A
female
age
30-35,
anonymous
writes:After reading so many posts here and seeing what girls and women do around me, I have a question, why on Earth women agree to FWB situation?? I understand if casual sex just happens once, in a heat of a moment, once very rarely and it's not a norm of behavour, but to be for a guy an occasional sourse of relief for me is just humiliating. I know women of all ages don't want to do it, because we as species have a tendency to develop attachment to a man who we have sex with. I think it's imprinted inour genes. Men are the opposite, the more the merrier. Knowing that why to become one of many for a guy. For the past more twenty years guys probably think that a sort of sexual heaven came to earth. Not only they don't have to pay for hookers anymore but also they don't even have to make a slightest effort to get a girl into bed. They don't even have to lie now to a girl. All they have to say that they are not ready for a relationship. I read statistics that state that for the past 20 years use of female prostitutes declined gradually by 70%. That tells you that the only difference between paid sex workers and FWB is that there is no money transaction. Why on Earth girls want to be in a position of a hooker who doesn't even get paid. Also, a danger of STDs. I hope these women realize that they are not the only one their casual sex guy sleeps with, and I hope they realize that condoms are not always used 100% of the time. I think this arrangement was created by guys only, and now they are trying to convince women that it's a normal condition. The immorality of this behavour is obvious for me. People created morals for a reason: to survive as a humanI race, otherwise first STDs in a beginning of humanity would erase total population. So, my question stand at this: why women agree to this humiliating and bringing no satisfaction "relationship"?
View related questions:
condom, escort, money, prostitute, std Reply to this Question
Share |
Fancy yourself as an agony aunt? Add your answer to this question! A
female
reader, Ciar  +, writes (24 January 2014):
 I know this question is a bit old now, but I`m going to chime in anyway.
Some of these women hope that friends with benefits will grow into something more meaningful, but I suspect what most women want is to enjoy the companionship of men, on their terms and at their pace without being saddled with the unwanted baggage.
They want to know there is someone out there they can trust, be themselves with and have good times with without being suckered into doing his laundry, cooking for him, cleaning up after him and having to put out 2-4 times a week whether they want to or not just to keep the peace. They want to be able to come and go as they please and make friends with whomever they choose without having to account for their comings and goings and provide constant reassurances.
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): I don't see a FWB relationship anymore different than married people who still have sex but have drifted apart emotionally from each other.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): Prostitutes and gold-diggers aren't the only women who use sex to get something. Plenty of FWB women do it too. Lots of them prove by their actions that they would rather share a top-dog sexy guy than have an average guy who commits to them. Those women make that choice voluntarily. They get some rewards for it. There is nobody else to blame if they end up regretting the problems it causes them. FWBs aren't all fun and games for men either. How many women pick a less attractive guy than usual, or even the same as usual, for their FWB? Not many. Most women usually go "up" with their FWBs because they can. Think about the implications that has for the dating pool. FWBs are fun and games for a few really desirable men who get the majority of the women. For the majority of the male population these kinds of FWBs are just a drawback. Most average guys don't get the FWBs, they just lose women in their own range to sexier guys.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): Cerebrus, you are comparing 2 completely different types of women: one group has sex without any sexual attraction or feelings whatsoever for her partner, another which FWB is sexually attracted to their partner. Of course first group is not going to develop attachment, while second most certainy will in most cases.
