the old testament were indeed polygamous). This was because of economical reasons. There are really no reliable records stating that monogamy existed at all before until 3500 B.C. in Egypt.


We are neither Native American tribes nor ancient Hebrews.. what we are, in the west, are the inheritors of Roman culture.. so it stands to reason that Roman marriage customs would also be something which we inherited.

Oddly enough, there have been studies undertaken to explain the link between Polygamy and Suicide bombers in the middle east. The young men know there is no hope of them ever starting familys, due to the older more established men having multiple wives, so they are more open to the idea of blowing themselves up in the hopes of getting plenty of wives in paradise.

Just because SOME cultures practiced polygamy, at SOME point in time.. doesn't mean those of us living in the modern world should follow suit.


The polygamy in Islamic culture would have worked just fine if men and women had equal rights.


Sure, if you practiced ritual male infanticide to make sure there were 5+ women for every male.. kind of like the Jeffs sect does in Utah.. except they don't kill the boys as babies, they just chuck them out of town when they turn 18 to fend for themselves.


Equal rights mean that women aren't being forced into monogamy either. This is why polygamy works fine in many African tribes.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

29 May 2012, 7:58 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:

You can't really use a consenting adult for sex...


Sure you can if they are after a relationship and you pretend to be interested in that aspect and not just the sex, the girl or guy may be tricked into thinking you're actually interested in him/her and not just the sex so they will have sex thinking that. Then not be so happy about it later when they realize what the real intentions were.


You're still getting exactly what you put out. I've been "used" for sex as well, it's not as bad as some girls say it is (except for when the girl tries to get pregnant); I got exactly what I gave to the girls who've "used" me: sex.


Really because if I remember right, I was not looking for a f*** buddy, I don't think you can judge how bad or not bad something like that is for someone else. I don't like getting used period regardless of why or whatever justification they can pull out of their ass.


If you're not looking for a f.ck buddy, then nobody's forcing you to have sex before you're actually in a commited relationship.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

29 May 2012, 8:00 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
See this is what I've always suspected.

This is the equivalent of the "Friend-zone" but for women..

Both of them are nebulous status's that only exist because one party is either to oblivious or to hopeful to see that the other party is taking advantage of them in some way for a period of time. Some people will catch on right away, and move on. Others will take a long time to catch on, and then be more hurt by the revelation.

Both of these phenomena are equally bad because it means you are being taken advantage of in some way, while the other party is maintaining the facade that an actual relationship is always just around the bend.


I'd say the platonic friend zone is worse. At least a girl in the f.ck buddy zone gets to sleep with and have fun with someone she's sexually attracted to. A guy in the "friend zone" only gets downgraded to her asexual little girlfriend and ungratefully gets her problems dumped onto him.


oh real fun sleeping with someone who doesn't actually give a damn about you :roll: , but that's just my perspective...I don't even enjoy that activity.


I've slept with girls who didn't care about me. Still beats being downgraded into being some emotional tampon that gets nothing whatsoever. Sex is sex, no matter what people feel about each other.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,155
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

29 May 2012, 8:04 pm

Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:

You can't really use a consenting adult for sex...


Sure you can if they are after a relationship and you pretend to be interested in that aspect and not just the sex, the girl or guy may be tricked into thinking you're actually interested in him/her and not just the sex so they will have sex thinking that. Then not be so happy about it later when they realize what the real intentions were.


You're still getting exactly what you put out. I've been "used" for sex as well, it's not as bad as some girls say it is (except for when the girl tries to get pregnant); I got exactly what I gave to the girls who've "used" me: sex.


Really because if I remember right, I was not looking for a f*** buddy, I don't think you can judge how bad or not bad something like that is for someone else. I don't like getting used period regardless of why or whatever justification they can pull out of their ass.


If you're not looking for a f.ck buddy, then nobody's forcing you to have sex before you're actually in a commited relationship.


Well at the time I thought it was a relationship, he certainly did not say otherwise...but whatever his loss probably, he wasn't that great of a dude anyways. I never said anything about being forced to do anything anyways. I simply explained I could relate to what was said in the OP about people being used.


_________________
Metal never dies. \m/


Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

29 May 2012, 8:05 pm

Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:

You can't really use a consenting adult for sex...


Sure you can if they are after a relationship and you pretend to be interested in that aspect and not just the sex, the girl or guy may be tricked into thinking you're actually interested in him/her and not just the sex so they will have sex thinking that. Then not be so happy about it later when they realize what the real intentions were.


