A Female Persective On The Friendzone

[Guest username]

1 minute ago, aurum said:

@Emerald

I've worked with a lot of these guys. The whole "she put me in the friend-zone thing" is part misinformation about male / female dynamics due to conditioning, and part just a way to avoid responsibility. Because as long as it's the girl's fault, they don't have to change and face all those fears that are "keeping them in the friend-zone".

The female equivalent to this is when a girl thinks a guy should want to commit to her "just because". But the reality is every girl I meet is basically thrown into this ambiguous, default category for relationships UNLESS she shows me something that makes her stand out.  

 

Thanks for pointing that out. I think that's a really big area where women don't sympathize with men a lot. Also one of the things that prevents me from just flat out accepting feminism-- subtle reverse double standards like this absolutely exist. People don't owe each other sex, but they also don't owe each other commitment, is how I see it.

If women expect something more from a guy they plan on hooking up with and are disappointed when they don't get it, that's on them. Most of my female friends would probably disagree here, but I think that's definitely an entitled attitude on women's part.

[aurum]

11 minutes ago, username said:

Thanks for pointing that out. I think that's a really big area where women don't sympathize with men a lot. Also one of the things that prevents me from just flat out accepting feminism-- subtle reverse double standards like this absolutely exist. People don't owe each other sex, but they also don't owe each other commitment, is how I see it.

If women expect something more from a guy they plan on hooking up with and are disappointed when they don't get it, that's on them. Most of my female friends would probably disagree here, but I think that's definitely an entitled attitude on women's part.

Dude it's bad sometimes. A couple years ago I went on a first date with this girl and we had sex at the end. Literally her last words as she's walking out the door are "Text me. We had sex, so I think I earned a second date". And she was dead serious. Good-bye any chance there was of that happening.

So it's not a men or women thing. There's just massive misinformation about how to interact with the opposite gender because any time you try to bring this stuff up, people who are using that strategy get mad af because their bullshit is being called out.

[Guest username]

@aurum Yeah, I've known guys who've had to deal with the same stuff. One married guy had a wife that demanded more authority over the child (his child, not hers) because she had been putting out more regularly, then she denied the blatant manipulation when she was called out on it.

I'm honestly not sure how accurate if at all, any sorts of generalizations I make are. I'm not even sure if it's possible for any one person to get enough reference experience to really explain how it works. I'm inclined to agree with you it's more of an inherent problem of communication and the fact people have different perspectives.

That's largely why I keep seeing simply becoming more conscious of the best way to deal with things.

[smd]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

There's nothing wrong with learning some game. I would learn the hell out of it, if I were a man seeking a relationship or seeking to have some adventures with women. There is nothing inherently bad about that. It sounds like fun adventure to embark upon if taken with a mindset grounded in reality and done with an inner awareness of one's emotions and motivation. And with honesty too, of course. And from a woman's perspective, I like it when a guy knows what he's doing.

But it's the outlook on women and men that is very stifling for a man that adopts the ideology because it takes the world and boils it down to a sexual value game. It keeps us focused toward the lower nature realities as being of prime importance and ignores the higher nature within us and sees it as less natural and forced. So, it's very reductive and "black and white values"-based. So, it is akin to Social Darwinism in many ways. And as such, it makes meeting certain standards of masculinity akin to a survival need for the men that subscribe deeply to those notions. So, at this point, it is an authenticity killer even if there were some benefits from the confidence boost that it gives. The stakes are just too high to show anything less that the utmost masculine parts of oneself. I see so many men who've adopted this ideology in an extreme way and living a half-life because they decided that most of themselves is unacceptable. And you can tell because there's a stiffness to them. And there's generally a stingy kind of way about them, which is ironically part of the Shadow Feminine. And men who have it really bad, pretend to themselves not to care what women think of them when in reality, it's their number one concern in life.

And like I said before, if you live by the sword then you die by the sword. And I think the relief that guys feel who get into the red-pill thing, becomes an emotional holding-point that keeps them stuck in a place that's difficult to transcend... simply because it feels empowering to embrace those ideologies. It's easier in that sense for women to slough off this mindset because the narrative is very dis-empowering because it's about submission and there isn't really much women can do in that narrative to make their lives better from it. It's just not very appetizing. The flip-side here is that there's a resistance to any of the actual threads of truth that run through it, because they fear going back to the dis-empowerments of yesteryear. And there may especially be a resistance to certain romantic/sexual preferences that may be interpreted as dis-empowering. For example, a woman may resist being a submissive lover even if it is actually authentic for her because she fears seeing herself as inferior or fears her lover thinking that of her.

