Your definition of friendzone?

[Otohime]

Technically I "friendzone" people all the time -- most people I know are "friendzoned" - but I don't say it because I find the term silly and unneeded. Basically, if I friendzone someone that means I will NEVER EVER EVER be in a romantic relationship with them, no matter what or when. It means I have no romantic attraction towards them and probably not sensual attraction (no desire to touch them). For a sexual, it probably means no romantic or sexual attraction. Basically, the term doesn't mean all that much. Technically, a heterosexual female "friendzones" every female she meets, including a lesbian who might have a crush on her (of course, the lesbian probably isn't upset by this at all because she doesn't feel entitled to have every woman feel attraction back).

Friendzoned doesn't mean the person isn't a friend. They could be your best friend... it just will never go past that. If a person hasn't friendzoned someone else, that means there's the possibility for more. Maybe not anytime soon.. just a possibility some day if the circumstances are right.

I usually hear the term "friendzone" in relation to men who feel they are "friendzoned" by women. Many of them do not like this. Sometimes it is because they have a crush on a woman (I understand the disappointment if she doesn't return his feelings). Other times, men view this as negative, simply because they want the *option* of more. Some guys think that's the main reason to have female friends. They might currently be in a happy relationship with a girl, but having female friends around who haven't friendzoned him more basically means he has back-up. Maybe for a potential hook-up or a relationship.

Friends with benefits is more complicated, but I DO think it is possible for friendzone someone and have a sexual relationship with them at the same time. I hear about men doing this more than women. If there's a woman that he hook-ups with but he would NEVER be in a relationship with her, he has friendzoned her... or at least friendzoned her with benefits.

[Guest]

1. Agreed. To clarify my stance on this: You can absolutely be hurt about something (= human) without making an entitled huffy fuss about it (= douchebag).

2. Sometimes, one's emotions are better kept to one's self (and/or, for those so inclined, literally "between you and you god" - personally, I've found prayer/meditation to help with coping with socially induced üain, quite a lot).

1. Ahhh... perfect way to put it.

2. "Sometimes"... really, most of the time, let's be honest. And even if your feelings need to be expressed, doing it to the one who hurt them in the first place is just poor form.

[Guest]

I wouldn't see the situation that way, but if I have a friend and this friend tells me "so I would like us to friendzone each other because I don't want you to develop anything else for me", I would feel like there isn't much trust. Being friends and nothing else, especially with someone who isn't open to romance (for example, where one of the two persons is involved in a monogamous relationship, if their romantic orientations are opposite, or if at least one of the two said "I prefer being single"), is a part of a loyal and trusting friendship to me. Sometimes I don't think "I don't want our friendship to become something else" is something that needs to be explicitly said. It can be implicitly understood between two friends who know and understand each other well. Maybe I idealize friendships too much :D but it's a part of the way I see a great friendship.

Well, I guess we're different in that way (not the first time that happens this week, innit? :lol: ). I consider everything that isn't explicitly ruled out to be something that is open for development later on (which is why I actually find the strategy that TBBT's Sheldon uses, comically exaggerated as it is, to be laudable - go into relationships with a clipboard full of explicit terms of use and dealbreakers. ;))

What confuses me about your answer is that you ID as demi, yourself, though. How can you then ever arrive at a romantic and/or sexual relationship, even in theory? I mean, a quick and dirty definition of demi is "needs to be close friends first, and for a long time", right?

Technically I "friendzone" people all the time -- most people I know are "friendzoned" - but I don't say it because I find the term silly and unneeded. Basically, if I friendzone someone that means I will NEVER EVER EVER be in a romantic relationship with them, no matter what or when. It means I have no romantic attraction towards them and probably not sensual attraction (no desire to touch them). For a sexual, it probably means no romantic or sexual attraction. Basically, the term doesn't mean all that much. Technically, a heterosexual female "friendzones" every female she meets, including a lesbian who might have a crush on her (of course, the lesbian probably isn't upset by this at all because she doesn't feel entitled to have every woman feel attraction back).

