The young adult often finds her or himself browsing Reddit when they
should be doing other things, such as: a class assignment, cleaning
their room, working out, doing something nice with their gf/bf - taking a
shower (let's be honest, some of you guys let yourself go way too much
because of your Internet addictions). But I digress. This post came
to my attention via my boyfriend, who thought it was hilarious and all
too common. I, on the other hand, have my own take on it. As always;
teehee.
This status is a great example of our society's growing obsession with the "friendzone". The Urban Dictionary handily defines this recent phenomenon as: What you attain after you fail to impress a woman you're attracted to. Usually initiated by the woman saying, "You're such a good friend". Usually associated with long days of suffering and watching your love interest hop from one bad relationship to another. Verb tense is "Friend-ed".
Apparently it is even important enough to have its own Wikipedia page, which actually does a good job at explaining many criticisms of the friendzone. At its core, it asserts that if a guy puts in enough time or money, he should be rewarded with by the girl with a relationship. The friendzone is a byproduct of what I would like to call "the myth that girls and guys can't be just friends". It's a little lengthy, I know. But it is definitely a myth that exists in our culture. Perhaps it's our Western version of the "men and women should not be friends because it will lead to premarital sex and we must limit social interaction between the genders/sexes!" belief. Only it's become much like a self-fulfilling prophecy. I mean, how many shows do you know where F/M friendships either end in the two dating or banging? Apparently we just can't keep our genitals apart when we're in proximity; they're like opposite poles on a magnet! This is science people, you can't deny gravity!!! Or whatever it is (I don't do that physics $#!t).
When can dudes and chicks be friends? Either when he is gay or "she's just one of the bros". Otherwise, why is she friendzoning him? Why isn't he boning her? What's secretly going on there? ;) Why is it that when we have two people of the opposite sex who are heterosexual, they must automatically be sexually/romantically attracted to each other? If you're a straight dude, are you attracted to every chick? If you're a lesbian, are you attracted to every girl out there? No. Our attractions are all conditional. Even I myself, who am pansexual (Google it), still am attracted to only certain people. I may not care about your gender identity or private parts, but I still care about the kind of person you are. And furthermore, I may love you as a person, but that doesn't mean I want to have sex with you. Sometimes I just want to talk, laugh, enjoy your company, "hang out," and you know, be friends. Not that you can't be friends and have sex, I guess...but our culture has a lot of beliefs on how that turns out, too, doesn't it? A la No Strings Attached and Friends With Benefits.
Not to mention, we are provided with plenty examples of the inevitability of romantic feelings or sex developing from friendship - Friends (pretty much every frickin person on that show has slept with each other at one point or another), Boy Meets World (Cory & Topanga), even That's So Raven (Eddie & Chelsea) and the Harry Potter series (hey, I'm a child of the 90s).
Back to the original point, apparently only two girls or two guys could have a great friendship. We - the ones with the same set of sex chromosomes (and don't get me started on how flawed that is) - are the only ones who really understand each other, right? Those of us with the same naughty bits obviously have similar brain waves, so clearly if we interact with anyone who possesses dissimilar nether regions it's only because we want to get in their pants. Is it part of some deep-seated biological imperative to mate, maybe? I don't know, but someone tell me quickly, because suddenly I'm having a strange urge to just hump EVERY guy in the room.
Another interesting thing I would like to point out is the gender-bias in these 'friendzone' situations. In my experience it is most often an insult leveled at girls (which I don't understand it as an insult itself, because I see very practical reasons for establishing the nature of a relationship with someone you just want to be friends with). Is it inconceivable that a guy might want to be just friends with a girl? And if a girl does this to a guy, why is she automatically in the wrong? Because clearly if a guy is nice to her she owes it to him to date and/or take him to bed. But if a girl really likes a guy, and he's just not that into you - well that's perfectly alright! He is well within his bounds to rebuke her on grounds of pretty much anything (he wants to keep his 'options' open, she's ugly, etc). He doesn't even need a reason. Because guys don't have to date girls who are friends, only the other way around. He might be expected by his bros to bang her though. Maybe. It's possible.
But satire aside, I honestly believe this is a serious issue. This misconception disadvantages men as much as women. Our inequality in expectations for women and men sets unrealistic and unfair tropes for both parties.
On the one hand, it assumes that women owe men something for being friendly or friends. That somehow you earn/deserve sex or a romantic relationship just because you are nice, funny, or share time with the person. This simply isn't true. Not only should kindness be inherently rewarding, but it's not some kind of currency used to buy love. We are all free to choose who we want to spend our time and share our bodies with, regardless of how much that person wants to be with us.