Women do choose even their one night stands mostly based on emotional attraction. Looks are important, but a guy who knows how to talk to a woman wins. There is a sort of emotional attachment from the initial stages. While a guy at the same time can go without it and deffinitely doesn't base his choice on it.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): (Female anon again) Cerberus - I would like to point out the 2 types of women you are talking about are not the same, they couldn't be more opposite. A woman who has sex for her own sexual gratification is a confident woman, doesn't mix pleasure and business because she is confident in her abilities in both, knows herself so well she doesn't care what society says & is paving the way for A much more equal society. A woman who uses sex for financial gain or to further her career either has no confidence in her other abilities or has no other abilities, she uses sex because its EASY. She would more than likely be a complete selfish, lazy narcissist, who can't make any money herself but thinks she deserves every penny her man has. The bottom rung when it comes to women. You can't compare the 2. & yeah, the latter don't get attached, because they're not attracted, you can't get attached to someone you're not attracted to, but I bet they don't enjoy it either & they will be more common than the prior type of woman as its difficult for women to orgasm through penetration. So to meet someone who is so self- sure, confident and orgasms easily & wants casual sex is an amazing but rare kind of woman.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): Really interesting thread and the post about reputation. People can say it shouldn't matter but fact is to some people it will. It can be limiting to anyone. If its good for someone then all the power to them. I don't think people have really changed that much but surely the societal pressure has to a degree. What's normal now isn't the same as 50 years ago but in the end it still comes down to the person and what they want for themselves and also what their potential mate wants in them. Fact is there aren't many posts on this board about people who have relationship problems because their spouse didn't have enough casual or meaningless sex and it impacts their relationship now. I haven't seen many people say it would be an issue to them if their partner hadn't has some FWB experiences. Things may have evolved but not that much at least for everyone. Generally there is still some value held to sex that is really up to the person to decide what is right for them and what is acceptable and to be prepared to own up to the fact that it may have consequences for them.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): Female anon, that type of woman is very common. It's the same kind of woman who uses sex as a tool to advance or to gain power, or for financial benefit, or even just to find a male provider to take care of her and give her kids.
All throughout history there have been concubines, mistresses, prostitutes, arranged marriages and even female nobility and leaders have been known to be very sexually active with multiple partners, Cleopatra for example.
Just because women can get an emotional attachment doesn't mean they always do. In fact there is more evidence to suggest that every woman is capable of sex without attachment just most won't actually sleep with a guy they care that little about as a personal choice, not a biological function.
By the way the whole getting married because you're in love thing is very new, and still isn't practised in many cultures. It is wrong to suggest all those women fall in love, it is also wrong to suggest they feel trapped and abused, it's more somewhere in the middle. Plenty of those women have sex as a duty without any emotional attachment nor any emotional turmoil either, it's just how they were raised and most are fine with it.
There is a big culture still of women who are gold diggers, I met quite a few on my honeymoon. We hung out with other millionaires and the amount of beautiful, young aspiring models that hang out in those places, the amount of trophy wives we met only with the guy because of his power and status is quite big, that's not even counting the mistresses these guys have. One guy I got to talking to at a bar in one hotel was there with his second mistress and he still had his first one too. He bought them both apartments in different cities so he could visit them when he was in town.
He started giving me advice on how do it, and didn't believe me when I said I wasn't that type of man, he simply said I will be in the future as it comes with territory. Are those women emotionally attached? I don't think so. None of those women are in love with these guys, their emotional attachment is non-existent just a lust for money and status. The biggest aphrodisiac.
People talk about biology all they want, there is no biological rule that says women can't enjoy sex without attachment. It simply doesn't exist. People who talk about the differences in biology in men and women are talking about hormones and they do have a part to play but can be superseded. I know plenty of guys who don't go chasing tail and don't care if they ever have sex, so there's no biological rule to this.
In most Western countries up until the 60's, women didn't have sex until they were married. So they only ever had one partner for life. Did all of them get emotionally attached? Not at all. I interviewed many of those women for a project on what on their experience of life and they literally went from their parent's home to their husband's home with no independence in between. A huge number of these women chose their husband based mainly on what he could provide for them and his prospects in terms of employment, love was just a bonus, the fact he seemed like a nice person and was dependable was given a higher priority than love. In fact most women still find that very important these days too.
Back in the days when the Church ruled Ireland all the way up until the 80's, sex was viewed as a sinful act and only to be done for the purposes of procreation. It was the norm for women to tolerate sex more than actually like it for gratification. As you can imagine when the church rules a person's sex life pleasure is far from the goal so the majority of women didn't even know about things like clitoral stimulation and even fewer would dare to explore their bodies purely for that purpose.
You see when people quote tradition or history as to why women these days are "lost" when it comes to concepts of casual sex and somehow modern women have the wrong idea about it, they are just idiots with no notion of how life really was other than what they see in movies. The emotional significance of sex as an act is cultural, it's defined by each culture. To a Pakistani woman in an arranged marriage there may be no pleasure, no emotional attachment just a duty to a husband who is a good person and a good provider, which is not all that different as to how it was in the past in Western countries.