Even when I do have romantic feelings for someone, I can still friendzone them because of dealbreakers (and have done so in the past, before SSRI made me effectively aro - nowadays, this obviously makes that point moot to start with, lol).

Friendzoned doesn't mean the person isn't a friend. They could be your best friend... it just will never go past that. If a person hasn't friendzoned someone else, that means there's the possibility for more. Maybe not anytime soon.. just a possibility some day if the circumstances are right.

Yes, my point exactly.

Friends with benefits is more complicated, but I DO think it is possible for friendzone someone and have a sexual relationship with them at the same time. I hear about men doing this more than women. If there's a woman that he hook-ups with but he would NEVER be in a relationship with her, he has friendzoned her... or at least friendzoned her with benefits.

Meh... I'd find that a strange concept to the point of undermining the entire term "friendzone". But that may be because I tend to consider all happy, healthy relationships to be a form of FWB, anyway. *shrug*

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Why call it "friendzoned" though, why not just call them your friend or acquaintance? "Friendzoned" sounds sort of... like being put in a filing cabinet, whereas I see relationships between people as something organic that is fluid and ever changing. I don't know, I don't understand the word *shrugs*

[Guest]

Why call it "friendzoned" though, why not just call them your friend or acquaintance? "Friendzoned" sounds sort of... like being put in a filing cabinet, whereas I see relationships between people as something organic that is fluid and ever changing. I don't know, I don't understand the word *shrugs*

That's actually a good description. :D Friendzoning is actively excluding this chance of fluidity, when being friends still remains open to it. IME, both have their place and their time.

[Tarfeather]

Whut??? You never came across to me as acting on entitlement. In fact, I severely doubt we'd have managed to have a close, friendly dialogue if you did. (As you well know, I loathe entitlement with a passion, and am all about respecting and fostering the exact opposite - the right of everyone to make free choices about their own life.)

*looks at current conversation*

No, I'm afraid you simply don't know me. I'm incredibly entitled. I'd never even consider a relationship where I have to swallow down my own negative feelings, and if someone asked me to, that would probably be the end of that. You didn't know that aspect of me very well because you've never been a target of my romantic outbursts.

I wouldn't see the situation that way, but if I have a friend and this friend tells me "so I would like us to friendzone each other because I don't want you to develop anything else for me", I would feel like there isn't much trust. Being friends and nothing else, especially with someone who isn't open to romance (for example, where one of the two persons is involved in a monogamous relationship, if their romantic orientations are opposite, or if at least one of the two said "I prefer being single"), is a part of a loyal and trusting friendship to me. Sometimes I don't think "I don't want our friendship to become something else" is something that needs to be explicitly said. It can be implicitly understood between two friends who know and understand each other well. Maybe I idealize friendships too much :D but it's a part of the way I see a great friendship.

I can agree to that to some extent. A romantic/whatever relationship is only possible when both want it, and when the other wants it, you *will* know. So there isn't much point to "friend zoning" someone, unless their romantic feelings for you actually make you uncomfortable, and you want to distance yourself as much as possible from that. Which is a perfectly legitimate desire, I suppose. But at that point where I have romantic feelings for someone, and they are uncomfortable with that, to be honest I don't see anything good coming out of that friendship.

[Rising Sun]

I wouldn't see the situation that way, but if I have a friend and this friend tells me "so I would like us to friendzone each other because I don't want you to develop anything else for me", I would feel like there isn't much trust. Being friends and nothing else, especially with someone who isn't open to romance (for example, where one of the two persons is involved in a monogamous relationship, if their romantic orientations are opposite, or if at least one of the two said "I prefer being single"), is a part of a loyal and trusting friendship to me. Sometimes I don't think "I don't want our friendship to become something else" is something that needs to be explicitly said. It can be implicitly understood between two friends who know and understand each other well. Maybe I idealize friendships too much :D but it's a part of the way I see a great friendship.

