Married Folks: Do you nurture friendships with opposite sex individuals?

[kalanamak]

I just love your story of romance with your DH. It has such a charm to it.

 

 

The funny ending is that we decided to be "just friends", and live like brother and sister now. We'd both been recently dumped by "the loves of our life" (me 12 years, him 19 years) and we were well into middle age. We decided a peaceful, happy brother-sister relationship was best for us.

 

I think all those hormones were a trick to get the human race to continue. Once we conceived, we mutually backed off. The mutual part was the stroke of genius. We are both AARP-aged and romance takes too much energy!!

[I.Dup.]

For us it is not a good idea. Without getting TOO personal, I do have boundary issues. I know this is a very strange aspect of my personality that is not socially acceptable but I do know it about myself. We have a history of affairs in our marriage and I can't really think of any situation where developing a "nurtured" relationship with someone of the opposite sex would be a good idea. I love men and have no problem being friendly with men and that is part of the problem for me. I have always turned to male friends and often something else develops and that is something I just can't do anymore, it's not appropriate. Dh also has his boundary issues- he's more clueless than I am and gives off strange signals at times. He has gotten decently close to a female mechanic he works with and at first I was jealous because of things in our past history, but I have seen them together and feel more comfortable with it; however, I would NOT be comfortable if he were taking her out for coffee or lunch alone, etc. I also think it would be very easy for a sexual attraction to happen if one of the "friends" was attractive, esp. the female. Women seem to be less discriminatory in this.

 

There's my TMI post of the day. :)

[PeacefulChaos]

I voted on this yesterday but didn't take the time to type out a reply.

 

I voted 'No'.

 

I do not have a problem being friends with men.

 

In my pre-marriage days (which was at the ripe old age of 18! lol) I was friends with mostly guys. Some were 100% platonic and I'm friends with them on facebook now, though we're not close at all and don't really have any involvement in each others' lives. I might notice they're having a baby and I'll say congrats or like the picture. That's about it. I also had several who were not 100% platonic (and who I very much enjoyed the attention of), and I wouldn't have a problem being friends with them on facebook either, because it would be in the same vein as the others. We're all married, have/are having children, etc. It's the same as it is with female friends in that respect.

 

NOW that I'm married (and have been for 11 1/2 years) I don't go looking for men to be friends with. I understand that some people would say, 'I don't go LOOKING for friends, period'. I get that. Most of my friends are from church. If there is a woman at church that I really like or want to get to know better, I may try to extend an invitation to her - for coffee, for dessert (my personal favorite! lol), for our kids to play together if they are similar ages. There are some women that I invite along when I go shopping or to a consignment sale, or women who I particularly enjoy working in the nursery with or seeing at our book club.

There are guys at church that are very nice. Their wives are nice. I joke around with them during practices, I don't feel any sort of attraction to them, but I recognize them as good men. I text them for information about stuff but not socially. I don't ask them for coffee or dessert or anything else. I don't really notice whether or not they are there for a particular event the way I would a good female friend. I don't feel it would be appropriate if I DID, and I would have to do some MAJOR soul searching if that happened.

I just don't feel any need for it, either. I've NEVER met a guy that I wanted to be friends with the way I've developed my friendships with my close friends. Never.

 

So anyway, all that to say that I'm not saying that being friends/acquaintances with people of the opposite sex is a bad thing or is wrong.

I DO think that it is something to be very careful with. I'm not a perfect individual by any means. I feel that to 'nurture' a friendship with someone of the opposite sex could prove to be very dangerous. I hear people say all the time (IRL) 'I can't believe that so-and-so had an affair! That would NEVER happen to me!' and I try to remind them that most people think that. We have to be vigilant and protect our marriages. To give special care and attention to someone of the opposite sex who isn't our spouse could definitely prove to end up being far more than what we (collective) originally intend.

[Lady Florida.]

I'm sorry I'm not up to speed on every post since last night, but I wanted to speak to a couple. In the original situation, Attractive Male Friend extended an invitation to Female Friend from Teenagerhood, "Hey, it would be great if you could come to (a neighboring state) and hang out for a bit." So Female Friend says, "Hmmm. I would like to, but my husband may definitely think it's going a bit far to give up a weekend (since the drive would necessitate a stay in a hotel) to go 'hang out' with my friend I haven't seen IRL since teenagerhood." Attractive Male says, "Bring your husband if you want. I don't care." Female Friend says, "That's not really a solution, Dh doesn't want to give over a weekend to go hang out with my best male teenager friend. So, if I came at all, it would be alone." Attractive Male says, "Then your dh is a jealous @ss. Or you don't trust your own character. Or both." Female Friend says, "But wouldn't that indicate that I'm willing to put quite a bit of effort into seeing you? I don't even spend as much time with other, current friends as I want to, let alone those that live in another state." Attractive Male gets offended that he's not "worth" the time investment. Female Friend wonders if she is correct and making a wise decision or if she's being old-fashioned and paranoid. I think her decision is wise.