The only difference between having sex in those circumstances as a duty and of women who enjoy FWB's is that FWB women do it for sexual gratification and not just material reasons or out of duty. There can be just as little attachment in both scenarios.
You see being in a relationship doesn't mean there's an emotional attachment during sex either. There is wealth of historical, sociological and psychological evidence that shows women throughout history have been having sex with zero attachment and it's only the codes and practices that have changed.
People who like to refute the idea that intellectual evolution can change attitudes towards sex need to look at the birth rates correlated with education. The higher the education levels the lower the birth rates. Again that has always been the case, even before women had access to contraception. In developed countries the birth rate is quite low, in those countries the highest birth rates are in those who are less well educated. It is a logical fallacy to suggest that education just means they have poor sex ed. The working class in Ireland, the biggest breeders in our country all know how to access to free birth control and know exactly what it's for yet they still breed like rabbits. Yet those with a college education have far lower birth rates and you may be surprised to find out they are just as likely to engage to in casual sex relationships.
The idea that women are somehow too weak, too emotional and too inclined to become attached through casual sex to successfully do it is completely wrong and I'm sorry but if anyone thinks casual sex is the same as promiscuity they too are misguided fools.
It's simple, people who think women are a weaker sex and men are somehow sexual beasts with understandable urges are fools. Women have the same urges only the cultural constraints held them back. Now they're more free to explore their sexually people still can't let go of the idiotic religion based notions that they're somehow a Madonna or a whore. The fact is they're human, the same as guys in all ways that matter and are perfectly capable of enjoying no strings sex as men are regardless of the hormonal differences.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): Cerberus- I think you are reffering to a certain kind of woman in your posts, that is quite uncommon, from my experience most women do have Fwb in the hopes of it turning into something more. When these women like someone, they find it hard not to do everything they can to please the object of their desires, & if having sex with the man will make him happy...
I think women who do orgasm easily & can have sex without getting attached & are open about their sexuality are great, they're the ones paving the way to make this playing ground much more even & I wish more women could be like that.
Alas, most women don't orgasm easily & do become attached.
Just to point out though, the reputation thing can work both ways, personally I would not be with a man who has slept around a lot.
...............................
A
female
reader, Jaeger12 +, writes (15 January 2014):
I ended up in FWB situation through lack of communication.
I got the wrong impression of his true intentions (thought he genuinely liked me) we acted like normal bf and gf would but when i finally asked him where it was all going he replied I was just a friend.
It's a hard situation to get out of, once you are already in.
...............................
A
male
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): I dont agree with some answers about women nowdays being liberated enough to be in casual sex without any emotions, I must say that we still need to remember what sex like this does to us on an emotional level. It makes our hearts hardened. To deny that sex matters not only on physical level is silly. To deny that men and women are different is even more that. To deny that promiscuity lost its meaning because we evolved somehow into species that are "strong and liberated" enough to have meaningless sex is propostorus. Promiscuity is promiscuity, and it's also very much true how OP said that ussualy men and women who involved in FWB do have multiple partners and protection is not used at all times which creates a dangerous situation for both. Women who are involved in FWB have much more at risk and have much more to loose than men. Unwanted pregnancies could be a result of that, and lets not deny again the fact that women even the most strong and liberated are at more risk to get involved emotionally with the same partner than men. I don't believe for a second that strong and liberated women are the ones who go for a casual sex. I see it as a complete opposite. Before I met my wife This is what i did: lots of casual sex. I took telephone numbers left and right when I was out in a club, using them in a future as a sourse of getting laid. I stoped doing it after a few years as it was always the same story: I never encountered a woman that I had sex with who was ok in a long run just to have FWB. I saw some of them just for sex many times after that, and they were the ones with insecurities issues, with hurt selfesteems and some kind of emotional problems. Strong women know what they want and don't get involved in FWB, strong women know how it is to be in a relationship and go for it. I don't think for a second that OP is JEALOUS of women who are in FWB, instead she brought up the issue only based on a fact that that these women seem to her very unhappy and dissatisfied with the arrangement.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): I had FWB.