Well, I guess we're different in that way (not the first time that happens this week, innit? :lol: ). I consider everything that isn't explicitly ruled out to be something that is open for development later on (which is why I actually find the strategy that TBBT's Sheldon uses, comically exaggerated as it is, to be laudable - go into relationships with a clipboard full of explicit terms of use and dealbreakers. ;))

What confuses me about your answer is that you ID as demi, yourself, though. How can you then ever arrive at a romantic and/or sexual relationship, even in theory? I mean, a quick and dirty definition of demi is "needs to be close friends first, and for a long time", right?

I guess that's my way to feel safe in a friendship. If i'm in a friendship and I always fear that my friend might want a relationship with me, and can't move on when I say "no" (because i'm not the kind of person who says "yes", usually), it would break all trust between us and probably mean the end of the friendship in the same time. I'm clear in my own way. Without telling things directly, I can say in a conversation that I already have someone in my heart, and that if this man weren't a part of my life, I would prefer being single. If after a conversation like that, my friend doesn't understand that I don't want to share anything else than friendship, I would consider that disrespectful of my life choice.

About me, I fell in love twice in my life. The first time, we were friends, but the door for a relationship was clearly open when i fell in love with him. The second time, we knew each other through a common Facebook friend who thought that we may be compatible, so we were friends with the possibility of dating later if we wanted to and eventually fell in love with each other one year later. Both times, the situation was clearly open on both sides for something else than friendship and if it weren't the case, I would have kept my feelings for myself and moved on.

[Elluna Hellen]

Friendzone, the (also a verb) = the state of being friends with someone and ruling out anything beyond a platonic relationship with them; as a verb: the action of declaring this.

There's nothing bad about this, and it's a very real thing. I've friendzoned people and have been friendzoned - that's just how life works.

The real issue is:

Misogynist Douchebag (noun, m) = someone who is in a woman's friendzone and makes a big entitled huffy fuss about it instead of accepting it gracefully. Strong overlap with "Nice Guy^TM"

That's the problem, not the friendzone itself. And yes, it's a big problem, because there's a lot of these misogynist douchebags around.

Yeah, by the literal definition I have friendzoned people too. Have never BEEN friendzoned for obvious reasons *points at aromanticism*

Still, I think people mostly call it that when they're the douchebag kind.

[Guest]

*looks at current conversation*

No, I'm afraid you simply don't know me. I'm incredibly entitled. I'd never even consider a relationship where I have to swallow down my own negative feelings, and if someone asked me to, that would probably be the end of that. You didn't know that aspect of me very well because you've never been a target of my romantic outbursts.

Bummer indeed, then. :(

However, you did always know that this has been the very core of my "romance sucks" stance, right?

(In other words... I'm not ready to revoke our friendship just because I learned you fit my definition of douchebag. :P )

Without telling things directly, I can say in a conversation that I already have someone in my heart, and that if this man weren't a part of my life, I would prefer being single. If after a conversation like that, my friend doesn't understand that I don't want to share anything else than friendship, I would consider that disrespectful of my life choice.

Hehe. I'd call that a very diplomatic form of friendzoning people. ;)

[Brosephmerrick]

There are a lot of negative connotations attached to the term "friend-zone," and most of the time, they are well justified.
However, everyone experiences relationships and friendships differently.

As a demi, I can count on one hand (more precisely, 3 fingers) the number of people I have been attracted to in my life. I can count on one finger the number of people I have had sex with in my life.
For me, a relationship doesn't necessarily have to include sex. I could live without it and be completely happy and fulfilled.

I was "Friend-Zoned" (I cringe even typing the term) by one of those three people.
When I first became friends with this person, I was not attracted to her in the least. I had no intentions of a relationship, or any thoughts of sex.
Over the course of three years, we became great friends. We spent practically every day together. Played MTG, went to movies, went out to eat, sat around watching netflix. I even bought insulin for her when she couldn't afford it.
She said that if she ever had kids, and something happened to her, she wanted me to raise them. (She was an uncontrolled, uninsured diabetic)
We even talked about getting an apartment together. After all that, I did start to have strong feelings for her.

It was not about sex, it was about loving someone, and supporting someone, and wanting that same level of support and recognition as a partner.

When I inevitably told her how I felt, I wasn't shot down necessarily. But, all she could respond with was how she was a terrible person, how she didn't deserve to be loved, etc...