You're still getting exactly what you put out. I've been "used" for sex as well, it's not as bad as some girls say it is (except for when the girl tries to get pregnant); I got exactly what I gave to the girls who've "used" me: sex.


Really because if I remember right, I was not looking for a f*** buddy, I don't think you can judge how bad or not bad something like that is for someone else. I don't like getting used period regardless of why or whatever justification they can pull out of their ass.


If you're not looking for a f.ck buddy, then nobody's forcing you to have sex before you're actually in a commited relationship.


Well at the time I thought it was a relationship, he certainly did not say otherwise...but whatever his loss probably, he wasn't that great of a dude anyways. I never said anything about being forced to do anything anyways. I simply explained I could relate to what was said in the OP about people being used.


But did he say that you were in a relationship?



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,155
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

29 May 2012, 8:06 pm

Kurgan wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
See this is what I've always suspected.

This is the equivalent of the "Friend-zone" but for women..

Both of them are nebulous status's that only exist because one party is either to oblivious or to hopeful to see that the other party is taking advantage of them in some way for a period of time. Some people will catch on right away, and move on. Others will take a long time to catch on, and then be more hurt by the revelation.

Both of these phenomena are equally bad because it means you are being taken advantage of in some way, while the other party is maintaining the facade that an actual relationship is always just around the bend.


I'd say the platonic friend zone is worse. At least a girl in the f.ck buddy zone gets to sleep with and have fun with someone she's sexually attracted to. A guy in the "friend zone" only gets downgraded to her asexual little girlfriend and ungratefully gets her problems dumped onto him.


oh real fun sleeping with someone who doesn't actually give a damn about you :roll: , but that's just my perspective...I don't even enjoy that activity.


I've slept with girls who didn't care about me. Still beats being downgraded into being some emotional tampon that gets nothing whatsoever. Sex is sex, no matter what people feel about each other.


Alright well not everyone's first priority is sex, I myself have found it to be quite boring...and I am not offended if someone would rather be friends, that's kind of ridiculous holding a grudge like that just because someone isen't interested in having a relationship with you.


_________________
Metal never dies. \m/


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 35,155
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

29 May 2012, 8:08 pm

Kurgan wrote:

But did he say that you were in a relationship?


Yes that was discussed first...I would not have had that impression otherwise.


_________________
Metal never dies. \m/


Last edited by Sweetleaf on 29 May 2012, 8:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

rabbittss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Dec 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,348

29 May 2012, 8:12 pm

Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
edgewaters wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
If we're talking about pair-bonding in most other primates, it involves friends with benefits without any commitment or obligations.


Wrong.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~phyl/anthro/mating.html

And again, you're not understanding what pair-bonding is. Pair-bonding occurs in FWB.


You're still missing my point that relationships the way they are today are unnatural. Furthermore, your article states that only 20% of all human societies have traditionally been monoamous.

There are many forms of pair-bonding. Long term pair-bonding isn't natural in humans and all the obligations and expectations that go with sex in humans are the most unnatural parts.


Our hominid ancestors have been demi-monogamous (not completely) since about 1.5 million years ago, before the rise of homo sapiens. The last time we weren't, we were Australopithecus.


That's bull.

Most native American trives for instance practiced polygamy well into the 18th century and the Bible speaks warmly of it.

Monogamy became widespread in Europe after the expansion of the Roman empire (notice how the new testament avoids mentioning polygamy, whereas a lot of important persons in the old testament were indeed polygamous). This was because of economical reasons. There are really no reliable records stating that monogamy existed at all before until 3500 B.C. in Egypt.


We are neither Native American tribes nor ancient Hebrews.. what we are, in the west, are the inheritors of Roman culture.. so it stands to reason that Roman marriage customs would also be something which we inherited.

Oddly enough, there have been studies undertaken to explain the link between Polygamy and Suicide bombers in the middle east. The young men know there is no hope of them ever starting familys, due to the older more established men having multiple wives, so they are more open to the idea of blowing themselves up in the hopes of getting plenty of wives in paradise.

Just because SOME cultures practiced polygamy, at SOME point in time.. doesn't mean those of us living in the modern world should follow suit.


The polygamy in Islamic culture would have worked just fine if men and women had equal rights.


Sure, if you practiced ritual male infanticide to make sure there were 5+ women for every male.. kind of like the Jeffs sect does in Utah.. except they don't kill the boys as babies, they just chuck them out of town when they turn 18 to fend for themselves.


Equal rights mean that women aren't being forced into monogamy either. This is why polygamy works fine in many African tribes.


