Is it possible for a guy and a girl to be just friends?

ceruleantiger · Post by **ceruleantiger** » Jul 24th, '06, 05:45

My best friend for many years was this absolutely gorgeous girl. The romantic thing just didn't work out, and it was entirely possible to 'just be friends'. It's definitely easier to have a friend who's a girl if you don't find her in the least bit attractive though

S@GDI@N@:-) · Post by **S@GDI@N@:-)** » Jul 24th, '06, 09:50

It´s possible when you have many other friends you can fall in love with. If you hang around with your male friend day and night, you could fall for him. It´s something really stupid I think, because you may lose your friend if you´re in love with an other guy/girl.

chocomocha · Post by **chocomocha** » Jul 24th, '06, 10:12

xmz wrote:I was chatting with a friend on the phone the other day and we were wondering if it is possible for a guy and a girl to be just friend. and not later on, the guy falling for the girl or the girl falling for the guy? and if that would happen do you think that it would be possible again for them to be just friends again??

I'm sure you have more than 1 girl-friend rite? .. If not, then falling for a girl who was your friend is normal.. your friendship developed and you relise you like her.. thats all! ..
but i'm sure that not all your girl-friend fall for you? .. and you dont fall for all your girl friend rite? ...If No, then it shuld answered ur question! .. If Yes, then there is a problem with the frdship! .. Theres is a limit in friendship! .. but i'm sure it is possible for a girl and a boy to be friends.. isnt it obvious? .. Afterall we are all humans beings.. why would a boy and a girl only can be bf/gf.. that dosnt sound rite does it? ..

and isit possible to be friends again? .. thats something between u and her.. everyones differnt! i'm sure its possible..

whowhatme · Post by **whowhatme** » Jul 24th, '06, 10:27

my answer is NO, guys and girls cannot be 'just friends'. usually what happens is one side or the other starts to like the other side and then things get awk.

Of course, the caveat is if both parties already have significant others... in that case, it's possible to be friends, probably. I think i agree with what Billy Crystal says in "When Harry Met Sally" though. there's always some sort of undercurrent of attraction/non-attraction that's always there below the surface, no matter how platonic the friendship might be!

andrity_tsheva · Post by **andrity_tsheva** » Jul 24th, '06, 10:40

I have never had a a friend is a girl i can say that at least it's right till now. I can't understand why did you ask a question like that? To me if she can't be my girlfriend, I will separate. Each goes their own way. It's impossible to make friend and girlfriend both.
Anyway just my opinion.

Harthorn · Post by **Harthorn** » Jul 24th, '06, 13:32

It is possible.

If guy believes girl is not attractive lol, then yes will only be friends

. Vice versa for woman.

But things like these are temporary, it is unlikely that at some point, that the guy would not find something good in that woman. So the real question should be, how long can it be just friends? lol

nikochanr3 · Post by **nikochanr3** » Jul 24th, '06, 20:57

i think a lot of the OF COURSE NOT have to do with age. If you are 19, i can see you feeling that way, cause 19 year old guys are dogs with less self control. =P lol. If you are 30 year old guy and you still feel like that, its a little scary but almost ok...if you are approaching 40 and still think that its sad.

Mythrel · Post by **Mythrel** » Jul 25th, '06, 16:37

nikochanr3 don't put me in the same group as these dogs. Some of us know how to see women as other something than objects.

nikochanr3 · Post by **nikochanr3** » Jul 25th, '06, 16:48

Mythrel wrote:nikochanr3 don't put me in the same group as these dogs. Some of us know how to see women as other something than objects.

lol, i meant i understood it more, not that all 19 year olds are like that. sorry!

i think as you get older you realize its not reasonable to expect to have a physical relationship with a women, or none at all. some of the people here i wonder...if you are only going to talk to girls you can get too...then you'll just have all guy friends and all guy opinions all the time. thats strikes me as bizarre...

lavender311 · Post by **lavender311** » Jul 25th, '06, 17:11

I think it's possible for a girl and a boy being friend. I have a boy in my group of friends. We look really close to each other. It has been almost 4 years even all of those girl in our group changing and we don't offen go out with them anymore. He and I are still friend and we really close to each other. Now he has g/f also and his g/f is getting close to me too. Sometime, I hang out with 2 of them. We have a lot of fun.

I think boy and girl are possible being friend if they know how to deal with each other well. Once You fall for them it also mean your friendship is done. So think carefully before you fall for them.

wewa · Post by **wewa** » Jul 25th, '06, 20:16

Leykis 101 students know that we do not wanna be friends with women. We tell women that we are their friends in order to hopefully get in there and nail them, ultimatley. That's the only reason we do it. Unless they're gay. Those men that are gay, well maybe they do want to be friends with these chicks, and we don't trust all of them. Some of them are on the fence. But straight men definitly do not want to be friends with women. We don't. We want to have sex. Will we also go to a ballgame with you? Oh sure, but we want sex. If we are talking to you and hanging out with you without having sex, it is usually because we are waiting for you to have a fight with your boyfriend, that night will come when he acts like a jerk, or he forgets your birthday, doesn't bring you flowers. There will be some night where you have a stupid argument and we are gonna be there waitning over you like vultures. No two ways about it.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... Leykis+101

http://tinyurl.com/gpb2v

sharinerz · Post by **sharinerz** » Jul 25th, '06, 22:00

Seriously though, it is possible to be friends with a guy... totally possible without having feelings for that person. I mean, if you truly consider the person as a friend, then i don't think other feelings would occur. Most of my friends are guys, the majority actually, and I'm pretty close to a couple of them to (as friends) and we can talk about anything, but that doesn't mean we have any relationship-y feelings for each other.

Mythrel · Post by **Mythrel** » Jul 26th, '06, 06:01

sometimes I wonder about some people... Not all men are dogs, but this thread proves there are lots.