Instead, she chooses men who neglect her emotionally, and in some instances physically, as partners.

I'm not bitter about it. I don't regret any of the time I spent with her. I still love her and will always be her friend, but it is painful seeing someone you care about that much, choosing to be with someone like that, rather than you.

Worse yet, it seems like she is doing the same thing with someone else. I can tell that he sincerely loves her, and that she will never give him a chance as a romantic partner.

[Tarfeather]

I guess that's my way to feel safe in a friendship. If i'm in a friendship and I always fear that my friend might want a relationship with me, and can't move on when I say "no" (because i'm not the kind of person who says "yes", usually), it would break all trust between us and probably mean the end of the friendship in the same time. I'm clear in my own way. Without telling things directly, I can say in a conversation that I already have someone in my heart, and that if this man weren't a part of my life, I would prefer being single. If after a conversation like that, my friend doesn't understand that I don't want to share anything else than friendship, I would consider that disrespectful of my life choice.

(Emphasis mine)

Yes, exactly. And on the flipside, if a friend of mine doesn't understand that I have feelings for her, that those feelings won't change whether she returns them or not, and that I truly consider her that way in my heart, I would feel that she does not accept me as the person I am. So you see, I totally understand your perspective, but I'd be no less adamant about my own interpretation. That's my way of self-love, even if it means that I will have to reject very many people who might otherwise make good friends.

Bummer indeed, then. :(

However, you did always know that this has been the very core of my "romance sucks" stance, right?

(In other words... I'm not ready to revoke our friendship just because I learned you fit my definition of douchebag. :P )

Hm.. I used to try to convince myself that I had a similar opinion to yours. However, it clashed strongly with my emotional state, which led to depression and me acting like a total jerk, among things. About a year ago, I accepted that this is simply how I feel, and that those things are simply what I want, and I embraced myself for that. Next thing I know, I've got a partner who (ironically) loves me in a very non-romantic way, yet fully embraces me and the romantic feelings I have for her, which in turn has led me over the course of the last year to learn to be happy with what I have in her, and to not expect things she can not give. Bottom line, by accepting my own entitlement, I've become practically more happy and less entitled. ;)

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Why call it "friendzoned" though, why not just call them your friend or acquaintance? "Friendzoned" sounds sort of... like being put in a filing cabinet, whereas I see relationships between people as something organic that is fluid and ever changing. I don't know, I don't understand the word *shrugs*

That's actually a good description. :D Friendzoning is actively excluding this chance of fluidity, when being friends still remains open to it. IME, both have their place and their time.

Oh right, I think I understand now. I suppose I've never had need to use the term friendzone because I've never really thought someone might have romantic thoughts for me! It's just not something that ever passes through my mind I guess; apparently there are two lads at college that fancy me and I never noticed, but everyone else did xD

[DiEvAl]

Friendzone? What's that? Why would I complain about having an additional friend? ;)

Acquaintancezone, on the other hand is pretty annoying.

[Otohime]

Friends with benefits is more complicated, but I DO think it is possible for friendzone someone and have a sexual relationship with them at the same time. I hear about men doing this more than women. If there's a woman that he hook-ups with but he would NEVER be in a relationship with her, he has friendzoned her... or at least friendzoned her with benefits.

Meh... I'd find that a strange concept to the point of undermining the entire term "friendzone". But that may be because I tend to consider all happy, healthy relationships to be a form of FWB, anyway. *shrug*

Agree. It's a non-tradition use of the word. That said, I know of girls who complain that a guy will sleep with her but he doesn't want a romantic relationship. And that eerily similar of guys complaining that a girl will be friends with him but she won't be in a romantic relationship with them.

In both cases, it could just be said "you've been friendzoned." Either take the friends with sexual benefits (scenario one) or take the friendship with no sex (scenario 2), but you aren't entitled for a romantic relationship. Knowing that a romantic relationship will never happen can make it easier to take what they have or leave it all together.

