fooling about with gal pals, innocently enough, no strings attached, and then the inexplicable phenomenon of their needing to tell you in great detail about how happy they are with their new boyfrien

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Also, does this happen to anyone else but me, or am I just an immoral Don Juan who deserves to be thrown into the fiery pit upon his demise? Commisseration is appreciated.

― j.s., Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Sometimes fooling about with gal-pals ends up with you in a hospital watching your child come out of her hoohaw yo.

― so not nickalicious (nickalicious), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:27 (twenty-one years ago)

This has happened to me a couple of times. "Fooling around" often means they're not just "pals".

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:28 (twenty-one years ago)

DUD. but what is it you want there?

― mullygrubber (gaz), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:29 (twenty-one years ago)

YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF KIDS YOU'RE NOT TELLING US ABOUT TUOMAS?!?!?

;-)

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:30 (twenty-one years ago)

They're something more than a friend if you're fooling around, but what do I know, I don't think males & females can be platonic friends without one of them at least fancying the other at some stage!

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Sorry, an unintentionally funny x-post.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, I don't mean to quite that extent. I mean airy, casual little things, that don't seem to be too emotionally overwhelming at the time (a description of conditions under which sex, however "casual", typically doesn't fall unless one is up to the one-night stand thing, and I'm not). The aforementioned phenomenon has occured to me no less than *six* times in the past three months and it's getting downright painful. Le ugh.

― j.s., Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:32 (twenty-one years ago)

and bleh.. I was answering nickalicious with that post. then all these new posters crept up out of nowhere. people actually *replying* to a post of mine? inconceivable! :)

― j.s., Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:33 (twenty-one years ago)

You've had "things" with six different gals in three months? I envy you.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Maybe you don't get wit the gurls coz you don't put out, then!

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:34 (twenty-one years ago)

pp is right. well, thats what i always felt...but is that universal?

― mullygrubber (gaz), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:37 (twenty-one years ago)

No. Most of my friends are gals, and while I've certainly fancied a few of them at some point, most of them I haven't.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:38 (twenty-one years ago)

i must run to class, but do continue talking.. it's so nice to vent, especially if it holds the prospect of my current low-grade angst being alchemically transformed into amusement at the whole lot. you're all wonderful! gimme your hands! *throws gladiolas at the audience, departs*

― j.s., Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:38 (twenty-one years ago)

I think we're in the minority Gaz, but in my experience, it has proved itself time & time again. Then there's the ones that say 'oh yeah I never fancied her. Well of course we had sex..' !!!!!!
x-post
But Tuomas, they might have fancied you!!

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:38 (twenty-one years ago)

A couple of them, maybe, but I doubt that all of them would've.

― Tuomas (Tuomas), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Of course, you have to assume they're both straight or bisexual ...

But no, either way, I've had and have female friends where there's no attraction involved at all, and in some cases that's a large part of what has kept us friends.

It's hard to make generalizations about the way people relate to each other without a large dose of projection.

― Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:41 (twenty-one years ago)

All I can say is that in my experience (that includes me & all of the ppl I have ever known) this is the case. I don't necessarily mean anything will ever come of the attraction, but there is always a point in the relationship that one or the other will give it some thought.

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, does giving it some thought and concluding "not if you were the last xxxx on earth" count?

Because I've had this experience on both counts. A couple of times.

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:44 (twenty-one years ago)

thread titles like therse make me kind of ill

― strongo hulkington (dubplatestyle), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:45 (twenty-one years ago)

What's the underlying phenomenon there, though? That friends will eventually become attracted to one another if they're gender-compatible? Or that people won't become friends with people (or at least people of the appropriate gender) they can't be attracted to?

I can't buy either proposition. Although, according to another thread, I'm very picky about who I'm attracted to. (I'm picky about friends, too, but along different criteria, I'd think.)

― Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:46 (twenty-one years ago)

(This is the only recent thread title to make you ill, jess?)

― Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:46 (twenty-one years ago)

While I have certainly fancied several of my platonic female friends at some point, there are generally more that I have never fancied and probably never had any interest in me judging as how they tend to be attracted to/date guys that are absolutely nothing like me, so I think your analysis isn't necessarily the norm, pink.

x-post

― webcrack (music=crack), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Well fine if that's your opinion, I have a different one.

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:49 (twenty-one years ago)

if they're so happy with their boyfriends why are they "fooling about" with you?

― stockholm cindy (Jody Beth Rosen), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:52 (twenty-one years ago)

What is the correlation between "opinion" and "experience"? I'm just curious here?

If you have never had a certain experience, (no matter what the experience actually is) then I think it's more likely that you'd have the opinion that such an experience is impossible.

While if you have had a certain experience, then your opinion is almost guaranteed to include the idea of the experience being possible.

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:55 (twenty-one years ago)

yeah the qualifier here is "fooled around with"

― mullygrubber (gaz), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:55 (twenty-one years ago)

best xpost ever

Sometimes fooling about with gal-pals ends up with you in a hospital watching your child come out of her hoohaw yo.

-- so not nickalicious (nza2342...), April 8th, 2004.

This has happened to me a couple of times. "Fooling around" often means they're not just "pals".

-- Tuomas (tuomas.alh...), April 8th, 2004.

