Comments

1
Yes.

He probably thought that talking about taking your relationship to a higher level would result in you becoming his slave.

He doesn't even deserve the benefits he's been receiving from you. Drop him.
2
SIGH, he was happy to be in a NSA relationship with you, but he's not looking for a committed relationship with you (and perhaps anyone), and once your connection felt to him like a relationship he wanted out.

I once dated a woman for a bit of time, who then told me that she no longer wanted to date, but would be happy to have NSA sex once a week or so. We did this for a period of time, but we also would go to dinner, concerts, the theater, and did other things together, while we each looked for other partners. During this time she would about how great it was that we could be friends in addition to having sex.

Then one day out of the blue she wrote something along the lines of: "I've been thinking about stopping hanging out. This happened in the past but I keep forgetting that when I get into these temporary relationships that in my head I know aren't long term, I eventually get angry and unhappy. This is my fault because I should have just kept it totally in the bedroom with you, but we would go out for dinner and drinks, and see shows . . . And we talk a lot when we're together (my fault, I know I talk a lot) but anyway, it ended up being a lot more time and closeness than I expected and I'm getting annoyed with myself that I'm not fully focusing on finding someone that I feel could be a long term for me. And I know it seems like it would make sense to just decrease the time together but in my head it's already too late for that with you. I'm sorry."

SIGH, I think your guy would write more or less the same thing if you pressed him for an answer, but would you really find any meaning in trying to figure out why someone with whom you share good sex and have good compatibility outside the bedroom doesn't want to see you even as a friend?
3
Goddamn, Dan, you are slaying these days!
4
@2: "would you really find any meaning in trying to figure out why someone with whom you share good sex and have good compatibility outside the bedroom doesn't want to see you even as a friend?"

He doesn't seem like the sort to give them a direct answer anyway.

And yeesh, what a crap situation to be in, from your anecdote. "Whoops! I always waste my time on people". Geez, at least acknowledge that she enjoyed spending all that time with you.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wmbLB4OIua…
5
This guy was a dick, and after all the time you have spent together he owed you a better explanation. But the fact is, you were friends with benefits and that was working fine. He obviously didn't want the restrictions that go along with a bona fide relationship and freaked out. I don't know how old you are, but this sounds like 20s something shit that guys pull when they aren't mature enough to be honest with their partner. Lick your wounds, learn your lesson and find someone better.
6
Isn't "he didn't see me for about two weeks" pretty frequent contact for a FWB?
I think he mentioned that you "seemed to be in a relationship" because he felt he'd got pulled into something bigger than he wanted, which explains why he's trying to now drive you away with dickishness. He doesn't WANT to be in a relationship, or at least not with you.

On this subject, has anyone (like SA's non-girlfriend, @2) ever managed to successfully steer a relationship that has grown to be more than FWBs back to FWBs? Asking, ahem, for a friend.
7
@6/BiDanFan: In answer to your question, I think it is dependent on whether someone was not just open to, but actually seeking, a romantic relationship. By way of example, SIGH's boyfriend doesn't want more than low stakes NSA sex, but it seems that SIGH actually was angling for a relationship. In that context, SIGH's bf might have difficulty maneuvering back to NSA sex only. In my relationship, I was fine with NSA sex, but friendship was offered too, which was an offer I accepted. For me this relationship worked great. I had a friend with whom I had sex, while meeting other women for dates and a potential LTR. Had my sex partner asked to reduce the frequency of our non-sex activities, I would have been ok with that, so it was possible for her to shift back to a more NSA sex-based connection. What was mystifying was her ending the sexual relationship and the promised friendship, which she indicated would extend beyond our sexual relationship.
8
Bi @6: No.
9
BDF @ 6
As lawyers, accountants and the like often say, “It depends.”
During the fairly limited personal experiences I had while in my early mating days, and the assumed LW’s present whereabouts, a relationship that started as monogamous as was the norm could lead to a mutually experimental short term afterwards.
Those who still cherish mutually experimental short term afterwards may have an easier time transitioning back to an a la carte FWB, maybe even reviving the old days and further benefiting the beneficial aspect of it.

BTW- are we sure "they're" a she?

10
SA @7: "it seems that SIGH actually was angling for a relationship."
Not necessarily. The FWB "recently told me that we seemed to be in a relationship." There's no context for why he said this. SIGH "thought that meant he would make more of an effort to communicate and spend more time with me." This doesn't necessarily imply that SIGH wants a relationship; it could imply that FWB is crappy at communication (which the rest of the letter supports) and that SIGH wants sex more frequently than FWB. I'm wondering whether the letter is being read as "she wants a relationship" because SIGH is being read as "she," which, as CMD notes, isn't stated either.

