This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
If we could hear this from the woman's perspective I suspect it would go something like this:
I suspect this is the case because if you spend any amount of time in a place where women discuss their relationships you will have heard some variation of the above.
Woman meets man. Man apparently wants to be a platonic friend. They grow close. Man tries to convert platonic relationship into a romantic or sexual one. Woman declines. Suddenly man is no longer interested in being platonic friends.
We are missing the last part from this story, I suspect because the woman in question pattern matched OP's actions to this narrative and cut it off preemptively. All their friendly interactions are suddenly recast through the light of "was this an authentic interaction or did he just want to get in my pants?" She cut off the friendship with OP because she believed she could no longer trust that OP wanted to be her friend in some kind of authentic way vs being her friend as a means to get a sexual relationship with her. This also, I believe, explains the level of vitriol directed at OP from people hearing about it second hand. "Awkward guy in our study group awkwardly asked me for sex" shouldn't, and I think probably doesn't, tend towards that kind of reaction but "guy in our study group pretended to be my friend to try and sleep with me" seems like it would warrant a much harsher reaction.
This also brings us back to the "be clear about your intentions" advice. Contra some other commenters I don't think this advice is satisfied with "be direct about asking for sex when you want it." The way I understand the advice is more like "when starting a long term relationship with a woman (of whatever kind) be clear about what kind of relationship you want it to be." I think a lot of people giving this advice would say OP was not clear about his intentions, given he started the relationship indicating it would be platonic when he wanted it to be sexual. Now, I think an obvious problem with this advice is that one's intentions for a relationship can change over time. Giving OP the benefit of the doubt, he did authentically want a platonic friendship and only developed the desire to convert it to a sexual one (and belief that it could be) some substantial time in to the relationship. Unfortunately this is where I run out of ideas. It's not a position I've found myself in and there doesn't seem to be a great way to be clear about how you want the relationship to change that doesn't involve some risk of destroying the relationship as it already is, beyond what some other commenters have noted.
This argument that men pretend to be friends so that they can get sex strikes me as a rationalization. The situation makes the woman feel bad so she finds a reason to direct the blame onto the man. You never hear about this problem of "pretending to be my friend to get sex" when the feelings are reciprocated. Shouldn't the deception be just as bad a betrayal whether the feelings are reciprocated or not? If the man was more clear about his intentions it could still easily spun into a creeper accusation. The thing that actually matters is the extent to which you can avoid making the woman feel bad or uncomfortable. To the extent that you can't avoid it, you just have to accept the risk that the woman will think you're a creep.
More options
Context Copy link
It's almost if people believe that men can't catch feelings. What I mean by this, is that there's the idea that men have to (and are able to) make their decision about what bucket the relationship is going to go in right off the bat.
I have to say, the more I think about this type of situation the more misandry I see in it. Not that I think the guy was correct in this case, to be clear. I can understand why the guy did it, and while wrong, I do think it's understandable. But I think even forget the FwB thing. If he asks her out on a date, which is the more conventional thing....this situation is maybe what...80% of what it is? I don't think it's THAT sizable of a difference.
Again, I think there's a lot of misandry, and yes, objectification of men involved here.
Why so? If he'd simply asked her if she'd be keen for a cup of coffee the next morning (as in, make a harmless offer and make it clear refusal is a valid option) and she'd politely refused, it would be very different. Sure, she might feel weird around him for a little while, knowing that he has some interest in her as a potential date, but will likely still talk to him. And if he'd started seeing someone else (her proof that he's no longer trying to pursue her), it would be like he never asked her out at all. Definitely won't get into "permanently strained and impossible to mend" territory.
More options
Context Copy link
No it isn't. One is implying she's a cheap slut by proposing a very one-sided deal, the other isn't.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Does a person in this position who takes a chance on love deserve to be cast out for lechery?
He didn't "take a chance on love"; that would be if he simply asked her if she wanted to get coffee or drinks or dinner or any of the other normal things men do when they ask women out. He pretty much directly proposed that they enter an unorthodox relationship whereby he gets sex with out any of the attendant obligations. Starting a relationship out like this with someone you know a little but not well is like saying "I like you as a friend and think you have a nice body so I'd be willing to sleep with you, provided that you understand I don't really like you enough to take the relationship further and see no future there". FWB isn't something anyone really aspires to have; it's something that you end up with when there aren't any better options.
More options
Context Copy link
Kinda? Maybe? I don't know. Too much depends on context.
But like @Gillitrut I kind of feel like a lot of these problems can be effectively bypassed by being honest about one's feelings/intentions from the get go. To be clear; I'm not saying "ask for sex directly the moment you meet her" I'm saying that if you are trying to get closer to a woman because you find her attractive do not try to pass this off as anything else. That would be dishonest, and dishonesty deserves to be punished.
More options
Context Copy link
Probably not? The issue is distinguishing, from the outside, individuals who are "tak[ing] a chance on love" and individuals with more nefarious motivations.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link