Dating is odd to me. I do not really know what my motivations are. If I actually find someone. What then? What will we do? How different will our relationship be from a regular friendship (besides you know what). And should it be?
Should you be wanting to do other things with your SO then a very good friend?
What I’m getting at is, have you ever thought to someone: “They don’t really want a relationship they just want a one particular friend with benefits.”
I don’t know if I’m rambling over here. But I’m really having difficulty digesting this one.
Edit: The reason I ask is because I’m thinking to start dating again but I don’t know my end goal.
A good friend (platonic relationship) is someone I can see every day, talk to about anything, and I want them in my life regularly. I personally cannot spend 100% all my time with someone who is just a good friend.
A romantic relationship is a good friend who I can live with and want to share a blanket and cuddle with at the end of the day. It’s someone I might want to hold hands with, kiss, or sleep with. It’s someone I want to come home to at the end of a good day to share good news, or end of a bad day to make it better.
A sexual relationship is someone I want to kiss and have sex with.
There are overlap. Romantic friends and friends with benefits are pretty common terms. Having a romantic relationship with sexual interest often ends up in bad relationships; I’ve heard this described as “feels like it should work” or “I loved them but I didn’t like them.”
And ideally, when you find someone that is in all three circles for longer than a honeymoon (or refractory) period, that’s the one you marry!
Very true! Although honeymoon phase/stage can last quite a while, individuals depending.
I think this is all personal preferences, but by default many times with an SO you usually are both building towards a common goal together to cement your future together. Again, I’m sure that’s not the case for everyone but I am just speaking generally.
With a “very good friend” that might not necessarily be the case - but these lines can all get very fuzzy depending on people’s outlooks, perspectives, wants etc.
I probably haven’t given you much clarity here but I also think many people have wrestled with at one point or another in the dating world.
For me: SO (and if they’re not the same: spouse) is more about becoming a team.
With a really good friend, unless you have something very special, you’ll probably not tether your lives together and commit to going through the rest of your days together.
There’s something that happens over time when you have that commitment that really bonds you (so I’ve found). I haven’t felt it with a friend, and the closest I’ve come to it otherwise is with family (though there’s even less commitment between family members, I’ve found).
It’s hard, but it’s also great.
An SO will align their goals with you. A best friend may find another goal in life and go off on their own. A friend isn’t tied to you, and you’d support them if they ‘leave’ you to seek their own fortune. A partner stays with you and you and they need to find ways to reach your goals together. There’s a stability and security to a partner that you don’t get, no matter how close your friend is.
This is an interesting question. My husband is my ONE. Wherever he is, that’s home. We are absolutely best friends & more. We share absolutely everything & neither of us ever have to worry about the other one waking up one day & deciding to move on without the other.
I realize I’m lucky. Not every relationship is anywhere close to that. I was married before & lived with others… And I thought the “one true love” stuff & long-term monogamy was complete BS until he & I got together.
But not everyone wants the kind of relationship we have & that’s fine too. I have plenty of independent & awesome friends who have great friends, great lives, great hobbies; they adventure, travel, are fulfilled, etc etc all without an SO. Others who are in great relationships but are much more prone to doing things separately, and that’s what works for them.
So maybe if you don’t have that drive to find that relationship, maybe it’s not for you or maybe you just haven’t met the right kind of person yet. Your SO relationship can ultimately be whatever you want it to be, provided you find a partner agreeable with it. Best wishes either way!
My wife says she got to marry her best friend, and I say that I get to bang my best friend whenever we want.
In my eyes that distingueshes a “normal” friendship and a life partner is the planning for the future and being a team. You make big life decisions (moving house, career changes, medical decisions) together thinking of the best outcomes for both as a team. You could be a life partner with a non romantic totally platonic friend, but that’s usually not the case you see represented.
Many romantic relationships evolve more or less into this over time also.
You’re overthinking it. It starts as good friends and grows from there. You don’t have to know how it works right now. Just find someone who you work well with and go from there.
You get a teammate for your battles against the world, and benefits.
Yeah, I’d say SO generally are like great friends (with benefits), but often, over time you end up doing so much stuff with them that they eclipse any other individual friend. And eventually (especially if you end up living together) they become such a part of your day to day life they can begin to feel like an extension of yourself (or rather, that you’re both part of one being) and it’s hard to live with out them. I remember laughing at my dad for wanting to phone my mum everyday when he was away on business. I’d be like “what do you even have to talk about? You see each other all the time” But now, if I had a day where I didn’t at least message with my partner I’d feel so isolated.
I’m wondering if you might find these a helpful starting point:
https://breezewiki.com/lgbtqia/wiki/Aromantic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queerplatonic_relationship
(or not, sorry if I’m misunderstanding and just confusing you further)
Well, I guess it feels more like, all I have to offer is friendship with intimacy. But not that I don’t want to. What I mean to say is: Is not being (or not knowing how to be) a romantic type the same a someone who is aromantic?
You might be aromantic, or it might just be that you haven’t met a person or had the time with a person to develop romantic feelings.
