[Way OT & possibly NC-17 rated] Can men and women "just be friends"?

[Merlion]

First let me say: good luck to you. It can be tough having tings come between you and family. But one has to be true to one's self. I hope it all works out for you. You have my prayers (if you want them).

Oh well.

Yes I do. thanks
Most of the people who knew me well until relatively recently(essentialy, my family) were to busy being in denial to actualy figure me out for other people its been about half and half. Picking up such things isnt just a matter of your "gaydar" its also a matter of the other person...how they are how hard they hide it etc.
Funny...going back to your mother...people are frequently surprised to hear that my mother wouldnt have had any problems if I had hooked up with a black girl. its only the guy/guy part that bothers her.
Anyway I apologize for the momentary thread hijacking.

 

[Drakron]

Actually its quite normal to feel attraction towards parents and siblings when we are still very young.

However emotionaly we usually grown out of it (and because the need of expanding the gene pool we as a race dont favor that kind of sexual relations since sex always equal reprodution).

Still incenst exists and its nothing about hormones, we are by far more complicated ...

 

[EricNoah]

So I guess what I'm saying is that yes a man-woman friendship can work. But the vast majority of the time it doesn't stop there if there are no impediments to a more intimate relationship.

Ooooohkay, I think I finally get (maybe) what Riga was getting at originally. Can two people who are unattached, and who find each other attractive, become friends and then stay "just" friends? "Can" -- yes. "Will they" -- no. But they will still be friends -- they'll just end up as "friends with fringe benefits."

Does that physical intimacy then change the nature of the friendship? Yes, of course. The more intimate (physically or however) you become with someone, the more risk you are taking and the more hurt you have the potential to be if things go wrong.

 

[The Sigil]

Being a MAN, we will assume you've at least fantasized about her, but all it was was a fantasy. Now if she came on to you, for whatever reason, could you refuse her?

Boom. This statement is ignorant at best and bigoted at worst. "Being a MAN, [you have] fantasized about [any girl you find attractive.]?" Holy heck. This offends me greatly - it implies (a) homosexuals are not men, (b) those men who are governed by their MINDS instead of their HORMONES are not real men, and (c) men spend most of their time objectifying attractive women as sex objects.

Please, mods, tell me this statement alone is enough to slam the lock on this thread.

Refusing someone means, there is no temptation there. Why is there no temptation? Probably because either a) you are married b) gay c) she is ugly d) she is related to you. Those are the only reasons I can see why you would be friends with a girl and not be tempted by her invitation (although married people can be tempted, I am giving people benefit of the doubt here).

Infidelity suggests married people are in fact tempted. Jerry Springer suggests family members are in fact tempted. What you seem to fail to realize is that there are a vast number of people who are capable of RESISTING temptation.

Again, humans are different from animals.

Animal -> Stimulus-response, stimulus-response

Human -> Stimulus-thought-choice-response

Gads.

Now if you are resisting her, it is for other reasons. There is a temptation there. You want to go further with her, but don't let yourself because it would be "wrong" in some way, shape or form. If you fall into this category, you can't truly be "friends" with a girl because you will at some point be tempted (whether you go for it or not is a different point).

So you can't truly be friends with an attractive girl unless you go further with her? Wrong again. What the heck does having sex have anything to do with friendship.

Not sure if that was any clearer... [/B]

Unfortunately, it was.

I think it will be clear to the mods that this thread is over. It's not really exploring anything but bigotry and/or ignorance.

--The Sigil

 

[RigaMortus]

Emphasis added...

Well, if we're both consensual then it's going to happen, isn't it? That's what it means. But I have the choice whether I consent to it or not, and in some cases, no, I wouldn't go with a friend, regardless of any immediate consequences, because a) I don't like the thought of long term consequences and b) I'm a coward when it comes to these things

Ok, bad choice of words. I meant, if you are both available. Basically, there is nothing holding you back from doing so (not married, not gay, not ugly, etc.).

Oh, and I can definately relate to the being "a coward when it comes to these things" part of your statement as well :/

Notice, Riga, how you're having to qualify your position more and more in order to hold onto it.

I'm not so much trying to qualify it as I am trying to clarify what I mean. I just want to cover all my bases incase someone comes up with another scenario I didn't think of.

The premise is the same. You are "friends" with a girl. If she wanted you, would you go for it? There are plenty of reasons not to go for it, but they go against the norm of the conversation. Of course if you are gay, you won't go for her. Of course if you are married, you won't go for her. Of course if you aren't at least mildly attracted to her, you won't go for her. Of course if she is your sister, you won't go for her.

