THE FRIEND ZONE

Post Reply New Topic

What exactly qualifies a man to enter "the friend zone" with a woman? Or is it all baloney?

It seems to me that most (I don't mean to generalize, just judging from my own experience) women have a very small grey area when it comes to sexual attraction and love interest. I used to think there was a set time period, wherein if the man didn't make a move the woman would just assume he's not interested and if social contact pursued after that then she would consider him a friend and move on. I was once told by a woman that I missed my chance because we ended up having a deep conversation about another guy she was possibly interested in, so that shot my "time limit" theory out the window, considering it had only been 48 hours since we met.

Or all of this could be silly and I'm grossly misinterpreting woman, as usual. Any women, NT or Aspie, care to shine some light on this subject for me??

I don't think there's a time limit on someone going into the friend zone, I think it's based more on what attracts the person. If a person doesn't meet the attraction criteria (which can include characteristics as well as physical traits) but their company is still enjoyed it puts that person in the friend zone (I think).

The presumption here being that if a man just did X and Y within Z time frame, he'd have successfully launched himself into this narrow NON-friend "zone?

Sorry- if you're in a woman's "friend zone", it's cause that's how she sees you. Period.

So you're saying that if a woman becomes interested in you romantically, or even just physically, that never changes?

I have witnessed countless instances when a woman's intentions drastically changes, and I'm wondering what men do to initiate this? I'm trying to word this as best I can, I fail most of the time so please have patience. What happens that make men go from someone you are chasing, to someone who you just want hang out with?

I'm saying if you're in the "friend zone" it by definition HAS changed.

I have no clue...I've never "chased" anyone, having no self-esteem and a very shy personality,
and I'd be tickled pink if a man wanted to "just hang out" with me.

Romantic interest seems very complex, but it's not really. If a girl is into mountain climbing, she probably isn't going to be romantically interested in anyone who isn't also a mountain climber. Doesn't mean that she can't be, but it depends how serious she is about mountain climbing. People describe it as "the other half" and "making someone whole" which is mainly complimenting her personality. My parents have been married for almost 30 years now, and my father was fond of his father, but not of his mother. My mother was fond of her mother, but not of her father. You see that a lot in relationships, and it's become a cliche, usually called "daddy issues" but guys are never described as having "mommy issues" which is really the same exact thing, only a little different. I would probably end up with a girl who isn't quite trusting of her father, but still has some contact with him, and likes to play sports, but still likes to do simple things, and prefers that over overly complicated things such as clubbing.

I had something close to that once, but we didn't quite work out. Why did I get put in the friend zone? Because I wasn't patient. I jumped right into Step 2, and she wasn't quite ready. I was ready, and she wasn't, and eventually she just said "Ok, forget it" and that was that. Part of it was that I changed in the last 2 years differently than she changed in the last 2 years. We went in different directions. She gave me plenty of chances, because we were compatible in many ways, but not all the ways necessary, and I screwed it up regardless.

Another girl put me in the friend zone because I wasn't bold enough to make the next move, which was to JUST KISS HER ALREADY!! She needed a guy to just take control, and that's not who I am, and so I got put in the friend zone, or the zone for guys that are almost there, but not quite. It's sort of like the "sex reserves" similar to how a football player can't quite crack the starting lineup because he doesn't quite have it, only that's not about sex in the long run. Yes, the friend zone is about sex, because all male/female relations are somehow tied back to sex. Only thing is, the friend zone is like being second or third string, and even if the starter gets injured, chances are the coach will try to acquire someone in a trade, or look to the draft in lieu of taking a chance on the backup. Of course, that all depends on how long you have been a backup quarterback. Maybe someone else can explain it better.

That really is garbage, quite frankly.

I think it's possible that some guys believe this to be true though.

There were guys that I wanted to be friends with, I enjoyed their company but I didn't even think of them in any form of sexual fashion. These friendships were generally recked because despite clearly indicating that I just wasn't interested in them that way, they kept up a subtle pushing and I just had to cut off contact with them.

I would like to have friends in rl but I find other women difficult to understand and guys (except friends of my bf) keep on pushing for to be more than they are.