Why call it "friendzoned" though, why not just call them your friend or acquaintance? "Friendzoned" sounds sort of... like being put in a filing cabinet, whereas I see relationships between people as something organic that is fluid and ever changing. I don't know, I don't understand the word *shrugs*

Because a lot of people do categorize people? For some people, there are friends and then there are friends with the possibility of more. It shouldn't make a difference, but it does to some people. Maybe some people like knowing where they stand. A guy might not want to put effort into giving attention to his friend if she will never reciprocate his feelings (no, that gives him no right to be upset, but if he wants to know he's "friendzoned" so he can move on that's fair).

I think people devalue friendship. Personally, I can think of nothing horrible about *just* being a friend forever with no chance of more. Sounds freeing, actually, but I'm very un-romantic in general. I don't really get crushes on people, so I have trouble understanding how horrible it might be to not have that returned.

Anyway, being friendzoned shouldn't be considered a bad thing....

I do understand that relationships are ever-changing so putting something like a static "never" does seem extreme. I thought I wouldn't be one to say "never" -- as I've always has the philosophy of "never say never" because there's always an exception. But then I had this guy, a friend, who wouldn't stop pursuing me. He would be in relationships with other girls and they would break up and he would say he just kept coming back to me, because he would see himself with me. He would say that if we weren't together now, he saw us together in the future, maybe not until we were 60 (I was 23 at the time). Finally, because he didn't seem to get my hint of "no", I told him NEVER. I said I would never return his romantic feelings or be in a relationship with him. Not even when I'm 60. For me, that's friend zoning - there absolutely know way I would feel romantic towards him (of course his feelings were so involved I couldn't even really be his friend either. I was just too uncomfortable.).

That's why I like friendzone. Wish it was respected both ways....

[Anthracite_Impreza]

Why call it "friendzoned" though, why not just call them your friend or acquaintance? "Friendzoned" sounds sort of... like being put in a filing cabinet, whereas I see relationships between people as something organic that is fluid and ever changing. I don't know, I don't understand the word *shrugs*

Because a lot of people do categorize people? For some people, there are friends and then there are friends with the possibility of more. It shouldn't make a difference, but it does to some people. Maybe some people like knowing where they stand. A guy might not want to put effort into giving attention to his friend if she will never reciprocate his feelings (no, that gives him no right to be upset, but if he wants to know he's "friendzoned" so he can move on that's fair).

I think people devalue friendship. Personally, I can think of nothing horrible about *just* being a friend forever with no chance of more. Sounds freeing, actually, but I'm very un-romantic in general. I don't really get crushes on people, so I have trouble understanding how horrible it might be to not have that returned.

Anyway, being friendzoned shouldn't be considered a bad thing....

I do understand that relationships are ever-changing so putting something like a static "never" does seem extreme. I thought I wouldn't be one to say "never" -- as I've always has the philosophy of "never say never" because there's always an exception. But then I had this guy, a friend, who wouldn't stop pursuing me. He would be in relationships with other girls and they would break up and he would say he just kept coming back to me, because he would see himself with me. He would say that if we weren't together now, he saw us together in the future, maybe not until we were 60 (I was 23 at the time). Finally, because he didn't seem to get my hint of "no", I told him NEVER. I said I would never return his romantic feelings or be in a relationship with him. Not even when I'm 60. For me, that's friend zoning - there absolutely know way I would feel romantic towards him (of course his feelings were so involved I couldn't even really be his friend either. I was just too uncomfortable.).

That's why I like friendzone. Wish it was respected both ways....

To me true friendship is at least equal to, if not more important than (in some situations) family bonds. I can count the number of true friends I have on one hand and to call them friends in a derogatory (can't think of the right word) way is like saying "Oh they're just legs, I could do better" (no offence intended to disabled people). To me my friends are what keep me emotionally on my feet like my legs are what keep me physically standing. I'm aromantic too though, so I may be kind of biased there...

