"Friends with benefits"... can that really work?

[begin_within]

I think of this as a relationship thread, not a sex thread. Someone once told me that when I meet someone I have to make a choice: either be friends with them or have a sexual relationship with them. That I can't really have both with one person. Is this true? Is "friends with benefits" really feasible or is it a modern-day myth? Have you had a relationship like this and had it last? How did it develop?

[jberryhill]

1. I was burned by that....

After we quit seeing each other, the state labor office told me that she wasn't really paying the unemployment insurance tax.

Man, was I pissed.

She was also skimming from my 401(a).

The pension wasn't bad, though.

[Inchworm]

3. *brain explodes*

Took me 20-30 reads to see what you were saying.

:toast:

[begin_within]

19. Well alrighty then, I have my answer.

[PVnRT]

21. I see what you did there

[Droopy]

2. It depends on the individual

I couldn't go for a relationship like that. But I think that if you were interested in that kind of deal that it is possible. You just have to be open and up front about it with your potential "friend."

[Radical Activist]

4. It can work for some people for some period of time.

I don't think it can last for long. One person or the other gets hurt. Unless the sex is a once in a blue moon thing and neither person gets too attached. Its not easy.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. It would not work for me. Maybe for other people not, for me. n/t

[Quantess]

6. I have never had something like that, but I know people who did,

one always seemed grumpy.

[Lucian]

7. I wouldn't mind one of those right now.

[DarkTirade]

8. Depends on the people involved.

[harmonicon]

9. I've never understood it

I'm far too much of a romantic. I couldn't have a sexual relationship with someone that I wasn't completely committed to. Other people aren't that way, but this seems to be the opposite extreme, and it makes me think that at least one of the people involved must be rather cold hearted. I probably have the chance to do something like this right now, but it just kind of grosses me out. It's not that I don't really really enjoy sex, but it has to mean something to me as well. I'd rather be in love with someone and have a relationship where we rarely have sex (trust me, I've done it for many years - super long distance relationships) than be in a relationship without love but with frequent sex.

[MrSlayer]

10. Sure it can work. Before I was married I had a few "Bed buddies".

I thought it worked out well really. No strings, all fun, no hurt feelings.

[billyskank]

11. Look, there are no rules.

What doesn't work for someone else might work for you, and vice versa.

[Mojambo]

12. Only if both people are shallow intimacy-phobes. n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. people can know that they are not compatible with each other or that a deep romantic relationship

is not what either are looking for without being "shallow intimacy-phobes"

thats a very limited view on relationships/sex

[Mojambo]

42. Yeah, yeah, yeah I know. I was just trying to stir the pot

I'm still irritated by the whole concept.

It just feels like people trying to get a free lunch. You want sex? Put in the time and irritation of a relationship!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

43. i think friends with benefits is a great arrangement. probably why it irks people

who dont have it or havent had it. :)

[Mojambo]

44. Freeloader!

;-)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

46. not any more. now i pay the price

:)

[HEyHEY]

13. Okay, I've had some experiences in this matter

I lost my virginity to a friend and that was that. To this day she jokes about it in front of her boyfriend, who I set her up with. So THAT'S okay. THen there's another girl who always insisted that it was "just sex" which it was cause our relationship consisted SOLELY of text messages after eleven then fucking. SHe got a bit attached, despite her denials, I have no idea why, and I cut the cord cause I wasn't interested and that wouldn't be cool.

HOWEVER.... the one success I did have was this other girl who, on new year's eve I sent a confusing text message to. It ended up in an agreement to sleep together. And that's what we did... complete, guilt free, no bullshit the next day, sex. It went on for months. It was great. It may have been so much easier as she was on a working vacation and leaving anyway. But that's the only success I've had. Wed still talk, though she's back in Ireland. She fucking rules. Just a fellow mischievous scamp, and funny as hell.

[stewartcolbert08]

16. and...

she ruled so much that you never wanted a relationship w/ her? of did one of you develop feelings?

[HEyHEY]

27. She lives in Ireland, it's like the other side of the planet for me

We never developed feelings cause of that knowledge I suppose.

[stewartcolbert08]

50. well that

very well could be LOL too bad she lives so far away , it sounds like you two could have hit it off!

[Bunny]

14. Sure it can.

Not a myth.

[Connonym]

15. we seem to have gone a record month or 2 since the last time this was bandied about

[begin_within]

40. well I don't recall it

and I've been here almost continuously for 4 years.

