The "Friend Zone"

[coonskee]

My favourite description of the friendzone:

If the “friend zone†applied in other situations

Man walks into a store and finds employee.

Man: Alright, I’ve had enough. Why haven’t you guys hired me?!

Employee: Uh…well sir, when did you put in your application?

Man: I never filled out an application.

Employee: Well sir, we can’t consider you for employment if you’ve never filled out an application.

Man: No, that’s bullshit, because I’ve been coming here for years now, and every single time I tell you all how much I love this store and how much I appreciate your customer service, unlike some of your other customers might I add!

Employee: Well, but that doesn’t-

Man: AND I even told you that I didn’t have a job!

Employee: But sir, that doesn’t indicate to us that you would like a job at our store. And again, if you’ve never filled out an application, we can’t consider you. Besides, we’re not hiring.

Man: OH! Not hiring, HA! What a laugh. I see your store go through seasonal workers all the time. They come and go like nothing, but you won’t consider me as a part-time employee even though I KNOW you’ve been looking for workers to fill positions? That’s insane!

Employee: Sir, we’ve been looking to hire a few people for management positions. Do you have any management experience?

Man: Well no, but what does that matter?

Employee: …Well sir, that’s what we’re looking for. You won’t be suitable for the position without management experience.

Man: Oh that’s such a load of crap. You know, you’ll be waiting around a long time for a manager if you don’t lower your standards a little. Who cares if someone knows how to manage a store? I LOVE this store and I’m willing to work here, that’s all that should matter to you.

Employee: That…doesn’t make any sense.

Man: NO! I’m done. This is over. From now on, no more Mr. Nice Guy.

Employee:

Man:

Employee:

Man: Fuck you, slut.

In terms of the friendzone: my boyfriend STILL regularly complains (2.5 years in) that I friendzoned him for three and a half years of college before we started dating. The thing is, he WASN'T persistent enough - he wasn't a jackass like the other frat boys out there (which is why I love me my Sigma Chi boys), but I had no idea he was interested in me, because he was realy shy and didn't want to 'intrude'.

I ended up being the one kissing HIM first...And the thing is, if I hadn't made the first move, I don't know if we ever would've ended up doing anything at all, and I wouldn't be dating the guy I plan to say 'yes' to whenever he gets around to buying a ring

Basically... don't INTRUDE on her, don't be a jackass, don't use the ****** that you learn in pickup classes. Just... show your interest. Ask her out. Try to win her heart, but make sure she KNOWS it. And if she doesn't want it? That's her right. The world doesn't owe you anything - just like you don't NEED to date/kiss/sleep with whatever girl happens to be crushing on you.

That doesn't condone letting a girl take advantage of your kindness, of course. If you make clear you're trying to woo her, and she acknowledges and just leads you on... drop it like a hot potater!!

[Leimanu]

The Art of Manliness has written a couple articles about this. Your posted reminded me of this:

http://artofmanliness.com/2008/09/28/nice-guys-dont-have-to-finish-last/

basically, a man can be nice but that's no excuse to be a "weiny." hehehhe, weiny.

http://artofmanliness.com/2008/02/05/the-brad-pitt-rule/

http://artofmanliness.com/2008/01/16/stop-hanging-out-with-women-and-start-dating-them/

Is it weird that a woman reads these? They're really good tips for anyone, and I think I'd like a man who does these

[---]

No, Leimanu, it's not weird. I plan on subscribing to their RSS (once I actually remember to plug the feed into my reader).

[Atalan]

There does need to be a term to identify the middle-ground, since without one our language will continue to support the dichotomy. I propose "Good men."

The denotation is obvious (in my opinion), but the connotation is where it's at (as with most language). It adds a level of meaning that suggests the men who are Good Men as opposed to Nice Guys or Douchebags aren't just good people. I'm struggling a little bit to explain the meaning, but basically, it adds a level of: "these are the men you want to pursue/look for if you're into men romantically."

[Jcannon98188]

The Art of Manliness has written a couple articles about this. Your posted reminded me of this:

http://artofmanliness.com/2008/09/28/nice-guys-dont-have-to-finish-last/

basically, a man can be nice but that's no excuse to be a "weiny." hehehhe, weiny.

http://artofmanliness.com/2008/02/05/the-brad-pitt-rule/

http://artofmanliness.com/2008/01/16/stop-hanging-out-with-women-and-start-dating-them/

Is it weird that a woman reads these? They're really good tips for anyone, and I think I'd like a man who does these

Ehhhh too much work. Can't I just be a d-bag instead?