So what you're suggesting is heterosexual polyamoury. I don't think many people would go for that, and it would make enforcing child support virtually impossible, and likely lead to ever greater amounts of absentee parents. The ancient celts tried this too, had to give your money to your nephew cause you couldn't trust that your wifes kids were actually yours. Lead to the encouragement of a lot of honor duels.. since if they couldn't carry on your lineage, the least they could do is bring honor to you as their war chief.

No thanks. I'll stick with Monogamous pair bonding if it's all the same to you.

Just because things make sense Evolutionarily speaking, doesn't mean they make sense to modern humans.. who have effectively removed themselves from the standard Darwinian model of evolution by inventing tools that not only level the playing feild for the weakest members but actually tilt them in their favor. The small crafty guy with the gun can beat the hulking brute with the 2x4.



madbirdgirl
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 105

29 May 2012, 8:22 pm

Kurgan wrote:
DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
See this is what I've always suspected.

This is the equivalent of the "Friend-zone" but for women..

Both of them are nebulous status's that only exist because one party is either to oblivious or to hopeful to see that the other party is taking advantage of them in some way for a period of time. Some people will catch on right away, and move on. Others will take a long time to catch on, and then be more hurt by the revelation.

Both of these phenomena are equally bad because it means you are being taken advantage of in some way, while the other party is maintaining the facade that an actual relationship is always just around the bend.


I'd say the platonic friend zone is worse. At least a girl in the f.ck buddy zone gets to sleep with and have fun with someone she's sexually attracted to. A guy in the "friend zone" only gets downgraded to her asexual little girlfriend and ungratefully gets her problems dumped onto him.


because you have an easier time empathizing with men than women
any relationship based on lies or misrepresentation in the interest of manipulating another person is wrong, no matter what the end goal of the manipulation is


If a girl was being used for emotional toilet paper and her romantic interest called her in the middle of the night to b!tch about how the girl he's sleeping with left the toilet seat down, to imply that the girl now owes him a relationship or to complain that "all women are the same", I'd gladly empatize with her. Especially if he told her "I wish more girls were like you" or led her on with flirting.

Actually, most guys who aren't interested in more than a friend with benefits don't hint about more either. That's why the girl often wonders what the guy wants. If your in the FWB zone, you get most of the good parts (sex, going to concerts, watching movies together etc.) from a relationship without getting any of the bad parts. The guy who's being used for emotional toilet paper gets all the bad parts.

my original topic is NOT about strictly FWB relationships - it is about false relationships, or girls expecting more because they are purposefully manipulated into the "someday" trap.
if you've been the nice guy used as emotional toilet paper, i'm sorry, but can't you stop picking up the phone? it's not like you have memories of making love to her. in fact, no serious emotional damage occurs in nice guy friendzones. becoming sexually frustrated and longing for something to happen is NOT the same as sacrificing your time, effort, plans, goals, and body for a person who actually hates you enough to lie to your face and take what you value most from you.



Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

29 May 2012, 8:27 pm

madbirdgirl wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
See this is what I've always suspected.

This is the equivalent of the "Friend-zone" but for women..

Both of them are nebulous status's that only exist because one party is either to oblivious or to hopeful to see that the other party is taking advantage of them in some way for a period of time. Some people will catch on right away, and move on. Others will take a long time to catch on, and then be more hurt by the revelation.

Both of these phenomena are equally bad because it means you are being taken advantage of in some way, while the other party is maintaining the facade that an actual relationship is always just around the bend.


I'd say the platonic friend zone is worse. At least a girl in the f.ck buddy zone gets to sleep with and have fun with someone she's sexually attracted to. A guy in the "friend zone" only gets downgraded to her asexual little girlfriend and ungratefully gets her problems dumped onto him.


because you have an easier time empathizing with men than women
any relationship based on lies or misrepresentation in the interest of manipulating another person is wrong, no matter what the end goal of the manipulation is


If a girl was being used for emotional toilet paper and her romantic interest called her in the middle of the night to b!tch about how the girl he's sleeping with left the toilet seat down, to imply that the girl now owes him a relationship or to complain that "all women are the same", I'd gladly empatize with her. Especially if he told her "I wish more girls were like you" or led her on with flirting.