So, my advice would be to learn the techniques, but don't swallow the ideology. Just stay rooted in reality, and do what ever helps bring you closer to what you want. Don't put yourself in a box, and know your motivations well. Many that I see are not doing it for the joy of new experiences. Most I've seen do it to compensate for a perceived lack in themselves and to try to fill the void of self-love with female attention.

 

Well in my 20s, I do recall being stuck in the winner take all, must-have-sex at any cost trappings.  My body demanded it of me & there wasn't much I could do about it.  Now, I could've been one of the unfortunate who never get laid but...where there's a will, there's a way & I got my many notches on the bedpost.  In fact, this was way before there was any game or relationship books & the Internet still in the infantile stages.  My view of self-development at the time was "these people that read these books are fucking nuts & I'm capable of figuring out any issue by myself."  Although I came very close to buying a copy of The Way of The Superior Man, at the large Barnes & Noble at the time, but didn't...lol.  20 years too bad unfortunately.

I think many of the folks that have fallen into MGTOW and so on, were probably burned pretty bad.  They tried the nice guy routine, or got hung up & later pissed when they figured out what happened.  It's a phase that I think all men go through early in life, but I don't know of anyone that thinks that way forever.

[smd]

1 hour ago, username said:

@smd I'm not trashing game in general. I'm critiquing some aspects of it. If getting sex at all costs is your priority, then that's that, but I've seen a lot of genuine misogyny and advocating emotional abuse in those circles. I've met plenty of men who argued that since false rape accusations exist, real rape is almost non-existent. I've met guys who thought it was okay to take advantage of drunk girls who couldn't consent, who thought it was okay to lie to get sex, and much more.

I'll be straight: I'm not an expert and am not even saying that I'm necessarily right, but after having spent years making friends and talking to PUAs and TRP people on the regular, I know some of the attitudes held toward women, and to say that misogyny isn't spread in those communities is not accurate. It's fine to want to improve your dating life, but far too few men, from what I've seen, are actually interested in leaving the girls they get with better off. More often, it's just trying to get some pussy without regards to the means or the consequences.

 

You have some colorful friends....lol.  I don't know such people but if I did, I wouldn't consider them friends.  Especially this part about wondering where the boundary for rape is.  But who wouldn't lie to have sex??  I don't think I could condemn somebody for that.  What kind of lie did they use?  I'm intrigued now.   I don't know any PUAs, I just watch the videos or read the material online.  I only do solo work & I'm quite happy running around by myself & checking out the field.  Some really weird shit happens when I'm out alone.  Not always, but it's very entertaining when it happens.

[Preetom]

Male or female this could be a subtle/serious self esteem issue.

1) If someone is interested in me, then maybe I'm better than him/her. So I'll just reject them and run after someone I have less chance of mating.

2) I never got any intimate loving connection from close people( mom,dad etc). That's why I can't get close to this nice person who is interested in me. Cause I'll fuck up and they deserve better than me.

3) then there could be bunch of limiting beliefs, unrealistic sexual orientation through addictions/inattention. In these cases, the victim can't even contemplate a simple, non dramatic relationship.

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, aurum said:

@Emerald

I've worked with a lot of these guys. The whole "she put me in the friend-zone thing" is part misinformation about male / female dynamics due to conditioning, and part just a way to avoid responsibility. Because as long as it's the girl's fault, they don't have to change and face all those fears that are "keeping them in the friend-zone".

The female equivalent to this is when a girl thinks a guy should want to commit to her "just because". But the reality is every girl I meet is basically thrown into this ambiguous, default category for relationships UNLESS she shows me something that makes her stand out.  

I made a similar point to this earlier on in the thread. Really, these types of rationalizations are just designed to be soothing sentiments to give more of a sense of control over the situation. And to be able to rationalize of a painful situation in a way that paints themselves as the righteous one. But it just adds more confusion to the situation because men and women just don't work in those ways.

