How powerful is the composite FriendZoned character?

[Sol_M]

I was just taking it to mean "that group of people who feel like they're owed sex, and are upset that they're not getting it."

At which point we're probably verging on Jupiter Gorilla.

Oh, yeah, if it's a stacked composite including unnamed individuals, Jupiter Gorilla is probably not too far off.

I was thinking unstacked composite and/or named characters only.

[Nik Hasta]

I was just taking it to mean "that group of people who feel like they're owed sex, and are upset that they're not getting it."

At which point we're probably verging on Jupiter Gorilla.

I feel like there has to be the friendship with the object of their affection though.

Otherwise it's not the friendzone, it's just unrequited desire.

Like Gaston isn't in the friendzone with Belle, for example. She flatly doesn't like him. Same with Shin and Raoh as I outlined above. The point of the friendzone is the friend aspect, it's in the name.

[Sharpandpointies]

I was just taking it to mean "that group of people who feel like they're owed sex, and are upset that they're not getting it."

At which point we're probably verging on Jupiter Gorilla.

I feel like there has to be the friendship with the object of their affection though.

Otherwise it's not the friendzone, it's just unrequited desire.

Like Gaston isn't in the friendzone with Belle, for example. She flatly doesn't like him. Same with Shin and Raoh as I outlined above. The point of the friendzone is the friend aspect, it's in the name.

I feel it's both of these. There's the 'are friends' (or at least the object of desire believes they are friends) necessity, and there's also the 'believes are owed/deserve sex and are upset they're not getting it' part (which to me is different than 'unrequited desire', given how 'friendzone' is often used as a transitive verb).

[Sol_M]

I feel it's both of these. There's the 'are friends' (or at least the object of desire believes they are friends) necessity, and there's also the 'believes are owed/deserve sex and are upset they're not getting it' part (which to me is different than 'unrequited desire', given how 'friendzone' is often used as a transitive verb).

Isn't one of these from the perspective of the object of desire/third person and the other can only ever be from the perspective of the one who wants more?

Both perspectives can exist at the same time and don't automatically invalidate the other.

[Sharpandpointies]

Isn't one of these from the perspective of the object of desire/third person and the other can only ever be from the perspective of the one who wants more?

Both perspectives can exist at the same time and don't automatically invalidate the other.

I didn't say they were invalid. I noted that it IS both things: 'are friends' and 'believes are owed/deserves sex and are upset they're not getting it'. One of them is the belief of one of the people, and the other one is the belief of the other.

Not sure what you're getting at, here.

Unless you're referring to the unrequited desire part.

See, there my issue with it 'just' being unrequited desire is the fact that the common use of the word is 'She friendzoned me', or 'I got friendzoned [by her].' Which is indicative of 'she DID this to me.' An active action on her part, as if contrary to how things would have been, and usually as a whiny complaint.

That's not just unrequited desire, that's 'it was something that should have happened, but she friendzoned me.'

Which is where my dislike of it comes from. How something is phrased matters.

Had we stuck with 'I'm in the friendzone', it might have been better, but the whole business of 'friendzoning' or 'being friendzoned' is just...bleah.

Mileage may vary, and probably does.

[Sol_M]

I didn't say they were invalid. I noted that it IS both things: 'are friends' and 'believes are owed/deserves sex and are upset they're not getting it'. One of them is the belief of one of the people, and the other one is the belief of the other.

Not sure what you're getting at, here.

Unless you're referring to the unrequited desire part.

See, there my issue with it 'just' being unrequited desire is the fact that the common use of the word is 'She friendzoned me', or 'I got friendzoned [by her].' Which is indicative of 'she DID this to me.' An active action on her part, as if contrary to how things would have been, and usually as a whiny complaint.

That's not just unrequited desire, that's 'it was something that should have happened, but she friendzoned me.'

Which is where my dislike of it comes from. How something is phrased matters.

Had we stuck with 'I'm in the friendzone', it might have been better, but the whole business of 'friendzoning' or 'being friendzoned' is just...bleah.

Mileage may vary, and probably does.

Ah, I thought you meant that these were referring to different scenarios, so I was mentioning how it seemed like they could be different perspectives on the same scenario.

I don't think friendzone when used as a verb is a real thing. People don't "friendzone" other people. If someone believes that they were friendzoned, then it's either entitlement or delusion.

However, the practical difference between someone believing they're in the friendzone and they've been friendzoned from the perspective of the individual themselves is probably insignificant in determining what characters qualify. This is why a proper definition was important.

[Sharpandpointies]

Ah, I thought you meant that these were referring to different scenarios, so I was mentioning how it seemed like they could be different perspectives on the same scenario.

I don't think friendzone when used as a verb is a real thing. People don't "friendzone" other people. If someone believes that they were friendzoned, then it's either entitlement or delusion.

'A real thing'? The entire term is a slang to start with.

And yes, it is. For example, it is used in the phrase 'put in the friendzone' (which, while not actively verbifying it, is still using it in a transitive fashion), and I've seen/heard enough of it being used as a verb. It even states as much in the wiki article on the subject.