[Connonym]

51. Sorry, I'm not trying to bust your balls

Sorry if I came off sounding snarky. Of course nobody can read or remember everything that gets discussed in here. I've only seen it so much because I'm a pev and I gravitate toward that kind of stuff.

[regnaD kciN]

17. False dichotomy (or maybe trichotomy?)...

...based on an assumption that, basically, you make a snap judgment at first meeting of whether you want to fuck the person (instant sexual relationship) or not (permanent "just friends"). FWB just mixes that up by filing someone as "just friends, except when I really want to get fucked." It's still based on a snap judgment. OTOH, some of the best relationships I've known have been of people who started out as "just friends," and found their feelings for each other changing over months or even years.

[The Doctor.]

18. Of course.

It requires a sort of maturity, but it's plenty workable.

[begin_within]

20. Thank you for giving me hope.

[redqueen]

23. IMO "maturity" is the wrong word.

Just because you can separate emotions from physical acts doens't mean you're mature... it's just a type of mindset.

[The Doctor.]

55. Well...

For most people, the ability to 'separate emotions from physical acts' comes with maturity.

Also, sex is rarely emotionless. It's not a matter of merely 'separating emotions', it's a matter of recognizing and reconciling those emotions with the preferred or ideal state of the relationship. (staying 'just friends')

If you have a friend you share intimacy with, it is inescapable; you will develop deeper, more proprietary feelings for them. The psychology of sex is very primal and virtually impossible to escape through the 'separation of emotions'. Rather, the approach to those emotions must be balanced with healthy self-respect and independence... two fairly 'mature' traits... among others.

One test for this is to picture your friend being in a relationship and having sex with another man/woman, and understanding that their relationship likely shuts out any physical intimacy with your friend.

If at your deepest levels, you have no feelings of jealousy or loss whatsoever, and you can be strictly platonic with your friend for the rest of your lives, then you are past that threshold of maturity.

If, OTOH, you have even slight pangs, or you find that you are just 'waiting patiently' for his/her relationship to be over, then you have much more work (read; maturation) ahead of you before you can have healthy casual intimacy.


It's also a function on the heels of maturity to be honest with oneself and learn to come face to face with one's true feelings and motivations. Without that, one cannot experience casual intimacy with friends for long before things go badly.

I know exactly where I am on that scale, and although I consider myself way ahead of the curve in this category... there's still work ahead.

After all, the process of maturation is not a step, it's a journey.

Cheers. ;)

[supernova]

22. It's not for me

I don't enjoy emotionless sex. And I've been in enough of those situations to know that.

I have to have a romantic attachment to the person and have to know that it's mutual. That's the only way it would be "fun" for me. Otherwise, I'm content on my own.

[begin_within]

32. That pretty much describes me too.

Except I am too willing to have a roll in the hay with someone just for its own sake. I'm too easy that way.

[redqueen]

34. Yes, well said.

I'm content on my own too. :)

[La Lioness Priyanka]

24. yes, very well. both as friends and lovers.

[Deep13]

29. Where the hell was this friends-with-benefits thing when I was single?

Damn! :shrug:

[skygazer]

25. It can work very well but it depends on the individuals

as well as their expectations. I've had a couple such arrangements and never had any difficulties with them.

Quite honestly, when I was growing up it was more likely that we had casual sex with friends than commitments to particular people. Other than the very real danger of either pregnancy or STD's, it worked pretty well because everyone looked at it the same way.

Like any other kind of relationship, the key is honesty and communication.

[unpossibles]

26. I've had it work, and I've had it not work

just like any other friendship and relationship.

[IndianaJones]

28. does it count if it was with one of your wifes friends? nt.

[begin_within]

33. Male or female?

[Deja Q]

30. I was burned by that too. I saw more than what was.

I know the ex had called back some 7 years later.

A structure and idea of a plan needs to be upfront. A clear goal. I am a straightforward person and am not fond of tricks.

[av8rdave]

31. I always wondered if I would have been able to handle something like that

Guess I'll never know!

[SarahB]

35. Sure, why not?

That's pretty much how most relationships started for me (sometimes they ended up as serious and long term, usually not). I can't imagine having to get super serious before sex with someone. I wouldn't want some huge commitment before sex. Too much pressure- gah! Then again, I've often been accused of thinking like a guy.

For me: friends, then sex, then maybe love, then maybe commitment (in that order).

[begin_within]

36. I like that order.

[mike_c]

38. hmmm-- I have a couple of relationships that qualify, to one degree or another...

