Just Friends-- After Meeting on a Dating Site?

Normally I don't like to read my work email during hours that aren't 8:30am-4:30pm on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays or Fridays. A job-related problem came up last night as I was lounging on the couch in oversized sweatpants. I had to open up my dreaded inbox. Crisis averted after a few moments of panic and a couple instances of almost throwing up. Apparently, though, I wasn't the only one having a day of uncertainty; because I opened up my work email, I found that a work friend was having his own issue to deal with-- one that didn't involve work but that somehow found its way into my work email.

"Will you be in tomorrow?" he wrote. "I have a girl issue to discuss with you."

After a morning equally as stressful as my night, I finally found a second to catch up with friend to get the 411 on his situation. He explained that he had gone on a date. A really good date, for all that that's worth. I couldn't help but wonder what the issue was. Could he be like one of us girls who gets upset when things are going well for us? Was he about to sabotage something good out of fear of letting himself be too happy?

Yes, it was a good date and yes, they most certainly had a great time. They had such a fun time, in fact, that he really wants to go out with her again. Minor detail: he's just not attracted to her.

The problem was much simpler than I expected. The solution, on the other hand, might not be so easy to determine. Could he just tell her that he wants to be friends with her-- and then actually remain her friend? he wondered aloud. NO, I answered.

But why not? Why couldn't they just be friends?

Are you really looking for new FRIENDS? I asked him.

No, he answered.

I asked him if he thought that this girl was searching for more friends.

Negative. She wasn't and isn't.

This girl is on a dating site for a reason, and it aint because she's looking for another man friend to play Scrabble against on a Friday night. Sure, there are exceptions to this rule. Maybe sometimes we are looking for new friends; for example, we might be on the friend prowl when we've moved to a new city or we find that our group of friends has dissipated. But, in general, how often do you think people are really spending time on matchmaking sites without any intentions of finding romance and/or sexual partners? It's quite simple actually: dating sites are for that very purpose-- dating. Deep, I know.

Well, this friend wanted to know, what was my rationale behind my very solid opinion? I clearly had made a decision, and it wasn't based on the idea that guys and girls can't just be friends. (I'm a strong believer that they can be.) Past experience, though, has taught me that people who meet on dating sites (generally speaking) can't and won't develop friendships. Take, for example, the last time I thought that was possible. The guy and I became close "friends" and we hung out platonically dozens of times. But, each and every time we hung out, it became clearer and clearer that he had ulterior motives for our hangout sessions, whereas I really just wanted a guy friend to spend time with since I had just moved into the area.

Our "friendship" ended when he decided to attempt to pull a fast-one, but I ended that situation quicker than he could have ever imagined. Sure enough, he found himself a girlfriend a couple of months later because, after all, that was what he had truly been yearning for the entire time. (Disclaimer: no fault against him for wanting a romantic relationship with someone; I was the one who lost points for being the idiot to not see through his whole friendship act.) He had met me on a dating site for a reason and since I wasn't fulfilling his desires, he wasn't about to accept just friendship with me (a girl who he apparently was attracted to) while eager for more.

When I started to think about my coworker's situation, though, I realized that another occurrence had also influenced my point of view. Years ago when I was dealing with an on-again/off-again situation with a guy and things just weren't working out, I told him in one of those emotional, college-maturity ways that I thought we should just be friends. Funny thing is I was serious-- I really thought that.

His response?

"R, I don't NEED anymore friends. I wouldn't have been out looking for a girlfriend and gotten involved with you if I were looking for more friends."

I really believe that we can never have enough friends. That said, it's more important to develop deep and meaningful friendships, rather than stretch ourselves thin over dozens of "friends." (Same goes for how we shouldn't do that with members of the opposite sex!) But, this boyfriend's comment was the end to whatever we had between us. To be quite honest, I think it was the end of me thinking that guys and girls on dating sites (who found each other via this technology) can really end up friends. After all, if we were looking for more friends, would we really be going to the trouble to advertise ourselves as seeking romance?

Legally Married... and Dating with Permission

I’ve heard some pretty interesting stories of ex-spouses over the years. People who were divorced yet would still share a bed with their (mutual) children also living in the house. Couples who split legally yet would still date and even sleep together. Personally, I thought the point of divorce was to divorce yourself from your partner, but maybe I’ve been mislead all this time.

Then there are the stories of those not actually divorced (in fact, they’re still married) yet one or both of the partners has another significant other on the side. Whoa, confusing even in writing it, no? One example in particular pops into my mind. I know of a couple who have been married for years and years. Their lengthy marriage, though, didn’t stop a third character from entering their relationship. The husband has had a longtime girlfriend, but in no way has that caused his wife to end things with him.

In fact, what has happened since the introduction of this second woman is completely counter intuitive. You’d think the wife would be horrified, right? That she’d obviously leave her husband immediately? Nope, not at all. I know you won’t believe it when I say it, but now the couple has turned into a threesome-- although I don’t mean that in the sexual way. Perhaps I really should mean in that way, but I don’t know the details in that department.

What I do know, though, is that the three are often spotted out to dinner together and sometimes show up at parties as a group. I don’t know the specifics of their arrangement and I certainly have no idea how a wife is comfortable with sharing her husband with another lady. But maybe that’s not important. If it works for them, who am I to judge?

So for the entire time that I’ve know about this situation, I had foolishly assumed that it was unique. Who would have known, though, that these people were, in essence, a product of their time, foreshadowing an up and coming trend in America?

This week, The New York Times’s Pamela Paul just published a story called The Un-Divorced. (See http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/01/fashion/01Undivorced.html). I quote the following paragraph regarding Warrn Buffet from her article-- a statement that seems to parallel the previously described scenario:

Mr. Buffett separated from his wife, Susan, in 1977 but remained married to her until her death in 2004. All the while, he lived with Astrid Menks; they married in 2006. The threesome remained close, even sending out holiday cards signed, “Warren, Susan and Astrid.”

Um... right. A holiday card from the three of them. That’s just as normal as if they were to birth a child with genes from all three of them.

Here’s another interesting one:

Jann and Jane Wenner separated in 1995 after 28 years but are still married, despite Mr. Wenner’s romantic relationship with a man.

It’s interesting to note that Wenner not only has three sons with his wife, but also another three children with his partner. Again, another situation that, at least to me, is so difficult to comprehend and rationalize that it’s difficult to type.

Now, I, for one, certainly would want to remain married and committed (legally at least) to a man who was romantically involved with another man. There’s nothing I’d want more, in fact, than to share the man I’ve committed myself to with another person. But that’s just me.

Anyway, it’s important to read the entire article to get a full picture of this current sociological trend. What I think the article provides us with, though, is an interesting commentary on the current state of living in the US.

How pathetic is it, for example, that people have to stay married just so that they can share health insurance? Or what about the fact that the legalities of divorce can be so difficult to navigate that people would rather remain components of an unhappy marriage than to deal with the obstacles of the system?

At the end of the piece, the author makes the point that “not being divorced is also an excuse not to marry.”

Touché.

Would you really have the energy in you to remarry if you had just spent decades sharing your “soulmate” with another person? At that point, I’d rather just be alone-- without any cats, thank you very much-- than to deal with marriage ever again.