Tyrane · Post by **Tyrane** » Jul 30th, '06, 05:51

My best friend (also my ex from a few years ago) is a girl, and we're just friends. Although I still think about her romantically sometimes

Littleangel91356 · Post by **Littleangel91356** » Jul 31st, '06, 01:10

wewa wrote:Leykis 101 students know that we do not wanna be friends with women. We tell women that we are their friends in order to hopefully get in there and nail them, ultimatley. That's the only reason we do it. Unless they're gay. Those men that are gay, well maybe they do want to be friends with these chicks, and we don't trust all of them. Some of them are on the fence. But straight men definitly do not want to be friends with women. We don't. We want to have sex. Will we also go to a ballgame with you? Oh sure, but we want sex. If we are talking to you and hanging out with you without having sex, it is usually because we are waiting for you to have a fight with your boyfriend, that night will come when he acts like a jerk, or he forgets your birthday, doesn't bring you flowers. There will be some night where you have a stupid argument and we are gonna be there waitning over you like vultures. No two ways about it.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... Leykis+101

http://tinyurl.com/gpb2v

That's crap. Honestly, you can't get girl friends if it's like that so anyways, not even a pretty girl will fall for that kinda person. Not all girls wanna be laid, only some idiot girls who only think 'sex' is the answer to a relationship.

ha calling a girl fugly? Look at yourself before calling someone fugly.

xmz · Post by **xmz** » Jul 31st, '06, 21:54

@wewa

i don't think that girls are that stupid to go for a ' friend who just wants to have sex with you'. Girls may somethimes be a little naive but they do have some intellengence you know. I really can't imagine what your friends who are girls have to go through. really guys as you scare the hell out of me :S and not all the lives of man tend to evolve around sex some men do have feelings and want to be just friends even through they might be attracted to the girl.

avarix98 · Post by **avarix98** » Aug 1st, '06, 06:20

it is SOOO possible. =) I have experience.

wai_muna · Post by **wai_muna** » Aug 1st, '06, 07:19

not impossible..i`d experience it too...after broke up...we become a friend...just a friend..not best friend anymore

Showtime · Post by **Showtime** » Aug 3rd, '06, 00:34

it can go both ways...just depends..from most people's experience and mine i feel becoming friends after splitting from your significant other is almost impossible.
you'll see a couple people accomplish such a thing but 90% of the time we fail.
everything is just different afterwards...but if you've got something to prove then give it some time then jump back in the ring to earn their seal of approval to be friends again...i'm trying something like that

kaname · Post by **kaname** » Aug 3rd, '06, 00:48

In my experience it depended on our maturity level...when younger (young dumb and full of cum) I could not be friends with a girl cuz all i saw was...well you know. The girl (pick one there were plenty) could also be just as immature at the break up point and beyond. After i got beyond seeing all women as a target i formed many wonderful and lasting friendships that rarely had anything to do with a physical connection although there were girl friends who by mutual desire were sex partners- we were mature enough by that time to remain friends

Showtime · Post by **Showtime** » Aug 3rd, '06, 00:50

all in all maturity is the deciding factor...somebody has to step up to the plate

Kimmy07 · Post by **Kimmy07** » Aug 3rd, '06, 03:15

I voted "Yes" even though my experiences should tell me different. Every single guy I've been friends with I eventually fell for or he eventually asked me out. Most of the time after that we drifted apart even as friends, only one guy stuck around as my friend but he ended up asking me out constantly, mentally cornering me about it, and overall making me feel horrible about it so we're not really friends anymore either.

But I think it's possible. It's just a matter of two people with no chemistry getting along right? I think more often than not it'll turn out one-sided but there will be special unique times when it's mutual or really just friends. Or someone will be gay, then it's definitely possible.

dead_cute · Post by **dead_cute** » Aug 3rd, '06, 19:05

possible but sometimes not

mister · Post by **mister** » Aug 3rd, '06, 19:06

heck yes, of course it's possible

nikochanr3 · Post by **nikochanr3** » Aug 4th, '06, 12:50

kaname wrote:In my experience it depended on our maturity level...when younger (young dumb and full of cum) I could not be friends with a girl cuz all i saw was...well you know. The girl (pick one there were plenty) could also be just as immature at the break up point and beyond. After i got beyond seeing all women as a target i formed many wonderful and lasting friendships that rarely had anything to do with a physical connection although there were girl friends who by mutual desire were sex partners- we were mature enough by that time to remain friends

its frightening that i know people as old as me (im 34) and older who arent even close to being at that maturity level. and some of them ae married (Which you think would get you off seeing every woman as a target....cause if you target other girls you would get divorced)

mimmi · Post by **mimmi** » Aug 6th, '06, 02:44

nikochanr3 wrote:
kaname wrote:In my experience it depended on our maturity level...when younger (young dumb and full of cum) I could not be friends with a girl cuz all i saw was...well you know. The girl (pick one there were plenty) could also be just as immature at the break up point and beyond. After i got beyond seeing all women as a target i formed many wonderful and lasting friendships that rarely had anything to do with a physical connection although there were girl friends who by mutual desire were sex partners- we were mature enough by that time to remain friends
its frightening that i know people as old as me (im 34) and older who arent even close to being at that maturity level. and some of them ae married (Which you think would get you off seeing every woman as a target....cause if you target other girls you would get divorced)

@ nikochan3...

how very true

....but yeah, it's is possible to be just friends without any physical attraction....because when your married, you got a good one waiting for you, the love of your life, the one that loves you like nobody can, whom'll make you feel like the king of the world

....

rossier · Post by **rossier** » Aug 14th, '06, 10:45

The result says it all... my ex and i now become good friends and i have a few guy friends with no physical or emotional attraction beyond friendship.
[img]http://www.qoos.com/photos/data/506/175 ... ame_16.jpg[/img]

KniteMare · Post by **KniteMare** » Aug 14th, '06, 11:06

I'm a 30 year old straight guy and engaged so I probably have more experience with this than most of you. It is very possible to be friends with a girl that ur attracted to and not attracted to. But it's harder to be a friend with a girl ur attracted to. Mostly it depends on the person and the situation. If you are both in a relationship then it makes things alot easier to be friends but if your both single and your physically attracted to her and she is with u then friendship isnt going to last long, it will just be a stepping stone to either having sex with each other or having a bf/gf relationship. I have several female friends and most are very physically attractive and about half of those are in relationships or married and the other half single but we are still all friends and I even introduced them to my fiance and she became friends with them. As for a woman I think it is easier to be single and have a male friend she is attracted to but just stay friends but it's impossible for a guy to be single and have a female friend he is attracted to and just be friends even if she is already in a relationship. This is because a guy (if he is not gay) is always going to want more or have that desire to want to have sex with her.

