Friends With Benefits Vs Relationship

[thornz]

SF, did you see these FWB regularly? Were you exclusive if not committed?

[Pleasedonot5]

To me:

 

Casual hookup: happens a couple times maybe, not intimate, purely sexual

 

FWB: respectful, friends, not-exclusive, not public, sexual/intimate, romantic or not

 

Relationship: respectful, boyfriend/girlfriend, public, exclusive or not, sexual/intimate, romantic

[maew]

To me:

 

Casual hookup: happens a couple times maybe, not intimate, purely sexual

 

FWB: respectful, friends, not-exclusive, not public, sexual/intimate, romantic or not

 

Relationship: respectful, boyfriend/girlfriend, public, exclusive or not, sexual/intimate, romantic

 

I second this.

[IAmFCA]

To me:

 

Casual hookup: happens a couple times maybe, not intimate, purely sexual

 

FWB: respectful, friends, not-exclusive, not public, sexual/intimate, romantic or not

 

Relationship: respectful, boyfriend/girlfriend, public, exclusive or not, sexual/intimate, romantic

 

I third this.

[Batya33]

I agree. My situation works in part because it grew organically as a way two specific people express their connection.

 

But isn't your sex partner married? So that changes things because he can't date, he can only cheat on his wife, right? (unless they have an open marriage I guess). I think that's different than having a sexual arrangement between two single people -hopefully the fact that one is married and cheating is enough to convince the single person that it can't go anywhere or mean anything beyond meeting to hang out and have sex.

[Batya33]

But isn't your sex partner married? So that changes things because he can't date, he can only cheat on his wife, right? (unless they have an open marriage I guess). I think that's different than having a sexual arrangement between two single people -hopefully the fact that one is married and cheating is enough to convince the single person that it can't go anywhere or mean anything beyond meeting to hang out and have sex.

 

On second thought I don't think it matters for this thread whether a sex partner is married or single - and I forgot whether yours is or not. Sorry!

[figureitout23]

To me:

 

Casual hookup: happens a couple times maybe, not intimate, purely sexual

 

FWB: respectful, friends, not-exclusive, not public, sexual/intimate, romantic or not

 

Relationship: respectful, boyfriend/girlfriend, public, exclusive or not, sexual/intimate, romantic

 

 

I 4th this. Labels are just that, labels. People are going to live their life, they aren't going to stop because something's labeled wrong. Men and women sleep with people outside of their marriages, there are 'private casual sex' relationships that have deeper connections than many 'public relationships'.

 

The issue I see with FWB isn't the label, its the fact that one person often develops feelings and the other doesn't. Also sometimes one party essentially settles for a purely sexual relationship because they figure it's better than nothing. So they knowingly and willingly allow themselves to be used as a sexual release hoping and praying the other person eventually feels what they feel. If that person who is already going through emotional turmoil wants to label their sexual arrangement FWB, really thinking about it, I can't see any reason for me to care or for that to be my focus.

[Batya33]

I 4th this. Labels are just that, labels. People are going to live their life, they aren't going to stop because something's labeled wrong. Men and women sleep with people outside of their marriages, there are 'private casual sex' relationships that have deeper connections than many 'public relationships'.

 

The issue I see with FWB isn't the label, its the fact that one person often develops feelings and the other doesn't. Also sometimes one party essentially settles for a purely sexual relationship because they figure it's better than nothing. So they knowingly and willingly allow themselves to be used as a sexual release hoping and praying the other person eventually feels what they feel. If that person who is already going through emotional turmoil wants to label their sexual arrangement FWB, really thinking about it, I can't see any reason for me to care or for that to be my focus.

I see an issue with the FWB label because it’s inaccurate and used often by someone not willing to call it what it is - a sexual arrangement. The people usually are not close friends who decide to have sex. They are most often two people who met and are attracted to each other and the one who suggests FWB is the one who wants sex when he or she feels like it but doesn’t see potential for a relationship and probably doesn’t want the other person to feel offended.

Other labels are not just labels but help people have common ground about general boundaries and standards. To me being exclusive was not just a label - it meant that we felt committed and saw long term potential. Being married is not just a label in the least. I’m our case we always generally wanted marriage and when we finally got our act together and got back together the first thing we clarified was that we were dating again only because we wanted to see if this time we would get married. Thinking about marriage for me was about my heart mostly and also about my head - the meaning of the commitment in every way.

And yes the status of marriage is important to me for a number of reasons too. And yes I know couples - one in particular - who are not married and who are just as if not more committed to each other than many I know. But no none of it is a label if it describes something genuine about your interaction. FWB is rarely describing a friendship where the people both want it have sec when they feel like it and neither wants anything different.