But it was more benefits than friendship. It worked. I wanted to get laid without having to make an effort with them. I didn't want to text or hang out or the emotional stuff.
It was not as good as being in a relationship. But at the time, I wasn't in a relationship nor did I have candidates who were relationship material. Sex with no emotion was better than no sex at all.
For the record I did not get attached, nor did I feel like I lost out. When I met someone I wanted a relationship with, I simply stopped the casual sex. No hard feelings on anyone's part.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): Because they don't know how to be and/or are too afraid to be alone. Then they act all surprised when they get a certain reputation...
...............................
A
female
reader, Tisha-1 +, writes (15 January 2014):
 "why women agree to this humiliating and bringing no satisfaction "relationship"??
Playing the other side's advocate here, maybe she enjoys some nice blood-pressure lowering and satisfying
orgasms with a guy she trusts?
Maybe she wants someone to find her sexy and is willing to spend a bit of time making sure she is sexually satisfied, without having to pretend to want more, the family, the dog, the grandchildren?
If she is happy with the FWB then why are you second-guessing her?
I get what you are saying about STDs and the risks and and the lack of intimacy and all that.
But sex feels good… and having sex with a friend without future expectations is better than having sex with a stranger, no?
I'm not a big fan of people having unsafe sex and certainly not happy when women or men enter into relationships that aren't healthy for them.
That all being said, I do have to agree that the goal posts have shifted a bit and there's a sense that FWB are the norm. I think that young women are pressured to be sexual before they are ready and that they have to be sexy in order to be considered socially viable.
Blaming the young women for this though seems to me to be blaming the 'victim' as you portray them, FWB being a win/lose with the woman being the loser no? Why aren't guys held accountable for irresponsible sexual behavior? Why do they get a pass? Because they have an X and a Y chromosome? Because their gonads do all the thinking for them? Hm?
I could totally see why a young woman who practices safe sex and has a high sex drive might not want to go into a relationship and so would be okay with having some mutually satisfying sex with a trusted friend. It doesn't make him a user and it doesn't make her a whore… unless you really can't see having sex out of marriage as an option.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (15 January 2014): The bottom line is men and women ARE different. That is the way it is. No way around it. Nothing to do with evolution and all the arguments others have brought up here. It is simple biology.The point is once a woman enters a FWB situation... the LONGER she is in it and having sex with the man, the more she IS going to get attached emotionally. Or the greater the possibility of her becoming emotionally attached.I believe these situations start off with the best intentions... no attachments and just sex.... but as time goes on, everything will change. Somebody will become attached. Usually the woman. Even if she convinces herself she does not want a relationship. Humans are not designed to have sex and not feel anything. If you get to know the person in any way, you will start to see them as more than a sex toy. I can see it having a better chance of working if you just screw each other without saying a word and leaving. No small talk. No cuddling. No hanging around. Nothing like that. The more impersonal the better.I do think women do it because they are hoping the man will fall for them. Some do it for sex and fool themselves into thinking they won't get attached. I would say that is not the norm. Most women in order to even want sex with a man need to have an emotional connection. Women are not programmed to just say let's do it even if the desire is there. It isn't that easy.One of the posters is right. Sex is never as good as when you have an emotional connection as well as physical connection to a person. A purely physical connection if it is a FWB situation is going to wear off pretty quickly. There will be nothing to sustain it. Onto the next in this case I suppose. But how would a woman feel if she was just discarded by a man if the man moved on? Could she handle him going to another woman for a FWB once their chemistry wore off? And maybe it would be the guy who decided that, not the woman? Would that woman, even if she only wanted sex, not feel rejected and used? Would she not feel upset? YES she would. There are always some kind of feelings involved.
...............................
A
male
reader, Sageoldguy1465 +, writes (14 January 2014):
 Amen....
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): I brought this up with my wife a while ago (she's a psychologist) and for the record casual sex was never her thing. I asked her why a lot of women are so vehemently opposed to other women having casual sex and she said simply that it was jealousy and competition.
No more profound a reason than these women dare to cross boundaries to get male attention, sleep with them with no emotional consequence and women who can't are jealous of that kind of power and freedom, plus they hate the idea that men would choose a woman who wouldn't make them work for when they have to. They see women like that as a threat so they cast them down and degrade them to the lowest level.
