Friends with benefits !

Page

Next Last

shalini1323

@shalini1323

Navigator

Posted: 13 years ago

So after no strings attached, friends with benefits - I recently watch Cocktail. 😕

Not going to talk much about the movie but all three films mentioned above touched on one common theme - "friends with benefits". The latest trend for uncommitted singles is to be a 'friend with benefits.' Put bluntly it is sex without strings. I don't even know if it can be even coined "open relationship" because there is no relationship involved.

Personally, it wouldn't do for me. At the risk of sounding completely out of time I'm an old fashioned girl who is still looking for a soulmate. But I am not trying to judge people who indulge in this. It's fine - personal decision. As long as emotions are kept aside and people know what they are doing .... it's fine ... i guess.

But my question is -

1) has this made it confusing - are physical love and emotional love completely different entities? In this era, is it silly or naive for people to confuse sex with love and yearn for fidelity and loyalty? Of course we can't speak for everyone!

Listening to the experiences of some of the stories of my girl-friends who have been trying to find the benefits in open relationships lately - make me wonder..

2) what are true feelings? When do we actually realise that the person is more than just a casual lover?

And as for the guy-friends I have.. (like the character of Saif in cocktail) - you simply get annoyed when these caddish menfolk keep saying things like 'I know there is someone for me out there somewhere and I'll recognise her when I see her, but for now, it isn't Hema, Rekha, Jaya or Sushma -I just sleep with them.' Is there a logic to this?

3) Do people one day miraculously realise that they are in "love" for sure this time round & the feelings involved are genuine?! but it gets very complicated if the other party gets it wrong - when she/he thinks she/he has found Mr/Ms Right ! Then what happens? Broken hearts?

4) Who are 'friends with benefit' likely to be?
Someone you wouldn't look twice at when sober?
Someone whose genuine friendship you risk losing because of that awkwardness that erupts when you propose a relationship the minute sex is over?
Someone who is so not your type and your heart remains intact to the point you ask yourself what's the point, other than just sex?

5) Do you personally believe in the concept of "friends with benefits" ?

6) Are there even benefits attached to a casual relationship ? (apart from physical)

7) Do you believe in this common saying - "I will just know it when I meet the right girl/guy"

8) Is it then worth it to rather wait, look,hope for a soulmate? Or is better to keep it casual with no commitments attached, have fun & and just emerge with your heart & health intact ?

Edited by shalini1323 - 13 years ago

Quote

Frequent Posters

373577

Suspended

Posted: 13 years ago

As you sow so shall you reap so look before you leap 😳

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

shalini1323

@shalini1323

Navigator

Posted: 13 years ago

Has this topic been discussed before :S

Quote

Believe

@-Believe-

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 13 years ago

Originally posted by: shalini1323
So after no strings attached, friends with benefits - I recently watch Cocktail. 😕

Not going to talk much about the movie but all three films mentioned above touched on one common theme - "friends with benefits". The latest trend for uncommitted singles is to be a 'friend with benefits.' Put bluntly it is sex without strings. I don't even know if it can be even coined "open relationship" because there is no relationship involved.

Personally, it wouldn't do for me. At the risk of sounding completely out of time I'm an old fashioned girl who is still looking for a soulmate. But I am not trying to judge people who indulge in this. It's fine - personal decision. As long as emotions are kept aside and people know what they are doing .... it's fine ... i guess.
But my question is -

1) has this made it confusing - are physical love and emotional love completely different entities? In this era, is it silly or naive for people to confuse sex with love and yearn for fidelity and loyalty? Of course we can't speak for everyone!
Listening to the experiences of some of the stories of my girl-friends who have been trying to find the benefits in open relationships lately - make me wonder..

2) what are true feelings? When do we actually realise that the person is more than just a casual lover?

And as for the guy-friends I have.. (like the character of Saif in cocktail) - you simply get annoyed when these caddish menfolk keep saying things like 'I know there is someone for me out there somewhere and I'll recognise her when I see her, but for now, it isn't Hema, Rekha, Jaya or Sushma -I just sleep with them.' Is there a logic to this?

3) Do people one day miraculously realise that they are in "love" for sure this time round & the feelings involved are genuine?! but it gets very complicated if the other party gets it wrong - when she/he thinks she/he has found Mr/Ms Right ! Then what happens? Broken hearts?

4) Who are 'friends with benefit' likely to be?
Someone you wouldn't look twice at when sober?
Someone whose genuine friendship you risk losing because of that awkwardness that erupts when you propose a relationship the minute sex is over?
Someone who is so not your type and your heart remains intact to the point you ask yourself what's the point, other than just sex?

5) Do you personally believe in the concept of "friends with benefits" ?

6) Are there even benefits attached to a casual relationship ? (apart from physical)

7) Do you believe in this common saying - "I will just know it when I meet the right girl/guy"

8) Is it then worth it to rather wait, look,hope for a soulmate? Or is better to keep it casual with no commitments attached, have fun & and just emerge with your heart & health intact ?