To be honest if someone said that to me it would freak me the hell out and I'd run for the hills (something similar happened to my friend and she had to get a restraining order on him). I don't think I could remain friends with someone who I knew was constantly hoping I'd fall for them as it would be unfair on both of us, but if "friendzoning" works for you then hey, good luck to ya :)

[Otohime]

To me true friendship is at least equal to, if not more important than (in some situations) family bonds. I can count the number of true friends I have on one hand and to call them friends in a derogatory (can't think of the right word) way is like saying "Oh they're just legs, I could do better" (no offence intended to disabled people). To me my friends are what keep me emotionally on my feet like my legs are what keep me physically standing. I'm aromantic too though, so I may be kind of biased there...

To be honest if someone said that to me it would freak me the hell out and I'd run for the hills (something similar happened to my friend and she had to get a restraining order on him). I don't think I could remain friends with someone who I knew was constantly hoping I'd fall for them as it would be unfair on both of us, but if "friendzoning" works for you then hey, good luck to ya :)

Not disagreeing in the least. True friendship is IMO the best relationship a person can have. Outside of my sister, I don't know that I've ever had a true friend, but I'm envious of those that do.

That's why I say the definition of "friendzone" isn't bad. The fact that "friendzone" is considered lesser is bad. "Friendzone" is only lesser if you think that romantic relationship is more. The fact that "friendzone" is considered a negative thing is probably why it shouldn't be used.

I like the idea of friendzone, but not the term. I'd only use the term IF it was both considered to be positive and it was respected.

In my case with the guy who wouldn't get the hint, I was likely trying too hard to be nice. (I never felt threatened so a restraining order would be extreme).

Basically though - in an oversimplified version:

He says "you want to go out?"

I say "no." He hears. "Not now."

Six months later, he says "you want to go out?"

i say "no." He hears "not now."

That could go on forever. To me, it would make sense if it went this way instead.

He says, "you want to go out?"

I say, "I'll never be interested in more than friendship" (IE "Friendzone").

He never suggests romantic feelings again and we are either friends or not.

The problem is most guys would be offended if I said I would never be interested in them, which is why I generally wouldn't phrase it that way. Most guys get the hint as it were. Anyway, if friendzoned wasn't seen as such a negative thing, it would be like the same thing as me telling a guy I was lesbian. A guy wouldn't get offended by her basically saying that she will never see him that way, and unless he really didn't want friendship, he'd be her friend. Even if I'm not a lesbian, if I have the same lack of interest in a particular guy, there should be a nice why to say "never happening." And have that taken seriously, non offensively.

[argar]

I have had time to reflect and listen to other peoples opinion on the "friendzone" and have come up with an amended view.

On the one hand I hated the idea that some guys might have the idea that if you do enough for a woman, the ultimate prize is sex. In this example that includes being extra nice, giving gifts, and doing extra favors when ever.

On the other hand I started thinking of all the lovestruck (or luststruck) guys that bend over backwards to please that certains someone, wanting to be liked. The woman in this equation knows what the guy wants, and takes advantage of him knowing full well she will never give him anything.

Clearly looking at both perspective, both are in the wrong. The guy for thinking that he is owed something, and the girl for taking advatage of this belief. I used to believe the guys were the only ones in the wrong, but this is a problem both parties bring about.

I still think guys are wrong for having this belief, but I also think that the other party should not keep feeding this belief.

In my example I used guys and girls, but I think it can be reversed as well. Girls and guys like in the movie "Holiday" with Kate Winslet.

It could also be guy/guy, or girl/girl.

I think the issue is not the "friendzone" exactly, but having common respect for someone's feelings. If a guy or girl is being extra nice and attentive, thank them but be straighforward. Tell the individual you value them, but have no interest in them, and no matter what they do nothing is going to change that. Reinforce that as much as you need to. We all get a little stupid when we like someone, and sometimes we need to be reminded of the reality of the situation.

I like what someone else on AVEN said, but I can't remember his name. To paraphrase he said that the minute one person develops more than friendship feelings for the other, the friendship is over. It sounds harsh, but I think he is right. I blame romantic movies for perpetuating the idea that big romantic gestures, or being the "fake nice guy/girl" is going to win you love. I also blame them for the idea that unrequited love is somehow a good thing. Unrequited love sucks and it is better to rip that Band-aid right away, and get on with your life.