[Emerald]

2 hours ago, smd said:

You have some colorful friends....lol.  I don't know such people but if I did, I wouldn't consider them friends.  Especially this part about wondering where the boundary for rape is.  But who wouldn't lie to have sex??  I don't think I could condemn somebody for that.  What kind of lie did they use?  I'm intrigued now.   I don't know any PUAs, I just watch the videos or read the material online.  I only do solo work & I'm quite happy running around by myself & checking out the field.  Some really weird shit happens when I'm out alone.  Not always, but it's very entertaining when it happens.

Women may want to have sex with a man that she likes if he says that he's interested in a relationship. But she wouldn't be interested in having a one night stand with that guy. So, if a man lies to a woman about this, she will feel very used. It's actually an incredibly fucked up thing to do. So, it isn't some lie like, "I have a mansion and ten cars" or something like that. That's what I think you were imagining. Some silly lie that shouldn't convince anyone to sleep with anyone. But using deception to have sex with a woman is really awful.

[Emerald]

23 hours ago, Toby said:

I guess you are deluding yourself. What is called "friend zone" - which I think does not really exists - is when the man is used to such a degree that he complains about it and even invents such a term "friend zone". There is no problem being friends with someone. But looking back where I experienced such dysfunctional relatings I can say that the women didn't respect boundaries and core "values" which should be a given in friendships. I mean, why is it that a woman tells a man "I'm single" when later it turns out she lives together with her boyfriend for the last five years? Or why does a woman have to show a man nude pictures on her smartphone and tell constantly about sex and her dildo-collection? Or to give an even more insane example from someone else: why does a woman cuddle in a bed with someone and then is surprised he wants more than a friendship? I think this is pretty insane and has nothing to do with friendships.

What you're talking about is called 'being lead on.' This isn't actually what's referred to as being in the friend zone. It's mixing terms and makes the friend-zone sound more nefarious than it is. Friend zone is just when a woman doesn't have romantic feelings for a guy that is attracted to her. And it's just the normal state of relating to people for women. Like I said before, it's just default.

[Toby]

I was using extreme examples to make things clear. I still think you might have a wrong impression what is meant by "friend zone". It is not meant that the friend is "a" friend or an acquaintance like everyone has many... no... it is supposed to be a very very special and close friend emotionally. Otherwise, why would the man be upset that she has no interest? He is upset because he was unconsciously lured in emotionally by the woman and therefore feels used and lied to. And the woman feels used and lied to because she thought the man was interested in leading an asexual marriage-like relationship with her. So it's different interests that both have and project that the other feels the same. It's a mistake of both imo.

[Emerald]

46 minutes ago, Toby said:

I was using extreme examples to make things clear. I still think you might have a wrong impression what is meant by "friend zone". It is not meant that the friend is "a" friend or an acquaintance like everyone has many... no... it is supposed to be a very very special and close friend emotionally. Otherwise, why would the man be upset that she has no interest? He is upset because he was unconsciously lured in emotionally by the woman and therefore feels used and lied to. And the woman feels used and lied to because she thought the man was interested in leading an asexual marriage-like relationship with her. So it's different interests that both have and project that the other feels the same. It's a mistake of both imo.

By "asexual marriage-like relationship" do you mean "friendship"? If so, nobody lures or manipulates anyone into friendship. Friendship is just something that happens between two people that enjoy eachother's company. It's a spontaneous thing. So, a man is mistaken if he thinks that he was lured or manipulated into a friendship. Friendship is always mutual. He may have had other intentions for trying to be friends... but this is his personal agenda. And if he doesn't tell her up-front about this agenda at the onset of the friendship, then she's not doing anything manipulative at all by keeping him as a friend. It's just what you do with people you enjoy being around.

To answer your question, the man would be upset if she has no interest, because he has feelings for her. So, he feels a sense of unrequited attraction and rejection. But for her, it was only ever just friendship. So, feeling rejected and bummed out is totally normal. But feeling cheated and lied to because a woman didn't see you as a romantic interest when you were just friends, is just a really distorted mindset about the situation that smacks of entitlement. And it serves the purpose of making the guy feel better because then those negative feelings of being rejected can be projected onto the woman, as she can be seen as manipulative and as the aggressor of the situation. But in reality, she entered into the friendship with the man as a mutual partner, just like she does with her other friends. So, when the man wants things to be romantic and she doesn't, it isn't her that did any manipulation or misleading. She just doesn't have feelings for him. It's as simple as that.