Sexually liberated women means a power and domination that women with less control of their emotions can't achieve, they're the female equivalent of the alpha male. Having their sexual needs met without the burden of societies gendered constraints or their own personal weaknesses.
The vast majority this prejudice is borne out of insecurity and low self-worth due mainly to cultural, familial, religious or self-imposed restrictions.
"Why should they be able to do it when I can't?" Kind of sexual power struggle then is the result.
She basically said it's a prejudice with the same psychological factors as racism, sexism, homophobia etc. The use of fictional "morals" is often used as a justification for prejudice whether it's your daughter marrying a black guy you're against or her having sex outside of a relationship. Morals that are usually not clearly defined, inexplicable or clearly made up on the spot i.e. it's wrong "just because".
She then went into a bit too much detail and specifics about the various different hormones that affect sexual urges to explain why men find it easier to remain detached. How the differing hormonal make-up of men and women mean women are more inclined to emotional attachment through sexual stimulation, but that is only one of many different factors which explain why it can tougher for women but by no means is it something that can be used to say it's "wrong" as there are just as many ethical issues with only having sex in relationships. Women deriving any pleasure from any kind of sex is still a hugely contentious issue.
She was also keen to point out that more men condemn that kind of behaviour in women than women do and again it's jealousy and competition behind that too.
She also said to note the language of prejudice that kind of person uses when describing these sexually liberated women. Their attitudes towards these women being whores, scum, bitches, disease carrying filth hold many similarities to those who are racist, homophobic and look down on working class people are scroungers and thieves. Like all prejudice it stems from insecurity, competition and a misguided jealousy of a concept they just cannot understand because they can't experience life in the same way.
Pretty good insight in fairness, although she was only talking about the women who can do regular casual sex and enjoy it. I would have been there all day if I asked her all the other reasons.
Oh and she said prostitution hasn't declined at all, prosecutions for it have because people are more accepting of it, don't need to hang around on street corners as much because of mobile phones and the internet and more governments are relaxing laws to make it safer for women who choose this kind of lifestyle and to prevent trafficking.
It's weird how women are still viewed as some kind of victims or whores and men as cave-man like predators who can't help it during sex and it's just "expected". My wife said feminism has to take a lot of the blame for that too, instead of empowering women they're trying to make men "sluts" and whores too. Feminists need to take a good hard look at the society of blame they're trying to create.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): Thank you all for answering veru much. Some answers were shocking to me to say the least, but most I think I agree with. the reason why I asked this question was that I read here on DC and also hear from my friends about FWB, and it is always ONLY women who gain nothing from this arrangements. Its never a guy. May be these women are " weak and emotional" how someone suggested, so let be it, then why to get involved wit someone who will break your heart?I think that especially women who are weak and emotional, not all, but most who get themselves into this kind of arrangement.I like sex like everyone else, but for me It's not just a physical act, and I know for most women it is not also. Its a very tiny percentage if even that really think of sex like that.I think men who think that its the same for women as for men are delusional, honestly. I don't think its an "old story". My mom who is 45 never heard of it when she was my age, and she says that even if it happened here and there, it was not widespread like it is now.I would never ask this question if I saw that this arrangement makes women happy, but all I can see that women get hurt by this all the time and still go for it.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): I think because women think that they are cool with being with someone just for sex, but reality is different. I don't agree with someone's answer here that because its 2014 morals changed. Morals are not changeable. People feel the same since the day they were created: jealosy, love, and other emotions were always present and always will. it has nothing to do with weakness.Actually this is exactly the line a man would use to bully a girl into FWB by telling her that she doesn't want it because she is weak and emotional,lol. I also don't agree that fucking anybody without any attachement or feelings is a sign of progress. I think its quite the opposite; its degradation. Sex without feelings is a pity state of body and mind. Real good sex is only with someone who you are attracted on both levels: physical and emotional. Its also true about decline in amount of men paying for prostitutes, I read it about Asian countries. Men are created differently, we can argue with it as much as we want. I grew up with 3 older brothers, and I know exactly what guys want and how they go about it. When they were younger, not married, I heard how they talked about getting a freebee here and there. They didn't respect these women a bit, those who gave it to them easily, and didn't give another thought about them the next day. And it was not that long ago, all my brothers in their 30s.Many of these women were not even attractive to them, they just had sex with them because they gave it to them.I agree with you, OP, I don't understand either how women can put themselves in this situation.And don't listen to any man who tells you that because its 2014 you need to lower your standards and be someone"s mattress. Of course they will tell you that, how else they can have their obligation free sex without paying for it.