"friends with benefits" sounds better than "f*ck buddies"...Actually "Friends with benefits" in reality is telling you to your face that you're good enough to f*ck, but not good enough to invest feelings in!

PS: I have benefits if anybody needs a friend. 😛 😉😛

Quote

373577

Suspended

Posted: 13 years ago

Originally posted by: Prometeus

"friends with benefits" sounds better than "f*ck buddies"...Actually "Friends with benefits" in reality is telling you to your face that you're good enough to f*ck, but not good enough to invest feelings in!

PS: I have benefits if anybody needs a friend. 😛 😉😛

"Friends with benefits" is a new term for me and I agree Vinubhai that it sounds better than what it means 😆 Are these benefits supposed to be cost effective 😃

Quote

Freethinker112

@Freethinker112

Sparkler

Posted: 13 years ago

Well I am young and have never been in a relationship but here are my ideas from what I have seen and experienced.

1) I think it is possible to keep emotional and physical level aside. We have friends and family whom we love emotionally but I don't think I wanna get physical with them. Then there are celebrity crushes which I think is purely physical. It is possible to fall for the person emotionally afterwards, but I think it is possible to keep them separate initially.

2) I can't answer because I have never been in love. 😆

3) See above

4) It can be a close friend, but I think that will create problem. It should ideally be someone you don't connect much emotionally. Because if you already are emotional towards the person and then start having sex, the oxytocin will send the love in high gear!

5) Yep, I believe in having friends with benefits.

6) I don't think there is any other benefit than taking care of your physical needs.

7) Nope. You have to search your right partner and make a move when you find someone you like. Expecting a perfect girl/boy to fall in your lap is like Bollywood movies i.e. out of this world.

8) I don't think that there is any problem in having some fun while you search for your partner.

I think that everybody should be free to do anything, if all the people involved have agreed voluntarily. Personally, I don't think I will ever have a "friend with benefit", because future complications and stress are not worth the fun, but I don't think there is anything wrong in it.

Quote

Forever-KA

@Forever-KA

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 13 years ago

- Friends with benefits, no strings attached, live ins, open relationships et al. are basically more respectable, fancier and palatable words for lust. lol.

- Love and friendships should not be seen as benefits and loss. Lets not associate the word love with any of these behaviors.

- Lust is physical intimacy while love is a much bigger emotion where physical intimacy does have a role in specific sub-type i.e. love marriage

- Personally I do not like of any of these. I just think it represents animalistic type of non-sophisticated behavior where one is looking to satisfy a certain need.

- It is not only about religion and family values. I did look at it from objective point of view. I see such relationships as mechanical and in my view it is disrespectful to treat another person like this.

- I do understand that my take would not be appreciated by many lol.

- However people are free to live their lives and take whatever benefit they want from whomever. I am okay with that. lol

Edited by King-Anu - 13 years ago

Quote

344471

Suspended

Posted: 13 years ago

Originally posted by: King-Anu
- Friends with benefits, no strings attached, live ins, open relationships et al. are basically more respectable, fancier and palatable words for lust. lol.

"Live-in" is not a more respectable word for lust-based relationship. Some people don't believe in the institution for marriage, but that does not make their love and living together an expression of lust only.

Btw, you said LGBTs should not be granted the right to marry (but be given all other human rights and let to live their life) in the other topic, so the only option left for them is to "live together" without a proper marital institution. What say?

A monogamous live-in relationship is a different issue altogether, and can't be compared with the others.

Edited by Beyond_the_Veil - 13 years ago

Quote

Forever-KA

@Forever-KA

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 13 years ago

Originally posted by: Beyond_the_Veil

"Live-in" is not a more respectable word for lust-based relationship. Some people don't believe in the institution for marriage, but that does not make their love and living together an expression of lust only.

Btw, you said LGBTs should not be granted the right to marry (but be given all other human rights and let to live their life) in the other topic, so the only option left for them is to "live together" without a proper marital institution. What say?

A monogamous live-in relationship is a different issue altogether, and can't be compared with the others.

1) My post was divided into two parts 1) My opinion 2) My action

- In my opinion I said "Personally I do not like of any of these".

- In my action I said following "However people are free to live their lives and take whatever benefit they want from whomever. I am okay with that. lol"

That answers your LGBT point

2) When we think of lust we think that okay one person is trying to satisfy his or her physical needs through multiple others. I did not use it in that context. It can be with one person also.

3) To me love means commitiment, sincerity and responsibility towards the other person. That comes through marriage. You will probably reply by saying that well a live in couple can be more commited while a marriage could end in divorce and that makes sense. However we dont know about future, we dont know whats in anyones heart. Therefore marriage sort of shows you good intention.

If we take away this then what is left is basically physical needs getting fullfilled without any solid commitment. I therefore do consider it primarily lust based and not love based. Hope I am clear

Edited by King-Anu - 13 years ago