On the other hand, it expects that men only pursue friendships with women for sex and/or romantic relationships. It doesn't allow them to just want to be friends. And I simply don't believe that guys are incapable or unwilling to see women as more than potential bed mates or life partners. Sure, sex can be great, but do we always have to put the pressure on guys to "get some"? Can't we just accept that he has a friend who is nice and fun to be around, and that's all it is, regardless of how "hot" she is? One reason this is problematic is because it further reinforces notions that females and males should behave differently or are naturally different.
And sure, unrequited love/feelings does happen, and it does suck - and if we were living in a fantasy land, we would never have to deal with that (or ads before Youtube vids or traffic or racism...or gaining weight from pb m&m's) - but the fact is we are all entitled to reject or not date whoever we so choose, regardless of whether they are nice to us or not.
I think the notion of the friendzone itself is one worthy of exploration, but I think it is also important to examine why we so often draw attention to when guys are 'friendzoned' by girls or the mis-attribution of the term.
There are many reasons why this phenomenon may occur. There are three I would like to discuss.
1. Our culture's inability to effectively acknowledge and deal with males' emotions
This status is a great example of our society's growing obsession with the "friendzone". The Urban Dictionary handily defines this recent phenomenon as: What you attain after you fail to impress a woman you're attracted to. Usually initiated by the woman saying, "You're such a good friend". Usually associated with long days of suffering and watching your love interest hop from one bad relationship to another. Verb tense is "Friend-ed".
Apparently it is even important enough to have its own Wikipedia page, which actually does a good job at explaining many criticisms of the friendzone. At its core, it asserts that if a guy puts in enough time or money, he should be rewarded with by the girl with a relationship. The friendzone is a byproduct of what I would like to call "the myth that girls and guys can't be just friends". It's a little lengthy, I know. But it is definitely a myth that exists in our culture. Perhaps it's our Western version of the "men and women should not be friends because it will lead to premarital sex and we must limit social interaction between the genders/sexes!" belief. Only it's become much like a self-fulfilling prophecy. I mean, how many shows do you know where F/M friendships either end in the two dating or banging? Apparently we just can't keep our genitals apart when we're in proximity; they're like opposite poles on a magnet! This is science people, you can't deny gravity!!! Or whatever it is (I don't do that physics $#!t).
When can dudes and chicks be friends? Either when he is gay or "she's just one of the bros". Otherwise, why is she friendzoning him? Why isn't he boning her? What's secretly going on there? ;) Why is it that when we have two people of the opposite sex who are heterosexual, they must automatically be sexually/romantically attracted to each other? If you're a straight dude, are you attracted to every chick? If you're a lesbian, are you attracted to every girl out there? No. Our attractions are all conditional. Even I myself, who am pansexual (Google it), still am attracted to only certain people. I may not care about your gender identity or private parts, but I still care about the kind of person you are. And furthermore, I may love you as a person, but that doesn't mean I want to have sex with you. Sometimes I just want to talk, laugh, enjoy your company, "hang out," and you know, be friends. Not that you can't be friends and have sex, I guess...but our culture has a lot of beliefs on how that turns out, too, doesn't it? A la No Strings Attached and Friends With Benefits.
Not to mention, we are provided with plenty examples of the inevitability of romantic feelings or sex developing from friendship - Friends (pretty much every frickin person on that show has slept with each other at one point or another), Boy Meets World (Cory & Topanga), even That's So Raven (Eddie & Chelsea) and the Harry Potter series (hey, I'm a child of the 90s).
Back to the original point, apparently only two girls or two guys could have a great friendship. We - the ones with the same set of sex chromosomes (and don't get me started on how flawed that is) - are the only ones who really understand each other, right? Those of us with the same naughty bits obviously have similar brain waves, so clearly if we interact with anyone who possesses dissimilar nether regions it's only because we want to get in their pants. Is it part of some deep-seated biological imperative to mate, maybe? I don't know, but someone tell me quickly, because suddenly I'm having a strange urge to just hump EVERY guy in the room.
Another interesting thing I would like to point out is the gender-bias in these 'friendzone' situations. In my experience it is most often an insult leveled at girls (which I don't understand it as an insult itself, because I see very practical reasons for establishing the nature of a relationship with someone you just want to be friends with). Is it inconceivable that a guy might want to be just friends with a girl? And if a girl does this to a guy, why is she automatically in the wrong? Because clearly if a guy is nice to her she owes it to him to date and/or take him to bed. But if a girl really likes a guy, and he's just not that into you - well that's perfectly alright! He is well within his bounds to rebuke her on grounds of pretty much anything (he wants to keep his 'options' open, she's ugly, etc). He doesn't even need a reason. Because guys don't have to date girls who are friends, only the other way around. He might be expected by his bros to bang her though. Maybe. It's possible.