 

 

In this case Attractive Male Friend is rather selfish and immature, and possibly doesn't understand what a good relationship with one's SO looks like. Female Friend made a good decision in saying no.

 

I still stand by my statement that there's nothing wrong with having friends of the opposite sex though.

 

Forgive me if this was brought up since I haven't read what was posted since last night. If it is so "dangerous" for heterosexuals to be friends with someone of the opposite sex, does the same go for homosexuals? Should gay people in a committed relationship (or married where it's legal) never be friends with someone of the same sex? Or never be friends with another gay person of the same sex?

 

It just doesn't make sense to me that adults can't see that pursuing/nurturing a particular friendship is not a good idea, rather than just saying all friendships with the opposite sex (or same for gay people) are temptations and should be avoided. SMH.

[Sahamamama]

I voted "Other."

 

I find that as a married person, I seek to nurture friendships with other people in the context of being a married person. That is, I am confident that I am capable of relating to other healthy people in a way that is open, compassionate, secure, and healthy, because it's so very clear upfront that I am __________'s happy, happy, happy, happy, happy, happy wife. :001_wub:

 

No one who spends five minutes around me doubts this, so no one would venture to "move in," KWIM? If anyone did try it, he would die quickly, LOL. I have had to kill off a few admirers. ;) It doesn't even get to where my husband would need to step in. I weed my own garden.

 

My husband travels for work all the time. I don't feel vulnerable talking to the wonderful men at church. They are like brothers, and I am thankful for their manliness. Honest confession: I like men. I mean this in a good way. I really like what and who and how most good men are -- how they are different from many good women. It's refreshingly to-the-point, get-'er-done, and undramatic. I have three daughters, full of drama and tears, so sometimes talking to men is a relaxing change of pace.

 

I never had a brother growing up, just one bossy older sister. Our dog was female. Even the hamsters were female. Probably the goldfish were, too. I missed having a brother, I think, so I pick up "brothers" wherever I go. There are many good men in the world, and I am glad they are here. Why miss out on interacting with them?

 

My BILs are like the closest people I have to brothers. Our pastor is a good man. Most of the men at our church are good men. For example, our hot water heater broke a few weeks back, and my husband was out of town. My dad called my BIL's brother (a plumber), my pastor lined up a young man from our church, and they all came together to get in a new tank and take out the old, all in two days' time. Men just get things done. I suppose I can like that about them, like who they are, share everything with my husband, who shares his interactions with women (work related, usually) with me -- and we all are basically connected in healthy ways. I don't feel any anxiety about it, but if I had a check in my spirit, I would go the other way.

 

On the other hand, I don't meet the pastor alone for coffee. I wouldn't. That just wouldn't work for me. My husband could meet with him, or we could both meet him, but alone -- no. Along the same lines, my husband doesn't go out on even a business lunch alone with a woman. Another guy, yes. A group, yes. One woman, no. So that's our boundary.

 

I don't think that going out alone with a person of the opposite sex is exactly the same as "nurturing a friendship."

 

Do I go out alone with a man who is not my husband? No, never.

 

Do I nurture friendships with men who are not my husband? Yes, all the time. We relate family to family.

[Guest]

 

What someone might call lack of trust in oneself, others might call over-confidence . It is possible for people with every intention of remaining faithful to "find themselves" in affairs they never would have thought possible. In those cases, it's often because they weren't aware of how easy it was to move down a continuum from "not possible" to "possible, but I can control it" to "I can't or don't want to control it." For many folks, it's a decision to keep it "not possible" by setting boundaries on a relationship before it even has a chance to become a temptation.

 

For me, fidelity also means emotional fidelity, not just the absence of physical contact of a certain sort . I do not have close male friends and I would not appreciate my husband having close female friends with whom he was "cultivating" a friendship. I am fine with him keeping up with old female friends via FB, etc, but he doesn't do it in person.

 

This could not be better said. :thumbup1:

 

I think the direction of small choices matter.

[Guest]

In this case Attractive Male Friend is rather selfish and immature, and possibly doesn't understand what a good relationship with one's SO looks like. Female Friend made a good decision in saying no.

 

I still stand by my statement that there's nothing wrong with having friends of the opposite sex though.

 

Forgive me if this was brought up since I haven't read what was posted since last night. If it is so "dangerous" for heterosexuals to be friends with someone of the opposite sex, does the same go for homosexuals? Should gay people in a committed relationship (or married where it's legal) never be friends with someone of the same sex? Or never be friends with another gay person of the same sex?