I am single now, and I have a couple female friends, and I'll tell ya what... If one of them wanted to go further, I would. Do I have an intentions for being their friends, such as wanting more from them? No... I don't plan or intend on dating them or getting intimate with them. But if the opportunity arrises, I sure as hell would go for it. I'd be willing to submit to this and say, as of right now, they are good friends of mine, as a matter of circumstance. Because IF the cirumstance changed to where they wanted to date or whatever, I wouldn't mind in the least.

I can be perfectly honest... no, they wouldn't mind. How do I know? Because it's come up. Several times. We've gone to movies, lunch, and other stuff. Similarly, I've trusted my wife when the tables are turned.
--The Sigil

Ok, I'll give you that much. But I still think it is different when you or the other person is married. You are pretty much required not to do those things.

but people CAN and DO control this and other urges.

I disagree. I think you can resist them, but not control them. To go back into a fantasy analogy, Frodo couldn't control The One Ring, but he sure could resist it.


Can men and women be friends? It's a simple question with a not-so simple answer.

 

[Nail]

sex is a basic drive, just like hunger.

so the important question is- if oyu had a good friend who was a hamburger would just eat him when you were kinda hungry and kill the friendship or wait till something else came along and keep the friend?


i know a lot of hamburgers

Wow, that's funny.

That's got "pick-up line" written all over it.

"Hey babe, you look like a real hamburger!"

 

[The Sigil]

I disagree. I think you can resist them, but not control them. To go back into a fantasy analogy, Frodo couldn't control The One Ring, but he sure could resist it.

I suppose it depends upon how you use the word "control."

If "control" means "make it do whatever you want," no he couldn't. If "control" means "he limits the ring's actions, rather than the ring limiting him," then yes.

IMO, control - the more limited version - is the same as resistance, at least in the context of resistance of temptation.

How does one control/conquer temptation? By not giving into it. Not by facing it and trying to beat it, but by avoiding it. How do you "win" the battle against a semi truck? Simple. You avoid it altogether. The truck must vanquish you to win. You must merely survive.

How does Frodo control/conquer the One Ring? By NOT putting it on. By NOT trying to use it. So long as he does so, he "wins" - the ring can't do what it wants.

How does one control/conquer the temptation of sex? By NOT "trying" a sexual relationship on. So long as you have not succumbed to the temptation, you ARE in control, by my reckoning. But try to "take it on" by doing it and you lose every time - just like with the truck.

--The Sigil

 

[Merlion]

I disagree. I think you can resist them, but not control them. To go back into a fantasy analogy, Frodo couldn't control The One Ring, but he sure could resist it.


.

I admit a certain ambivalence to this issue. My mother wishs I would control/resist my desire to be with a man rather than a woman. Of course in that case the issue is that I shouldnt have to...but anyway I must say I see the distinction between control/resistance in this case to be mainly semantics. The point is, people keep themselves from doing things they have an urge to do.
I think Eric is right tho...what you seem to be talking about is two people who are in fact atracted to each other. and yes trying to be "just friends" with someone you find atracted AND have an interest in(the two are not neccsarily synonomous) would be diffacult and unpleasant.

 

[RigaMortus]

To me, a "friend" relationship is very akin to a "sibling" relationship. I have few friends. Those friends are very close. Most of them are women. One (that I met in high school) calls me brother, and I call her sister. But that's how I think of all my female friends. More like close family than anything else.

Why don't you feel sexual attraction to your sister? Your mother? Because you can control your hormones, that's why. Lower life forms (like mice and rabbits) could care less what their relationship is towards the object of their desire. We're humans. You can not be attracted to your friends the same way you're not attracted to your family. 'Cause you just don't do that.

Ever heard of an Edipus complex (I probably spelled that wrong)???

Anyway... Is that really a hormone thing? I don't think the fact that you are not attracted to your sister has anything to do with hormones. If so, then I guess you can control your hormones. So then let me ask this... If the reason a male isn't attracted to his sister is because they can control their hormones, why are gay men attracted to other men? Are you saying gay men choose to be attracted to other men (and thus gay) because they are controlling their hormones to do so? Or are you saying they are incapable of controlling their hormones and thus their hormones "make" them attracted to other men?

(No offense to any gay person here, I am just trying to make a point).

I guess I don't undestand...

Hormone says, "She is hot, go for it!" and you say "NO"... this means you are resisting your hormones.

Hormone says, "She is hot, go for it!" and you say, "No, I like that boy over there" then hormone replies, "That boy over there is hot, go for it."... this means you are controlling your hormones.

That's just how I see it

 

[The Sigil]

How does one define the "Greatness" of a human being?

Is it in what he does?

Is it in what he has the power to do?

Or is it, perhaps, in what he chooses not to do, despite having the power to do so?

Relate this to the "temptation" offered by someone whom you find attractive, and I think you have some more insight.

That the third option exists is unique to the human condition, and therefore, I think, the best way of measuring - why else would it exist if not for that purpose?

--The Sigil