Friend zone or endzone????
 

Well having been out the dating game for almost a half a decade... I was wondering if some of the rules have changed? My best friend called three weeks ago and was explaining to me she met a guy that fit everything on her list that she was looking for, college educated, his own place, own vehicle, ran his own business, and no kids... I told her it seems she has found everything she was looking for. She said she was going to give it go...
Fast forward to one week ago.... She calls and says his personality was a great fit as well but she feels it would be better if they were friends...

So my question to the ladies and the fellas on the forum is this how the game is now? Because my brother in law says he ends up in the friend zone too often.....

http://partygifs.com/wp-content/uplo...-explained.gif

CTFU @ that gif. I feel you, frat. I think it works like it does in nature. I'm not trying to compare people to animals, but I think what a lot females look for in a dude is that "Alpha Male" mentality. Do you ever watch National Geographic? You ever watch two males fighting over a female. She always walks away with the stronger male. I know that's some crazy shit to compare humans to that, but I think it kind of works the same way with people in a sense. Most females look at nice dudes as being kind of soft. They make great friends, but not companions. Kind of like the soft dude females go to when they want to complain about dude they're dating. The soft dude will listen, give great advice, but still isn't getting any ass. LOL you feel me? Dude can have money, a crib, a tight job, but if he looks soft to a female, she'll kick it with a dude who's broke as hell, an okay job, and light weight doesn't really care about her other than hittin it. Dude may not be right, but dudes like that don't come off as being soft. You feel me? Check this out, and this is for real. I saw two birds fighting over a female bird once, she was just sitting there watching dudes scrap. After the Alpha Bird whooped dudes ass, she left with him, leaving the weaker bird with no ass LOL. I thought that was some funny shit. I think it's like that with people in a sense. That's why I think a lot of females like to chill with foul ass dudes.

Lots of the guys who complain "she only wants a player, she doesn't want a nice guy" are really NOT that big of a catch. They're passive aggressive, or they want a girl to make all the decisions (i.e. they want a mommy who they can also have sex with). Or they think just because they look great on paper, girls should be falling all over them. Sexual attraction is something you can't make happen.

Being nice does not mean being a doormat, but some guys just don't get that. If a girl is rude or mean to you or keeps jerking you (or other guys, for that matter) around, call her on her shit. She'll respect you a lot more. Part of the reason I'm friends with the guys I'm friends with is they will, always, call me on my crap. If they just sat around saying "oh honey, that's so awful, here let me buy you a drink and a Dairy Queen blizzard and we can talk about it" I wouldn't want to be around them for a minute.

Nah, not really. When it comes to a mate and survival, animals think on instinct. People make choices. Like dogs for example -I have clients who treat their dogs as if they’re as smart as humans; others as if they were dim-witted children. They’re neither. Dogs and animals alike are as intelligent as they need to be –which means their intelligence isn’t going to be like ours. With dogs and other animals, they evolved in environments different from those that shaped the human race, so it should hardly be surprising that they don’t think in exactly the same way we do. I mean, there are some similarities. For example, their associative learning capacities, as well as some of the emotions that drive them, follow the general mammalian pattern and are therefore similar to ours. What I’m saying is like us, they try to avoid situations that have scared them in the past, and repeat experiences that they have found rewarding. When it comes to a mate we are not the same. It’s their more complex cognitive abilities that are likely to be qualitatively different from ours since these would have been selected to match their lifestyle. If we overestimate their ability to reason/make choices that aren’t just based on instinct, then we are led into making them accountable for their actions in situations where they are actually unaware of what they are doing.

This and everything else. Call it chemistry, fireworks, spark or whatever. A guy/romantic interest can be great but if we don't hit it off then we can't force it.

Totally agree with both of you. You can't make chemistry happen. It is either there or it isn't, even if a guy is fantastic in every way.

And a lot of the time, the guy saying that nice guys finish last is a doormat or passive aggressive.

This. They can also be, as my mother calls them, guilt engineers.

That's a perfect name for them.

