Is the friend zone really a thing?

[jackofwind]

I don't think I ever claimed it's not real, but you're underestimating the strength of manipulation.

An abusive marriage is also easy to leave by pressing charges and yet the abused doesn't, that's what manipulation is.

Dismissing that away with '' oh just stop being manipulated '' just shows ignorance of how the world and human psyche works.

Friendzone =/= strung along. The only thing that keeps people in the friendzone is misplaced hope that someone who doesn't want to fuck them will suddenly do a 180.

- - - Updated - - -

No, I am not 12. I am merely mocking your extremely emotional, ad hominem responses.

Insulting someone without any provocation either shows you're really triggered or suffer from some inferiority complex where people that express controversial opinions upset you. Perhaps because you lack the nerve to express your own? I don't know, take your advice and see a therapist.



Already gave you articles.

You were too busy throwing a tantrum.

Says the guy dripping bitterness and emotion with every word he writes. This is comedy gold.

PS: Your articles are personal opinion pieces, not scientific papers. Anyone can write anything, that doesn't make it more than anecdotes. Just like your opinion isn't the truth just because you believe in it strongly.

[pateuvasiliu]

Friendzone =/= strung along. The only thing that keeps people in the friendzone is misplaced hope that someone who doesn't want to fuck them will suddenly do a 180.

- - - Updated - - -



Says the guy dripping bitterness and emotion with every word he writes. This is comedy gold.

Being strung along is what the friendzone is. If friendzone described a person that's a friend and you're not attracted to, then most of the people you knew would be in your friendzone. It would have no meaning.

Says the guy dripping bitterness and emotion with every word he writes. This is comedy gold.

Please.

You tried, you got told. Spare yourself and spare us.

[jackofwind]

Being strung along is what the friendzone is. If friendzone described a person that's a friend and you're not attracted to, then most of the people you knew would be in your friendzone. It would have no meaning.



Please.

You tried, you got told. Spare yourself and spare us.

This is what you're getting confused about. In the friendzone there doesn't need to be any hints from one party to the other of more than a platonic relationship. The party who has romantic feelings has them regardless of the other person's feelings, and continues the friendship in the hopes that the other person will suddenly fall for them.

That's literally what it is, and why it's pathetic. It doesn't require any stringing along at all.

And, once again, you saying things doesn't make them true. Spare us the annotated commentary - you're the minority in this thread.

[pateuvasiliu]

You do realise that in this thread people are laughing at you, right?

The horror!

Luckily I have you to give me a lesson in what 'issues' and 'baggage' are.

Should probably tell me a thing or two about wit as well, since you clearly have it in spades.


Teach.

[Deleted]

Bare some outliers and excluding relatives, you simply can't have the same deep non-sexual bond with a woman that you can have with men as a man.
Most women understand loyalty as = "how useful can you be to me now or in the close future". Any "loyalty" to you is non-existant if one of those two conditions are not met.

[pateuvasiliu]

Your articles are personal opinion pieces, not scientific papers.

You want a scientific paper on... social norms?

What?

That's why they're social norms, they aren't scientific.

There's no science that explains why men wearing skirts are ridiculed, that's just what the society feels is wrong/right.

- - - Updated - - -

Bare some outliers and excluding relatives, you simply can't have the same deep non-sexual bond with a woman that you can have with men as a man.
Most women understand loyalty as = "how useful can you be to me now or in the close future". Any "loyalty" to you is non-existant if one of those two conditions are not met.

In my experience, women seeking to befriend men do so because:

1. They are bad at befriending other women ( for various reasons )

2. Being the girl in a group of dudes means you get a lot of attention, and if you're #1 then you probably lack said attention.


I mean honestly there are so few things that a woman friend can do for a guy which a guy friend couldn't do. The only one I can think of is wingmanning but if that's the reason for a friendship it's precisely '' what can that person do for me '' and that's no friendship.

[theostrichsays]

Personally I would say yes.

