Your definition of friendzone?

[~RedArcher]

Aren't they just acknowledging that the douchebag meaning is one of the main meanings, if not the main one now? It's how definitions evolve and words' meanings change over time. Sounds like the meaning you describe that the word originally had is still contained in saying that "Hey, you're still my friend", so it can be communicated.

I know but that previous post was what I was trying to say in the first place and it wasn't coming out right. Now I've since had some sleep and can structure it better.

AND also to inform the people sneering at the idea that if they reject someone's romantic advances and remain friends with them, they are indeed using the friendzone xD Whether they like it or not. The act of being friends and nothing more.

[JAKQ7111]

But the PROPER way, like I and Otohime have explained, is just that you see people as a legit friend and nothing more. Basically, "just friends". Friendzone is just new age chat talk.

People who are claiming that the friendzone is not a real friendship are incorrect. Just because I don't want to date someone doesn't mean I can't be a damn good friend to them. Nobody knows me well enough to know who my friends are and what we've been through - why can't I treat my friends well even after we've had the "could this be more?" discussion?

Everyone seems to think that once you're friendzoned, you're no longer seen as good enough. No, that's the douchebag way again. We didn't see them as compatible in the first place, only now that person has expressed their feelings and we say, sorry but I don't feel that way. That's all it is.

But why does there have to be a "just" before "friends"? Doesn't that language imply that friendship is less important or valued than romantic relationships? That's where I have a huge issue with the critique of the term. It devalues friendships in comparison to romantic/sexual relationships, which our society already does enough. I know personally, if I were to be rejected romantically by someone without it being awkward, and we were to remain close friends, that would be fine! I think the problem that most people have when they use that word is not that they just wanted a quick lay, but something a bit more intimate, physically and emotionally.

Also, of course you can be a darn good friend to someone you don't necessarily want to date! That's perfectly fine, and honestly, very respectable! Again, I'm not sure if that's the issue per se. Maybe it is for some select people, but the implications of the term "Friend Zone" as opposed to simply a close friendship is that it isn't close enough, and if you like someone really badly and they don't want to be as close to you, that's painful.

[~RedArcher]

But the PROPER way, like I and Otohime have explained, is just that you see people as a legit friend and nothing more. Basically, "just friends". Friendzone is just new age chat talk.

People who are claiming that the friendzone is not a real friendship are incorrect. Just because I don't want to date someone doesn't mean I can't be a damn good friend to them. Nobody knows me well enough to know who my friends are and what we've been through - why can't I treat my friends well even after we've had the "could this be more?" discussion?

Everyone seems to think that once you're friendzoned, you're no longer seen as good enough. No, that's the douchebag way again. We didn't see them as compatible in the first place, only now that person has expressed their feelings and we say, sorry but I don't feel that way. That's all it is.

But why does there have to be a "just" before "friends"? Doesn't that language imply that friendship is less important or valued than romantic relationships? That's where I have a huge issue with the critique of the term. It devalues friendships in comparison to romantic/sexual relationships, which our society already does enough. I know personally, if I were to be rejected romantically by someone without it being awkward, and we were to remain close friends, that would be fine! I think the problem that most people have when they use that word is not that they just wanted a quick lay, but something a bit more intimate, physically and emotionally.

Also, of course you can be a darn good friend to someone you don't necessarily want to date! That's perfectly fine, and honestly, very respectable! Again, I'm not sure if that's the issue per se. Maybe it is for some select people, but the implications of the term "Friend Zone" as opposed to simply a close friendship is that it isn't close enough, and if you like someone really badly and they don't want to be as close to you, that's painful.

No no, absolutely not!

The "just" before "friends" is to imply Stop! Go no further! JUST friends, nothing more.

Stupid English language xD I can see what you mean though, the choice of words is poor but the "just" in this case is to emphasise the Friends Only thing and no possible chemistry, that's all.