 

It just doesn't make sense to me that adults can't see that pursuing/nurturing a particular friendship is not a good idea, rather than just saying all friendships with the opposite sex (or same for gay people) are temptations and should be avoided. SMH.

 

A few posters have spoken about homosexual relationships. I really have no idea. I have no direct experience with homosexual relationships, so I don't know how the dynamic works if this person is your SO, but this person is your bff...I don't have any idea.

[Scarlett]

 

A few posters have spoken about homosexual relationships. I really have no idea. I have no direct experience with homosexual relationships, so I don't know how the dynamic works if this person is your SO, but this person is your bff...I don't have any idea.

 

 

Me either.

[Scarlett]

I just asked dh. Soooo. What would he think if I said I wanted to go have a coffee date with Gideon?

 

Dh: I'd have a problem with my wife dating another man. You know, what with you already being married to me and all.

 

Okay what if I said I wanted to just go have a friends night out, but Gideon with the only friend I went with?

 

Son17 from other room listening in: That would be awkward.

Dh: yeahhh. Is this some board thing someone posted?

 

Okay, now what if it was someone male I haven't already been friends with for some time?

 

Dh and son17 in unison: I'd have a problem with that.

 

Dh says if I said Gideon and I were going out to brainstorm for a book, he wouldn't have a problem.

 

So there's a snippet of our vague sentiment on the matter.

 

 

So hilarious. He clearly didn't really fear you were going to start dating Gideon. Speaks to the nature of your marriage.

[TravelingChris]

Lets just say that I have had the unpleasant experience of getting confirmation of what the Utah State Boys were saying = this was a long time ago but guys I was not at all attracted to in college, who I thought were "just friends'' and who later decided to start pursuing me.

 

I go to a Wednesday night class at our church and so far, I have been the only female attending this semester. That isn't problematic. It wasn't a problem when last year, I talked with one or two guys about where my dh was or his experiences in the military at another Wednesday night class when my dh was traveling to Australia, like he did a lot last year. But I talked with these guys in the hallway after class and there were plenty of others there. Just like it isn't a problem when my dh talks with one of the women after church while I am going to do some other errand in the church. In both cases, we aren't going on dates with anyone- we are chit chatting with lots of people around. I would have a big problem with my dh traveling to see some woman, out of state or not. (TN is the next county over, so OOS isn't as far as most places in state for us).

[kalanamak]

Speaks to the nature of your marriage.

 

Or Gideon.

[Scarlett]

Or Gideon.

 

 

LOL. Maybe.

[Murphy101]

 

 

Or Gideon.

 

 

Lol. I don't think so. More like dh knows me very well.

[Murphy101]

I wanted to comment on the issue of affection even without attraction.

 

Really I think it doesn't have to be sexual to be wrong. There's nothing wrong with sharing interests with a friend that dh isn't interested in.

 

But too many people IMO alienate affection with their spouse by sharing too much of themselves with someone else and neglecting to also share and share more with their spouse. I don't think that made a lick of sense. Sorry. If anyone understood me, I think that kind of relationship can creep up if not guarded against.

 

And I'm very much an open person, but there is a part of me reserved for dh only and it isn't just about sex. Tho that's a very nice bonus I'll admit.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I've been thinking about this thread. I said up thread somewhere that I have no problems with male friends. But none of my male friends are into the intimate heart-to-heart talk and we are never alone. We talk about all sorts of things - some pretty deep but none of it is super personal. We are always in public places usually with my kids around. But then all of my female friendships are the same. Sometimes my female friends talk about more personal things but my male friends just don't. A guy thing?

[LucyStoner]

 

This is not the type of situation I'm talking about.

 

There was a homeschool dad I was friends with and I invited him into our playgroup. Sometimes it happened that others couldn't come so on a given playdate, it was this father, his kids and myself and my kids. Nothing "dangerous" in this scenario. BUT if I found myself thinking what an attractive guy H. was and how he was so good with the kids and then I started calling H. to chat and get close to him...this is what I think is wrong. Or likewise, if that seemed to be what H. was doing - started calling me to chat and behaving as though we should become exclusively close friends within the playgroup.

 

Naturally, I don't run screaming from the room whenever a man says "Hi" to me for fear that I might suddenly be attracted to him. :rolleyes: I don't feel at liberty to spell out every detail of the particular situation that brought on my question - it is the WORLD wide web, after all. But take my word for it, the male-female friendship in this case has the potential to lead to attraction that is more than just discussing backyard chicken habitats. The person rationalizing (is how it looks to me) the friendship seems in denial that this potential exists. I think many a mistake begins that way.