Ashes-Wishes · Post by **Ashes-Wishes** » Aug 14th, '06, 16:46

Why it wouldn't? I have three very good boyfriends and I really can't think any of them romantically with me. Two of them are too hot to be humans and third one doesn't look bad either [he's good-looking, yes, but just aren't my type], all of them are really great people who I treasure very much (after my best friend, of course). And any of them aren't in relationship so it should be easy to think them romantically with me without any problems, right?

But no. I really would never fall in love with any of them because it would be just too strange. Of course I feel some attraction to those 2 who are like dream come true when I see them, but I can't just think of them romantically. It's like me trying to have romantical feelings for family member; I feel like it's so horribly wrong.

[and maybe me pairing those two is the thing that takes my "interest" in them off. xD]

KniteMare · Post by **KniteMare** » Aug 14th, '06, 22:25

Ashes-Wishes wrote:Why it wouldn't? I have three very good boyfriends and I really can't think any of them romantically with me. Two of them are too hot to be humans and third one doesn't look bad either [he's good-looking, yes, but just aren't my type], all of them are really great people who I treasure very much (after my best friend, of course).

Haha

this is funniest thing i've heard in long time. Hot to be humans ? Haha! What have u been dating or going out with before ? Dogs ? Cats? Monkeys? Haha I would hope they would be humans. How many different species do u think has hot males

?

Anthony1709 · Post by **Anthony1709** » Aug 15th, '06, 14:24

Hi,

I think it is possible sometimes, but most of the time it isn't. I'm a guy, and met this girl a few months ago. Became really good friends, asked her out, and she said no. Not sure if we will stay friends now. Only time will tell. But I don't regret asking her out, otherwise I would of never know. But I just hope will can remain friends now, but I doubt it will be the same.

I also have a few friends who are girls, some I feel attractive to but have left it, as it is not possible to go out with her, at the moment.

So I think it is possible, as long as both the guy & girl, don't feel attractive to each other, then you will be able to be friends.

splur · Post by **splur** » Aug 15th, '06, 15:44

Very possible. You should've added "forever" after the question though, that makes it a bit harder to answer. Because I mean, you can be friends with the opposite sex for a month, a year and then start going out. Still friends before that right?

It's the attraction which gets in the way after a while, you two might become attracted to each other. Then things go awry. So is it possible for a guy and a girl to remain friends for an extended period of time? Yup, as long as they're not attracted to each other lol.

xmz · Post by **xmz** » Aug 22nd, '06, 02:19

i think by adding forever wouldn't really make it very hard to answer. cause i think nothing lasts forever. friendships even between people who aren't attracted to eachother it is very difficult to say if it would last forever. people tend to grow and to develop. some grow closer together others more apart. and with the extra factor of the possiblity of attraction, it would make it much more difficult to let a friendship last forever. i think that a lot of people would say definitly no, that it couldn't last forever.

and what is forever for you??? is it a life time?? or even more???

Littleangel91356 · Post by **Littleangel91356** » Aug 22nd, '06, 20:58

......

Akasha · Post by **Akasha** » Aug 31st, '06, 08:40

Its not possible for a guy and a girl to be just friends because eventually one of them fall for the other.

scott12199 · Post by **scott12199** » Aug 31st, '06, 20:42

if she's ugly... you'll be friends for life

sachan · Post by **sachan** » Aug 31st, '06, 21:32

I think it is possible for a girl and boy to be friends. There were tons of those kinds of people at my high school. But all of MY guy friends ended up liking me..which sort of ended our relationship. They just get all annoying and...obvious that it started to piss me off. [And now he likes my friend...wtf?] But I do believe it is possible.

I wish I had some guy friends that I could just talk with. haha.

seitentaisei · Post by **seitentaisei** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:02

I do believe that a boy and a girl can be friends. but sometimes depending on how strong their friendship is, there could be a time limit to that relationship.
I had a boy-friend, we get along very well, but those that don't know us very well always try to get in our way and start outraging rumours about us, and in the end we couldn't hold onto our firendship. I guess we weren't strong enough to ignore those rumors.

I think that if a boy and girl are friends, then it is a great thing. you can understand each other far better than some other people. I still have a lot of friends that are guys, this time I'm stronger to those rumours.

rxvien · Post by **rxvien** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:21

i say, 'hell yeah!' .. of course it's possible. however, my guy friends will disagree. they don't think it's possible fir a guy and a girl to be just friends cause one or the other will eventually develop some kind of feeling. but i still say YES!

muknut · Post by **muknut** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:21

Yes it is possible... it just depends on the situation and circumstances...

anhny wonton · Post by **anhny wonton** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:25

I really think that a guy and a girl can be very close friends and not feel anything for each other, and that even if thay did like each other at one point and it didn't work out, they can still remain being friends. That has happened to me and we are fine right now. my best guy friend liked me for more than two years, but when he confessed i said that i do not feel for him the same way, and eventually he moved on, and got another girlfriend that he loves. we're still fine now and i think we're even closer than before.
i still do not have any special feelings for him, even when all of our other friends say were perfect for each other. so really, it's possible, and we've been friends since i was in elementary.^_^ if you're not meant to be, then you're not meant to be. It doesn't change if you're friends.