Actually, most guys who aren't interested in more than a friend with benefits don't hint about more either. That's why the girl often wonders what the guy wants. If your in the FWB zone, you get most of the good parts (sex, going to concerts, watching movies together etc.) from a relationship without getting any of the bad parts. The guy who's being used for emotional toilet paper gets all the bad parts.

my original topic is NOT about strictly FWB relationships - it is about false relationships, or girls expecting more because they are purposefully manipulated into the "someday" trap.
if you've been the nice guy used as emotional toilet paper, i'm sorry, but can't you stop picking up the phone? it's not like you have memories of making love to her. in fact, no serious emotional damage occurs in nice guy friendzones. becoming sexually frustrated and longing for something to happen is NOT the same as sacrificing your time, effort, plans, goals, and body for a person who actually hates you enough to lie to your face and take what you value most from you.


That's basically what an emotional tampon is. I severed contact with the previous girl who attempted to use me that way ages ago. Furthermore, a lot of girls sleep with a guy before tey put him in the friendzone, but they stop it once they start throwing their emotional garbage at him.

In most "false relationships", the girl gets what she puts out—no more, no less. There are far worse ways a guy can use you than just for the sex.



AScomposer13413
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Feb 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,157
Location: Canada

29 May 2012, 8:31 pm

madbirdgirl wrote:
my original topic is NOT about strictly FWB relationships - it is about false relationships, or girls expecting more because they are purposefully manipulated into the "someday" trap.
if you've been the nice guy used as emotional toilet paper, i'm sorry, but can't you stop picking up the phone? it's not like you have memories of making love to her. in fact, no serious emotional damage occurs in nice guy friendzones. becoming sexually frustrated and longing for something to happen is NOT the same as sacrificing your time, effort, plans, goals, and body for a person who actually hates you enough to lie to your face and take what you value most from you.


Probably gonna get a lot of flack for this comment :? The whole scenario goes both ways. Both genders are capable of hurting the other in the manner you describe. Full stop.



madbirdgirl
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 105

29 May 2012, 8:37 pm

Kurgan wrote:
madbirdgirl wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
rabbittss wrote:
See this is what I've always suspected.

This is the equivalent of the "Friend-zone" but for women..

Both of them are nebulous status's that only exist because one party is either to oblivious or to hopeful to see that the other party is taking advantage of them in some way for a period of time. Some people will catch on right away, and move on. Others will take a long time to catch on, and then be more hurt by the revelation.

Both of these phenomena are equally bad because it means you are being taken advantage of in some way, while the other party is maintaining the facade that an actual relationship is always just around the bend.


I'd say the platonic friend zone is worse. At least a girl in the f.ck buddy zone gets to sleep with and have fun with someone she's sexually attracted to. A guy in the "friend zone" only gets downgraded to her asexual little girlfriend and ungratefully gets her problems dumped onto him.


because you have an easier time empathizing with men than women
any relationship based on lies or misrepresentation in the interest of manipulating another person is wrong, no matter what the end goal of the manipulation is


If a girl was being used for emotional toilet paper and her romantic interest called her in the middle of the night to b!tch about how the girl he's sleeping with left the toilet seat down, to imply that the girl now owes him a relationship or to complain that "all women are the same", I'd gladly empatize with her. Especially if he told her "I wish more girls were like you" or led her on with flirting.

Actually, most guys who aren't interested in more than a friend with benefits don't hint about more either. That's why the girl often wonders what the guy wants. If your in the FWB zone, you get most of the good parts (sex, going to concerts, watching movies together etc.) from a relationship without getting any of the bad parts. The guy who's being used for emotional toilet paper gets all the bad parts.

my original topic is NOT about strictly FWB relationships - it is about false relationships, or girls expecting more because they are purposefully manipulated into the "someday" trap.
if you've been the nice guy used as emotional toilet paper, i'm sorry, but can't you stop picking up the phone? it's not like you have memories of making love to her. in fact, no serious emotional damage occurs in nice guy friendzones. becoming sexually frustrated and longing for something to happen is NOT the same as sacrificing your time, effort, plans, goals, and body for a person who actually hates you enough to lie to your face and take what you value most from you.


That's basically what an emotional tampon is. I severed contact with the previous girl who attempted to use me that way ages ago. Furthermore, a lot of girls sleep with a guy before tey put him in the friendzone, but they stop it once they start throwing their emotional garbage at him.

In most "false relationships", the girl gets what she puts out—no more, no less. There are far worse ways a guy can use you than just for the sex.

I know, and am I just talking about sex? I believe I mentioned attention and money, too. Yes, oftentimes a man will also use a woman for ATTENTION, which is what my past "users" have also done to me. I know what it's like to be an emotional tampon... men do it to women too! Actually, people do that.