Now, there are women out there that lead men on. This is manipulative and misleading. But that's not what the friend zone is. The friend zone is just where a man is attracted to a female friend of his but she doesn't reciprocate the feelings.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Emerald

[Toby]

A friendship is a friendship. A friendship is not an asexual marriage-like-relationship which often happens in "friend zones". I for example don't cuddle with my male friends, I don't go swimming alone at night with my male friends, I don't bombard my male friends with text messages, I don't go for a walk in the woods alone with my male friends. These things are no friendships. That are examples of friend-zone-relatings which are caused by both - man and woman. The woman is afraid to say no, the man might be afraid to make a move and waits for her to open up. So both keep things secret to try to get what they want. And even if the man is honest, the woman usually tries to lure the man back in and calls it "friendship". So their unconscious patterns fit perfectly and create a mess. I still think without both playing that game this mess will not be created.
My theory - and I could be wrong - is that most women who do a lot of "friend zones" might have been sexually abused at an early age so that they don't know the difference between sexual/romantic interest and a friendship. Or they have some borderline condition where they are unable to be alone.

[LaucherJunge]

@Emerald

That is not how i see friendship and sex this is what society sees it at. Obviously you still live in a society if you are not a cave meditator that has its own rules those are not defined by me, instead this is what I see on a daily basis.
If you think you can just ignore society by being "transcendental" then you are wrong, those rules still apply to you to a degree even if it's just the mask you put on occaisonaly to not get into trouble. And even more so it applies if you are talking about a relationship to someone within this society, do you think i can just be what i want to be without any consequences in relationship I am not in a romantic relationship for years already just because of this reason because i can't put on this mask for that long and spirituality is sadly still uncommon. And this is also the reason i don't want a friendship with a women.

Edited September 28, 2017 by LaucherJunge

[smd]

8 hours ago, Emerald said:

Women may want to have sex with a man that she likes if he says that he's interested in a relationship. But she wouldn't be interested in having a one night stand with that guy. So, if a man lies to a woman about this, she will feel very used. It's actually an incredibly fucked up thing to do. So, it isn't some lie like, "I have a mansion and ten cars" or something like that. That's what I think you were imagining. Some silly lie that shouldn't convince anyone to sleep with anyone. But using deception to have sex with a woman is really awful.

 

 

Most guys are like this, if a woman is ready to move that quickly into the bed.  I figure that's why you date & put sex off for a later time.  But then again, I know a guy who remarried with a gal he met on Tinder.  They slept together just after the first date.  I figure the marriage will fail, not only because most of the stuff I've read about it says such relationships fail, but because I know the guy's relationship history for the past 20 years & it's always the same:   get laid fast, get into a relationship, couple years down the road the woman leaves him.  Rinses and repeat.

Edited September 28, 2017 by smd
typo

[Emerald]

12 hours ago, Toby said:

A friendship is a friendship. A friendship is not an asexual marriage-like-relationship which often happens in "friend zones". I for example don't cuddle with my male friends, I don't go swimming alone at night with my male friends, I don't bombard my male friends with text messages, I don't go for a walk in the woods alone with my male friends. These things are no friendships. That are examples of friend-zone-relatings which are caused by both - man and woman. The woman is afraid to say no, the man might be afraid to make a move and waits for her to open up. So both keep things secret to try to get what they want. And even if the man is honest, the woman usually tries to lure the man back in and calls it "friendship". So their unconscious patterns fit perfectly and create a mess. I still think without both playing that game this mess will not be created.
My theory - and I could be wrong - is that most women who do a lot of "friend zones" might have been sexually abused at an early age so that they don't know the difference between sexual/romantic interest and a friendship. Or they have some borderline condition where they are unable to be alone.

Here's the thing though. I cuddle with my female friends. I have gone swimming late at night with my female friends... a few times naked :D. I have gone for walks in the woods alone with my female friends. And women text eachother all the time. Really intimate female friendships are just intimate like this. So, if she sees you as a real friend, she will want to do these things with you naturally. It's not a manipulative tactic at all. It's just how women relate to their friends. Perhaps it shows a blindspot to the male interpretation of those actions. But it's not a nefarious thing at all. She just cares about you and likes your company.

[ajasatya]

to men: there is no friendzone. you're just too needy.
to women: there are no assholes. you're just too needy.

[Forestluv]

18 hours ago, Emerald said:

Friend zone is just when a woman doesn't have romantic feelings for a guy that is attracted to her. And it's just the normal state of relating to people for women. Like I said before, it's just default.

