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

[Rel]

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."

More than likely.

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.

I've heard of a few cases where a man and a woman are good friends and they DO stop things at that level when there are no impediments to "taking things to the next level". The argument is usually, "We wouldn't want to lose each other as friends if we turned out to be lousy lovers together."

Let me just say this about that: I believe that in many cases, this sort of thing gets said because one party in the friendship really DOES have an impediment to going forward to a more intimate relationship. If so then that rationalle helps save hurt feelings and also preserve the friendship which they genuinely value.

If on the other hand they both really are attracted to each other in all the ways it is possible to be but decide not to become more intimately involved, I think that is a missed opportunity. I mean some people look their whole lives for someone they can be in love with and be friends with. It seems a shame to let it lie fallow within arms reach if you come across it. But that's up to them.

Me? I would rather regret the things I did do than the things I didn't.

Sheesh. How did I get involved in this topic on these boards? How about this:

You are unattached. A female friend approaches you and wants to "take things to the next level". What do you do?

Duh. Sense Motive.

 

[RigaMortus]

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.

At this point, I don't even know what I was trying to get at, LOL.

 

[Merlion]

The simplest answer to the question of this thread is Yes. Men and women(or gay men and gay men etc etc) can be just friends without sex entering into it.
Now to the question of, can a man or a woman(or whatever) be just friends with (insert favored gender here) to whom they are atracted and in whom they are interested? the answer is still yes...but it would be hard...likely emotionaly dangerous...and likely to fall apart.
But those are 2 pretty different questions if you ask me

 

[MerakSpielman]

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

Gay men are attracted to (their hormones direct them to) men. Straight men are attracted to (their hormones direct them to) women. As far as I am concerned, there is no "Choice" there.

As far as your body is concerned, your sister (or if you're gay, your brother) is just another hormone-inspiring member of the appropriate sex. Yet you do not do anything. You don't even let yourself feel anything. That is control. You can apply it to anybody in your life, and as far as I'm concerned, you can apply it to any emotion or desire, not just lust. For some things it just would take more dedication and willpower than others.

 

[EricNoah]

At this point, I don't even know what I was trying to get at, LOL.

Ah, well that makes 50 of us!

 

[Merlion]

Ahh thanks Merak nicely put...saved me the trouble.
and just for the record...I dont even find my brother atractive...

 

[The Sigil]

At this point, I don't even know what I was trying to get at, LOL.

A common problem for me on these boards, too, I assure you. LOL

--The Sigil

 

[Pielorinho]

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.

Thing is, you've got it overqualified again. Let's restate this premise:

You are friends with a person [remove the unnecessary quote marks and unnecessary gender restriction ]. You are at least mildly attracted to him or her. If he or she wants you, would you go for it?

Assuming there's nothing else in the way (prior commitments, incest taboos, etc.), most people will go for it. Why is this surprising, or even interesting?

There's an interesting observation hidden in here, though: you're assuming that it's "against the norm" to be in a committed relationship and/or to be not even mildly attracted to a person of the appropriate gender. I submit that you're wrong, there. In fact, most of my female friends are either in committed relationships (making them non-partners even if I were single and they were attracted to me) and/or not particularly attractive to me. That's the norm in my social circle, not the exception.

But yeah -- were I single, and if I were at least mildly attracted to a single, nonrelated friend, and she (or theoretically he, if I were attracted to a he) were interested in me, then I'd probably go along with it. As I said, that's pretty obvious.

Daniel

 

[The Sigil]

Ah, well that makes 50 of us!

I know what I gleaned from this thread...

It's almost lunchtime.

I'm hungry.

For some reason, I have this hankering for a hamburger....

--The Sigil

 

[Pielorinho]

You are unattached. A female friend approaches you and wants to "take things to the next level". What do you do?

Duh. Sense Motive.

Another difference between us. You sense motive; I'd level up.

Daniel