...............................
A
female
reader, chigirl  +, writes (14 January 2014):
 "because we as species have a tendency to develop attachment to a man who we have sex with. I think it's imprinted inour genes. Men are the opposite, the more the merrier"
Men and women are a lot more similar than you think. It's just social structures that tell women not to enjoy sex for the sex itself, and the same social structure tell men they are not "men" unless they have plenty of sex. But how each individual actually feels about it varies a lot, and in my experience men and women are not that different in this department. I come from a very liberal city where one night stands are extremely common. We've topped the national lists of outbreaks of chlamydia year after year. Jokes around the country speak of how easy it is to get laid in my city. And yeah, we do sleep around a lot. Less inhibitions, less cultural stigma. The area has a tradition for being sexually liberal. So I know plenty of women who go out hunting just for sex. I also know several men who fall in love with the one night stand and tries to pursue her, without any luck. It goes both ways!
Also, men in general, world wide, do not find it THAT easy to get sex from a woman. They need to smooth talk to her, work their way in. Not all men are bold enough to just go for it, not all men find it that easy, and certainly, not all women jump at the opportunity. If you think it's so easy, and happens so often, I think you're just seeing what you want to see. For every couple who has one night stands there's at least 5 who don't.
"I read statistics that state that for the past 20 years use of female prostitutes declined gradually by 70%. That tells you that the only difference between paid sex workers and FWB is that there is no money transaction"
OR, the police is doing a better job at preventing human trafficking/the social structures have come in place that help women find a job rather than prostitute themselves. Again, you're only seeing what you want to see. A decline in use of prostitutes does in no way imply that FWB are more frequent.
"The immorality of this behavour is obvious for me. People created morals for a reason: to survive as a humanI race, otherwise first STDs in a beginning of humanity would erase total population. "
I'm skipping this part and pretend I didn't read it. I recommend you don't bring this up as an argument if you want anyone to take you seriously in future debates.
"So, my question stand at this: why women agree to this humiliating and bringing no satisfaction "relationship"?"
My question to you is this: why do you ask why women do it, why don't you ask why men do it as well? That's the crux of your post. You're trapped in the social structure, it defines your entire question, yet you try to find an answer outside of the social structure, including bringing in morality and instincts of the humans as a race. You can't find the answer with the premises you have set.
...............................
A
female
reader, So_Very_Confused +, writes (14 January 2014):
 IF a woman is comfortable with her sexuality and wants an FWB and is doing it to scratch an itch.... (let's say she's divorced and does not wish to have a serious relationship and is content to have a guy service her needs) I think it's fine.
I had an FWB with my now husband. He fell for me before I fell for him... I was more than content to be FWB with him.
IT's not always the women that fall or get hurt... more often it is because women will have sex with a guy they really like in HOPES of getting him to be more than FWB or NSA sex.... when he's being open and honest with her that
he does not want a relationship
he does not feel that way about her.
The issue comes when the partner who feels more deludes themselves into thinking the other person is "lying to themselves" when in reality it's the other way around.
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): I say cynicism and a lack of faith in men.
I believe that the major reason women agree to it is they are looking for companionship and intimacy; by offering it with no strings attached, they better their chances of getting a man to take the bait.
They may like the sex; but very few can be as emotionally detached about it as we men can.
Some resign to the belief that it's better having a man on these terms, than not having one at all. It is surrendering your real needs in compromise for having someone you can count on to come back to you; without fear of responsibility or your dependency. Offering him the milk; without selling him the cow.
Changing the label and description from "committed-relationship" to FWB; makes it more enticing. It hides the real intentions behind it. Showing one face, but having a hidden agenda. It is more often a trap. A way of clinging to someone who has broken up with you, or giving a guy a taste of what he might be missing; or could have.