But satire aside, I honestly believe this is a serious issue. This misconception disadvantages men as much as women. Our inequality in expectations for women and men sets unrealistic and unfair tropes for both parties.
On the one hand, it assumes that women owe men something for being friendly or friends. That somehow you earn/deserve sex or a romantic relationship just because you are nice, funny, or share time with the person. This simply isn't true. Not only should kindness be inherently rewarding, but it's not some kind of currency used to buy love. We are all free to choose who we want to spend our time and share our bodies with, regardless of how much that person wants to be with us.
On the other hand, it expects that men only pursue friendships with women for sex and/or romantic relationships. It doesn't allow them to just want to be friends. And I simply don't believe that guys are incapable or unwilling to see women as more than potential bed mates or life partners. Sure, sex can be great, but do we always have to put the pressure on guys to "get some"? Can't we just accept that he has a friend who is nice and fun to be around, and that's all it is, regardless of how "hot" she is? One reason this is problematic is because it further reinforces notions that females and males should behave differently or are naturally different.
And sure, unrequited love/feelings does happen, and it does suck - and if we were living in a fantasy land, we would never have to deal with that (or ads before Youtube vids or traffic or racism...or gaining weight from pb m&m's) - but the fact is we are all entitled to reject or not date whoever we so choose, regardless of whether they are nice to us or not.
I think the notion of the friendzone itself is one worthy of exploration, but I think it is also important to examine why we so often draw attention to when guys are 'friendzoned' by girls or the mis-attribution of the term.
There are many reasons why this phenomenon may occur. There are three I would like to discuss.
1. Our culture's inability to effectively acknowledge and deal with males' emotions
- Historically, the emotional capacity and experience of men has been denied and repressed. It was considered a weakness to show emotion or admit feeling hurt. Men have to be strong! And when you are sad, you should express it as anger.
- If a guy likes a girl, he may not feel free to express these feelings. Many of us fear rejection. We also find dealing with the feelings afterwards uncomfortable, painful, difficult and the like. This is especially the case for men. Often guys do not have outlets or skills to express this. Sometimes to avoid "looking bad" a dude will lie about being rejected, or say that he didn't want the chick anyway because she was "ugly" or a "slut". Certainly girls do this too, but it is to a larger extent socially ingrained in men. It is a defense mechanism. No one wants their buddies to think they are unable to get chicks, but even worse, they don't want to seem like a "pussy" for actually caring enough to get hurt.
- Because we do not know how to acknowledge/address the male's feelings in regards to rejection, we focus on the female's "wrongdoing" for friendzoning.
- Guys are believed to be inherently more sexually-oriented than women, and thus always seeking sexual experiences. It is often assumed that if a guy likes a girl, he wants to have sex with her.
- Similarly, guys are expected to pursue women. There is an implicit social expectation to land chicks, even though how often this actually occurs is greatly exaggerated.
- Girls are presented in a more complex manner...people believe that women don't seek out sex as much as men, but they also believe that women love sexual attention/gratification from men.
- Similarly, young women are often thought to "need convincing" - i.e. She wants it, but she doesn't want to give it too easy, because doesn't want to be seen as a slut. So she "has to" play hard to get, or say no initially, or reject me. But if I just keep trying, and be nice, she'll eventually admit that she wants to date or have sex. (I can see how this has been rationalized, considering the confounding way in which women are portrayed as both innocent/temptresses, and need to be modest but sexy, etcetera, but it is simply a bad policy to follow).
- Our culture is saturated with images of women who appear to be hyper-sexual and there for your pleasure. Seeing half-naked women so often makes it easy to begin to believe that it is our privilege or right to see women's bodies (for more on this, check out Dude You're a Fag by CJ Pascoe). That their beauty is for us. Their nakedness and sexuality is for me! Popular media (e.g. music videos and movies) often portrays women as eye-candy, fuck buddies, "the girlfriend," and the help-mate. And when a woman focuses on her career or doesn't put out, it's because she's a bitch or "hasn't learned to love" (think The Devil Wears Prada or The Proposal). These movies also reinforce the notion that if you are patient and persistent in pursuing a woman then you will break down her hard exterior and find, underneath, that she wants you.
- When so much of a woman's value is contingent on her relation to a man, and so much of her sexuality is based on the assumption that she is there to please a male, it becomes problematic when a chick friendzones a dude. Here he was, doing all the right things to get her to like him or get in her panties, and she has the nerve to just want to be friends! This is not congruent with what we usually see in movies. Typically we see that the girl is always wanting a guy (e.g. "chick flicks" or romantic comedies) and that she loves male attention/affection. And if he plays it right, he gets the girl! And they live happily ever after :)