In a way, we can't help people misinterpreting and then not feeling the need to discuss it any further, especially if it was an embarrassing blow so that's why complications appear. I think with having the "I like you as a friend" talk, you raise and eliminate the idea that people might think they mean less before they start to think it xD

I think THAT one is up to the friendzoner lol

[Guest]

for me

friendzone: no romantic feelings

beyond friendzone: romantic feelings

[BerenErchamion]

Why is everyone discussing the douchebag meaning of friendzone when it's original meaning was just new age chat lingo for a girl rejecting a guy's romantic advances because she thinks of him only as a friend.

Because the original meaning is irrelevant, as the term has shifted considerably since then.

[Prairie]

BerenErchamion yep, which is why saying that someone uninterested romantically is putting them in the friendzone is incorrect, since friendzone doesn't mean just being friends (regardless of whether it did before). If it did really mean just friends, every friend of a person would be in the friendzone, and the word wouldn't have even been necessary in the first place. The point as I see it of the term is that it implies that the person has dropped a weight or fence around someone, imposed something artificial over how they can relate (which is apparently how the rejected party tends to feel).

[Hooded_Crow]

Friendzone: word men use to express their horror at the idea of maintaining a friendship with a woman they previously proclaimed to like.

And in your experience women are not horrified when someone who feels for them romantically still desires a friendship? I've made the opposite experience.

Yeah, to be honest I picked a side here for the sake of simplicity. But I'm sure women act like that too. Let me correct this:

Friendzone: a word people use to express their horror at the idea of maintaining a friendship with someone they previously proclaimed to like.

Better? :)

[Corretto]

Thanks to my hyper-aromantic orientation I'll never have to concern myself with 'friendzoning' anyone, or being 'friendzoned' by any other party.

One of the few positive features of aromanticism, that's often documented, is that I don't have 'friends' or any of those wacky relationships that define them.

Reclusivity to the rescue!

[Guest]

Since when can aros, even "hyper-aros" (whatever that is), not have close friends?!

I don't see the connection there... except that in your personal case, apparently both happen to be true at the same time.

[Qloshae]

I used to believe in the friendzone, but then I became illuminated and realized it is only about people thinking they deserve to have sex with the other person because of having done them favors or been nice to them.

So it is really just a "self-proclaimed entitlement zone".

On the topic of 'nice guys', it might sometimes be correct and I stress 'sometimes', but usually it is just that you lack something that the other person wants in a relationship.

I found this song and video kinda funny and mocking about the 'nice guys finish last' idea (also, do notice the lesbian in the back xD ).

[Kalidas]

Well I sure am late to this party. I had a friend (I say had because he just annoyed me so much with this crap). Who would not stop complaining and posting on facebook about how nice of a guy he is and that no woman would ever want him and or take him.How women just "friendzone" all the "Great" guys in their life.

So here to make it simple for any idiots out there.

1. If you are nice to a woman because you hope for sex, then you are NOT a nice guy

2.If you expect sex because of something nice you did, you are an asshole

3.If you are "friendzoned" maybe it's because she just doesn't find you attractive? Move on

4.Stop your whining, you are a grown ass adult act like it!

This goes for some women too, I have been accused of friendzoning in the past and even got guilted into a relationship I really didn't want to be a part of because of it. This is what "friendzone" problems can cause, guilting people into uncomfortable and sometimes dangerous situations. I wonder how many women just "gave up" after years of being worn down by their "friendly suiters". This is not to say if you develop feelings for a person you shouldn't let them and even try to pursue a relationship, just understand that if she (or he) says no to leave them alone, and stop guilt tripping them with terms like "friend zone".

[Corretto]

Since when can aros, even "hyper-aros" (whatever that is), not have close friends?!

I don't see the connection there... except that in your personal case, apparently both happen to be true at the same time.

I only use the "hyper" bit to convey where I believe I'm sited on the good old aro spectrum...off the end of it.

I could be accused of sympathy-seeking etc, but since my 'varsity days I've simply not maintained friendly relationships with anyone. I have pleasant acquaintances with individuals that I may encounter daily eg shop-keepers or neighbours etc. Apart from daily, functional, encounters I share little else with them...and don't seem to seek too.

The same phenomena occurs with family members. Some folk on site may relate to that; but combined with the friendless scenario...their are no 'friends', let alone 'close' ones.