As for your ex-FWB, I can relate to the situation from her perspective, though I agree it doesn't make logical sense (feelings are not logical). Once the shift goes from "fuck buddies" to "partners" in someone's mind, it's hard not to think of how they're a bad fit as a partner, and therefore you shouldn't be with them at all. This is how a lifetime of immersion into "you need to find The One" dogma can screw up a good thing.
11
@10/BiDanFan: Even if it's not the only possible reading of SIGH's letter, I think a fair reading of "I thought that meant he would make more of an effort to communicate and spend more time with me. We went to a dinner and concert after this discussion" is that SIGH was in fact interested in pursuing a relationship at that point, and believed that dinner and a concert were evidence a mutual interest in taking their relationship in that direction.

If that's not the case, if SIGH's bf was not interested in pursuing a relationship, and if SIGH did not want to pursue a relationship, then to answer your question, I think it is possible to salvage the NSA sexual relationship they both were enjoying. As I noted @7, where the person who does not want a romantic relationship is also the person who is beginning to feel an unwanted emotional connection, there is also the potential to salvage the NSA sexual relationship. But I don't see a way to address the situation where one person wants a relationship and the other does not.

I will also note that I assumed SIGH was a man. I think I assumed that Homo in the sign-off indicated that the writer, and not Dan, was homosexual. I think there is something off-putting about the idea of a straight woman signing-off her letter to Dan by calling him Homo, even if I've been reading this column long enough to remember when everyone started with the salutation "Hey Faggot."
12
I agree that it sounds like SIGH was open to the relationship while the FWB was not. But it's ambiguous if the FWB was initially interested or if the FWB danced around the topic and left it confusing (which sounds likely). SIGH sounds more confused about what is going on than pining to be in a relationship. Clear communication lacking here.

If I can be a little sympathetic to the jerk FWB, it sounds like the problem is the way they handled the situation. I think it's pretty normal to think that you are going to like someone more than you do before you actually hang out with them. If the sex was good too, the FWB might have thought they could possibly have something going. Then one date showed no. At this point, FWB, responded in a jerk way. I'm just saying it could be more from feeling like you accidentally got caught up in something and don't have the social skills to get out of it gracefully rather than the FWB trying to be controlling or find a slave, etc. I've met a lot of people who are great to do one thing with or another, but then when you try to hang, the energy is all wrong. That 'keeping up' thing is real. It's a drag to be around people who move real slow or get overwhelmed quickly or who get tired out quickly if you are the sort of person who wants to go go go go. I imagine it's also a drag in the reverse- to be a take-one-thing-at-a-time person around someone who is always moving on to the next thing. These are the sorts of things that actually matter in a relationship and a friendship. Sexual compatibility might be great, even interests/values might align, and then you find out you just can't hang.

@Sublime
Dan has said that he sometimes makes up the sign-off names.
13
I, too, took the sign-off name to suggest that the lw was a man, but gender and orientation really makes no difference whatsoever in this letter.
The way I see it, the FWB has caused the hamster in SIGH's head to wake up, get on its wheel and start running. When I feel my hamster wake up and head to its wheel, I have learned to respond by stopping. I have come to realize that anyone who sets my hamster on its wheel is bad for me, and that I prefer to live with my hamster at rest.
14
@13 worst part is, damn hamsters are always up running the wheel at 3 o'clock in the morning!
15
Reading between the lines here, it seems like SIGH and the FWB were seeing each other on a pretty consistent and frequent (>once a week) basis. Not only were they hooking up for sex and happening across one another, they were also doing stuff together like going to dinner and doing concerts.

If we were to look solely at the behavior here, rather than the verbal justifications SIGH is providing, I'd personally say that this situation looks an awful lot like dating to me. SIGH doesn't say if either of them have been dating or fucking around outside of this FWB relationship, which might help clear things up a bit.

Which leads me to ask the community here, just where are the bright lines to be drawn between dating/FWB/casual sex relationships?

A definition that rests solely on the declaration of both parties seems rather an inadequate one (Which leads us down a rather Trumpian rabbit hole: "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.").

Regardless of FWB's subsequent actions, I do have to kind of agree with his initial diagnosis of what's going on. SIGH proceeded to infer that FWB wanted the relationship, but there never seems to have been any discussion of whether or not that was the direction anyone wanted things to go. It's entirely possible that FWB is pulling back a bit because he's trying to honor the relationship as it was originally constituted.

My suggestion would be to be direct with him. What does he want? A full-on relationship? A friends-with-benefits situation? Perhaps a downgrade just to being friends (or just casual fucks now and then)? Is this monogamous or open and to what degree? Once everyone knows what they want and expect from the relationship (and this is a relationship, if an unconventional one) then you can set about negotiating what that should look like and/or if it can continue.
16
Real deal:

FWB mentions that it seems like their FWB situation has morphed into a real relationship. SIGH feels like this means FWB wants more out of this relationship, and takes hanging out again (like they have been doing for a while) as evidence of this, then starts treatin FWB like they're in a relationship.

But FWB mentioned it feeling like they were in a relationship because he actually just wants to be FWBs, and SIGH's sudden treatment of the situation like a real relationship caused FWB to create distance.