Most the time it simply isn't a malicious thing, its just a lack of 2 way feelings. I have a great friend, whom I have zero attraction to but enjoyed talking to. Our friendship ended for a long while because, she wanted more and I didn't and rejection hurts. Eventually we made up, and she met someone great and that six months that we didn't speak at all is never mentioned anymore.

Sometimes though it is a malicious and manipulative thing. Ever saw a guy with no self confidence get a little bit of attention from a woman, who has no itnerest in him but likes the attention and other things given to her? One side wants more, the other doesn't, seems pretty consistent with most peoples generic definition of the friend zone.

[MrPaladinGuy]

I have some friends complaining about it. I told them to move on, but they keep saying they keep getting friend zoned. Is it a real thing?

[jackofwind]

You want a scientific paper on... social norms?

What?

That's why they're social norms, they aren't scientific.

There's no science that explains why men wearing skirts are ridiculed, that's just what the society feels is wrong/right.

There are papers on such things. It's called psychology. Shockingly, it's not just a fairy tale. It's pretty obvious that for you to have a point taken seriously you need to provide more than opinion pieces, because those are, by definition, nothing more than anecdotes.

There are scientific papers that explain why social norms exist and why they differ from culture to culture. Or didn't you know that in many cultures men wear skirts? Even basic anthropology could have taught you that.

Again: there is no requirement of stringing along for the friendzone. All that is required is for one party to want a romantic relationship while the other does not, and for that party to stay in the friendship in the hopes that such a relationship will someday spontaneously manifest. It's self-inflicted.

[Stelio Kontos]

This forum really does have a lot of angry internet man-children. It's pretty cringey at times.

The friendzone is a self-constructed prison, and one that both men and women can find themselves in.

[Fencers]

Hell yes. Totally real.

But it's more like the "I actually don't want to have sex with you. Can you chill out/not think all interactions must lead to sex or they are pointless. Y/N?"-zone.

[pateuvasiliu]

There are papers on such things. It's called psychology. Shockingly, it's not just a fairy tale, and numerous studies have been undertaken, and papers written, on the ever-changing nature of social norms.

There are papers that explain why social norms exist and why they differ from culture to culture. Or didn't you know that in many cultures men wear skirts? Even basic anthropology could have taught you that.

Again: there is no requirement of stringing along for the friendzone. All that is required is for one party to want a romantic relationship while the other does not, and for that party to stay in the friendship in the hopes that such a relationship will someday spontaneously manifest. It's self-inflicted.

This is like the pay to win debate. You can go for the literal definition of paying to win, or you can go for what most people use it for.

When people lament the friendzone it's really the stringing along.

Friendship without sex is pretty much what most people have. That's not the friendzone. That's just friendship.

Arguing about friendship is pointless, if you stay in a friendship that has clear boundaries and doesn't satisfy you, that's 100% your fault.

There are papers on such things. It's called psychology.

You'll learn far more 'psychology' from interacting with people and keeping your eyes wide open than you will from some crappy papers that usually carry an agenda, especially a 'psychological' one that talks about men and women. We live in the PC world, you can't write shit like 'women make up roughly half of the domestic abusers' without being buried by the feminists.

As I said, your simple truth is just reading the comments of those articles.

There is no study or 'paper' about who should pay ( or there shouldn't be, it would be moronic ) simply because that's not a question of science, it's a question of opinion. That man should or should not pay is not a fact. It is an opinion. And the majority of women want the man to pay. Plenty men want to, as well.

[Stelio Kontos]

I think a lot of the time if a man or woman gets strung along, and it goes on after a certain point, it's on them for sticking around and letting it continue.

[jackofwind]

This is like the pay to win debate. You can go for the literal definition of paying to win, or you can go for what most people use it for.

When people lament the friendzone it's really the stringing along.

Friendship without sex is pretty much what most people have. That's not the friendzone. That's just friendship.