Blog-site and talk-back radio hosts are those that I have the closest relationships with. Unexplained; I promote a very wide-radius personal space that no one seems to venture into. "The Recluse"?

[Guest]

I only use the "hyper" bit to convey where I believe I'm sited on the good old aro spectrum...off the end of it.

I could be accused of sympathy-seeking etc, but since my 'varsity days I've simply not maintained friendly relationships with anyone. I have pleasant acquaintances with individuals that I may encounter daily eg shop-keepers or neighbours etc. Apart from daily, functional, encounters I share little else with them...and don't seem to seek too.

The same phenomena occurs with family members. Some folk on site may relate to that; but combined with the friendless scenario...their are no 'friends', let alone 'close' ones.

Blog-site and talk-back radio hosts are those that I have the closest relationships with.

I've been through times when it was similar for me; thankfully these times didn't last that long. And it's no secret that the way I live now - with 98%+ of my social life happening online - would feel dreary and unbearably lonely for most folks. So, I certainly know where you're coming from.

I still stand by saying that's two different things - being aro (even no-trace-of-grey-100%-aro) on the one hand, and being a complete loner on the other. Sure, that can happen together, and fits well together (for a certain sense of "well" *sigh* ), but I just don't think there's any immediate, causal connection.

[Arctangent]

Personally, I don't like using the term "friendzone" because it makes it sounds like if I think of someone a friend, I won't consider having a more intimate relationship with them. In fact, it's basically the reverse - it's hard for me to think of being emotionally or physically intimate with someone unless I'm already close friends with them. Being friends works toward intimate relationship compatibility for me, not against it. Intimate relationships are just more intimate friendships to me anyway (in which romance or sex may or may not be included).

It's still true that I wouldn't consider all of my friendships as potential intimate relationships. Although I do feel care and affection for all of my friends (that's part of what "friendship" means to me) some of them are monogamous or otherwise incompatible with me. That's not because they're in the "friends" category, though, that's because we're incompatible. I would rather just say that outright than use the term "friendzone" for that, which makes me feel like I'm downplaying valuable friendships just because they're not "intimate relationship material."

I don't know. I know other people interpret it differently, but "friendzone" makes friendship sound too much like a demotion to me.

[Kalidas]

Personally, I don't like using the term "friendzone" because it makes it sounds like if I think of someone a friend, I won't consider having a more intimate relationship with them. In fact, it's basically the reverse - it's hard for me to think of being emotionally or physically intimate with someone unless I'm already close friends with them. Being friends works toward intimate relationship compatibility for me, not against it. Intimate relationships are just more intimate friendships to me anyway (in which romance or sex may or may not be included).

It's still true that I wouldn't consider all of my friendships as potential intimate relationships. Although I do feel care and affection for all of my friends (that's part of what "friendship" means to me) some of them are monogamous or otherwise incompatible with me. That's not because they're in the "friends" category, though, that's because we're incompatible. I would rather just say that outright than use the term "friendzone" for that, which makes me feel like I'm downplaying valuable friendships just because they're not "intimate relationship material."

I don't know. I know other people interpret it differently, but "friendzone" makes friendship sound too much like a demotion to me.

It turns a friendship into a consolation(im not sure I spelled that right) prize

[CluelessWonder4577]

I use the friend zone as well, not to hurt people, it is where I put people I absolutely couldn't lose. I'm an aroace and though I would be okay attempting a relationship, I would not be okay losing one of my best friends (the only people truly stuck in the friend zone), that is the only reason I use it and it will stay that way.

[Geo]

Personally, I don't like using the term "friendzone" because it makes it sounds like if I think of someone a friend, I won't consider having a more intimate relationship with them.

But I think a lot of people operate like that.'Friend' and 'relationship partner' are two complete separate categories for them. And a person moving from one to the other is extremely difficult or even impossible. I've even heard people respond with disgust when asked if they and someone else were in a relationship when in fact they were not, but were close friends.

I feel like this is actually a quite common mind set which is sad. I've always hated 'The Friendzone' but I don't really have a problem with the term being used. I use it myself sometimes, it's the concept that's problematic.