― The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:57 (twenty-one years ago)

kate are you speaking to me?

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:57 (twenty-one years ago)

I figured it was a puppet show, but the "no strings attached" makes me wonder. Sock puppets can lead to a lot of hanky panky.

― Tep (ktepi), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:58 (twenty-one years ago)

No you in specific, Pink, but it's more of a general question I've been thinking about quite a bit lately. It's one of the fundamental philosophy of science questions: how do you recconcile one group of people saying "it's not possible" with another group of people saying "it's possible and I experience it"?

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 13:59 (twenty-one years ago)

I would guess the latter group wins, since they have empirical data and the first group just has speculation.

― The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Well there is no reconciliation i guess. My experience has led me to form an opinion. it seems to prove itself time & time again & hence my opinion is strengthened. I am of course talking about close relationship, not acquantances that you rarely see.

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:01 (twenty-one years ago)

My timer runs out at 59 minutes.

― lucas (lucas), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:02 (twenty-one years ago)

x-post...

Not necessarily, Huck. I mean, what if the "empirical data" is an emotional experience which is just not measurable? Substitute something like "religion" for "experience" and you've got a heck of a conflict.

Anyway, I'm going to bookmark this discussion and revisit it at another time when it's not an hour before I go to a party on the last day of the week!

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:02 (twenty-one years ago)

When you're friends with anyone, there are obviously qualities you like about them, and if they're of the opposite sex I think it's completely natural to at least contemplate whether you should go beyond being platonic friends.

― Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:02 (twenty-one years ago)

i can see the point if the fooling around with gal pals involves MORE than one galpal. i mean even i have played strip catch with a galpal i fancied AND a gal pal i didn't. (or even two i didn't i guess bt i haven't). and i would not then feel depressed if the one i didn't choofed off with some fella. but if i was playing strip catch with ONE galpal i'm pretty sure i fancied her.

whats this fooling around shit anyway?

― mullygrubber (gaz), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:03 (twenty-one years ago)

You're going to a party at 10 a.m. on a Thursday?

Oh wait, I keep forgetting about TIME ZONES. God bless Sir Sanford Fleming, if that's the name of the guy I'm thinking of.

― The Huckle-Buck (Horace Mann), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Jordan that is well otm. you win.

― Ste (Fuzzy), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:06 (twenty-one years ago)

Pink, it seems that the argument hinges on the closeness of the relationship, and definitions of "friendship" and "relationship" and that brings us into the nebulous world of the "fuckbuddy" and trying to separate sex from emotion, which I'd rather not descend into. I think we're getting our definitions mixed up.

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:06 (twenty-one years ago)

If girls are freely 'fooling' around i.e. mini flirting, it either means that
1) They are 'firmly' attached to boyfriends, or
2) You are f.a. with new Girlfriend.

― mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:12 (twenty-one years ago)

"are you going to eat that cake or what?"

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:13 (twenty-one years ago)

A fuckbuddy is a friend you fuck, hence not platonic. Whether you have agreed to a fucking relationship is irrelevant!

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Stop swearing at me! ;-)

― Super-Kate (kate), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:17 (twenty-one years ago)

heheh, sorry! ;-) should have put the last expletive in quote marks!

― Pinkpanther (Pinkpanther), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:18 (twenty-one years ago)

Did anyone see that Onion sidebar last week, something like "Fuck-Buddy Becomes Fuck-Fiance?"

― Jordan (Jordan), Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:22 (twenty-one years ago)

i think ther bf needs to come home early and kill both of you

― kephm, Thursday, 8 April 2004 14:31 (twenty-one years ago)

This exact thing happened to a female friend of mine and I could only watch the stupidity going on with horror. OK, I had a guy friend who was best (platonic) friends with this female friend of mine. Then the guy friend gets a girlfriend and starts going ON and ON relentlessly about how great his life is now and how wonderful his girlfriend is, how BEAUTIFUL and SMART and WELL ADJUSTED and it was enough to almost drive me insane with feelings of inadequacy, and SUPRISE SURPRISE his old platonic female friend did crack up and start hating the new girlfriend, having a breakdown, etc. And nobody could say to this guy 'SHUT UP ABOUT YOUR GIRLFRIEND' because that would be trampling on his happiness or being a spoilsport or whatever. And it's like, you can reassure yourself with ideas such as 'no-one who TALKS about happiness is truly happy' but that's not really any antidote to Mr Smug. All I'm saying is I feel sorry for you, j.s.

― student, Thursday, 8 April 2004 22:01 (twenty-one years ago)

I really, really don't believe any of my current guy friends (which is all of my friends) fancy me or even view me as female.

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Thursday, 8 April 2004 22:03 (twenty-one years ago)

Student has a good point - everyone's been banging on about the shagging/flirting aspect and forgetting the friendship/loyalty/jealousy aspect that certainly could get affected if one of the two friends suddenly got a partner and then did nothing but talk about how happy they were with them

Surely we've all experienced the dynamic shift when a close/best friend gets a partner/gets married/has a kid and everything changes? Depression could occur for sure. And it has fuck all to do with the fooling around part. I cant believe no one touched on that.

― Trayce (trayce), Thursday, 8 April 2004 22:48 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.