Thats my oppinions anyways.=]

scott12199 · Post by **scott12199** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:49

anything is possible... if a dog can be a man's best friend so can a girl.....

anhny wonton · Post by **anhny wonton** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:52

scott12199 wrote:anything is possible... if a dog can be a man's best friend so can a girl.....

lols... very true =] (i happen to also have a dog)

angeizahoy · Post by **angeizahoy** » Aug 31st, '06, 22:55

i believe it can. =)

maybe it's just me, but for some reason, i always seem to align myself with the wrong types of girls... onces that are complete backstabbers that you later realize they aren't even worth your time... you'll always see me hanging out with a huge group of guys! although that's changed in the past year or two. i have close girl friends now =)

mina04 · Post by **mina04** » Sep 10th, '06, 03:21

of course guy n a girl can just b friends.

kawaiineemei · Post by **kawaiineemei** » Sep 10th, '06, 03:48

u know what i think.... YES. and NO.

there is a 50/50 percent chance that friends are already slightly attracted to each other .. its just they don't feel that deep confusing emotion that we all THINK is love .. which can most likely either be LUST or... the feeling of needing that person to be with you all of the time .... attachment basically is what I'm saying.

besides that --- i have a best friend that's a guy but im not attracted to him. it feels too much like im going to like my brother and i don't find that pleasant at all.

mimmi · Post by **mimmi** » Sep 12th, '06, 06:43

I still say it's possible, or maybe I'm just too old and comfortable with my life to have that kind a feeling anymore....ok, now the song "feeling" is starting humming in my head

....I'd better stop reading these posts....they're starting making me feel loony (not the bird) here....Is it still a full moon tonight?....ok, blame it on the moon

....

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Sep 12th, '06, 07:19

I think the best answer depends on what you term, friends. A successful relationship, boyfriend x girlfriend, roommates, and so on pretty much means you are friends anyhow. Friends are those you care and respect, but not those you command or coerce. So long as you don't lose respect for the person and the person values the respect you give, then you can be "just" friends.

Even when the desire to date one another arises, so long as the approach and responses remain respectful, then you can be "just" friends. This is why we have some cases of success and some cases of horror stories. LOL

Maturity came up here and there, but it is such a broad word and not very well understood by those not yet mature. Consider if you answered no, you have a pre-determined thought that may affect how you go about doing things. Perhaps think yes and the odds of a successful continued relationship would immensely increase.

nedayaj · Post by **nedayaj** » Sep 20th, '06, 23:09

Basic fact:
If your single, and the other person is single, you will eventually have feelings for one another. No matter how hard you try, you or he/she will.

I used to believe guys and girls can be friends, well now i realize NOPE and sometimes it depends on the person. I've already proven it to myself. Those who believes that no feelings will erupt, wella go do some socializing, you'll get the feel sooner or later. But after confessing to that person you like, and he/she doesn't feel the same, that feeling does go away. Eventually you'll be just aquintance. Saying hi and bye every now and then. But the friendship won't be there again. How sad... tears...

If you dating someone already, thats a different story. Of course, your friends, because you already got the one you like.

Falcon1309 · Post by **Falcon1309** » Sep 25th, '06, 01:26

You can definitely be friends with the opposite sex without becoming more then friends.
It's not hard at all.

-Falcon

berserk · Post by **berserk** » Sep 25th, '06, 02:44

It's possible if both parties remain unattracted to each other. But once one side develops feeling for the other that cannot be reciprocated, the friendship is more or less over.

atxtomtom · Post by **atxtomtom** » Sep 29th, '06, 23:25

yes, it's possible, this isn't the movies..

i got plenty of chica amigas..

ocha otoko · Post by **ocha otoko** » Oct 4th, '06, 11:31

mmm...it all depends yeah? it depends if the players involved are willing to forgive or to forget at least and you it also depends on other factors like say if there are other distractions...as we age a lot of things will get in the way of relationships and friendships...methinks...but then again i also think, if you work hard and want it to work...then that's all u can do, if it happens then it does...if not then well...bad luck...

nikochanr3 · Post by **nikochanr3** » Oct 4th, '06, 13:31

i cant believe there are people who cant be friends with someone without getting all emo about them at some point. how do you get through life like that? it has to be difficult.

Ann ^-^ · Post by **Ann ^-^** » Oct 8th, '06, 14:00

Yes its possible. One of my best friend is a guy!

atxtomtom · Post by **atxtomtom** » Oct 8th, '06, 18:15

there's this thing called the "friend zone".. which basically means yea, they're just friends..

eye · Post by **eye** » Oct 9th, '06, 20:27

Short answer: No.

Long answer: http://www.laddertheory.com/

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Oct 9th, '06, 23:39

Following are from the link posted by eye

You can recognize this has gone on because Bob says " I'd like to **** Jane, but not as much as I want to **** Connie"

I think that everyone has heard this or something like it enough times for us to accept it as axiomatic and move on. You might be thinking, " Well what about Jane and Connie?" We'll get to them next.

Absurd- a false axiomatic assumption. (In the 1990's) Let's say cigarette were safe and made you look cool. Hear that enough times and it is, by his standard, an axiom. Axioms are built upon [mathematical/scientific] laws (law of conservation, distribution, etc.). Accepting something as an axiom because we hear it enough times is unscientific; I do not think i have to say more.

I will make no comments on his data for the following reasons:
1) I do not know the criteria for data collection (survey? what the survey questions are? etc)
2) I do not know how his population was sampled.
3) I do not know the criteria for data interpretation.

The ladder theory is a theory. While I have no intention of proving or disproving it, it invalidates itself.

