Why are they like this? Anonymous 16677
>meet a cute guy, we get on well and he’s funny and kindhearted
>he seems like he’s interested, we start flirting at a party and things are looking promising
>next time we’re at a party I’m going at it, (“let’s share a seat”, lots of hugging eye contact etc)
>this time somethings wrong, he looks all conflicted and uncomfortable
>turns out one of his friends, who is in my lectures, likes me and he has promised not to “get in his way”
I never expressed any interest in that guy and made it clear to him but now it’s ruined forever just for some bullshit territorial boy friendship thing.
I believe the expression for this is "bros before hoes." I think it's kind of endearing tbh.
Eh, it's not endearing for me to be treated like a piece of property to be fought over.
Would you not do the same for a friend if their crush had a crush on you?
I mean, talk to the other dude maybe?
If I liked a person and they didn't like me back and instead liked my friend, I'd be okay with it because I can't force them to like me. If they already like my friend, I'm not going to be able to flip it just like that and I wouldn't want to.
you don't really have confirmation that the dude is into you so it's not really fair to pass judgement based on that assumption. all he said is that his friend was interested in you adn that he wanted to get out of the way for it - this could mean that he's interested in you but doing a weird dude thing but it could also mean that he's not interested in you
If you are into him just keep talking to him no matter what, show dominance by talking to the person you want to talk, then grab him by his penis and demonstrate you are the alpha female
and not to worry, I'm not into men anyway. But if the object of affection is a girl, I might try…
My point is I think it's sort of dumb to be a "rival" of love with a friend. The person who both of you are crushing on will decide themselves.
implying when boys use the phrase it isn't a misogynistic slur to treat a woman like property
also, if that dude is promising not to 'get in his way' that implies that he has some weird creepy goal and plans to get with u which is clearly not happening? TL;DR that dude is a fucking moron anyway dont bother with him
That's not what I'm asking, I asked "Would you not do the same for a friend if their crush had a crush on you?". I definitely agree that the guy who's having his friend "get out of the way" is being immature, is in the wrong, and being an ass, but the guy she has a crush on only has the option to either damage his friendship and go out with anon or choose what his friend wants and don't go out with anon. I don't think that's misogynistic I think he's just trying to stay on his friend's good side.
It's literally used almost exclusively to mean "Friendship is more important than sex." Grow up.
We also kinda have our own version, "Sisters before misters"
Too bad then. Plenty of fish in the sea I guess.
There’s not that many decent guys though, unless you’re a 10/10 or something
Is it really this hard to find a guy who isn't a closet psychopath, doesn't look like a corpse and scrubs themselves with a flannel every couple of days?
Idk maybe my standards are a bit different than yours
Like 'decent looking' or 'decent human beings'? Because if it's the first one you just have to lower you standards, and if it's the second you just have to graduate highschool.
I thought it was "fries before guys" because food is better than being slim enough for men?
Yeah but "nothing tastes as good as skinny feels"
I am in university firstly.
And I don’t necessarily think my standards are faulty, I could lower them sure, but I want the best man I can get for a long term relationship right? I just think it’s stupid I am being shut out of a good relationship because of some “bro” rule.
I mean, how would you feel if a guy wanted you to ruin a friendship in order to date him?
It's between him and his friend. If he were interested in you to a significant extent, he would not be willing to limit your relationship. He probably wasn't interested at all to begin with, he's only limiting it to give his friend space and avoid you liking him. Don't be such a child, people make decisions amongst themselves and not strictly in accord with your desires.
Polygamy, sister. It’s the way of the future. Better to share a 10/10 than have a 5/10 all to yourself.
That is literally the opposite of true, and is precisely what incels think happens, leading me to believe you are an incel.
Animals have been doing it that way for billions of years. You're denying your evolutionary instincts by pretending otherwise.
Animals also eat their own children. I don't think "animals do it" is a good reason to do something.
Some children deserve to be eaten.
Miss me with that cuck fetish
Just go for it, tell the guy you like you like him. Tell his friend you don't belong to him.
Boy friendship is a frustrating thing.
There is this boy I like lets call "T". T has a friend who lives with him who he has known since middle school, lets call him "K".