 

 

Then what exactly are you talking about really? Friendships that are long established are apparently not it, nor are those that are newly forming due to shared schedules. If you start feeling more for someone than you have to offer, I assume you are savvy enough to shut it down. I would assume that would stop you from reaching out to this dad outside of your kids contact with his kids. What has you ready to assert that beyond your own life and own decisions, it is playing with fire when other people nurture cross gender friendships?

 

I can only speak for myself. I both get to speak for my life and my ability to set and respect moral and ethical boundaries. In my life, being friends with men has not ever been cause for concern and my life is daily made richer by my friendships with men and women. You might call that rationalizing, but you would be incorrect. The potential does not exist meaning because I have a friendship bond with some one has the same basic primary and secondary sex characteristics that my husband does. The potential only exists if there's that extra layer of depth and feeling necessary to have a sexual relationship. Thinking someone is a good dad or a good listener doesn't rise to that level for me. It ain't something I run across very often. I'm a picky lady.

[kalanamak]

 

I can only speak for myself. I both get to speak for my life and my ability to set and respect moral and ethical boundaries. In my life, being friends with men has not ever been cause for concern and my life is daily made richer by my friendships with men and women.

 

I am reminded of how I know I'll never be an alcoholic. When I do have something to drink, at the very, very first whisper of facial warmth or slight lightheadedness I immediately push the glass away and don't drink again for 6 months or a year or longer.

 

Similarly, the moment I feel a heightened sense of a man, and we are not both single and any future together not unreasonable, I immediately CLAMP down on myself and snip it off. If I felt I wasn't able to, I'd avoid him politely. Now that I'm securely past menopause, I can safely declare that this good set of brakes I have is completely reliable.

 

If I didn't have that good set of brakes, I might well have answered the poll differently.

[LucyStoner]

I'm sorry I'm not up to speed on every post since last night, but I wanted to speak to a couple.

 

In the original situation, Attractive Male Friend extended an invitation to Female Friend from Teenagerhood, "Hey, it would be great if you could come to (a neighboring state) and hang out for a bit." So Female Friend says, "Hmmm. I would like to, but my husband may definitely think it's going a bit far to give up a weekend (since the drive would necessitate a stay in a hotel) to go 'hang out' with my friend I haven't seen IRL since teenagerhood." Attractive Male says, "Bring your husband if you want. I don't care." Female Friend says, "That's not really a solution, Dh doesn't want to give over a weekend to go hang out with my best male teenager friend. So, if I came at all, it would be alone." Attractive Male says, "Then your dh is a jealous @ss. Or you don't trust your own character. Or both." Female Friend says, "But wouldn't that indicate that I'm willing to put quite a bit of effort into seeing you? I don't even spend as much time with other, current friends as I want to, let alone those that live in another state." Attractive Male gets offended that he's not "worth" the time investment. Female Friend wonders if she is correct and making a wise decision or if she's being old-fashioned and paranoid.

 

I think her decision is wise.

 

 

OK, we agree here. Her old 'friend' sounds like he is fishing. I started bantering on Facebook with an old male friend. We arranged to see each other. For, at my house. With his fiance and my husband. that is also what I do with old female friends too. I don't usually make too many plans for things that don't involve my whole family.

[Joker]

I wouldn't because I had a bad experience in high school. One of my very best friends was male. I had no other feelings for him and thought he felt the same. One night at a party I was talking to a guy I did like and the next thing I knew my 'friend' had punched the other guy. I felt blindsided and I lost a close friend. I've been careful ever since and haven't really had any close male friends other than dh.

[DawnM]

Seek it, NO.

 

I do have some male friends that I made before I was married and we are still friends. Most of them are married too and DH is fine with me talking on the phone if they call or even having dinner with them if they are in town and he can't make it. I grew up with them as a missionary kid in Africa and attended boarding school with them. They are family.

 

But I haven't made new male friends since marrying that I would do the same with.

[Joanne]

Ah.. but how do you know you have an issue of character and integrity???? How many church members who would consider themselves to be people of great character have had affairs? Or church leaders? I've had 2 different music ministers at two different churches have affairs with choir members. ( Hence, I have never met alone with any choir director EVER.. I always have someone with me.)

 

 

The action of attending church (or not attending church) suggests absolutely nothing to me about integrity and character.

[mytwomonkeys]

no, not really. since i've been married we have moved several times. the friends we have now are really shared & we've met them as a couple. i do have two dear guy friends that we've known one another since 2nd grade. they are definitely "my" friends & not my husband's -- but they live in other states & we don't really keep up. one has a restaurant in atlanta & when i'm in town i will visit. i am friends with his wife and children though, so it isn't an exclusive one on one thing. we wouldn't make plans to leave our spouses and go off by ourselves for dinner or anything. for us, that would just be weird.