The above is all mostly my evolving opinion. I hope it makes sense.

Have a beautiful day.

[Platitude]

I truly do believe in the friendzone, honestly. I understand that goes against the Tumblr mindset, but I try to stay away from the political correctness arena anyways.

For me the friendzone occurs when you develop romantic feelings for a close friend, but are paralyzed by the fear of ruining the platonic relationship you have with them by pursuing a romantic one.

[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.

[Tarfeather]

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.

[Annapox]

I think the friendzone is a real thing, but I don't think it's a place other people put you. I think it's a place you put yourself.

See, people have unrequited crushes all the time. For me, the difference is whether or not the person who's interested in romance can handle the one-sidedness of their feelings. If they're fine with being just friends, it's not the friendzone. If they're not fine with it and they end the friendship, that's not the friendzone. If they convince themselves that they deserve this person's love just for being a decent human being and get angry about something that their crush has no control over, THAT is the friendzone.

So, to me, sentences like "She friendzoned me" don't make sense. She can't help not being attracted to you, but you can help how you respond. So the decision was yours, not hers.

I generally avoid using the term, though, because I feel like that encourages the people who do believe that the friendzone is some kind of cruel injustice.

[Guest]

I think the friendzone is a real thing, but I don't think it's a place other people put you. I think it's a place you put yourself.

See, people have unrequited crushes all the time. For me, the difference is whether or not the person who's interested in romance can handle the one-sidedness of their feelings. If they're fine with being just friends, it's not the friendzone. If they're not fine with it and they end the friendship, that's not the friendzone. If they convince themselves that they deserve this person's love just for being a decent human being and get angry about something that their crush has no control over, THAT is the friendzone.

Hey, i wanna change my answer to this one :D

[Mostly Peaceful Ryan]

Friendzone is still a thing?!?!?! people haven't realized how stupid it is yet??

**lost faith in humanity**

[JAKQ7111]

In my opinion, the friend zone is real, but not in the way that many define/use the term. For one, the term "friend" is misleading. If you get "friend zoned", you don't get treated with the same respect that I personally would expect of a friend. It's basically getting placed in a pool of people who are somewhere below the level of importance that a "partner" has. (...)

This.

You're friendzoned = you're the person's second-class social circle. You don't have any real importance in the person's heart, in a society where friends are supposed to be just friendly acquaintances to hang out and have fun with, nothing more. Being friendzoned isn't even real friendship.

I don't understand the issue with "friendzone". If you have strong romantic feelings for someone and they aren't reciprocated, that shit hurts. Being hurt by it doesn't make you a douchebag, or misogynistic or any other negative... anything. It makes you a person with feelings. Rejection hurts and that is not wrong.

Acting on that hurt is wrong. But that has nothing to do with friendzone... that's just a person who doesn't respect boundaries. A corollary issue, sure, but directly tied to the definition of "friendzone"? Absolutely not.

I very much agree with both Rising Sun and Skulls in these above posts, especially when Skulls said that if you have strong romantic feelings for someone and they aren't reciprocated, it's very painful. Being able to express that pain can be incredibly helpful in moving past it, barring any infringement on someone else's boundaries, but I feel like much of the hate on people in the Friend Zone is just throwing salt into the wounds of everyone involved. Also, that pain is truly doubled when the connotation is that "friendship" is treated as less important and intimate than a romantic/often sexual relationship. As Rising Sun said, that's not real friendship. Real friendship can be just as valuable, if not more valuable than romantic/sexual relationships, so that's not the problem. The problem is being relegated to a 'fair-weather' acquaintance status in the heart and mind of someone one cares about. That stings something fierce.

I think the friendzone is a real thing, but I don't think it's a place other people put you. I think it's a place you put yourself.

See, people have unrequited crushes all the time. For me, the difference is whether or not the person who's interested in romance can handle the one-sidedness of their feelings. If they're fine with being just friends, it's not the friendzone. If they're not fine with it and they end the friendship, that's not the friendzone. If they convince themselves that they deserve this person's love just for being a decent human being and get angry about something that their crush has no control over, THAT is the friendzone.