>T is really cute and I really like him and we get along great>His friend K is annoying >I am always trying to hang out with T alone just me and him>He would always be open to do so during the summer>K would come along sometimes but not too often>K would sometimes try to see if I would want to hang out just me and him but I always made excuses and said I couldn't>Go over to T's place and T isn't there yet so K answers the door>K looks up my skirt when I was going up the stairs at their place and made some sexual comments to me which were extremly hurtful>Really mad and upset about it>T comes home and we go out to get food together
>A few days pass and T invites me to hang out with him and K>I tell T what K did and how I don't want to hang around him>T says he will talk to K so he can better understand what happened >T says he talked with K and told me this>K said he wasn't aware that he hurt my feelings>K admitted he had a moment of weakness since he hasn't had sex in 3 years so he's been sexually frustrated >K acknowledges that there is no acceptable excuse for what he did>K says he will accept responsibilities for his actions >A week later get a text from K saying he wants to apologize>K asks if I want him to apologize in person or by text>I say a text apology is fine and accept his apology but inside I don't forgive him>Hang out with T a lot more times >Mostly its just us but sometimes K hangs with us to
>Halloween event is coming up and I get invited to go somewhere with friends>I invite T because I want to get closer with him >T insists K comes along to be designated driver for the group>I try to persuade him that K shouldn't come>T insists that K comes because he wants someone he can rely on >Ask why T is friends with K>T tells me that K is extremly loyal and is the type of person who will do whatever he can to help his friends>Tells me this story how K drove 8 hours to come help him >I say that T can come but K cannot and leave it at that>Halloween day>Get a call from T and he says that he doesn't want to come>Ask him why>T says that he believes that K has suffered enough and is truly remorseful for looking up my skirt>Really upset he's not coming>Go to the event with my friends anyway but it would of been so much better with T
>Fast forward to the present >Still seeing T quite often >But now he constantly always invites K to hang out with us now>Its getting harder and harder to just be alone with him>Nothing has changed between how me and T act around each other
It’s not cucking. There’s no humiliation. It’s hot-husband at best but that implies one woman being the “real” wife. Non-monogamy is picking up steam.>>16817
Enjoy your marginal boring unremarkable man whose best quality is that his inability to get women induces something resembling loyalty.
You've been hanging out with a guy for months one-on-one, and you havent fucked or been asked out?
He's either gay with his friend or has absolutely no interest in you as anything other than a friend. Since he already has a good friend you'll always come second.
>>16821>loyal friend who lives with you and who you know since forever>someone you know for some months who is not even your SO
Who would you chose in this situation? And be honest.
Enjoy dying alone when you get old and men no longer want to have sex with you.
>>16823>hasn't been friends with a guy for years before dating him
What K did is gross and it does suck for you that he seems to be such a big part of T's life, it is kinda weird that he invites K along so much. With that said, they sound like really good friends (honestly it's quite honorable what T did for his friend, I wonder if any of my friends would do the same for me), and if you want to be close with T, it seems you'll need to accept that K is a part of his life, and that you shouldn't expect him to just end a years long relationship for you.
Has K tried to approach you and hang out one on one since T spoke with him? It might be far fetched, but with OP's post in mind, T could have told K "not to get in his way", and K, being a loyal friend, is respecting that, and is leaving you alone.
You should try and talk with K one on one and clear the air. I know he might make you uncomfortable but you need to at least make the effort if you want to be closer to T, and who knows, maybe he might say whether or not T likes you, maybe you could say you like T and he might let him know / help you out.
Polygamy isn’t purely sexual. It’s literally loving more than one person. A really good guy is hard to find these days, but a really good guy doesn’t just love a woman because she’s all he can get. You’re more likely to get emotionally abandoned by a loser who’s only with you because he can’t do better and is afraid of being alone. I’d rather share a guy who is genuine, attractive, and has options.
Also, to the anons above talking about what happens in nature, I don’t really believe that nature is the ultimate law, but I do agree that the mark of success for a woman is a quality man, and the mark of success for a man is quantity of women; we have different strategies, that is inarguable. Polygamy satisfies that. The only people who don’t benefit are low quality men.
Jokes on you, I genuinely find """"5/10"""" men the most attractive. Have fun sharing Chad with several women while I fuck a cute little short guy every night (guaranteed since few other woman will be demanding his dick or attention, and none officially).
I don't think it's off to say some people fail to adhere to your bioessentialism anon.
Also weird for a thread where anon has two men after her. You'd think polyandry would be more fitting to bring up.
A quality man wouldn’t want polygamy so you have already failed there.
Yawn. And a quality woman is pure and only copulates out of a sense of devotion to her husband and never has sex for pleasure. Wake me up when you escape the puritanical Victorian era.
He doesn't like you anon. If a guy likes you, he won't give you up that easily. Nothing was lost tbh
Our parents' generation already tried this free love thing and it didn't work. Where are all the gray-haired 60-something year old polyamorous free lovin' hippies now? Most of them realized what they were doing was retarded and got married, but some boomer men who make a lot of money never stopped and now they date 40 year olds and women even younger than that and want nothing to do with old women their own age when they can have temporary companionship with tons of beautiful and relatively young women. Polyamory is a terrible strategy for ensuring lifelong companionship for women, even if you're a 10/10 yourself in your prime fertility years a rich man who doesn't want to be "tied down" to one person will pick companionship with someone 20 years younger than you and maybe
you can still compete if you can pay to pump yourself full of plastic. Ask any divorced woman in her 60s what the dating market is like for her and it's either guys with no hair or teeth on welfare or pigs like this. Men like this are pigs even if they have fat wallets and can be your sugardaddy until you hit menopause, even though divorce rates are high right now you still have a better chance of growing old and staying in love with a man who realizes free love is fake and gay.