[itsallgrand]

One involves commitment , one is about keeping commitment out of it.

Whether you call it fwb ( which I prefer to just say someone you are casually sleeping with and/or seeing) or not, the arrangement is about not committing. That's the point of it. What people get out of it is going to be different for everyone and whether it's worth it or not, what you are looking for.

 

I do dislike the term fwb. I had few forays of a casual nature, one was with someone I knew and you could call a friend, but I'd never call it fwb situation. It was sex and companionship, I mean, casual sex doesn't have to mean it's a stranger or one night with no fun involved other than in bed and where you only talk to arrange a bang. It's still casual sex though, why not just call it that?

[figureitout23]

I see an issue with the FWB label because it’s inaccurate and used often by someone not willing to call it what it is - a sexual arrangement. The people usually are not close friends who decide to have sex. They are most often two people who met and are attracted to each other and the one who suggests FWB is the one who wants sex when he or she feels like it but doesn’t see potential for a relationship

 

 

I guess my question is why does it qualify as an issue? Genuine question. This reminds me of people against gay marriage and saying well you can call it a civil ceremony but not marriage. It's kinda attempting to keep people in their place, that's what bothers me about this whole conversation.

 

I actually fully agree with you that sometimes men and women who enter these situations change the name of what it is, for whatever reasons, and sometimes they end up getting hurt or fooling themselves and getting out of it as soon as possible is their best bet and sometimes it's best to just tell them, look this is just sex, you gotta recognize things as they are. On that we agree, the rest... honestly? Reeks of judgement.

 

 

What do you want to call it? Casual sex relationship, sex arrangement, prosti-situation? Lets say society stops putting a stigma on sex and we all call it like it is. What's changed? Unfortunately, people aren't gonna stop leading with sex, hoping it'll lead to more, that's an issue that goes deeper than the FWB label.

 

I guess it's safe to say whatever you want to call it, don't enter it if you know there's any risk of developing ( catching 😊 feelings.

[IAmFCA]

I guess my question is why does it qualify as an issue? Genuine question. This reminds me of people against gay marriage and saying well you can call it a civil ceremony but not marriage. It's kinda attempting to keep people in their place, that's what bothers me about this whole conversation.

 

I actually fully agree with you that sometimes men and women who enter these situations change the name of what it is, for whatever reasons, and sometimes they end up getting hurt or fooling themselves and getting out of it as soon as possible is their best bet and sometimes it's best to just tell them, look this is just sex, you gotta recognize things as they are. On that we agree, the rest... honestly? Reeks of judgement.

 

 

What do you want to call it? Casual sex relationship, sex arrangement, prosti-situation? Lets say society stops putting a stigma on sex and we all call it like it is. What's changed? Unfortunately, people aren't gonna stop leading with sex, hoping it'll lead to more, that's an issue that goes deeper than the FWB label.

 

I guess it's safe to say whatever you want to call it, don't enter it if you know there's any risk of developing ( catching 😊 feelings.

 

Agree heartily.

 

A "sexual arrangement" robs the relationship of its human dimension, of its warmth.

 

Perhaps most sexual relationships are either in pursuit of a moment (of varying duration), or a Relationship, capital R intended.

 

To me, an FWB threads the needle that fits between those two options, and hence is rare in its pure form.Why have a sexual relationship with someone whom one likes or loves, and prevent the development of a Relationship? How do we not get offended or frustrated when we find we aren't well matched for a Relationship?

 

Often, for an FWB to be sustainable, the parties need to be unavailable. Emotionally, yes. Also, distance, age, something external on which the two parties can lay blame.

 

In my own case, we dated. We broke up. We were out of contact. In our time apart, we never lost our connection and we gained understanding and respect. We are now in different time zones, he is in a committed non monogamous relationship. We know how mercurial our relationship was, we want different things. We have proven that we don't go together.

 

He is more emotionally damaged than I; he and his SO need to have outlets to feel secure in their vulnerability to each other.

 

Other than this atypical situation, I don't think I have ever had an FWB that really was one, except this one.

[Lambert]

its really whatever the two people agree it is. but normally if your friends with benefits:

 

you are together when it works for both of you.

 

you are dating other people

 

AND

 

there's no expectations in any area other than you know what the other likes and you do it.

 

There can be good times, deep talks, or not. its up to the two people. but i guess the main thing is no expectations or obligation to each other.

 

aka

 

no strings attached.