I don’t think I can answer that for you unfortunately, it’s something for you to investigate with yourself, and at some point possibly with a potential partner too. There are also aro/ace communities around (sadly the ones on the fediverse seem pretty dead) where you can talk your feelings through with people who are going through a similar experience.
Either way, having friendship and intimacy to offer is a lot, and enough, don’t let any social constructs make you feel otherwise.
At the end of the day “relationship” is a pretty wide concept and it includes friendships as well as sexual and other partnerships, and no two are alike (despite what we’ve generally been socialised to believe - either completely platonic or the hetero-romantic boy meets girl, they date, fall in love, move in together, get married, have kids). What’s important is that you find relationships that work for you (and the other person/people involved of course), and the only way to make sure of that is to communicate as openly and honestly as you can with yourself and each other (so for example what you define as a “friendship with intimacy” might qualify as a romantic relationship to some but not to others).
Also - aromanticism, like other orientations, is a spectrum, so you might be greyromantic or demiromantic, which probably only confuses things more (I know it did for me, and so I’ve never really taken the time to figure out exactly where I fit on the aro/ace spectrums beyond knowing I’m on them), but just know that there are options for you to “try on” and see which fits most comfortably (if any!).
My first thoughts while reading OP’s post were demi and poly.
Intimacy, whether its shared via sex with a partner or deep connection via friendship, manifests much stronger and more complex emotions.
Things you wouldnt care about become more important. Do i have this persons trust, do they love me back, why do they do that one thing with their teeth?!
My wife is different than my friends because we literally live together. All decisions are made with the both of us in mind. As a result, we know each other better than just about anyone else, and that level of emotional intimacy is tough to find anywhere else. Don’t get me wrong, I have a few very good friends as well, but I don’t talk about the same things with them as I do my wife.
Having an honest to God companion to share the ups and downs in life is amazing. The ups are sublime, the downs help us both be more introspective and end up bettering ourselves.
Well basically love is a form of psychosis where someone becomes the most important thing to you and your whole reality bends around that. You feel a deep abiding satisfaction and comfort just being in their presence or hearing their voice. Your personal identity becomes secondary to your shared identity as a couple and your connection to them is a core part of your emotional state and thought process. Anything that contradicts being with or caring for them is basically impossible to even think. This can be really wonderful or really horrible depending on the circumstances.
This sounds more like infatuation than love, TBH.
The way I see it infatuation is just the surface feeling, love is when it becomes a more permanent core motivation and foundation of what you do and think. What do you think the difference is?
Some of the things you mentioned in your first comment really point to infatuation to me, like your perseonal identity becoming secondary to a shared identity, and “Anything that contradicts being with or caring for them is basically impossible to even think.” These sound like elements of an unhealthy relationship.
Why are those things necessarily unhealthy? I phrased it in a negative way to emphasize that love can be unhealthy, but having a shared life/identity, being devoted to a person beyond rationality, if these things aren’t present I’m not sure how it would qualify as love at all.
The point is that, good or bad, love is overwhelming and all encompassing.
It’s very exclusive and more intimate physically and emotionally than a good friend. That’s my interpretation anyway.
besides you know what). And should it be?
We’re adults here. You can say the word sex on the internet, and yes.
To me, it seems like you may not be the type of person that feels like they need intimacy. If you want it, however, then that should be ok too. That is a major difference (for many) in people who are in relationships, and people who are just good friends. It’s not the sole defining characteristic, no, but a big one none-the-less.
…they just want a one particular friend with benefits
Why can’t it be both though? I think there’s nothing wrong with that, in my mind. I suppose a big consideration would be if you live together or not, or want to/plan to.
Another thing to consider is that SO relationships are typically seen as more static/permanent while good friends are considered more dynamic/fleeting.
In my experience, relationships (all relationships) are more dynamic than static. Realities of our mortality.
We’re adults here.
You sure about that?
Well, maybe not.
#¯_(ツ)_/¯
This is an interesting question. In my opinion, romance, true romance, is built over time through consistent effort. Nobody truly loves someone the moment they see that person. Anyone who thinks that they fell in love at first sight, well, I call that puppy love. It’s the kind of “love” that middle school children engage in.
I think that distinction doesn’t get emphasized enough. And all the romance movies that glorify “passionate love” aren’t helping. If you were to ask me, true love is what’s left after the passion has died out. I know some people describe it as being like a best friend. I won’t necessarily say that it’s wrong, since it’s a pretty close approximation. But I don’t think that’s the full picture.
Have you ever lived with a roommate? A lot of it is about balancing each person’s wants and compromising. A lot of it is about forming a strong system of habits that won’t anger the other person. Who does the dishes? Who takes out the trash? Who keeps track of groceries? What do you do if the other person is upset? Even down to simple things, like what to do if you and the other person can’t agree on what to eat. If you had a roommate at any point in your life, you’d probably understand what I mean. Having an SO is essentially like that, but much harder, because you’re sharing many more things than with just a roommate. In my opinion, true love is about aiming to set up that equilibrium where both people enjoy living with the other person.
To summarize, if you were given a choice between living with your SO or living alone, and you end up preferring to live with your SO, then I would consider that true love.
In my opinion, true romance has Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette.