IF A MAN FINDS YOU ATTRACTIVE YOU CANNOT BE FRIENDS

Many women want to argue this point and say things like " I have lots of guy friends." Maybe. There are exactly 3 cases Intellectual Whores has identified whereby a guy and a girl can be friends:

1. The guy is gay
2. The guy does not find you attractive
3. The guy already has a woman much higher than you on the ladder

Even Nietzsche knew this. Most guys know this intuitively. Most girls doubt. I have a challenge for all of you girls who still doubt. Pick a guy who does not meet any of the criterion on the above list that you think is your friend. Then ask yourself this question: If you were both alone at his place one night, and you excused yourself to the bathroom and came out naked and asked him to have sex with you would he:

1. Tell you he doesn't want to risk the beautiful friendship you have created with messy physical entanglements.

2. Comply.

With all the data he presents, he still states the fact that "Guys and girls can be friends" given certain exception. An example that fits outside of his 3 exceptions is one's own daughter.
1) A man need not be gay to be a father, so they are not excluded by 1.
2) The father may find his daughter attractive, but that does not mean acts on it. He may even buy his daughter clothes to enhance her attractive. I do not hear fathers say they have unattractive daughters often, but it could happen. Again, fathers are not excluded by 2.
3) Violating or not the "Ladder" theory is of no consequence. But some fathers would value their own daughters moreso than someone already on the "ladder".

AboutDrama · Post by **AboutDrama** » Oct 10th, '06, 03:48

After I read eye’s post on the ladder theory, I felt the wave of disappointment. There are a few things realized after reading the ladder theory:

1)Based on the webpage, it seems to imply that the society has evolved in such that to men, women are just to f*** and to women, men are just for security? In the past, women can’t work and unable to support themselves, that’s the reason they have learned to secure their future, women have to find a better home (richer guy). But even so, they don’t have freedom even they live in luxury. In this modern world, now women can work, do you think the society still wants to enforce this idea to women that they are still incapable to take care of themselves but need men? MIND you, I’m referring a WIDER society NOT just one. If you’re a guy that respects women who have good career, I applaud you. The question is NOT to say something bad about men… but if society can change the thinking of women that they don’t need a richer men but they can take care of themselves, can this “Intellectual Who**” (from the website) become a different “Who**” ? If you want to say that I'm wrong, the society (in general) has changed. Then why there are dramas (like some of the Asian drama) that always show that the main actress is poor and love the main actor (that is usually rich and educated)? Why the dramas always show “poor” main actress is “goody” ones and “rich and successful” actress is “bad Bi***”? Why? Isn’t that the dramas want to feed to the women's' psyche that women should accept their fate of thinking “this way” and have fantasy of this “handsome, rich and educated” men will get their "security" in life or is the ONLY way of "love"? Can't a poor, hardworking and normal looking men not afford to give women "that" security? Then why TV shows a lot of glamorous actress with luxury clothes and accessories? Then why TV shows a lot rich men with pretty wives and getting many women?

2)In the "ladder" website, the person describe women as “Intellectual Who**” but he didn't describe men as “Fuc***”? Why always women are the bad ones?

3)Why women are the bad ones? In drama, women (usually supporting actress) always show their “unethical and dirty” tactics to get the men they love. Always women are the evil B***. Why women (supporting roles) have to continue to be like that? Can they make a drama that the women (supporting role) are more gracious to move on and find a better guys? While in drama, the “other” man (the supporting actor) wants to get the gal they love, the story will end up showing three alternative scenarios: 1) The “other” man will give up and be a gentlemen, or 2) the “other” man will use “force” to get the gal, or 3) the "other men" get the gal due to situation, which he didn't know she loves another. Again, the woman's fault for not telling him. So, men are less SOB but acceptable because they have been using this tactics for ages. I’m talking about most drama and I prefer men on scenario (1), and women who graciously back off and move on. Of course there are exceptions.

If anyone of you can tell me that I’m wrong. I will be very happy because right now, I’m really disappointed. Probably I can never ever have friends after I read that “ladder” website. Can’t one person have a friend with a true heart… just pure friendship?

schizoar · Post by **schizoar** » Oct 10th, '06, 04:08

Yes, it is definitely possible.

I think the ladder theory doesn't really apply to every single person in the world. Ok, so they've been researching this thing for how many years, but there are still some people who's not included in this one unless they've surveyed the whole world, then that would make me believe that this theory is 100% true.

NOTE: I didn't read the whole theory coz it's too long for me, lol, just the first 3 pages.

I have a friend who has a bestfriend for 10years now. I was questioning her at first coz I didn't think a guy and a girl can remain friends for that long, but hey, they lasted that long, isn't that something?

I don't know if someday they'll eventually fall for each other but the fact is, they remained friends for 10yrs, isn't that some proof that a guy and a girl can be JUST friends?

Lynn Minmei · Post by **Lynn Minmei** » Oct 10th, '06, 04:25

yes and no. the answer lies on both parties.

kotaeshiranaihito · Post by **kotaeshiranaihito** » Oct 10th, '06, 04:45

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Oct 10th, '06, 04:51

AboutDrama: Disappointed with "Ladder Theory"? For all their years of reasearch, it pales to the history of Feminism. A classical illustration to the plight of feminists is the bird cage analogy.

Bird Cage:
Consider opening the door for women.
Consider allowing women "first" (ladies first)
Consider not compensating women (Women are paid less than men for the same job)
Consider not allowing women to initiate divorce ("No-Fault" divorce in the US by 1985, prior one had to PROVE fault as in a husband's infedelity or abuse of their wives)
Consider not educating women (men have much more educational and advancement opportunities than woman. In fact, men nominally dominate most of HIStory in terms of contribution)
Consider not letting women vote (US suffrage)
...

The bird cage is a prison for women. If you look at each individual prison bar (considertion above) then you may not believe it is a big deal. It is when the bars completely surround women that they feel discriminated. I am certianly not doing justice to Feminism, but you can search the topic yourself if you are interested.