You'll learn far more 'psychology' from interacting with people and keeping your eyes wide open than you will from some crappy papers that usually carry an agenda, especially a 'psychological' one that talks about men and women. We live in the PC world, you can't write shit like 'women make up roughly half of the domestic abusers' without being buried by the feminists.

As I said, your simple truth is just reading the comments of those articles.

There is no study or 'paper' about who should pay ( or there shouldn't be, it would be moronic ) simply because that's not a question of science, it's a question of opinion. That man should or should not pay is not a fact. It is an opinion. And the majority of women want the man to pay. Plenty men want to, as well.

Nope, people misconstrue nonverbal communication signs due to confirmation bias and convince themselves that the other party is hinting at romance. Those people then get extremely salty about the non-reciprocation, and complain about being friendzoned. No stringing along required. If you're in the friendzone it's far more likely that you misled yourself than that you were misled by the other party due to confirmation bias. It's just the way our brains work.

Psychology doesn't have an agenda any more than, say, Oncology does. It tries to make sense of the human brain and mind. It's extremely rooted in science, it's not whatever kind of Women's Studies thing you seem to be claiming it is. You certainly can't find out more about actual psychology through personal observation than you can through documented scientific studies. That's like saying you can learn more about cancer by watching people die from it than you can by actually studying it.

I never disagreed with you regarding men paying for dates, that's a very well-documented and studied social phenomenon. you'd have to be an idiot to claim there isn't social pressure on men to do so. I've only ever been speaking to the concept of the friendzone.

As for it being moronic to study why men are expected to pay for dates, why do you think that exactly? What's moronic about researching the series of social norms that led us to our ones and how that differs from other cultures? You do realise that sort of thing is what academia is all about, right?

[pateuvasiliu]

Nope, people misconstrue nonverbal communication signs due to confirmation bias and convince themselves that the other party is hinting at romance. Those people then get extremely salty about the non-reciprocation, and complain about being friendzoned. No stringing along required. If you're in the friendzone it's far more likely that you misled yourself than that you were misled.

Psych 101.

That's why you don't base your assumptions on nonverbal signs.

- - - Updated - - -

I think a lot of the time if a man or woman gets strung along, and it goes on after a certain point, it's on them for sticking around and letting it continue.

Manipulation works wonders on the human mind, when that mind harbors hope.

We've seen people literally kill themselves over bullying, you really think getting strung along is that unlikely?

[Doomislav]

I say it only exists in the mind of the one who claims to be in it.

No one puts one into the friend zone, one puts themself in the friend zone.

As you said, the best thing to do is to just move on and stop pining for a woman who does not share your feelings.

This is a lucid point about young human nature.

[downnola]

The friend zone is a place that men create because they were rejected sexually. Women are hyper selective with their mates; deal with it and fix your shit.

[jackofwind]

That's why you don't base your assumptions on nonverbal signs.

- - - Updated - - -



Manipulation works wonders on the human mind, when that mind harbors hope.

We've seen people literally kill themselves over bullying, you really think getting strung along is that unlikely?

It's how our brains work, we can't help it as humans. No one can, everyone has confirmation bias. We even get it when dealing with verbal communication. I edited my previous post with more info.

It's a testament to the human mind's ability to convince itself of what it wants to believe. This is all scientifically documented stuff, it's not really a debatable point.

[Xar226]

I have some friends complaining about it. I told them to move on, but they keep saying they keep getting friend zoned. Is it a real thing?

Yes. But it's only a statement of where things stand between two people; if somebody is constantly bothered by it or trying to "escape" from it, that's on them and they need to find a way to move on.

That said, there is also a related thing where somebody leads somebody else on but never lets them get anywhere, which is legitimately scummy. If you're not interested in being more than friends with somebody, just make that clear.

[Berengil]

Guys saying they're "always friend-zoned", tell me that they only want girls as friends if there's a chance they'll get to bang.

Well ... yeah. Why else?

The only difference being: I'm never "friend-zoned." If a woman I find attractive doesn't want to sleep with me, that is the end of our interaction.

---- From the files of Captain Obvious