Results vary. The outcome is usually not what they really want. He ends up finding someone else for the most part, and she ends up falling for him and suffering for all the sacrifice.
The happily ever-after endings are rare. Men benefit more; because we think differently and express our feelings differently. Society judges us differently.
...............................
A
female
reader, WhenCowsAttack +, writes (14 January 2014):
Well, FWB isn't a term that existed when I was young and single. I did, however, have plenty of one night stands, some of them with fairly good friends, and never felt demoralized or degraded as it was quite mutual.
Personally, I never was able to have ongoing sex with someone without getting emotionally attached, so I don't really "get it". But I don't judge women who do.
Honestly, I think women as a species are evolving to view sex more casually without the need for attachment. It isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just natural progression. They're more empowered and confident, and less likely to feel the need to find a mate to take care of them, which is probably why they used to get so attached emotionally.
...............................
A
female
reader, Honeypie + ♥, writes (14 January 2014):
 I really don't know why women who WANTS a relationship does FWB, but I do know that women who wants "just sex" think it's a better option then a string of ONS. Safer then going home drunk with a "sexy" stranger.
All I can say is, for those women who DO FWB in hopes that the dude will date them, needs to learn and learn fast, if a GUY says I DON'T want anything serious, 9 out of 10 times is he being 100% honest.
I personally don't believe the sex industry went down, because of FWB. Look at how popular strip joins are these days it's all the "rage" to go there even as a couple or for women. And if you think all these "dancers" ONLY dance, think again. Look at the porn explosion. Yea there might not be as many "streetwalkers" but SEX is everywhere and right at your finger tip. Prostitution is the HARDEST thing even get a count on, with everything from human trafficking, to teen prostitutes getting an accurate number is impossible then add the convince of the Internet, and it gets MUCH easier to conduct prostitution without having your picture taken, you name written down and your person "registered" as a prostitute. I think the SEX trade is WAY up. Because this day and age anyone can "order" sex online.
And the whole FWB? It's just a new name for an old thing.
You think sex is free and unbridled these days? Take a look at the 1960 and think again.
My thing is, if you find it "wrong" then it might be wrong for you. Doesn't mean it's wrong for the next girl. I have had plenty of friends in my youth who had no problem with casual sex.
I would not do it myself, not now and certainly not when I was in my 20's. Because I believe sex is an intimate act that meaningful if you actually give a Fuck about who you do it with. I don't think that makes me weak. That is just how I see it.
I don't see FWB as immoral. Then again I'm NOT a Christian or Muslim - both religions see sex outside of marriage as a "sin" and thus immoral. Like Cerbeus said, NEWER religions has messed up otherwise useful codes/morals that were essential to our survival. I just see it as being emotionally dumb (for the most part) or emotionally stunted.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): I've often wondered that myself and have asked WHY would a woman reduce herself to the lowest common denominator and become an unpaid whore. At least get paid for the sex act.
But, this has been going on since the dawn of times. Times may have changed or been modernized and a different spin can be put on this by people all they want.
Sex is sex, and if a person can do that without emotion, as prostitutes do, I figure they are not playing with a full deck anyway and need psychological help when the sex is reduced to a guy getting off or "relieved" of his tension and only for that purpose.
If a woman is that desperate for a man to have a FWB relationship only then something is off with that woman and she needs help to get her self esteem back so that she does not continue to get used.
...............................
A
female
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): I am an educated woman, great friends, loving family and a healthy self esteem.
I have have 3 friends with benefits in my life that I initiated and personally decided in advance that I did not want a relationship with these people. I wanted to be single but still have sex.
I was not hurt, humiliated, nor was I hoping the guys would fall for me.
If It's not for you op, It's not for you. Those who enter into hoping the I don't want a relationship will change I want a relationship do exist, and that is sad.
But do not look at me and decide that I was used just because I had the vagina in the FWB. It is insulting if a man said that. But it is sad when a woman sees herself as less than
...............................
A
female
reader, AuntyEm  +, writes (14 January 2014):
 I also agree with you about it being on par with an unpaid prostitute (those girls are the smart ones IMHO).