[Sahamamama]

To bring a little levity to this conversation....

 

 

 

 

That was SO FUNNY! Thank you for posting the link. So funny. :)

[bolt.]

I think (from a Christian perspective) that it is absolutely critical to choose to nurture friendship and intimacy with people of both genders.

 

When we are repeatedly commanded by our Lord and Saviour to "love one another" -- I don't think we get to choose to ignore Him. Faith trumps culture. Our culture is over-sexualized, but I still don't plan on ignoring my Lord by intentionally failing to know my brothers well enough to love them.

 

If "they will know they are Christians by our love" -- just how is that supposed to work if Christians by-and-large choose half of all humans to never even actively befriend?

[Aspasia]

DH and I have always agreed that it's best not to have any friendships (existing or new) that involve alone time with the opposite sex. He works with several women and they chat at work and I understand that. But going to lunch or texting or anything like that would be crazy to me. I have lots of male Facebook friends, but it's not like we would ever arrange a meeting. They're just high school friends who comment on my posts and vice versa.

 

I hate when people assert that a "policy" like ours implies a lack of trust. It's not about trust and it's not about confidence in our ability to be smart. It's about respect--respect for our relationship, respect for each other's comfort, and respect for the strength of male/female attraction. Most people who have affairs don't go into it thinking, "Oh, he's hot. I think I'll pursue a friendship with him so that it will progress and we can get together and destroy our families." It always starts out innocent.

 

I just think that no friendship is worth risking my family's happiness, so it's not a big deal to me to pass on friendships with the opposite sex.

[kalanamak]

I am also just bent enough that I prefer my social time to be spent in groups rather than frittered away in small talk with a single other person who I don't know well.

 

Funny, I think groups tend to drop to "the lowest common denominator" (and are mostly small talk), and tete-a-tete is the best for really good talks. I find with a little probing most people have something very interesting in their past:

 

e.g. a woman I sat next to in an airport told me about how she decided to have an adventure when her husband of 20 years dumped her. She took her money and bought a goodsized sailboat, rounded up a cute guy, hired a sailor and set off to sail from Florida to Portugal. After two days at sea, and having not yet left sight of shore, the sailor sailor broke down and told them he didn't know how to sail but that he HAD to get to Europe and didn't have any money. The three thought it over, and decided to try it on their own. They made it.

 

No way I was going to hear that story at a neighborhood potluck.

[Audrey]

Oh, bull-hockey. I'm not a slave to my genitals. I have more self-control than that. :glare:

[violamama]

Funny, I think groups tend to drop to "the lowest common denominator" (and are mostly small talk), and tete-a-tete is the best for really good talks. I find with a little probing most people have something very interesting in their past:

 

e.g. a woman I sat next to in an airport told me about how she decided to have an adventure when her husband of 20 years dumped her. She took her money and bought a goodsized sailboat, rounded up a cute guy, hired a sailor and set off to sail from Florida to Portugal. After two days at sea, and having not yet left sight of shore, the sailor sailor broke down and told them he didn't know how to sail but that he HAD to get to Europe and didn't have any money. The three thought it over, and decided to try it on their own. They made it.

 

No way I was going to hear that story at a neighborhood potluck.

 

I think at a social gathering I have definitely had wonderful and interesting conversations like this with people one on one. (Excellent story- love it when something comes out like that.)

 

And of course I find men interesting as humans. I realize I wasn't very clear, but that was not really what I meant. I did mean that I feel more comfortable speaking to them (and everyone else) about deeper things in the social insulation of a group. That's the kind of conversation I prefer (peppered with whatever else is at the front of my mind & theirs), but it is usually too intimate to have those conversations one on one with a single male friend in a situation where I am out with them alone "nurturing" a friendship. My husband is truly the most interesting person I know, and we nurture that between us. I have not felt that level of interest in any other man, and will never look for it outside of my marriage anyway. It was both there from the start and took years to build.

 

I meant that I enjoy the safety and diversity of a crowd. Normally, true conversations (and thus deeper friendships) develop in little pockets in those settings and that's what I love.

[Jennifer3141]

Oh, bull-hockey. I'm not a slave to my genitals. I have more self-control than that. :glare:

 

 

I do believe I have found my new signature.

[Word Nerd]

Oh, bull-hockey. I'm not a slave to my genitals. I have more self-control than that. :glare:

 

If there's a prize for misrepresenting the gist of a thread, you win.

[kalanamak]

The potential only exists if there's that extra layer of depth and feeling necessary to have a sexual relationship. Thinking someone is a good dad or a good listener doesn't rise to that level for me. It ain't something I run across very often. I'm a picky lady.