...but in both cases the friendship came first and lasted a LONG time. I've known both women for 30 years or so. Neither relationship is emotionally shallow, as some have described here-- I love both of them dearly and I know the feelings are reciprocated. One is a former spouse (we divorced 20 years ago). We're all in our 50s-- not kids and not ruled by our gonads. Well, mostly not. :evilgrin: Both women know about each other-- although they're not friends that's at least partly because until quite recently we all lived in different parts of the country. One of them told me recently that she's planning on initiating contact with the other, however. Probably real soon. Like maybe today.

My choice is to not have sexual relationships with both of them simultaneously under the current circumstances-- both women have recently moved nearby. THAT is just a bit too complicated for me. The benefits are still there, though, one friend and I just aren't taking advantage of them currently. They moved here independently within a couple of months of one another-- made life a bit jittery for a while, but it looks like things are going to be fine.

I must emphasize that they are two of the most wonderful people I've ever known. That's the circumstance that has made it work so far, I think. Plus I'd forego the "benefits" any time if they threatened our friendships.

[begin_within]

39. That is awesome.

Thanks

[lizziegrace]

41. It can

with some people. With others, no. I've had one relationship that's worked out well. We both know that we care for each other and the attraction is there, but there's no long-term future for us. It works because we *do* genuinely care for each other.

The other FWB relationship did not work because, well, I'm not sure why. x(

[Xithras]

45. Sure. Did it many times when I was younger.

The problem is that you can never be 100% sure with the other person. I had a coed apartment rented in college and one of my roomates and I slept together on a regular basis. There were never any strings. There were several other instances where I slept with people who were simply friends, and it never went any further or caused any problems.

OTOH, there was one girl who apparently fell for me after we had sex. She was devastated when I told her that I had ZERO interest in her romantically. It was just sex.

[SteppingRazor]

47. Absolutely -- but not for long.

Friends with benefits only works if it's a temporary, between-relationships thing and both parties are cool with ending it as soon as one or the other (or both) finds an alternative. The longer you keep up a friends w/ benefits situation, the better the chance that one person or the other starts getting feelings that get in the way.

[Chan790]

48. It's preferable for me...

I'm not a great relationship person, but I do really well at the hang-out together, do things, maybe grab a drink, then...do things. :evilgrin:

I'm not the person you want to call for moral or emotional support, I don't really want to stand by someone through the tough times, and I don't dig the comfort of an LTR.

[Lorien]

52. Well, since a friend will do all of those things

you're really looking for a "fuck buddy"; an acquaintance that you can screw like a whore, but without the exchange of funds. By definition a friend is someone who will give you moral or emotional support when you need it and stand by you through the tough times.

[Chan790]

56. Perhaps...

I view it more as an issue of function.

I'm a great friend to my friends but they know that they should probably call someone else if they need sympathy. If they tell me their mother died I'm going to the funeral out of a sense of obligation. If you get in a fight with your sibling, I'm likely to take their side and tell you you're an ass if you're being one. I'm the not friend you call to talk to when your relationship is going south, I'm the friend who takes you to the bar to forget about it once it's a dead relationship. I'm not good at emotional support, I'm good for solutions.

I probably shouldn't have said I wasn't there through the tough times, I'm just not really supportive. That is, unless you are looking for someone to go with you when you show up and and demand your stuff back.

I prefer alone to company...there is something liberating about being able to take up the whole bed and having no responsibilities except to my self. (and my creditors and employer.) I should have just left it at: I don't want a relationship. It isn't unreasonable to feel that way since neither marriage or children is something I'd ever consider.

[Bucky]

49. Pfff, as if simply being my friend isn't "benefit" enough!

I doubt it happens much beyond the age of 30. At this age, I can't see having sex with someone I don't want to be involved with--but that's more a function of turning more conservative as I get older.

[InvisibleTouch]

53. Absolutely it can work.

The key is for everyone involved to be very clear on the nature of the relationship - that is, neither party wants to get too serious, and nobody gets possessive and clingy. (When "clingy" rears its ugly head, both the "friends" part and the "benefits" part are over for me.) It's supposed to be fun and casual. And if you enjoy one another's company, it's really not that complicated.

[Blue_Tires]

54. hasn't for me

but right now i'd be happy with just one or the other, since i have neither

[kwassa]

57. I've never been able to do it.

I either had relationships or I didn't, and now I'm married.

I believe "friends with benefits" are now grounds for divorce.

[otherlander]

58. Isn't that pretty much like having an open relationship?

:shrug: