Jump to content

Friend Zoning


NotFluffy

Recommended Posts

I personally don't need another term for those relationships, and I find this whole "just friends" thing sort of offensive, to be honest. It's totally okay if friends are "just friends" to you, but they are not to me. My friends are not inherently "lesser" than something else to me. They are not siblings to me, either. They are also not "sort of" romantic partners to me. They are my friends, end of story. Everything else I can figure out by talking to them.

There actually is a term for 'intense' non-romantic relationships already - "queerplatonic relationships". But I personally am not comfortable using it, amongst other reasons because I don't need yet another label I need to explain to everyone and their kitten, as well as because I've yet to find a German equivalent that doesn't sound ridiculous to my ears.

I don't mean to be sound harsh, but I'll label my relationships myself, thanks.

I know it may seem unfair and non-progressive to stick with some previous definitions of relationships, but we do have words to define general concepts for a reason, and stretching out a word to broaden that meaning just might end up making that word useless or not comprehensible when people use it.

Actually, "friendship" means a lot of different things according to who you talk to. There are very intense friendships portrayed in fiction that are in fact called friendships, and there are not few people in real life who value their friendships a whole lot. I really don't think using "friendship" will be more confusing than adopting a new term most people haven't even heard of. There are cultural norms that say friendships have to be a certain way, certainly, but there are cultural norms regarding all kinds of relationship. For example, a romantic relationship, in the minds of most peope, involves kissing, sex and only two people. That does't mean romantic asexuals who don't kiss or have sex and are in non-monogamous relationships need to invent a completely new term to replace "romantic" with.

I understand that there are romantic relationships requiring more than one person, there are polyamorous and polygamous relationship, and what I said about romantic relationships still applies to those relationships, it just involves more people. If someone in a five way romantic relationship, decides to have children, it still effects the four other people within the relationship.

All right, and I see what you mean. Just added that because you said, "close friendships are fundamentally different from romantic relationships in the fact that in a romantic relationship two people are planning on sharing a life together."

In my opinion, I just can't consider romantic relationships as just friendships but with sex, or just an intense friendship. Yeah a lot of these things are implied, but that is what most people associate with those words. I totally know of married couples who live in different apartments, but that doesn't make them more so friends and that doesn't negate their romantic aspect. They are still committed to being in each other's lives and effecting each other's life in their decisions more so than a best friend would. They may not sleep in the same bed all the time, but I still can't call a friend who lives an apartment down the hall more influential in the partner's life long term than the other life partner who lives down the street.

Your coming dangerously close to imposing a hierarchy on other people's relationships here. Stop it, please. Yes, those relationships you speak of are romantic - because the ones involved experience and label them as such. That does not mean that "best friends" can't have a very similar relationships but not experience them as being romantic in nature.

I totally think that there should be different general descriptions on relationships based on the level of commitment, promises, and mutually agreed upon effects the other will have in their lives.

I totally agree with this. I really wish I had more universally recognized labels to pick from when describing my relationships. Options are great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your coming dangerously close to imposing a hierarchy on other people's relationships here. Stop it, please. Yes, those relationships you speak of are romantic - because the ones involved experience and label them as such. That does not mean that "best friends" can't have a very similar relationships but not experience them as being romantic in nature.

I am not trying to say that some types of relationships are better than others, they all have their restrictions and freedoms, depending on what you want. Because in general most people, not including me, want a life long partner, they would rank romantic relationships as higher on the totem pole, and then they tend to think that applies to everyone and thinks that same ranking system is universal.

I do admit that it is very annoying for there to be a social expectation for a marital relationship to totally sustain people's social wants and needs, and that friends are needed for someone to feel socially fulfilled. And that the idea that friends are just fillers and stand-ins until you find a life partner of which then you are expected to ditch them. I disagree with that, I don't believe that at all and I wasn't trying to hint at anything like that type of warped social philosophy.

But for what you want in a relationship is satisfied with what you call your friendships, then those are a lot more important to you than a potential romantic relationship, and personally that is where I am, as well.

I am just admitting that they are there are some fundamental differences and implications with relationships, but not necessarily that one is more important than the other. But some people do might have their personal importance ranking system. Sadly society tells us to rank a marital relationship above all others. Isn't it something like "God, country, spouse, family, friends, community" ? And people are sadly expected to universally have this ranking system or at least it is the promoted ranking system.

So I can see your frustration, with this dismissive demotion with the phrase "just friends". But to be honest, I find that people who say that about their "friends" aren't really friends, and probably more so acquaintances.

One thing that is frustrating for me is that people have this idea that "strangers are just friends you haven't met yet." as in if you know them, you either have to dislike them or like them (ie friends). People tend to use the phrase "friend", for people that they know they find them generally pleasant to be around, and who they don't dislike.

There is a lost art of the idea of acquaintances; this goes back into the word "friends" being stretched to encompass the other spectrum of what was once known as acquaintances. I don't see calling people acquaintances making them less of a person, or that they aren't even valid in my day to day life. I have mainly work acquaintances, that I enjoy working with, but I won't necessarily invite them over to my apartment for dinner. But if someone ever heard me say, "Oh they aren't my friend." They would think that I hated that person's guts, instead of the mere fact that having real friends aren't a dime a dozen, and anyone I don't hate doesn't automatically join my friend club.

So in short, hahaha short, I can't do anything short, except my height...

I do agree that in society the idea of friendships are belittled, and they are not given enough acknowledgement. And I think the main part is because the word has been watered down by encompassing acquaintances. Sometimes I just want to say to some people, "Okay I don't hate you, I think you are nice, but still you are not my friend, so quit trying to add me on Facebook..."

Yeah, Facebook also doesn't help the conceptual idea of friendships either. "LOL we are in the same English class! Add me as a friend! Yay we are now friends!"

if+i+dont+read+ill+be+banned+you+ve+gotta+be+_556609664e191359c426f085e61392a8.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Put like that, I think I can completely see where you're coming from.

Like, I noticed that ever since I've started college, where people tend to refer to acquaintances simply with the German word for "fellow student", I become ridiculously happy when someone I like and feel close to talks about me and uses the term "friend" for the first time. At the same time, I've become more anxious "making the first move", so to speak, and try to avoid labelling a lot of my newer relationships. That can be awkward, but I definitely prefer it to "facebook friendships" - I don't have a facebook account, but I've had something similar once, and people who never even talked to me as well as people who outright disliked me kept friending me. I was like, "huh?" I've had that sort of thing happen in real life, too, and I just sort of stared in disbelief. I'm okay with people I like but am only very casually connected with calling me a "friend", but when there is neither mutual affection nor a lot of interaction, I find it almost unsettling.

So yeah, totally agreeing that this whole "just friends" thing sucks. I'm not going to blame people for labelling their relationships in whatever way they want, but I won't pretend my feelings on the matter are any less valid than theirs, either, and I sure as heck won't keep quiet when society tries to force its preferred relationship hierarchies on me and other people. I don't ask people, "Is that just a romantic partner or are you friends/related by blood/whatever?", and I think that courtesy should go both ways. Making assumption about how someone else's relationships work can be natural, but that doesn't make it okay.

Same goes for the "implications" of relationships. I know that norms exist and that people can't read my mind - I don't expect (or want) "let's be friends!" to automatically translate to "let's be life-partners!" to anyone. I just would like the possibility of such friendships acknowledged.

(Ha, I have a lot of trouble cutting myself short, too... good thing real life and my laziness triumph sometimes. xD)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also like to add that I think friends are great, and that acknowledging differences between forms of relationships isn't inherently wrong or insulting to those relationships. My mom is my mom, but she may also be my friend... if I were to just call her my mom, it wouldn't necessarily convey the entirety of the relationship. When I say "just call her my mom" I don't mean "just" in a way that's demeaning to the parent/child relationship... my point is quite specifically that multiple roles can be held by a single person, and using the word "just" simply demonstrates that only one role is being filled. Different words have different meanings, and those meanings come with expectations.

As far as hierarchy, I don't think romantic relationships are better than friendships, but I do think that romantic relationships come with the expectation of a shared life, and I do think that, when it's necessary to prioritize, one tends to prioritize the romantic relationship. Truthfully, I don't love my friends as much as I love my partner. I have no doubt that some of you think that makes me a shallow, shitty person, but I disagree. I also think that I'm not in the minority with my perspective.

I don't think that everything always needs to be equal in order to be valuable. I can have a friend who is an excellent tennis buddy. They are the best damn tennis buddy a person can have. Is that person closer to me than my bff, my family, and my partner? Nope. Should that in any way diminish the reverence I feel for my tennis buddy? No. I wouldn't trade them for the world! I have lots of friends who I am varying degrees of close to... I have some friends that I literally never see in real life but am super close to, I have friends I see all the time but don't feel particularly connected to... there is no equality amongst relationships. That doesn't make any single relationship not important.

As a final note, I don't think you see, very often, people with both a romantic and a platonic life partner and treat them both equally (polyamorous relationships aside... that's a different situation). If you thought I was implying that there can't be platonic life partners, I apologize. But that wasn't what was being discussed. Specifically, we were talking about the differences between romantic partners and friends, and I still hold it to be true that, in the vast majority of cases, the romantic relationship will come before the platonic. If you don't have a romantic relationship, obviously that's not an issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize that "just" can mean different things, but in the context of distinguishing friendships from romance, it is pretty common for people to act and talk like friendships are inherently less important.

As far as hierarchy, I don't think romantic relationships are better than friendships, but I do think that romantic relationships come with the expectation of a shared life, and I do think that, when it's necessary to prioritize, one tends to prioritize the romantic relationship. Truthfully, I don't love my friends as much as I love my partner. I have no doubt that some of you think that makes me a shallow, shitty person, but I disagree. I also think that I'm not in the minority with my perspective.

I'm not sure who you could be referring to here. I did not see anyone in this thread say that your personal relationship hierarchy are wrong or morally inferior. If I've missed something, then I apologize, but you keep bringing this up and I'm starting to think you might be talking about me?

I agree that relationship hierarchies are not automatically a bad thing - when it comes to individual people (rather than society as a whole), they are usually necessary and healthy. And I know what was originally being discussed; the point I at first intended to make was simply that it's not possible to say "romantic relationships are always like this and friendships are always like that". I was not planning to get into a huge discussion about the importance of romance vs. the importance of friendship (though I don't mind how things turned out). As for how many people put their romantic relationships first - I have no idea. Certainly quite a few, but I've also met several romantic people who day that they don't, and I'm going to take their word for it. At one point it sounded a lot like "aromantic people only put their friendships first because they can't get anything better" to me, and I know that's probably not what you meant, but I still felt I should say something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I realize that "just" can mean different things, but in the context of distinguishing friendships from romance, it is pretty common for people to act and talk like friendships are inherently less important.

As far as hierarchy, I don't think romantic relationships are better than friendships, but I do think that romantic relationships come with the expectation of a shared life, and I do think that, when it's necessary to prioritize, one tends to prioritize the romantic relationship. Truthfully, I don't love my friends as much as I love my partner. I have no doubt that some of you think that makes me a shallow, shitty person, but I disagree. I also think that I'm not in the minority with my perspective.

I'm not sure who you could be referring to here. I did not see anyone in this thread say that your personal relationship hierarchy are wrong or morally inferior. If I've missed something, then I apologize, but you keep bringing this up and I'm starting to think you might be talking about me?

I agree that relationship hierarchies are not automatically a bad thing - when it comes to individual people (rather than society as a whole), they are usually necessary and healthy. And I know what was originally being discussed; the point I at first intended to make was simply that it's not possible to say "romantic relationships are always like this and friendships are always like that". I was not planning to get into a huge discussion about the importance of romance vs. the importance of friendship (though I don't mind how things turned out). As for how many people put their romantic relationships first - I have no idea. Certainly quite a few, but I've also met several romantic people who day that they don't, and I'm going to take their word for it. At one point it sounded a lot like "aromantic people only put their friendships first because they can't get anything better" to me, and I know that's probably not what you meant, but I still felt I should say something.

To be honest, I usually say things that get at the gist of what I'm trying to say, rather than spend the time carefully crafting a post that states well, and eloquently, what I'm specifically saying. Largely because I'm at work, partially because I'd rather people attack my poorly written posts than my well-written ones.

