Increasing popularity of friends-first approach

Post Reply New Topic

Brief excerpt from Gen Z's dating revolution: Young people are adopting an old-fashioned solution for the humiliation and hassle of dating apps, by Daniel Cox, Business Insider, Mar 7, 2023:

The article goes on to give various reasons for this.

« Especially women »? Why? These male « friends » didn’t mutually think of these women as friends too?

I also think that the friends first approach is statistically more probable to resault in better long term relationships if I remember correctly.

I definitely prefer “friends first.” It seems safer.

I've always considered "friends first" to be the "right" approach, personally. I understand that others don't, or are happy to mix it up and go with "person I randomly met" experiences, but that's never really clicked with me as an option.

To me it's always seemed like the more respectful, connected, trust-building way of forming a relationship, and even the "natural" way of forming a relationship, based on a mutual connection that grows over time. It would certainly make me feel more comfortable, knowing that I and a potential partner already understand each other, know each other's quirks, know we enjoy each other's company, and so on.

On the other hand, in online discussions about dating practices, gender relations, and suchlike, I tend to hear conflicting views. Some say that approaching women you don't know is disrespectful, others disagree. Some suggest that trying to upgrade a friendship is a sign that you were never friends in the first place but simply wanted to charm your way into a woman's underwear under false pretences. Some say that you should express interest as soon as possible to show what it is you're looking for in this social bond you're trying to form. Others say that's objectification.

Then there's the dreaded "friend zone" where you've developed feelings which turn out to be unrequited. Or things can get awkward and the dynamic can change after you've expressed a wish to move to something more involved but the person you want to do it with doesn't want to join you in that.

Hell if I know what's what. I always thought the upgraded friendship was the way it was always supposed to work, but for every dating truth you'll find another one which contradicts it, and even paints you as a terrible misogynist. I really do hate the present social environment. At least 20 years ago, if I were to make a mistake, it'd be a largely innocent mis-step. Now it seems anything you do (particularly as someone without the experience to overcome the negative messaging) is a sign of disrespect, discrimination, and harassment against women, no matter how good your intentions.

But the numbers shows that there are about ~16% of men in the Gen Z group who were lying about their friendship, they have never seen their partners as friends-first . Or it was perceived as friendship from one side only, which is weird. I doubt the homosexuality would explain a such gap.

Last edited by The_Face_of_Boo on 15 Mar 2023, 7:43 am, edited 1 time in total.

Patience and perseverance pays off my friend

^ in the old days they use to call these 'crush.'

Possibly, in part, because young women are more likely than young men to be in heterosexual relationships at all, in the first place, whether with friends or non-friends, because, in most heterosexual relationships, the man is at least slightly older than the woman. Therefore, any trend affecting young people in heterosexual relationships will disproportionately affect women.

I think a lot depends on how and why the friendship formed, in the first place. If your only reason for becoming "friends" with a woman, in the first place, is erotic attraction, then that's not real friendship. There should be other reasons for the friendship too, such as genuinely having other interests in common and genuinely liking her as a person in her own right, with or without the potential for an erotic or romantic relationship.

Sure, but in certain online spaces where these things are discussed - which, I appreciate, does not necessarily represent "real life" but as an autistic person it may be all someone can find for context - it's frequently implied that any man who tries to move a friendship to a relationship was playing the long con and was never interested in a friendship to begin with.

I find that kind of dating discussion confusing, exclusionary, bitter, and disingenuous. But it's out there, people (like myself) who don't have the positive experience to know better, first hand, have to try and fish through the garbage to find the helpful nuggets. It's very draining when every second comment somewhere is an implication that, as a man, you must be obsessive, objectifying, manipulating, uncaring, and predatory. Especially when, for every comment which says "do this to not be those things" there's another which directly contradicts it and says "don't do this to not be those things".

I think the way to navigate that is to simply ask yourself how you would feel if someone treated you the same way. Women, and I think it's fair to say that the majority of people confused about finding a partner here are men, are just people. They aren't some separate species from men. There are no belief systems, character traits or behaviours that are unique to women, and none that they all share. Again, if people tell you there are, then ask yourself how you feel about men being characterized in the same way - if you don't like it, then there's your North star. Or Southern Cross for our counterclockwise-flushing friends.

Same for these guys who tell you that women are only interested in guys that have a car, or a good job or are good looking or whatever they've decided is the bar they fall short of. How would you feel about being reduced to a set of superficial considerations? Does your personality count for nothing? Should your kindness, sense of humour, empathy, interest have no value?

That's how you can separate the bs from the good advice. Flip the script. Do unto others...and so on.

There's actually a simpler way. Basically the right thing to do is usually the harder thing to do. Blame women for their terrible superficial ways? Or do some work on yourself and make yourself into a more attractive person (and no, I'm not talking about hitting the gym, getting a job and buying a BMW)?

The right thing is almost always the thing that takes more effort and makes you feel more uncomfortable.

-nb I wrote this response then realised it sounds like I thought you were complaining of being freind-zoned - I know you're not. It's just the words get my dander up.

I hate 'friend-zone'. Don't get me wrong, unrequited love sucks, it's painful and can be humiliating. But the idea of being friend-zoned by a woman is horrible. The language of it is subtly accusing. It's the language of victimhood that is so pervasive in incel culture. It's the woman's fault. She's done this to the man. How dare she not feel attracted to me.

Anyone who genuinely wants to be your friend is a gift. Attraction can pass, if it does you'll be left with that most valuable thing, a friend. If it doesn't then make your excuses and put some distance between you and her for both of your sakes.

One of the worst experiences in life!

I think that even if a man is befriending a woman with romantic intentions and is willing to go for the long run, that's still beneficial to the woman. Reasons are, the woman can take her time and decide about the personality of the man and if he is right for her. Secondly, a man that is willing to invest time and care for a woman that can reject him at the end, he trully cares for the woman. So if she decides to reciprocate then she is going to be with a non-opportunistic man.

This is applicable vise versa, as well as in same sex relationships, I think.

But, as women are one edit: not one monolithic being, that doesn't make sense. Do unto others only works if "others" share the same expectations and preferences as you.

It would be an absolute and unexpected joy to be complimented in public, yet many women say they don't like it; it's bothersome, it's cheap, it seems desperate, it's objectification.

I would be (at least) flattered (if not wholly enthusiastic to indulge her) if a female friend of mine were to express a sexual interest in me. After all, we're friends, we clearly already get on to some degree, so that would mean something to me. Yet some women declare this "typical" of men, "always wanting only one thing", and again objectifying.

I would probably feel somewhat privileged to be invited back to a woman's home, yet if I were to invite a woman to my home I would expect to be seen as hungry for sex, or trying to put her in a dangerous or compromising position.

Clearly not all women hold all of these opinions, but enough do - and are particularly vocal about it, in both casual discussions and professional media - to cause concern for an autistic man such as myself. Likewise, I feel concern for my own chances of eventual romantic success when I see signs on the Tube talking about how "sexual staring" is harassment. How, as an autistic person, do you put that puzzle piece together with all the others labelled "eye contact is socially important" and "eye contact is one of the keys to flirting"? What even is "sexual staring"? Who decides whether it was or not? What's the definition? What might the punishment be? How come it's OK if someone's socially adept and "flirting", rather than socially awkward and "creepy"?

The point I'm trying to get to is that there are women out there who would want and expect to be treated as I would want to be treated, but it's not obvious who they are, and there may be dire consequences (ranging from embarrassment and increased anxiety to legal action) to getting that calculation wrong. A calculation that many of us do get wrong, not necessarily through any fault of our own, or due to any kind of malice or intent to upset or perturb.