[MasterRay6]

There does need to be a term to identify the middle-ground, since without one our language will continue to support the dichotomy. I propose "Good men."

The denotation is obvious (in my opinion), but the connotation is where it's at (as with most language). It adds a level of meaning that suggests the men who are Good Men as opposed to Nice Guys or Douchebags aren't just good people. I'm struggling a little bit to explain the meaning, but basically, it adds a level of: "these are the men you want to pursue/look for if you're into men romantically."

I like that. "Good men". It has a nice ring to it. It's very classy compared to "nice guys". It's like one of the lost arts of manliness is being called a good man.

[Church]

I like that. "Good men". It has a nice ring to it. It's very classy compared to "nice guys". It's like one of the lost arts of manliness is being called a good man.

I have to ask: if 'nice guy' is one extreme, and D-bag is the other... Would I then be aiming to become a gentleman-douche bag?

And for the record, my personal opinion is that 'Gentleman' has a nicer ring to it

[realbrickwall]

The word you are all searching for is "mensch".

[Arbite]

Its not the fact that they are assholes. Its just that most women are heavily attracted by masculinity. Not all assholes are masculine, and many masculine people aren't assholes, its just that the two coincide more often than not.

[Church]

Its not the fact that they are assholes. Its just that most women are heavily attracted by masculinity. Not all assholes are masculine, and many masculine people aren't assholes, its just that the two coincide more often than not.

Very well said. Simple and elegant. I like it!

[leadchipmunk]

There does need to be a term to identify the middle-ground, since without one our language will continue to support the dichotomy. I propose "Good men."

The denotation is obvious (in my opinion), but the connotation is where it's at (as with most language). It adds a level of meaning that suggests the men who are Good Men as opposed to Nice Guys or Douchebags aren't just good people. I'm struggling a little bit to explain the meaning, but basically, it adds a level of: "these are the men you want to pursue/look for if you're into men romantically."

Couldn't we just go with "Man"? A real Man (note the capital 'M') shouldn't be a D-bag, nor should he be a "nice guy" and be walked over all the time. He should be confident but still humble. Masculine yet able to have feelings. And he shouldn't expect reciprocation for his generosity.

[Church]

Couldn't we just go with "Man"? A real Man (note the capital 'M') shouldn't be a D-bag, nor should he be a "nice guy" and be walked over all the time. He should be confident but still humble. Masculine yet able to have feelings. And he shouldn't expect reciprocation for his generosity.

I concur. Although I fear that the word 'Man' has been bastardized to the point where it is only a vague shadow of its former self. There was a time when a Man was all of theses things, but now the word simply denotes an individual who is both male, and over a certain age. It no longer has anything to do with character, values or virtue. Perhaps this terminology will cause confusion and misunderstandings until such time as we can change public opinion through example.

[ZenGwen]

I seem to be posting a whole lot of images as responses today, but this pretty much sums up how I feel about this stuff...

[leadchipmunk]

I concur. Although I fear that the word 'Man' has been bastardized to the point where it is only a vague shadow of its former self. There was a time when a Man was all of theses things, but now the word simply denotes an individual who is both male, and over a certain age. It no longer has anything to do with character, values or virtue. Perhaps this terminology will cause confusion and misunderstandings until such time as we can change public opinion through example.

That's why I made sure it was 'Man' not 'man.' There's a big difference between a "male over a certain age" and a "Man." But your last past is right, "Perhaps this terminology will cause confusion and misunderstandings until such time as we can change public opinion through example." So, until that time happens, gentleman it is.

[catspaw]

I seem to be posting a whole lot of images as responses today, but this pretty much sums up how I feel about this stuff...

LOVE!

[Unda]

I have to be another lady here to say that my hubby was my best friend for a year before we dated. We were all in college and there were plenty of people that I liked, both men and women. Which is one thing that I never have understood about the friendzone, where does it leave people like me? Potentially any gender is someone that I "would" have sex with, does that mean that I can't have any friends without being expected to have sex with people? Where does this leave me?

Ugh. Anyway, I dated a guy named Rob first. Rob was super cute, he still is. He had that skinny indie boy look that I really loved at the time, we liked LOADS of the same music but had enough diverse interests to keep each other interested whilst having our own stuff and sharing things. He was smart, cute, funny, loyal, honourable and a BLAST to be around. We dated for one week. It was SO awkward. We should have been perfect, but it really wasn't. I had no chemistry with him for some reason. However, he was my friend then and, eight years later he's still my friend now, one of my best friends in fact.