Maybe FWB could have communicated better, but SIGH is left with two options... wait a bit and just ask FWB if they want to hook up sometime and see if that dials it back to FWB, or call it a day and move on.

@6: Yes, although in the cases I've experienced / seen, with a break between the phases, i.e. break up from your romantic attempts, spend some time with minimal contact, then FWBs again.
17
@13 - I absolutely love your analogy, but it makes me sad for some reason. I think because I've allowed my hamster to engage with that wheel whenever its loopy little heart has wished, and while I would be the last person in the world to say that my life has easy or straightforward, I can't imagine living without the richness of chaos this has brought my way.
18
C O M M I T M E N T
I S S U E S
19
@17: aftertheafter, I'm not against thinking, but my hamster on its wheel is a description of what happens when someone sends me mixed signals: What does it mean that he said xxx and then said yyy? Why did he say ttt on Wednesday and then do fff on Friday? He said rrr, but then he also said ppp. WHAT DOES IS IT ALL MEAN?

Essentially, it all boils down to "does he like me? I can't tell. I like him and want him to like me and I'm trying to figure out if he does."

That makes me crazy. It's not a good thing. It took me many years to decide that mixed signals are always bad and that if someone sends me both I should only pay attention to the ones that tell me what I don't want to hear.
If I feel my hamster starting up, I know that no matter how many good messages are being given to me, I need to walk away. Because if someone really likes you, you shouldn't have to try to figure that out from clues.
20
@19: Yeah, it shouldn't be that hard/confusing.

Once you're into the relationship things get harder/more complex and you have to see them/yourself on a different level... you'll be even more confused.

That feeling of just treading water, ungh.
21
And hah, "What does it mean that he said xxx and then said yyy? Why did he say ttt on Wednesday and then do fff on Friday? He said rrr, but then he also said ppp. WHAT DOES IS IT ALL MEAN"

When you're reduced to haruspicy, things ironically don't augur well.
22
@21 ha.
23
why are we making this more complicated than it is

"HE'S JUST NOT THAT INTO HER" GREG BERNHARDT, DR PHIL, and STEVE HARVEY all say the same exact thing
24
I agree with @2 Sublime Afterglow that the friend saying, 'we seem to be in a more of a relationship' means 'this has got too heavy for me and I'm pulling away'.

I took the LW to be a straight woman saying 'you suggest something, Dan'--'you suggest something, 'homo', because you have an insight into how men, or just people, behave, and this hetero is mystifying or impenetrable'. This wasn't meant as slighting. Or as mildly slighting towards, and exasperated with, straight men. I could be wrong here.
25
Corydon @15: "Which leads me to ask the community here, just where are the bright lines to be drawn between dating/FWB/casual sex relationships?"

A very good question indeed; I often find the two people in any such relationship often disagree on its nature.

I don't think there are any "bright lines," only blurred ones. The answer is, indeed, what the people involved say the relationship is. To me "friends with benefits" differs from "casual sex" because of the "friends" element. Would you be hanging out with this person if you weren't having sex, yes/no. Do you only meet for sex, or do you do other things like go to gigs and movies together. If the latter, are these "datey" things (romantic dinners) or "matey" things (concerts or parties you were both probably both going to anyway). Dating differs from FWB because of, A, the emotions involved, and B, the desire or not to "progress" the relationship to exclusivity or cohabitation. Would you take this person to a wedding or to meet your parents? Is the L word involved in any way? If so, you're dating.

Nocute @13/@19: Love the hamster analogy too, and yes, hate the overthinking cycle!

Harriet @24: I also read "homo" as addressing Dan, and probably implying that SIGH has been reading Dan since the "Hey, Faggot" days.
26
I sincerely apologize in advance for the musician semantics to follow...
Concert- this implies a large venue. Something you would buy tickets for and have assigned seats. Paul McCartney plays concerts. When LW said "dinner and a concert" I assumed this was planned well in advance. In the hours prior, FWB realized that they were essentially going on a date-date, got cold feet, and dropped a vague hint rather than use his words like an adult human. Understandably, LW took him at the exact opposite of his meaning. "I want to be in a relationship" vs. "this is starting to feel too much like a relationship and I definitely don't want that"
Show- that's a catch-all, but typically a more casual affair. I play shows, my friends play shows, I might swing by the ____ show later but I'm kinda tired and have tickets to the Iggy Pop show tomorrow. (I don't because there isn't one, but a concert can be a show the same way a square is technically a rectangle). If LW had written "show" I would take that to mean they decided to go on a date-date *after* talking about their relationship, which would make FWB an asshole for what ensued instead of a vague jerk.
Gig- I have a gig next weekend, but you wouldn't go to my gig, you would go to my show. Gig implies (hopefully paid) work/obligation.
27
@19 thanks for adding to the comment, I very much agree with you in that case, and the hamster analogy is even more apt then I first thought.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.