To answer your question politely: it is all just baloney. I notice this mystical "friend zone" is never referenced in discussions regarding attractions going the other way (male-->female). What's the big difference though. Either there is an attraction at a given moment or there isn't. It can change. There's no stopwatch counting down.

No, it's not garbage. I'm not saying that girls are sexually attracted to all their friends, I'm saying that girls were at one point, for however brief a period of time, sexually attracted to their friends. Even if it was never "I explicitly want to have sex with you" it was once a possibility, because life is full of them. Would you ever be friends with a guy that you have zero chance of dating or having sex with? No. That's true of EVERYBODY. Even friends of the same sex are supposed to help with this. Ever notice how a group of guys have a similar aesthetic to them? That's no accident, because guys are the same way. If they weren't, then it wouldn't add up. I was, at one point or another, sexually attracted to all the girls I am or was ever friends with, and the girls I was attracted to that I was never friends with weren't attracted to me. Go figure.

Nope, firmly in the "that's garbage" camp here. I'm 43, I've been around the block a lot more times than those of you answering here. Pure and simply, for me, there are men I'm sexually attracted to and men I'm not. No one "becomes" sexually attractive to me. So, of course I have male friends that I've never, ever considered dating or having sex with. They simply don't register like that, to me. This could just be me, but I don't think so, from what I've read here.

Mindslave, just because you were interested sexually in all of your female friends doesn't mean that women feel the same way about things. It doesn't even mean that all men feel like this, it just means that you feel this. While saying this, it doesn't mean that your viewpoint and tendency is not present in many males, neither of us can say for sure because we're not them.

About this kind of thing, a person can only be sure about their own thoughts and tendencies, people can talk about it but their level of truthfullness can only be known by them.

I've tried to be friends with guys, I wasn't ever attracted to the ones I wanted to be friends with (bar twice because of personality traits). I never even viewed them in a sexual light except for the two.

For me, it could be any of a number of reasons. Obviously, there are guys you simply don't feel enough physical chemistry with, but enjoy in other ways. And chemistry can change; sometimes you have it for a while, and lose it, at which point it is best not to continue.

Then there are men you have some physical chemistry with, but you realize there is something that simply would not make you two a good long term match. An easy example for me there would be a guy who has negative feelings about God and faith; how could one build a life with someone who disagrees with such a fundamental part of who you believe you are? Sometimes it is really hard to put your finger on what made you realize this isn't the guy you are meant to marry but, once you realize that, assuming you are a woman who wants to marry, the only honest thing to do is put on the breaks. But when a guy has lots of wonderful traits that make you enjoy his company, despite there being a deal breaker for marriage, it is nice to keep that person in your life as a friend.

I don't think it's worth putting a lot of energy into figuring out why any single relationship went into friend zone. If you can form strong enough relationships to get that far, you're on a good track. Finding the person that is right for you is a long and slow process for most people; you have to be compatible on so many levels, and that is hard to find.

And be aware that most women are evaluating the potential for marriage from day one. You can be the best guy in the world but if they realize a marriage can't work, they're usually done, moving on.

No, it isn't. That was not true of me in my dating life, and certainly not true of me now that I am married.

Believing that will make you suspicious of very male friend your partner ever acquires. It's a false and potentially destructive generalization. People come in all sorts of mindsets, level of instinct, and need/desire. You need to allow for that.

Yeah. Garbage.

You're right, "no", because I'd never be friends with ANYONE because I simply don't value friendships versus romantic relationships. I would appreciate if you would stop presuming to speak for people's preferences and thought patterns and telling me what I think and what my habits are, let alone on the basis of my owning a vagina.

Except asexuals, social loners, people for whom sex is not an impetus in forming relationships....yeah. Other than that.

No. I have no concept of aesthetics, truth be told.

"My notions are true, because if they aren't, they wouldn't be?" Otay.

Cool story, bro! I'm left-handed. Therefore, all people are left-handed.

This reeks of inability to isolate variables.

To the bolded part - yes, of course I would and I already did more than once. Whenever I hear "that's true for EVERYBODY" I feel like screaming

You're just projecting your own (very limited) experience on everybody else.



Exactly, why is this so hard to understand?