 

My mother once told me she had only met three men she'd consider marrying. The first was my father. The last one was a retired scientist she met in her 70s (my father greatly admired him, too). I asked her about the third and she gave me one of her rare winks and said, "I'll never tell". She was about 88 when she said that.

 

If I had to guess, it was an old neighbor, a carpenter who was the nicest guy in the world. She treasured the wooden candlesticks he turned for her. It wasn't lust. He looked just like Fred in the old I Love Lucy show.

[TranquilMind]

I think it's more complicated than either side. I did vote "yes" in the poll, but I have personal experience with this (I have a very long thread about the whole story somewhere, actually)...it's just, well, not that easy to say yes or no to that question.

 

Right. My answer is...it depends. Is the opposite sex friend anyone to whom I could ever conceivably form an attraction to? Then I need to stay away. And you know this stuff right away, if you are honest.

 

If it's someone's 75 year old Dad I run into, or someone to whom it isn't remotely possible that I could form an attraction (or he would) sure...we will have coffee. I would not pursue this kind of connection with an age appropriate former classmate or something though. I know myself too well.

[TranquilMind]

If there's a prize for misrepresenting the gist of a thread, you win.

 

Concise. Beautifully stated. Right on.

[TranquilMind]

My mother once told me she had only met three men she'd consider marrying. The first was my father. The last one was a retired scientist she met in her 70s (my father greatly admired him, too). I asked her about the third and she gave me one of her rare winks and said, "I'll never tell". She was about 88 when she said that.

 

 

 

 

I'd like to think that maybe she had some amazing adventure that no one could believe, like Rose with Jack in "The Titanic" ;)

[TranquilMind]

Oh, bull-hockey. I'm not a slave to my genitals. I have more self-control than that. :glare:

 

 

Thou dost protest too much.

 

It's ALWAYS the people who arrogantly proclaim things like this that get caught up in affairs.

[TranquilMind]

I think (from a Christian perspective) that it is absolutely critical to choose to nurture friendship and intimacy with people of both genders.

 

When we are repeatedly commanded by our Lord and Saviour to "love one another" -- I don't think we get to choose to ignore Him. Faith trumps culture. Our culture is over-sexualized, but I still don't plan on ignoring my Lord by intentionally failing to know my brothers well enough to love them.

 

If "they will know they are Christians by our love" -- just how is that supposed to work if Christians by-and-large choose half of all humans to never even actively befriend?

 

 

You are introducing a false dichotomy here. It isn't simply "go deep and go long" or "do not speak to any men, ever"

 

It's much more nuanced than that. The point is that it is an unwise person who arrogantly assumes that she could never, ever be tripped up. You know when you are getting in. There is a whole fantasy life that accompanies friendships that you should not have, and it starts early. If you are smart, you get out early.

[TranquilMind]

Ok, since I'm getting tons of flack about love bank deposits I will explain. It is a concept from Dr. harley and Marriage Builders. Everyone has emotional needs. ( affection, admiration, sex, conversation, etc.) The reason you fell in love with your spouse is because they met that need very very well. You spent tons of time together talking, and holding hands ( Typically, women have conversatin and affection as their top needs, though they aren't mine.) They filled up your love bank. typically they were not making withdrawals by doing love busters either ( angry outbursts, disrespectful judgements, etc) Because if they were, you would have stopped dating them. As long as you and your husband continue to make those love bank deposits, you will continue to feel like you are in love. If you don't make deposits, then your love bank will go in the red: just like, don't care for, hate.

 

The problem is that in most marriages you drift. Work takes time away. Children take time away. Homeschooling, your hobbies. So the husband goes off golfing ( recreational companionship is typically a top need for males) the wife goes shopping with her friends. And the love bank deposits are not made and suddenly you have little in common.

 

Enter a male friend. If conversation is your top need and your husband isn't meeting it but he is...danger ahead. If the most recreational activitiy you enjoy you enjoy with someone other than your husband...danger ahead.

 

I'm sure some of you will scoff, but my husband and I had drifted and since we have been spending more time together making those love bank deposits, we are more in love than we have been in many, many years.. So make fun if you want.

 

 

No making fun here.

 

You are dead on accurate. Anyone who has been married a really long time should understand this.

[TranquilMind]

But see that is the danger and I've read about it on board after board or seen it in real life. They have been friends with someone since childhood or for 10 years. It has been innocent. No intentions whatsoever... and then the marriage hits a rough spot..... Of course innocent friend would be an easy person to talk to about it.... slippery slope... Before you know it at least an emotional affair.

 

I can't tell you how many people have said, "It can't happen to me."

 

 

 

 

This, totally.

[nmoira]

 

Thou dost protest too much.

 

It's ALWAYS the people who arrogantly proclaim things like this that get caught up in affairs.

 

 

Seems to me like it's always the ones concerned about making rules for the rest of us, to keep us "safe" from ourselves.