Not quite. The creepy mailman that was attracted to my girlfriend was NOT in the "Friend Zone" / "Default Zone". He was in the "Stay-The-Fuck-Away-From-Me Zone".

Based on my experience, the Friend Zone is when a male believes he has been elevated into the "prospect zone" and subsequently gets demoted to a "lower" zone (rather than elevated to the "Romance Zone"). The belief of being in the "prospect zone" can be illusionary or real.

Illusionary: Bob asks: "Have you seen the way Sarah has been smiling at me? I think she may like me.". . .  Yet, the fact is that Sarah smiles like that to all her friends and our fella is under the illusion that he is in the "Prospect Zone". A couple days later. Bob asks Sarah out for a few drinks and to "see what happens". Sarah surprisingly replies: "Of course not Bob, we're just friends". Bob interprets this as being demoted from the "Prospect Zone" to the "Friend Zone" - when in fact he was always in the "Friend Zone".

Real: Sarah and Mark have a Tinder date. Sarah swiped right and has been messaging with Mark for several days. Sarah and Mark both express interest in each other and have texted about what they are looking for in dating/relationship. They seem to be on the same page and Stacey texts that they seem to be compatible and there could be some potential here. Mark asks Sarah out for a few drinks and to "see what happens". Stacey replies that she would love to. The morning of the date, Stacey texts Mark that she is looking forward to meeting him.  Mark believes he is in the "Prospect Zone" and I would agree. Mark and Bob are NOT both in the "friend zone" / "default zone". Sarah is relating very differently to Mark than to Bob. Mark is in the "Prospect Zone". Stacey has clearly expressed that she is considering him as a potential Romance/Relationship partner. . . She arrives at the restaurant in a nice dress with her hair styled, makeup on and nice jewelry. She feels nervous. Mark is attracted to her and does his best to get elevated to the Romance Zone. Yet, Sarah notices that Mark is not nearly as tall as he said he was. She wonders:  "if he would lie about height, would he also lie about more important things if we were lovers?". She notices Mark embellishes his stories and seems to be "trying too hard". Sarah is disappointed that she is not feeling chemistry. Yet, they do have some in common and he is fun to hang out with. She decides Mark seems more like a friend than a lover. After a few drinks, Mark asks Sarah if she would like to come back to his place. Sarah is honest and says she was really hoping they would hit it off, but she isn't feeling chemistry. She says she would rather "just be friends". . .Mark has just been demoted from the "Prospect Zone" to the "Friend Zone".

 

Edited September 28, 2017 by Serotoninluv

[Emerald]

13 hours ago, LaucherJunge said:

@Emerald

That is not how i see friendship and sex this is what society sees it at. Obviously you still live in a society if you are not a cave meditator that has its own rules those are not defined by me, instead this is what I see on a daily basis.
If you think you can just ignore society by being "transcendental" then you are wrong, those rules still apply to you to a degree even if it's just the mask you put on occaisonaly to not get into trouble. And even more so it applies if you are talking about a relationship to someone within this society, do you think i can just be what i want to be without any consequences in relationship I am not in a romantic relationship for years already just because of this reason because i can't put on this mask for that long and spirituality is sadly still uncommon. And this is also the reason i don't want a friendship with a women.

I didn't make any spiritual claims or claims that don't jibe with social functioning when I said that seeing sex as a commodity is a distortion that's very unhealthy. And seeing friendship as a commodity is even less healthy. Both sex and friendship at their core are simply experiences. And at their most exalted forms they can be be expressions of love and oneness. So, there is no need to view the world through this limited lens as it's a very reductive mindset about something that is so much deeper and beautiful than this mindset allows you to see.

Basically, from your assumptions and beliefs about these topics, sex and friendship simply become a means for gaining social status or receiving something of objective value. And if you're around someone who's effected by that mindset when you're not effected by it, you can feel it weighing very heavily upon them. This is because what should be joyful experiences, become very painful when you think that no one will think that you're worthy. It will cause you a lot of suffering in relationships (platonic and sexual) if you continue to view these things in that manner. You'll be able to find no love and joy in either, simply because you view it in a manner that's very closed off from its essence and instead functions as just a means to feel more valuable to compensate for a sense of lack. This is probably because there is a perceived lack of self worth that underlies this thought.