My best friend/college sweetheart constantly gets himself placed in the "friend box." He totally does it to himself. I told him he kids around too much with the girls he likes--he doesn't have to be super serious but the innuendoes and double entendres automatically will put a guy in the friend box. Plus, he tries to help them solve their issues (usually involving other guys). It's just a bad scene but it's his pattern to work out.

CTFU @ the Dairy Queen blizzard comment. For real, though, I feel you on all of this. I think a lot of nice dudes are scared to call a female out on her shit because they fear being dumped, so they let her run all over him. I've never been that nice dude, but at the same time, I'm not the dude who treats females like shit, either. I treat her how she treats me. I feel y'all on the chemistry part too. That's exactly what it is. If there is no chemistry it isn't going to work, even if dude is your type, or if you think dude is your type. I think a lot of folks like to force it even when they know there is no chemistry. I haven't been with my girl long, but right now I feel like we have chemistry. She dated this one dude for a minute, but she felt he was one of those nice dudes. When she said jump dude said how high, basically. Like you said, she lost respect for dude. That's why I was saying that a lot of females they want that Alpha male mentality dude. I wasn't trying to compare people to animals per se, but that was just something I noticed.

For me, it's a lot more than just "chemistry". I just like to make sure that what I'm feeling is real, and not just lust based on good "physical chemistry". I don’t base it just on chemistry after a few dates, because mutual attraction (to me) and/or being deeply in like, neither of these will last past the first major conflict. This is why I do my homework, which takes time. To me, love is not controlled by emotion/chemistry. Contrary to popular thought, I believe love is driven by the decisions of the people involved. Although, I believe that similarities are important, love or how you feel about that person is ruled by the strength of your commitment to your partner, not by what he does or says to stimulate it. While love can grow or diminish based upon what each partner does, I think its consistency should remain grounded in your decision to love, not just based on "chemistry". Love requires you to use your mind as well as your heart. Just because you felt "chemistry" and have committed to each other does not guarantee the relationship will last if you and your partner don’t work at maintaining what you started. Love (to me) isn’t sustained my chemistry, it is maintained by the little things you did, and the way you treated each other when you were still trying to impress/win each other. I just think that it's those little things that you did in the beginning (and continuing to do those things) that establish strong connections and keep love grounded.

With the kindness part, I look for a kind-hearted man with leadership qualities. I do not like passive men. If he's passive about taking the lead (not relying on me to make all the decisions), then he will be passive about other things that are important to me as well. Such as pursuing employment, promotion, or anything else that will move his life forward. I also don't like the so called "bad boy". They are also lame, to me. You should not have to spend the entire courtship telling your partner how to be kind to you. You train children and influence adults –there is a difference. I am not going to be put in a position of being a man's mother, because he already has one. So if the basics are not in place, and he is getting more out of the relationship than I am, then it's time to replace him with someone else. That's just my opinion on it, but to each its own.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3d-qSk-dA0...-lego-like.jpg

I agree that chemistry/attraction is only one part of the equation, but I also think it is a necessary part of the equation. I believe you need attraction, love and friendship all rolled up into one. Without any of the three, it won't work. The love I refer to is love born of respect, thoughtfulness, commitment (true commitment of the heart, not just saying "we are exclusive") and kindness. The friendship is enjoying doing activities together, communicating well, and sharing common ambitions.

My first marriage was missing love, which led to abusiveness. My second marriage was missing chemistry and love, which led to boredom and resentment. I won't settle for less than all of the above, because it's better to be alone than to be in a bad relationship.

Agreed.


*LiKE*

Kill the visual, Jesus, kill the visual!! :eek:

I agree with just about everything said up there. Chemistry is key. Unfortunately, there are lots of men who meet all of a woman's preferences but there's just no spark. LOL and that leaves her feeling sad like "Man, I really wanted this to work! Why aren't there fireworks??" :p

I also find that men who get friend-zoned tend to treat me like a friend and nothing more. I am all for establishing that we have more in common than romantic feelings for each other. But there is a reason "date behavior" is called "date behavior." I like moving out of that phase to see the real man rather than just the façade but there is a time and place for that. If a man treats me too buddy-buddy, then my interest dies. Maybe it's because I think my feelings for him won't be returned so he's less appealing. But I do know that a man starting to relax a bit after we've know each other awhile is a sign that he's getting comfortable with me (not to be confused with just getting lazy, that looks a little differently). But to be that lax from the beginning doesn't say "I'm comfortable with you." It says "I don't have to show you the best of me because you're my homegirl." There are other ways to end up in the friend zone but those are the main2 for me.

Hey Cheerful, I feel you on some things, but it's pretty much all about chemistry. If you don't have that, how do you expect it to work? You feel me? I see your point, but you can't have friendship, attraction, or a decent relationship without chemistry. You see where I'm coming from?

I feel you on this. I think chemistry covers most of what is needed for a relationship to be successful. I've met females who I thought were fine as hell, but beyond the physical attraction, we just weren't feeling each other. The chemistry just wasn't there. I feel what you're saying.

So so so agree!! That's the other guy thing that drives me nuts - "if she was really looking for a solid relationship she wouldn't care how I dress/what I drive/if I shave etc etc etc." Yet if I didn't show up nicely dressed, perfumed and made up, he'd say I was a slob. No you don't have to go full out metrosexual, but for the love of all that's holy, wear something on the date other than your work polo shirt with the company logo on it. I cared enough to bring different clothes along and change, you should too.

p.s.: I don't really care what a guy drives, but you probably should clean the crap off the seat before I sit in it.

No, it is not all about chemistry. Maybe for you and others on here, but not for me. It’s just that there isn’t anything specific that you (in general) can point at to sustain it. Chemistry does not add up to long-term relationship, commitment does. If you are honest with yourself, you don’t know enough about your date to know if you like that person or not. Dating to me is just a "go see" -nothing more, nothing less. It's easy to feel chemistry early when the relationship is new. I am speaking of long-term maintenance. I just think that falling into predictable patterns and mediocrity will cause that "chemistry" you once had (or thought you had) to fizzle, big time. In other words, the two of you have to mix it up. Keep dating after the courtship has begun. I mean, the dating and romance must continue even after the connection has been solidified. Both partners must continue to grow so that you will always be discovering something new about each other. It's not just about being interested, it is also about being interesting. I just think that continuing to date the person you've connected to keeps the romance alive between a woman and a man who are in love.

I don’t care how much you have in common, how much chemistry you think you have, how many similarities you have, how much friendship is involved, how attracted you are to each other, or how well the two of you communicate, -if what you started in the beginning (that was brought on by "chemistry") is not maintained throughout the relationship, the entire foundation of whatever your relationship is based on will get weak, and your relationship will eventually fall apart. Time spent together intentionally should still be at the top of the priority list. I just believe that you should set aside certain times just to connect –time to get in touch and, if necessary, get reacquainted, because strangers cannot make love work. The "dating/romance" has to continue after the relationship has started. Just because you are now either dating exclusively or married does not mean this should stop. The way I see it, most of us do not give people enough time to become attractive in our eyes. To me, the most sustainable chemistry is one that builds slowly. I am in no rush to do anything when it comes to a mate/potential husband, because I don’t select a mate the way most people do. My selection process is different because my purpose for D&R is different. Like I said, to each its own.

Chemistry isn't just sex, or even anything sexual. If I can't connect with a guy (or anyone) intellectually on some level, I can't spend time with them. And no, I don't mean are they as smart as me, do they have a degree blah blah blah. If I'm hanging out with someone and have to explain every joke, every reference, every reason I'm laughing, it is going to be very heavy sledding - no matter how nice or "qualified" they are or how much you "commit" to making the relationship work.

Okay I see you. You're looking at it from more of a bigger picture. That's cool, though.

I don't think anybody is really talking about sex, but since you brought it up, for me that is apart of the chemistry. If she's all holy n shit, I can't fuck with her. I like to have sex. I don't get all into saving myself to marry and I don't want a female who's into that shit either.

http://www.freemania.net/wp-content/...nstant-win.bmp

I think this is one of those threads where everybody has their own agenda of what fits them. I've got mine, folks have theirs. I think it just comes down to what attracts you to the dude or female and what doesn't.