The term friendzone can be verbified, as in the sentence "So, she's friend-zoned you."

^_^

It definitely has a transitive property to it when used in such a fashion. For me, that really links it to some rather negative connotations.

Mileage may vary.

[Sol_M]

'A real thing'? The entire term is a slang to start with.

Slang can be used to refer to things that are real right? Whereas, friendzone as a verb seems to refer to a believe in something that's not actually happening (ie, the idea that someone does it to you (maybe maliciously?), as opposed to just not caring/wanting the same thing as you).

I shouldn't be surprised that Wikipedia has an article on this, that's hilarious.

Although I have no idea why the quote is cited from an article that uses the term friendzoned, but doesn't actually state that it's correct to do so: https://thejambar.com/the-friend-zon...than-it-seems/
In fact, it suggests to people to remove the word from their vocabularies entirely. Really bizarre.

[Sharpandpointies]

Slang can be used to refer to things that are real right? Whereas, friendzone as a verb seems to refer to a believe in something that's not actually happening (ie, the idea that someone does it to you (maybe maliciously?), as opposed to just not caring/wanting the same thing as you).

I see what you mean, there, and I misunderstood you before. And yes, I agree with you about the 'reality' of it (I had thought you were speaking of it as a term that is used) - the person ISN'T actually doing it to the supposedly 'friendzoned' person, but it's used in such a way to indicate it and it's that person's 'fault' or something. It's...ugh.

Which is one reason why I would agree with the article and figure this word should be pulled, yeah. I don't like it.

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

I feel like there has to be the friendship with the object of their affection though.

Otherwise it's not the friendzone, it's just unrequited desire.

Like Gaston isn't in the friendzone with Belle, for example. She flatly doesn't like him. Same with Shin and Raoh as I outlined above. The point of the friendzone is the friend aspect, it's in the name.

Yea but we're entering this weird overlap where the types of people who use "FriendZone" unironically to refer to themselves, are the same sort of people I'm referring to. Who would amusingly also 1) sympathize with Gaston, 2) blame Belle. Which is... actually an argument I saw recently, actually. "Gaston was trying to save Belle from herself". Talk about oof.

[Cthulhu_of_R'lyeh]

I see what you mean, there, and I misunderstood you before. And yes, I agree with you about the 'reality' of it (I had thought you were speaking of it as a term that is used) - the person ISN'T actually doing it to the supposedly 'friendzoned' person, but it's used in such a way to indicate it and it's that person's 'fault' or something. It's...ugh.

Which is one reason why I would agree with the article and figure this word should be pulled, yeah. I don't like it.

The way I see it, the word is projection.

"She's friendzoned me because she wants a bad boy, and I'm a nice guy." (read: She doesn't see me that way for a variety of reasons likely to do with who I currently am as a person but introspection is hard).

[Nik Hasta]

Yea but we're entering this weird overlap where the types of people who use "FriendZone" unironically to refer to themselves, are the same sort of people I'm referring to. Who would amusingly also 1) sympathize with Gaston, 2) blame Belle. Which is... actually an argument I saw recently, actually. "Gaston was trying to save Belle from herself". Talk about oof.

big ooofffs in the chat mate.

A fair point though, it is a very "in the eye of the beholder," sort of a thing.

[StupidMoniker]

I feel it's both of these. There's the 'are friends' (or at least the object of desire believes they are friends) necessity, and there's also the 'believes are owed/deserve sex and are upset they're not getting it' part (which to me is different than 'unrequited desire', given how 'friendzone' is often used as a transitive verb).

I don't agree with this definition. I would say it is sufficient that one party proposes a romantic/sexual relationship with another, and the other denies them and offers friendship as an alternative. There does not have to be an element that someone is owed or deserves something. To me it is an expression of disappointment (I wanted X, but only got Y). That isn't to say that people cannot feel that they deserve or were owed the sexual or romantic relationship, obviously that does happen and is toxic, only that this feeling is not a necessary element of the term. Just my half of four cents.

[Kuro]

As much as I find the concept of the FriendZone distasteful, I don't think you can reasonably say that Raoh or Shin were in it. As far as I understand it, for it to count you need to have a person in love with a person who only wants friendship.

Yuria didn't seem to want friendship with Raoh or Shin. Shin was a sociopath who kidnapped her and tried to murder her boyfriend and she hated being with him so much she tried to kill herself and the most affection she ever expressed to Raoh was pitying him for how emotionally broken he was and how his destiny was tragic.

She wasn't friends with them or interested in maintaining a relationship as such. Entire armies and wars were fought in a bid to stop Raoh interacting with Yuria, that's how much she didn't want to be around him.

You wanna know the irony? The friend zone was still worse than whatever they got out of Yuria in the series. That's how much the friendzone sucks.

[Nik Hasta]

You wanna know the irony? The friend zone was still worse than whatever they got out of Yuria in the series. That's how much the friendzone sucks.

This is a bit of a clown post my guy.