[TranquilMind]

I wouldn't because I had a bad experience in high school. One of my very best friends was male. I had no other feelings for him and thought he felt the same. One night at a party I was talking to a guy I did like and the next thing I knew my 'friend' had punched the other guy. I felt blindsided and I lost a close friend. I've been careful ever since and haven't really had any close male friends other than dh.

 

 

Awww. My best friend in college was a guy who befriended me because he thought I looked sad (he was right - lots going on). I always saw him as a friend but it soon became clear that he was in love with me. He took me into his group of friends, and just provided a structure at a time I was very lonely. I had decided not to date anyone else until I found my husband, which he knew. He thought some day I would just see him that way. It just wasn't there. He used to make all kinds of mix tapes with love songs on them for me (he was techy). When I met my husband and mentioned to my friend that I had gone out on a date, he never spoke to me again. It was sad. I hope he found his true love.

[TranquilMind]

 

Seems to me like it's always the ones concerned about making rules for the rest of us, to keep us "safe" from ourselves.

 

 

Hey, I'm not making any rules for you. I'm telling you why I have rules for myself. Do what you like at your own risk.

[nmoira]

Hey, I'm not making any rules for you. I'm telling you why I have rules for myself. Do what you like at your own risk.

 

 

Why would you assume I was talking about you? I don't agree with your assessment as to whom it ALWAYS is.

[TranquilMind]

Why would you assume I was talking about you? I don't agree with your assessment as to whom it ALWAYS is.

 

 

I can only speak to my own experience here. Those who assume it couldn't possibly happen to them and who ridicule others about it are at the most risk.

[Guest]

 

Thou dost protest too much.

 

It's ALWAYS the people who arrogantly proclaim things like this that get caught up in affairs.

 

If there's an interesting layer to this whole story, it's that Attractive Guy is on his third marriage. Just sayin'. :tongue_smilie:

[TranquilMind]

 

If there's an interesting layer to this whole story, it's that Attractive Guy is on his third marriage. Just sayin'. :tongue_smilie:

 

"There's your sign!" as that comedian, Bill Engvall says.

[LucyStoner]

My mother once told me she had only met three men she'd consider marrying. The first was my father. The last one was a retired scientist she met in her 70s (my father greatly admired him, too). I asked her about the third and she gave me one of her rare winks and said, "I'll never tell". She was about 88 when she said that.

 

If I had to guess, it was an old neighbor, a carpenter who was the nicest guy in the world. She treasured the wooden candlesticks he turned for her. It wasn't lust. He looked just like Fred in the old I Love Lucy show.

 

That's really sweet.

[LucyStoner]

The whole argument that this is ALWAYS dangerous seems to be tied to the idea that people are most vulnerable when they are not getting their needs met by their spouses. But you can't just wait to get your needs met or to be sure you are meeting your spouse's needs. If needs are not being met, avoiding all others of that gender is not going to solve the problem. My husband and I are both extremely proactive in meeting each other's needs, going as far as asking "is there anything you feel is missing?" at times. And then if there is, we make it happen. We also go to a therapist ~1 time a year to check in and hash out what Gottman calls our "perpetual issues" and how we are managing those. It's like our little state of the union planning session. We have made a running joke of the perpetual stuff and really downplayed it in our marriage but being mindful of it keeps up from making it an ongoing battle. I am far more capable of murder than of adultery, though exceedingly unlikely to do either. I don't think knowing that about myself makes me foolish or reckless. I just know the extreme importance that I personally place on loyalty and I know the barriers for me to form that sort of connection are very vast. The people I choose as friends are not people that I would ever become attached to this way.

[Guest]

The whole argument that this is ALWAYS dangerous seems to be tied to the idea that people are most vulnerable when they are not getting their needs met by their spouses. But you can't just wait to get your needs met or to be sure you are meeting your spouse's needs. If needs are not being met, avoiding all others of that gender is not going to solve the problem. My husband and I are both extremely proactive in meeting each other's needs, going as far as asking "is there anything you feel is missing?" at times. And then if there is, we make it happen. We also go to a therapist ~1 time a year to check in and hash out what Gottman calls our "perpetual issues" and how we are managing those. It's like our little state of the union planning session. We have made a running joke of the perpetual stuff and really downplayed it in our marriage but being mindful of it keeps up from making it an ongoing battle. I am far more capable of murder than of adultery, though exceedingly unlikely to do either. I don't think knowing that about myself makes me foolish or reckless. I just know the extreme importance that I personally place on loyalty and I know the barriers for me to form that sort of connection are very vast. The people I choose as friends are not people that I would ever become attached to this way.