So, to me, sentences like "She friendzoned me" don't make sense. She can't help not being attracted to you, but you can help how you respond. So the decision was yours, not hers.

I generally avoid using the term, though, because I feel like that encourages the people who do believe that the friendzone is some kind of cruel injustice.

Yes, she can't help not being attracted to you, but by that same token, can you help being attracted to her? Unless you are some magical creature with the ability to turn crushes or squishes on and off at will, my guess is no. What is to be done then? Like, is it my fault when I have a crush on someone who doesn't like me back? Is that pain justified? These are things I ask myself every day, and it's a huge part of why I am so painfully insecure when I develop romantic feelings for someone(s). It wasn't my decision to develop feelings for people any more than it was theirs not to develop them for me, so whose fault is it? Obviously mine.

[Touchofinsight]

I don't understand the issue with "friendzone". If you have strong romantic feelings for someone and they aren't reciprocated, that shit hurts. Being hurt by it doesn't make you a douchebag, or misogynistic or any other negative... anything. It makes you a person with feelings. Rejection hurts and that is not wrong.

Acting on that hurt is wrong. But that has nothing to do with friendzone... that's just a person who doesn't respect boundaries. A corollary issue, sure, but directly tied to the definition of "friendzone"? Absolutely not.

Honestly I feel like there is way too much rampant stereotyping of anyone who uses the term friend zone. So hostile. I have used the term friend zone many times and never once did I feel entitled to the relationship nor do the people I heard it from. They were just upset about becoming vulnerable with their feelings and then being rejected. Its just a simple phrase that helps describe a more complex concept... A label, something this community should be very familiar with.

Hell I remember the last time one of my friends told me about the rejection he went through and he went into a big detailed explanation about how he felt and what happened etc and then I smiled and cheekily replied: "got friend zoned huh?". He laughed and said yea that pretty much sums it up. It's an innocent term but people demonize it.

I understand some people have experienced entitled douche bags that have used the term in the past but that doesn't make it okay to write off everyone who uses the term as such (i.e. stereotyping).

[BerenErchamion]

This must be a US term because I've never heard it (nor do I believe we have an equivalent). Sounds pretty much a butt-hurt reaction to rejection to me though.

Basically, yes. It's just another way for misogynists to marginalize and demonize female sexual autonomy.

[BerenErchamion]

I don't understand the issue with "friendzone". If you have strong romantic feelings for someone and they aren't reciprocated, that shit hurts. Being hurt by it doesn't make you a douchebag, or misogynistic or any other negative... anything. It makes you a person with feelings. Rejection hurts and that is not wrong.

That's not really what the discourse is, though.

[Prairie]

Answering OP: Based on the way I've heard it used, the "friendzone" is a perceived mental category that women put an interested man into when she instead of grasping all he has to offer sees him as an inferior potential partner and wants to shut off her feelings for him. Used by those who have been "friendzoned".

[~RedArcher]

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.

THAT is what it means and people are getting harped up about a bunch of douchebags whining because they can't get their end away. Forget them.

It's origin came from hetero-culture because the first few hundred times it appeared, it was only used when girls would try to stay friends with guys who wanted more. Eventually it became a meme and escalated from there, the men being the ones who christened it, "the friendzone".

Now it's seen as an emasculation of men. The friendzone is used more by guys now talking within their own social circles because, again, like the male stereotype - which indeed applies to quite a few individuals - sex is a competition and according to them, the more sex they have, the bigger man they are. Being "friendzoned" is seen as a humiliation.

To make matters worse, girls have jumped onto the bandwagon too and use the friendzone as an insult.

The men don't HAVE to be the girl's friend, but they use it as in, "you're not good enough for me and the highest you'll ever reach is the friendzone", implying that if he did try to pursue her, he'd be wasting his time because she'd see him at most as a friend.

Now, it's basically used for that by douchebags.

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.

I just wanted to say that seeing the way people were trying to decipher the inaccurate, douchebag term we shouldn't be encouraging.

The History of Friendzone over here xD

[Prairie]

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.