I understand that this can be a difficult distortion to let go of if you've been un-successful with women, as this puts you in scarcity mindset about the topic of sex and relationships. So, it feels like these "everything has a price" understandings of the world are necessary to believe in in order to find ways to be accepted and valued and to protect yourself from pain and rejection. Mostly because it gives you an objective marker to determine your own worth relative to the sex/dating/relationship game. And it gives you the illusion of being emotionless and objective about these topics, and therefore completely un-phased by them. But this is just a self-deception game to avoid negative emotions that bubble beneath the surface.

And it feels like a survival need because connection with others is an actual human need. So, there is a rigidity and stinginess to anyone who senses a lack relative to this topic. And this stinginess is an expression of the shadow feminine, which comes up in lieu of the ability to express generosity of spirit which is part of the healthy masculine. I see this pattern in men who have become bitter and begin to see sex and relationship in a very cynical way. And who struggle with feelings of lack and worthlessness, then project these feelings upon women as a group who are then seen as aggressors who hold men's worth in their hands that need to be taken down a few notches.

That's not as to say that women who mirror this issue don't exist. In fact, you'll probably be attracted to women who meet the description who also see sex/friendship as a commodity and a marker of social value. Holding these types of mindsets creates an attraction point for other like-minded people and prospective mates. This is another reason why you want to drop any and all distorted mindsets, that keep your life small.

But if you spend time around people who are more emotionally mature and have a more subtle form of awareness relative to life and themselves, you'll realize that they see sex and friendship in a totally different way. And these are such better quality relationships, that any person who has this awareness would never want to go back to the shallowness and superficiality of the value labeling game. It's just a lot of unnecessary suffering and distortion.

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Serotoninluv said:

Not quite. The creepy mailman that was attracted to my girlfriend was NOT in the "Friend Zone" / "Default Zone". He was in the "Stay-The-Fuck-Away-From-Me Zone".

Based on my experience, the Friend Zone is when a male believes he has been elevated into the "prospect zone" and subsequently gets demoted to a "lower" zone (rather than elevated to the "Romance Zone"). The belief of being in the "prospect zone" can be illusionary or real.

Illusionary: Bob asks: "Have you seen the way Sarah has been smiling at me? I think she may like me.". . .  Yet, the fact is that Sarah smiles like that to all her friends and our fella is under the illusion that he is in the "Prospect Zone". A couple days later. Bob asks Sarah out for a few drinks and to "see what happens". Sarah surprisingly replies: "Of course not Bob, we're just friends". Bob interprets this as being demoted from the "Prospect Zone" to the "Friend Zone" - when in fact he was always in the "Friend Zone".

Real: Sarah and Mark have a Tinder date. Sarah swiped right and has been messaging with Mark for several days. Sarah and Mark both express interest in each other and have texted about what they are looking for in dating/relationship. They seem to be on the same page and Stacey texts that they seem to be compatible and there could be some potential here. Mark asks Sarah out for a few drinks and to "see what happens". Stacey replies that she would love to. The morning of the date, Stacey texts Mark that she is looking forward to meeting him.  Mark believes he is in the "Prospect Zone" and I would agree. Mark and Bob are NOT both in the "friend zone" / "default zone". Sarah is relating very differently to Mark than to Bob. Mark is in the "Prospect Zone". Stacey has clearly expressed that she is considering him as a potential Romance/Relationship partner. . . She arrives at the restaurant in a nice dress with her hair styled, makeup on and nice jewelry. She feels nervous. Mark is attracted to her and does his best to get elevated to the Romance Zone. Yet, Sarah notices that Mark is not nearly as tall as he said he was. She wonders:  "if he would lie about height, would he also lie about more important things if we were lovers?". She notices Mark embellishes his stories and seems to be "trying too hard". Sarah is disappointed that she is not feeling chemistry. Yet, they do have some in common and he is fun to hang out with. She decides Mark seems more like a friend than a lover. After a few drinks, Mark asks Sarah if she would like to come back to his place. Sarah is honest and says she was really hoping they would hit it off, but she isn't feeling chemistry. She says she would rather "just be friends". . .Mark has just been demoted from the "Prospect Zone" to the "Friend Zone".

 

Yeah. I don't see anything here that I disagree with.

[Forestluv]

@Emerald Cool. It took me a while to sort through some old beliefs I had. This perspective is sitting better with me. Thanks for your help.

Edited September 29, 2017 by Serotoninluv