 

 

Not to criticize your marriage strategy - if it works for you and dh, great - but I think it's too much to hope that your spouse is going to always meet all your needs and vice versa. I don't even expect my dh can meet all my needs. There are some things I enjoy that he's never going to provide. I went to go see Les Miserables with my SIL. We were joking with each other about how impossible it would be for our husbands to go see that movie with us. It would be hard for me to choose a movie he would less rather see! :laugh: Certainly no harm in seeing it with my SIL, but what if I had a male friend (who wasn't gay :D ) who would love to see it? Should I go with him? I don't think so because he's going to fill a role that dh is never going to fill, simply because dh has no interest whatsoever in classic literature. Or musicals. Or musical classic literature. By the same token, if dh had a female friend who loved racing motocross, it would not be okay with me for him to go to the races with her. No, I don't want to go. I'm never going to share his love for that sport. But it's not acceptable for him to find a female friend to share this with since I can't.

[Audrey]

Seems to me like it's always the ones concerned about making rules for the rest of us, to keep us "safe" from ourselves.

 

Bingo.

 

Really it is a simple thing as far as I'm concerned. I am not an overly emotional, overly hormonal creature. If I do not want to have an affair, it simply isn't going to happen.

 

People who are very into the whole "romantic" notion of relationships perhaps will not get that, but there are women -- yes, women -- who are perfectly rational in in control of their emotional and physical faculties enough to be able to eliminate all possibilities of romantic involvement with any member of the opposite sex. And, generally, when you tell a man who is your friend that the door is not open for that, so back off, well... they get it. And, if they don't, they're either masochists or idiots, so why would I continue even a friendship with that person?

 

I do not, for one minute, buy the argument that affairs just happen, or that there are situations that engender such a thing. What it boils down to is that someone WANTED to cheat. I don't, and hence it won't happen, regardless of who my friends are or aren't.

 

Some people, though, are afraid of such interactions because, likely, deep down they harbour some notions of it -- either fear of it or longing for it, or a combination thereof. So, they regulate themselves in an attempt to squelch their latent tendencies. It's when they insist on regulating others that it chaps my hide a bit.

[LucyStoner]

 

Not to criticize your marriage strategy - if it works for you and dh, great - but I think it's too much to hope that your spouse is going to always meet all your needs and vice versa. I don't even expect my dh can meet all my needs. There are some things I enjoy that he's never going to provide. I went to go see Les Miserables with my SIL. We were joking with each other about how impossible it would be for our husbands to go see that movie with us. It would be hard for me to choose a movie he would less rather see! :laugh: Certainly no harm in seeing it with my SIL, but what if I had a male friend (who wasn't gay :D ) who would love to see it? Should I go with him? I don't think so because he's going to fill a role that dh is never going to fill, simply because dh has no interest whatsoever in classic literature. Or musicals. Or musical classic literature. By the same token, if dh had a female friend who loved racing motocross, it would not be okay with me for him to go to the races with her. No, I don't want to go. I'm never going to share his love for that sport. But it's not acceptable for him to find a female friend to share this with since I can't.

 

 

It would be foolish for me to expect him to meet all my needs in life. But all my needs in marriage? It's not a matter of "hope", it's a matter of commitment. We don't hope that our marriage related needs get met, we openly state those needs, check in with each other on the other's needs and we both endeavor to do those things. My marriage has the same day to day mundane life activities as any other marriage but at the core it is not about the mundane, it is about the profound. Hobbies and movies are simply not a marriage need for us. My husband is more than capable of seeing a scifi movie without me without cheating on me, even if he goes with a friend from work. I am more than capable of going roller skating late at night without cheating on him, even though I have male skating mentors. The needs I was referring to are more personal, more emotional than seeing a movie. Where we do share hobbies, it nourishes our marriage but it is not a fundamental core need in our marriage.

 

When I say that we meet each other's needs, I am not saying that we both do everything with the other. I hate beer, I don't play a musical instrument, hate scifi, and I have the worst grasp of foreign languages imaginable (it's embarrassingly awful). My husband can't stand up on quad skates, does not care for the nuances of political history and what he knows about baseball fits in a thimble. But I don't need my husband to stand up on quad skates and he doesn't need his wife to like brewing and tasting beer. If he gets together with friends male and female to brew beer, play music or practice his mandarin, I don't need to worry because I know what he needs from marriage is there for him from me and me alone. I know that I am more important than all of those hobby type things and then some. That's trust and faith and respect. That doesn't mean that he doesn't come and stumble around the rink from time to time (on inlines!) or that I don't sip a new beer and comment to the best of my (limited) ability but it does mean that we don't tie our marriage to leisure activities. It's great that we share some interests (art, music of all kinds, camping, biking, reading etc) but I know many long married couples who are happy and faithful who share few if any hobbies.