I too am dissapointed with "Ladder Theory." I am dissapointed by its ignorance and its claim of scientific soundness as it is part of the Stupidness.com network. I read the site and castigate it.

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Oct 10th, '06, 05:23

kotaeshiranaihito wrote: I pretty much stopped reading when you asked "why in dramas?". The answer (and I know this may sound like rocket science, but please try to follow along) BECAUSE IT'S A DRAMA, NONE OF THAT STUFF IS REAL. IT'S FANTASY, COMPLETELY FAKE, MADE UP. PEOPLE DON'T WATCH DRAMAS TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REAL WORLD, IT'S FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY, AND ANYONE AND I MEAN ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY TRIES TO LEARN SOMETHING FROM A DRAMA AND APPLY IT TO REAL LIFE IS AN RETARD (sorry if that was an insult to retarded people).

I will agree with this in some respects, but not in others. Yes dramas entertain us, but some dramas are based on true stories or have a moral that applies to the real world. Books, the internet, and other channels may serve to entertain us- but does not mean they do not try educate as well. Granted, not everything is gold.

Anyway, I read the ladder theory and felt myself losing a few IQ points. It is definitely not based on any of the most modern studies done on the differences between men and women, it seems to be simply based on questionnaires, which in my opinion is the worst way to study human behavior. The answers people give in questionnaires almost never reflect the choices they make in actual situations, even though they themselves honestly believe in the answers they give.

The only testing I believe is controlled blind testing where subjects truly do not understand the tests they are receiving. These kinds of tests bring out true human nature for us to see (like the Mildred experiments for example-look it up).

Surveys are ok to believe if the survey is based on already occurred events (things people have done in the past already), but are completely useless when based on events yet to occur, and that's all this ladder theory seems to be.

When scientists were first experimenting with the electron microscope, they found that in observing a molecule or particle with the device they ultimately altered the direction and velocity of the subject molecule or particle. The same happens in surveys. In attempting to observe others, the subject changes their behavior because they are being observed (self-conscious). A blind test obscures what the testers are looking for, but does not remove the element of observation. As the testers may be human as well, a double-blind test may be effective in reducing the effect even more.

As for "True Nature" of man? An experiment must have a control to compare the results and the control in sociology are humans. Humans are so dynamic, the quotes to "True Nature" of man will not be coming off anytime soon. If so, it would simply be the nature of man.

AboutDrama · Post by **AboutDrama** » Oct 10th, '06, 06:43

I want to thank all of you for responding my post and also to make me feel better. Thanks you meotsuburu to make me feel that I’m not alone.

Kotaeshiranaihito, regarding the your reply on this
I pretty much stopped reading when you asked "why in dramas?". The answer (and I know this may sound like rocket science, but please try to follow along) BECAUSE IT'S A DRAMA, NONE OF THAT STUFF IS REAL. IT'S FANTASY, COMPLETELY FAKE, MADE UP. PEOPLE DON'T WATCH DRAMAS TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REAL WORLD, IT'S FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY, AND ANYONE AND I MEAN ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY TRIES TO LEARN SOMETHING FROM A DRAMA AND APPLY IT TO REAL LIFE IS AN RETARD (sorry if that was an insult to retarded people).

I want to explain to you the reason I use “why in drama.” It’s because it’s an easy example to express my opinions although it may be a bit too extreme. However, many TV shows often reflect the human psyche in the society. Whatever shows are broadcasted in TV, the "content" of the shows will automatic influence the thoughts (unconsciously) of the audiences. For example, with positive message from TV, the audiences will feel positive and vice versa. This has been proven in experiments. I use dramas to express the same reasons of what the dramas are trying to tap into the women's psyche of their only way to survive is to find a rich guys and why men's psyche that they should focus on having a successful career in order to get “something”. In real life, you see it all the time. If you observe the people around you, then you will see the similar psyche of men and women. Let’s say in general (I know there are exceptions). In high school, why teen boys want to be an athletics or why they want to be in the “in group/ popular group” or why they want to be the most intelligent student? Their actions are most likely to be girls oriented although future, enforce by adults, plays a part. In general, most teen girls, although they want good grades and good future but they also want to date boys that are popular, rich, or intelligent. Is that wrong? NO. It’s what one is brought up to be because of the external factors like TV, environments, society… I remember a quote by Simone Beauvoir and I’m going to say it in a general sense, “One is not born to be a man/woman. One becomes ONE.”

NOTE: I'm only using teenager example but DOESN'T imply all teens are like that. Only in general! You will also see the same thing happening in the adult world if you observe closely.

Anyway… thanks again to all of you… (with gratitude

)

kotaeshiranaihito · Post by **kotaeshiranaihito** » Oct 10th, '06, 16:10

waqar · Post by **waqar** » Oct 10th, '06, 16:49

I would say YES.

kotaeshiranaihito · Post by **kotaeshiranaihito** » Oct 10th, '06, 17:09

meotsuburu wrote: I will agree with this in some respects, but not in others. Yes dramas entertain us, but some dramas are based on true stories or have a moral that applies to the real world. Books, the internet, and other channels may serve to entertain us- but does not mean they do not try educate as well. Granted, not everything is gold.

The purpose of dramas is to make the company that produces it money. Nothing else. Never forget that. Just because a company makes nice and entertaining dramas does not mean they are a sweet and generous company that care about your well being and want to try to bring you up to be an outstanding citizen. They want your attention so their advertisers will give them theirs, nothing else. If you learn a good lesson from dramas than that is simply a by product, a side effect. It is completely unintentional. That is why you should never try to learn something from dramas. Dramas are an imaginary world, a world that is exciting and entertaining, but it is not real and it never will be. In dramas the man always saves the woman because it excites people. How often does that happen in real life? In real life a relationship is about communication and simply enjoying each others company. That's what real life is. Would that make a popular drama? Just two people sitting around talking and smiling for hours and hours? Of course not, you need "real drama", you need pain and heart break and struggle to make a good show. People who want to embed this to their real lives are morons and people who think their lives emulates what happens in dramas are even bigger morons. Even if the drama is based on real events, the drama itself is still not real. They add in A LOT of extra things to make it more exciting and appealing the the people watching it. the drama is BASED on real events, not the ACTUAL real events. The actual real events are probably just boring old real life and would make a terrible drama, so they add in stuff to spice it up.

