Friends w/Benefits/When is it too soon?
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 12-22-2004 - 12:07am |
In going over some of the older postings, I have noticed that some of the relationships discussed short term (mine included). With the media discussing the situation of "Friends with Benefits", I'm wondering if these relationships are based on mutual agreements, or, rather, standards that are not spoken about or shared? Are those involved confusing *not wanting to get into a relationship* with *not wanting to be lonely or undesirable*?
When is a relationship considered a FWB vs. having sex too soon and breaking up anyway? Is it defined as a physical relationship only? If so, why is the word "friend" placed first? Or, are the people deluding themselves so as to feel better? Is it not considered a "one night stand" or a "fling" because you know beforehand that you WILL be bumping into each other in the future?
I remember reading somewhere that females of the species, in general, feel the intimacy before having sex, and that males feel it afterwards. Could that be a factor in some of our troubles?
Mimiche

A true "FWB" arrangement is an express agreement between the two parties that they are hanging out and having sex on an ongoing basis, but that it's not going to lead to anything else...and each person is free to date other people. If either person meets someone they want to get involved with, the FWB arrangement ends, no hard feelings on either side.
However, it's also used to describe casual r'ships involving sex that aren't leading to a committed r'ship. This may or may not be known to both of the parties, however. Many women seem to assume that if they are having sex with a man, that means he's interested in a committed r'ship. But often the guy is just enjoying the sex and companionship, with no intentions of having it lead to anything else. That's why it's important that women who want a committed r'ship make sure the guy is on the same page before she gets involved with him (rather than making assumptions).
Sheri