What I'm trying to say is, I probably did come off sounding like I was saying "aromantic people only put their friendships first because they can't get anything better", which isn't what I mean... more to the point, I do think that people uninterested in romantic relationships are more likely to put their friendships first. I'd take out that "can't get anything better" part... I don't think one is better than the other, one is just more commonly preferred than the other.

There's a difference between dating and marriage, as well. I ALWAYS put my friends before my girlfriends, which oftentimes created problems in my relationships, but that's what I felt was right. At this point I've committed my life to someone and that does come before friends when necessary... not that it comes up all too often.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay, no disagreements here then, I think. I really have no problem with people putting romantic relationships or a specific kind of romantic relationship first - well, if I was involved personally, depending on the circumstances, I could be hurt by it, but that doesn't mean the other party would be in any way wrong, just that they have their feelings and I have mine, which is how it should be.

As for not putting too much time into forum posts, I can completely understand that. I try to do that, too, although sometimes I fail epically at it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a final note, I don't think you see, very often, people with both a romantic and a platonic life partner and treat them both equally (polyamorous relationships aside... that's a different situation). If you thought I was implying that there can't be platonic life partners, I apologize. But that wasn't what was being discussed. Specifically, we were talking about the differences between romantic partners and friends, and I still hold it to be true that, in the vast majority of cases, the romantic relationship will come before the platonic. If you don't have a romantic relationship, obviously that's not an issue.

I think here's where we get into the realm of what we wish were true rather than what is actually true. You're not in the minority at all. Most people (scratch that, every person I've ever met) puts romantic relationships before platonic ones. For whatever reason, from the shared life thing to the romantic love is a higher love, that's what they do. It doesn't mean it's not possible for a romantic and a platonic relationship to be on the same level (can we get a relationship anarchist in here? Fae?), just that I've never seen it happen... and that hurts when it's something you wish could happen. It's a pipe dream though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "friend zone" has a negative connatation to it. It seems to be seen as "you are not good enough for me to expand extra resources on to keep you around but you can stay if you wish" type situation. It sucks to be friend-zoned at first, until you get over yourself and the friendship wins out.

I have been friend-zoned in the last week and it made me so angry. I sat there and thought about it after and couldn't figure out why I was angry. It wasn't like that person told me they hated me or that I was a terrible person. Once I got over the instant reaction I realized they were right, being friends was the best road for us. If the person really matters to you then being told you are "just friends" should not matter. My best friend friend-zoned me, but that decision means the world to me now. We have been friends for years, we probably would have broken up if we dated in high school and wouldn't be as close are we are now.

I don't see much difference in the way of romantic partners and friends. I do all the same things with them, but the labels are different and the way things are paid for are sometimes different. Friends are generally on a higher plane that romantic relationships since my friends have been around much longer than romantic partners are. If the romantic partner can keep up with my friends then they get much more time and they get more credit. They do get seperate time for dates, but if I don't like a person (as a friend) how am I expected to (romantically) love them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, half of this thread is attempting to reason abstractly about feelings. That's an oxymoron.

Thinking through specific examples, maybe finding common ground, is the only real way to understand ourselves and other people. Abstract reasoning just won't work on feelings.

Part of it is language. I say this because I don't like the terms love, friend, in love, friendship, etc. They mean too many things to too many different people -- and I can sympathise with Nogitsune, because moving from Europe to America I had to adjust to the word friend meaning something different than a simple dictionary translation would have had me think. And the same for a lot of words, even simple ones like "awesome".

Part of it is change. With every new emotion you feel, with every new person you meet and have different feelings about, you are challenging your old definitions of these terms. And if they get too far in conflict, either your feelings or your definitions will give way. And I'd rather the definitions and abstract ideas gave way than the feelings, because feelings and abstractions each have their own domain, and they shouldn't try to suppress the other. Influence, sure, repress, no.

So how can you have a discussion about friendzoning when you mean different things by friend, love, attraction, romance, interest, etc.? I applaud the people who post specific examples, because they're enlightening. But the abstractions just cause confusion at this point. Stick to cases to begin with...

(Me? I haven't even decided if the term is meaningful to me. I know my feelings towards people, and the various emotional situations of my close friends, and that's it. "Friendzone" is a bit like "sex" to me -- I can see where it's relevant to certain specific people I know, but not to me.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...