After that I dated Jack, Jack was Rob's best friend which okay, yeah, a little skeevy of me but I was 16 and not that classy then, sue me. Jack was... he was lots of things. He was smart, witty, a little self centered (hey, he was 17 though), and a little mean sometimes, but he was competitive and fun and really interesting. He really challenged me and he was really fun to argue with, and he was pretty hot in a geeky way. But with him there was too much friction, the relationship was too abrasive and too high maintenance. I frequently didn't want to see him because it was a lot of energy. It didn't work out and, because he was always a little petty, he never spoke to me again which made me kinda sad.

After that I dated Chris. Chris had been my best friend through all of this and, so he tells me now, he liked me the whole time. He hadn't wanted to say anything and the others had been going on about how they were going to date me and how they would work better with me than the other, he'd not wanted to be part of that really so he'd stepped out of it and just been my friend, my best friend in fact. I trusted him more than anyone else and I could be completly honest with him, even when I was in a shitty mood and super tired I wanted to be around him. He eventually told me that he respected my decision to see whomever I wanted but he had to be honest and say that he really really liked me. I was pretty surprised, I'd not really thought about it before, but as I thought about it I realised that he was pretty cute (which, with me being who I am I find a lot of people cute, especially nerds, so it's not something I give a lot of weight to) and we should work on paper. I figured that I'd give it a go and if we didn't work we didn't work. So I kissed him. Now I'm 24 and married to him.

Moral of this story is that just because you're friends with someone doesn't mean that you can't also be interested in them, but equally just because you work GREAT as friends and you think they're kinda attractive doesn't mean that you're gonna work out either. Someone having the sense to notice that doesn't mean that they've denied you anything, as everyone else has said, no one owes you anything. Attraction, love and friendship are odd things and it's not always simple and it doesn't always make sense. It's not a grand lady conspiracy.

[realbrickwall]

I seem to be posting a whole lot of images as responses today, but this pretty much sums up how I feel about this stuff...

Hey, that's the image I used!

I don't know why mine got taken down. I guess direct-linking metapicture is a bad idea.

[Inksplat]

Friendzones is really something that only teenagers and college students have to deal with, in my experience. And I think its largely because you end up being able to spend so much time with people around campus and such, that you end up in a situation where you're practically married before you even go on a date.

There's no excitement in that.

Most adults don't have that problem. A woman sees a man, thinks he's attractive, gets a hint of something interesting (a book he's carrying, his suit, anything really), and her mind starts to build off that. That's when she'd most likely say yes to a date. It doesn't take much, so long as there's a hook. And it doesn't have to be a stranger, even minor acquaintances, who you see a certain way most of the time, and then, suddenly, the woman discovers something new that totally changes how she sees the guy. The hook works the same way.

And then once you've got the date, its okay to work towards that familiarity, because the switch has already been flipped. But younger people tend to get familiar and then want to flip the switch, which is a hell of a lot harder.

[Leimanu]

Ehhhh too much work. Can't I just be a d-bag instead?

Sure! The choice is yours!

I seem to be posting a whole lot of images as responses today, but this pretty much sums up how I feel about this stuff...

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! "sex falls out" what a weird way to put it, and so perfectly!

[MasterRay6]

Hmmm everyone has some interesting points. I read the AoM article that was linked here and I think men should be on a middle ground between nice guy and D-bag

You can either be an arrogant jack ass or a demure nice guy. But there is a middle a ground, the combination women are truly looking for: the extremely confident gentlemen.

Someone who is gentle yet fierce. Someone who shows feelings yet is solid like a rock.

The article also mentions how men get in the friendzone by being "nice". They become too nice and voila

But the problem is not that this man is a nice guy, but that he’s allowed niceness to travel down the slippery slope into weinerdom.

I don't know, I never thought about the friend zone. I was never friend zoned and I think it's an excuse that people use when someone isn't interested in him/her or something. It's hard to believe that a friend can't have interest in you. People in the "friend zone" probably didn't do much to woo their girl friend

[Cinda]

Wow, there are so many good responses here! All much more eloquently worded than i could ever hope to portray. I think Arbite put some of my feeling best into words as i have slowly started to realize masculinity is a quality i require for in a partner, but not for a friend.

My best friend is male, and in the beginning he actually friendzoned me! He changed his mind after a while, but by then i'd got to know him really well and what made him a fantastic friend, for me wouldn't have ticked the boxes for an awesome bf.