Yeah yeah you will hear so called modern women saying they can handle it, but once attached, you only have to scratch the surface to see all the feelings of jealousy, resentment, rejection and torment come rushing out of them.
As a species, we haven't changed much at all, we just think we are more clever by giving these things catchy names. Sexually, men and women come from very different angles (no pun intended) it's ingrained and that is why we can fool ourselves into thinking we don't care if a sex partner has no real feelings for us...but really we do and always will.
...............................
A
female
reader, AuntyEm +, writes (14 January 2014):
Because we live in a world where being single is seen as a weakness and a very undesirable situation to be in so women tend to get talked into these kinds of arrangements because they think the guy will suddenly fall in love with them and save them from being 'single'.
Talking women into bed has been going on since the dawn of time, calling it Friends with benefits is a way to legitimise it but really women do not cope that well in the aftermath!...but people rarely realise this until they have been through it...then they come here and we tell them DON'T DO IT AGAIN!!!
:-)
...............................
A
reader, anonymous, writes (14 January 2014): So your point is women are too emotional and weak to have their own needs and it's immoral for them to have sex casually?
Let me guess, you think symbolically cannibalising another human in form of eating their flesh "bread" and drinking their blood "wine" is somehow a divine act too.
OP people created morals to form a coherent society and ensure the safety of that society. Back in the days when there were no DNA tests, when bloodline mattered, when the infant mortality rates where so high (1 in 4 would live to be an adult), when the life expectancy was in the 40's, then that kind of "morality" had a practical function. Without a good stock of fertile healthy women your society just does not succeed. Those women were prized highly for that and because of that were just treated like currency and not people. Op there is no practical purpose to the kind of morality you talk about, it makes no sense. You can get an STD from your future husband, he can even be a virgin and give you an STD. Besides they're pretty much all curable now too.
It's 2014 OP, we live to be in our late 70's on average now. Infant mortality rates are very low, we have birth control, DNA tests and women have more rights to with their body what they please and so it should be. The world is a different and better place from the times when your version of morality was created. We no longer need "pure" women to ensure our survival, women have the freedom to work, have sex with whom they choose and do with their bodies what they please and more are discovering they're not as weak and emotional as churches try to tell them.
Just because you're too weak and emotional doesn't mean other women are. I've had casual sex relationships with women where I was the one who fell in love and they were fine about it.
It is a norm in behaviour now. Yes it's true women are more likely to gain an attachment and for those women they shouldn't do FWB's. But others do it just fine and the satisfaction comes from very good sex, trust me on that. Raw, hardcore emotionless sex is pretty damn good when you have an arrangement with a like minded individual.
You know OP, if you're one of those women who thinks guys should pay for the first date then you're more of a hooker than a woman who just wants to have sex. Trust me, I've dated enough old fashioned types to know they cost a lot of money to date and are far more demanding too. Casual sex women don't demand we pay for dates or gifts, but women who believe the guy should pay or he's not a gentleman are actual prostitutes even if they're not giving sex in exchange. We still have to pay for that woman's time, whereas a casual sex woman is actually the purist in that regard because they just want sex.
Old fashioned women are just glorified escorts. Women who judge other women immoral for exercising their freedom of choice are actually the one who are immoral these days. Because guess what OP? In practical terms progression is the only future for our species, it's the people who won't let go of codes of conduct that are no longer relevant that hold us back and are more of a threat to our survival.
To answer your question there a many reasons women agree to it. A lot don't think they will gain feelings from it. Others do it because they want the guy to fall in love. Others do it because they like sex and don't want the hassle of a relationship. Others do it because they love sex and want lots of it. It's not humiliating in the slightest and maybe some day you'll discover what satisfaction good sex can bring.
FYI: I'm a history teacher, people didn't create morals, they just exist naturally in our species as a survival trait. It's religion that messed that up for everyone by still trying to convince people women are only good for cooking dinner and popping out good little servants of whatever fictional character they drop to their knees for.
You're in for a tough life, OP, because whether you like it or not women are moving forward in the world and pretty much can do whatever they like. It's people like you who are going to be judged negatively as we progress. In 2014 you're actually the immoral one.
...............................
A
female
reader, eyeswideopen +, writes (14 January 2014):
 Good question.
...............................
|