I repeat anyone who tries to learn something from a drama and apply it to real life (aside for language improvement imo) is a retard.

When scientists were first experimenting with the electron microscope, they found that in observing a molecule or particle with the device they ultimately altered the direction and velocity of the subject molecule or particle. The same happens in surveys. In attempting to observe others, the subject changes their behavior because they are being observed (self-conscious). A blind test obscures what the testers are looking for, but does not remove the element of observation. As the testers may be human as well, a double-blind test may be effective in reducing the effect even more.

As for "True Nature" of man? An experiment must have a control to compare the results and the control in sociology are humans. Humans are so dynamic, the quotes to "True Nature" of man will not be coming off anytime soon. If so, it would simply be the nature of man.

I don't understand, what's your point? That blind tests can't be done because of observer bias? In a sense that is true and I would definitely be more comfortable with a double blind test, but when testing on human nature it's pretty hard to do. There have been successful blind tests done on people such as the mildred experiments and many others-our psychology professor actually did one on us without us knowing-and it was a complete success, it was a conformation test.

If you read about it, you will see many blind tests that were pretty successful.

Once again, if you find a double blind test that is not a questionnaire asking people what they would do if a situation came up I would gladly accept it more than a blind test. I was simply stating that the very least I I find acceptable is a blind study of actual interaction. Read about the mildred experiments to understand what I mean.

nikochanr3 · Post by **nikochanr3** » Oct 10th, '06, 17:31

i think the people who says its not possible add enough qualifications that it cant be possible. i just had lunch with my friend, and she's goregous. ive know her since 93, and we've never tried anything except friends, and this is with/without bf/gf, etc. things have changed so much. when people say these things are impossible, im not sure why im doing. are we not friends?

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Oct 10th, '06, 21:13

kotaeshiranaihito wrote:Ridiculous femenist crap disproven many many times. If you believe that TV causes these things are you also a believer that TV and violent video games cause killers?

Feminism is not a theory to be proven or disproven, it is a philosophy.

TV and violent video games cause killers? A killer is a person who kills. TV and violent video games do not cause people at all. And where does this conclusion come from? If I do believe something, I will say so myself! I do not need you to tell me what I do or do not believe. Do put words into my mouth so you can argue with yourself.

Yes TV does influence us, but it is not a "cause" to our actions and reactions, it is more of an exacerbation of them. From what you are saying, it's like TV is trying to conspire against people to keep them in groups and make sure we never go past our station. That is 100% wrong. The only thing they care about is money. TV shows us what we want to see based on millions of dollars of psychological studies (that are jealously guarded from regular scientists). TV advertisers probably know more about the human psyche than anyone else-even more than the best psychologists.

I am 100% wrong, but you agree TV influences us.

I also never said "cause" I said 'educate.' And from what I am saying, (READING COMPREHENSION ASSISTANCE) is that Dramas do not exclusively entertain us.

The shows all reflect what we innately want to see based on our instincts and innate feelings that we were born with.

Innate feelings are inane as well.

Feelings are temporal. We are born with a body: head, arms, hands, legs, and feet. If all shows reflect what we want based on what we were born with, it would be nothing as the body wants nothing (and needs nourishment).

For example. Everyone says that good looks are all a product of the media. But are they? According to studies babies on average feel a lot happier and more comfortable with good looking people than ugly people. Were babies watching TV in the womb?

Families that raised their sons and daughters exactly the same ended up with daughters who loved dolls and sons who loved to fight with dolls. Of course they were probably just lying right?

Saying that we're a product of the media is simply one of the many "not your fault" excuses given to you by femenists and other losers to ease your mind. But let me assure you, it's not to help you, it's to control you, to get you on their side. They tell you things you want to hear simply because they need you. They want you to feel sorry for yourself and powerless and then offer you a ridicluous answer to all your problems. How many people does gloria steinman or heath bell help nowadays? Do they give any money or help to women in arabian countries where they have very few rights? Of course not, all they do is sue big corporations, cause massive layoffs and put the nice paychecks in their pockets.

"Not your fault" excuses. Feminists and other losers are the underdog. The losers that escaped religous persecution sailed to the New World and are now called Pilgrims. The losers that escaped civil persecution and ran to the North are now called Runaway Slaves.

So you say Feminism is rediculous and crap. I, myself, do not agree with every word and letter but it is nice how you've label the two together.

The reason women are attracted to money and power is not because of TV, it's because they are born that way. Women are innately attracted to power, stature and emotional loyalty. TV understands this and uses it to boost their ratings.

Want me to give you an example? YOU YOURSELF. All you concentrate on are the dramas where men are rich and powerful and women are the evil and helpless (or whatever crap you said). There are tons of dramas that are nothing like that. The problem is 1) many of them are not popular because people don't watch them (it doesn't appeal to their innate unconscious), 2) even if they do watch it they only concentrate on those particular parts-like you did. It's your own fault if those are the dramas you choose to watch and those are the scenes in the dramas that you choose to take ti heart, not the company's.

Above is addressed to AboutDrama.

Anyway, I don't want to go on with this because it's getting long and I'm honestly not that good at explanations on message boards. If you want a deeper explanation that will make a lot more sense than what I wrote here, talk to me in real time. You will be able to understand what I say much easier that way. Here it will just lead to misunderstandings.