In a polygamous relationship there's obviously going to be a heirarchy among the wives. I would rather receive the full love and affection from a 5/10 than be subordinate to other women in a marriage to Chad.
Why is everyone convinced that you need the other person to "like" you first, especially in the age of online dating? What's so crazy about not having strong feelings for someone and asking them out to see how it goes?
I don't know why this got such a bad response. Seriously, I wouldn't say no to such arrangement as long as he was also really rich and could provide for our children. That's on top of 10/10 looks btw.
Nothing wrong with it if you're both on the same page and honest about where you stand. But that's rarely the case.
It's not that at all. What's going on here is, you value yourself over a friendship that's been around longer than you've liked this boy. In reality you're asking this guy to throw out a long term relationship for the potential of one with you, that's a gamble on his part and one you yourself don't have to get heavily invested in. You need to see this as >>16684
said, if you and a long term friend both liked a guy, strongly liked him, would you be willing to not compete for that man so your friend could have a shot at him?
Me too sister! There's something endearing about cute short 5/10 men.
T and K sound like really good friends, it would be rather selfish of you to come in and break that up just because K is somewhat vulgar
>>16846>>Have fun sharing Chad with several women while I fuck a cute little short guy every night (guaranteed since few other woman will be demanding his dick or attention, and none officially).
Have fun fucking your 5/10 while he thinks about me and the other girls who are fucking Chad. He's only with you because we're with Chad.>>16862
Oh, they're out there. Free love in the 60s was more about promiscuity, but there were a few poly folks around back then. There are still quite a few pockets of them in the PNW and a little north of NYC in the New Paltz area.>>16948>>There's something endearing about cute short 5/10 men.
Their availability. That's about it.
>>16951>their availability and that's it
There's no use arguing with you since you can't imagine someone having different taste than your own. That's ridiculous and delusional.
I've never seen the appeal in muscles or chiselled Chad faces myself, ever. Or white men, you know, the alleged most attractive race.>inb4 ur lying because biology dictates sexual taste!!1
If that's the case lesbians don't exist.
It's not farfetched to propose that since I (and other anon presumably) have tastes outside of the biological norm that males of a similar nature also exist. I know there are men who genuinely prefer fat girls or very tall women or very buff women for sure.
Your case just doesn't sound absolute. But I hope you find a conventionally attractive man who is into poly stuff.
the ones who say this kind of thigs are incels, they couldnt compete for stacy, probably any woman at all. The responsible one in his eyes is not him, but the stupid roastie mentality that puts chad before him. Eventually he realize that "roastie cunts" will eventually get older hence unatractive to him or any other chad and get what they deserved for rejecting him.
Dont think about them like real men being hatefull but little childs with lack of self esteem.
don't you think YOU are treating him like property here in the way you think?
Nah, if I was just sleeping with a guy then sure I don't care if he sleeps with other women. I like having a monogamous relationship though and I'd stop sleeping with the hott guy as soon as I could jump ship.
I'm not an incel, just saying the truth that when you're 80 you're getting kicked out of Grandpa Chad's harem and replaced with a younger model because gross men like that prioritize sex over companionship.
You're probably not in an impoverished country where there is a real financial incentive to being in a rich guy's harem so you can afford basic necessities, the only motivation for engaging in polyamory in developed nations is sexual hedonism.
We need to help these women so they don't need to resort to that
If T invites K when he could hang out with just you alone, he's never going to make a move on you or he's going to reject you (he's been doing it for a while now girl, wake up)
It kind of feels like you use what happened as an excuse for why you don't like K. Especially seeing as you didn't really like him prior to that either.
>>16951>Have fun fucking your 5/10 while he thinks about me and the other girls who are fucking Chad
You know what? I will. He can masturbate to dead horses if he likes, but I know he'll still be with me in the long run.
why should the 10/10 go with you if he could go with 3 9/10s or one 10/10 ?>>16721
t. has a brother who talks about his fee fees if hes drunk
>>24568>t. has a brother who talks about his fee fees if hes drunk
Do you have any deep discussion with him under the influence together?
lets be real you're on crystal cafe you're never gonna get with a 10/10 chad let alone be a member of his hypothetical harem
>>24091>Lowering your sexual market value, increasing the risk of STDs, pregnancy and becoming a single mother all for a guy who isn't attracted to you
Love yourself anon pls, men are shit but the least to ask for in a relationship is mutual attraction
It's not about "property" feminist BS, it's about social defeat. Losing your crush to a friend makes the friend an enemy on a very visceral level for guys. It's far worse compared to, say, a friend totalling his car.