'Here it will just lead to misunderstanding'- how well do you understand something if you cannot explain it? On a message board or not, it is just words.

eye · Post by **eye** » Oct 10th, '06, 21:22

nikochanr3 wrote:she's goregous. {...} we've never tried anything

kotaeshiranaihito · Post by **kotaeshiranaihito** » Oct 10th, '06, 21:29

Meotsuburu, just curious are you american? This isn't meant to be an insult, it's just that you seem to have misconscrued pretty much everything I said (I'm still trying to understand how you thought that I believe killers are created by video games and TV, it was a comparative sarcastic remark, not a statement).

Talk to me in real time. On a message board, it takes too long to explain something and if one line is misinterpretted then the entire message is lost.

for example you misinterpretted femenism with femenist crap-in this case that TV and media create the male and female genders. Two completely different things. You assumed that I meant femenists from the 60s, 70s and eariler. No, those were all good things that happened. Femenist crap is just what it is crap. Mostly the stuff pseudofemenists talk about nowadays which usually makes no sense. I guess a better term for it would be femnazi crap. I said I'm not good with simple message boards which is why real time is better. You would've assumed I meant femenism, told me, I would've corrected you and our time would've been saved.

Talk to me in real time if you want a deeper explanation.

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Oct 10th, '06, 21:51

kotaeshiranaihito wrote: The purpose of dramas is to make the company that produces it money. Nothing else. Never forget that. Just because a company makes nice and entertaining dramas does not mean they are a sweet and generous company that care about your well being and want to try to bring you up to be an outstanding citizen. They want your attention so their advertisers will give them theirs, nothing else. If you learn a good lesson from dramas than that is simply a by product, a side effect. It is completely unintentional. That is why you should never try to learn something from dramas. Dramas are an imaginary world, a world that is exciting and entertaining, but it is not real and it never will be. In dramas the man always saves the woman because it excites people. How often does that happen in real life? In real life a relationship is about communication and simply enjoying each others company. That's what real life is. Would that make a popular drama? Just two people sitting around talking and smiling for hours and hours? Of course not, you need "real drama", you need pain and heart break and struggle to make a good show. People who want to embed this to their real lives are morons and people who think their lives emulates what happens in dramas are even bigger morons. Even if the drama is based on real events, the drama itself is still not real. They add in A LOT of extra things to make it more exciting and appealing the the people watching it. the drama is BASED on real events, not the ACTUAL real events. The actual real events are probably just boring old real life and would make a terrible drama, so they add in stuff to spice it up.

I repeat anyone who tries to learn something from a drama and apply it to real life (aside for language improvement imo) is a retard.

Never said a company's purpose was to be sweet or generous. And the by-product/side effect of a lesson learned is your concession that dramas do not exclusively entertain us.

As for its application in real life, (again) not everything is gold.

I don't understand, what's your point? That blind tests can't be done because of observer bias? In a sense that is true and I would definitely be more comfortable with a double blind test, but when testing on human nature it's pretty hard to do. There have been successful blind tests done on people such as the mildred experiments and many others-our psychology professor actually did one on us without us knowing-and it was a complete success, it was a conformation test.

If you read about it, you will see many blind tests that were pretty successful.

Once again, if you find a double blind test that is not a questionnaire asking people what they would do if a situation came up I would gladly accept it more than a blind test. I was simply stating that the very least I I find acceptable is a blind study of actual interaction. Read about the mildred experiments to understand what I mean.

What I presented does not prevent a blind test from being conducted. A scientist conducts tests to support what he knows, how tests are conducted support the validity of the data.

If I (re)read about it, I will see many blind tests that were pretty effective. How you test does not speak for success, what you test does.

meotsuburu · Post by **meotsuburu** » Oct 10th, '06, 22:18

kotaeshiranaihito wrote:Meotsuburu, just curious are you american? This isn't meant to be an insult, it's just that you seem to have misconscrued pretty much everything I said (I'm still trying to understand how you thought that I believe killers are created by video games and TV, it was a comparative sarcastic remark, not a statement).

You cannot understand how I thought you believe killers are created by video games and TV because I never said you did (I addressed the remark, not the person). I misconstrue as you miscommunicate.

Talk to me in real time. On a message board, it takes too long to explain something and if one line is misinterpretted then the entire message is lost.

I prefer to make these comments public, and if there are criticism or faults on my part I hope people may be kind enough to let me know.

for example you misinterpretted femenism with femenist crap-in this case that TV and media create the male and female genders. Two completely different things. You assumed that I meant femenists from the 60s, 70s and eariler. No, those were all good things that happened. Femenist crap is just what it is crap. Mostly the stuff pseudofemenists talk about nowadays which usually makes no sense. I guess a better term for it would be femnazi crap. I said I'm not good with simple message boards which is why real time is better. You would've assumed I meant femenism, told me, I would've corrected you and our time would've been saved.

Talk to me in real time if you want a deeper explanation.

I can only go by what you post. While yes, I could be corrected on your term femenism, but your lack of detail and inability to be concise is apparent. Not everyone has the luxury of speaking with you real-time (and not everyone has the luxury of speaking to me in real-time as well).

atxtomtom · Post by **atxtomtom** » Oct 11th, '06, 01:18

i can see some people are really gettin into this discussion..

Asian DramaWiki Forum

Is it possible for a guy and a girl to be just friends?

Is it possible for a guy and a girl to be just friends?

Re: Is it possible for a guy and a girl to be just friends?

No. Only exceptions are if the guy is gay, or the girl fugly

Re: No. Only exceptions are if the guy is gay, or the girl f

Disappionted with "ladder theory"

yes, it's possible..

Re: Disappionted with "ladder theory"

Re: Disappionted with "ladder theory"

Re: Disappionted with "ladder theory"

Thanks ...

Re: Disappionted with "ladder theory"

Re: Disappionted with "ladder theory"

Who is online