Catholic Dating: Friends First
Continuing our discussion concerning the Christian dating scene, today I would like to talk about “Friends First” dating. I would like to ruminate over some of the advantages of this approach, but I would also like to discuss some of the potential pitfalls, at least as I see them.
In Christian formation and catechesis, you often hear praise of romantic relationships which were first based on friendship, before the addition of a romantic component. This is what is known as “Friends First” dating.
The approach certainly has much to commend itself. After all, it makes sense to get to know someone, that person’s character, personality, interests etc., prior to the big rush of hormones and emotions that come with dating. The “high” that comes from being in a relationship can leave one blind to the warning signs. It’s not hard to find examples of what happens when someone rushes headlong into dating and becomes so emotionally entangled with the other person that it becomes extremely difficult to deal with problems in the relationship, or even to recognize when problems exist.
I know plenty of people who have got together through physical attraction and initial chemistry, only to find out a month or two down the line that there isn’t really anything else on which to base the relationship. To their shock, they realize that the other person is not the person they thought at all! After all, it’s not too hard to “hide the crazy” for the first few months… 😉
“Friends First” Fails
As I see it, there are three main potential pitfalls with the Friends First approach. I would like to look at each of these in turn and, since it’s currently “Geek Week” on YouTube, I’ve chosen to illustrate each of these pitfalls with a picture from my favourite geeky TV show, The Big Bang Theory 🙂
Fail #1: Friends First, “Friend Zone” Forever
For shy guys, the Friends First strategy plays right into their wheelhouse. Wait a while before asking the girl out? Sure thing! Take things nice and slow? It’ll be at a snail’s pace! Don’t look her directly in the eyes at any point? Now we’re talking!
With this approach, it’s very easy for a guy actually never to make a move, finding himself in a perpetual “Friend Zone”. He may very much enjoy his friendship with the girl and may very much want to move things forward. However, due to fear, he never does anything to make it happen. He may even manage to convince himself that things are progressing, but in reality his glacial pace will simply mean that he’ll miss his chance when a less inhibited guy steps up and pursues her properly.
In response to this, I can only really offer the encouragement I gave in an earlier post. Guys, if it’s worth the risk, then you’re just going to have to put yourself out there and take a chance. You never know, she might even say “Yes” 🙂
Fail #2: Miscommunication & Hiding behind ambiguity
I would suggest that the main difficulty with the Friends First approach is that it is prone to miscommunication. What is the girl meant to think by the guy’s attention? Is he just being a friend, or does he have intentions of eventually taking things further? She might even be regarding the time they’re spending together as “dating”…. 🙁
When a female friend asks me to read the mind of some guy(!), I generally tell her just to accept the friendship at face value, but if it starts becoming really ambiguous, then maybe it’s time to have a chat and define the relationship. Personally, I hate having this conversation, but sometimes it’s just necessary to clear up misunderstandings and miscommunications. It’s often awkward and pride is sometimes bruised, but it’s always better in the long run.
So guys, if you’re asking a lady out, make it clear that it’s a date. Ladies, if the invitation is unclear and you’re not sure if it’s a date, why not ask?
Fail #3: Friends First, Enemies Later
There is a consequence to dating someone who is your friend. Although you have more of a foundation on which to build, more is at stake.
If you break up, you lose not only a girlfriend, but you may lose an extremely dear friend. During break-ups there is often talk of “staying friends”, but I’d say that it is rare that this actually happens. The pain of the break-up is usually too strong for at least one member of the former couple. Either that, or one of them will harbour unrealistic hopes of a reunion at some point in the future.
This reason, coupled together with the close nature of faith communities, makes it rather appealing for a guy simply to date someone with whom he is not such good friends and who even is outside his faith community. It’s simpler. It carries less risk. It’s far easier to ask out the waitress at a restaurant than it is to ask out someone whom you’ll see at Mass every Sunday.
I have suffered most of the problems described above. I have waited too long. I have had ladies misinterpret my friendship and I have misinterpreted the friendship of others. More painfully, I have become romantically involved with good friends and things didn’t work out. The consequences to this have varied. After one break-up, I was cut out of her life completely. In another, I was demoted to “acquaintance” status. However, I have also had a failed romantic attempt transform into a good friendship. It’s nice to know that it is, in fact, possible… 🙂
Despite these pitfalls, I’d say that I’m still pretty much a Friends First kind of guy. Upon meeting someone who interests me romantically, I set about making that person my new best friend and, if things go well, then ask her out. I think the benefits of this approach outweigh the potential problems and most of the possible issues can be alleviated with a little bit of prudence and some good communication.
Joey: “Well, the reason I think Monica and Chandler are so great is because they were friends first. Y’know? So I asked myself, ‘Who are my friends?’ You and Phoebe, and I saw you first. So…”
Rachel: “What are you saying?”
Joey: “I’m saying maybe you and I crank it up a notch”
Rachel: “Y’know honey, umm, as uh, as flattered as I am that uh, you saw me first, uhh, I just, I-I don’t think we should be cranking anything up.”
Joey: “I’ll treat you real nice.”
[Pulls out a chair for her]
[Rachel laughs and pushes the chair back in]
Rachel: “Yeah, well, y’know umm… No honey, listen I think it’s a great idea to become friends with someone before you date them, but I think the way you do it is y’know you meet someone, become their friend, build a foundation, then you ask them out on a date. Don’t hit on your existing friends!”
Joey: “Won’t-won’t that take longer?”
Rachel: “Yeah. Yeah. Oh, but once you find it, ohh it’s so worth the wait.”
Joey: “Yeah. I understand. I understand.
[Pause]
Joey: “Man…I wish I saw Phoebe first…”
Agree? Disagree? Please share your thoughts in the Comment Box below!
The article Catholic Dating: Friends First first appeared on RestlessPilgrim.net
Communicate.
Be assertive.
Accept the outcome.
caveat —
Communicate.
Be assertive *and confident.*
Accept the outcome.
I like Joe’s comment. I learned that yesterday in the Communication Skills. 🙂
I think the “friends first” idea is a good approach in principal. Unfortunately, I think a lot of guys go “friends first” in order to procrastinate. I say PURSUE NOW! Friendship may blossom, maybe not. And either result should be counted a success, I think. Achieving honesty with the girl and with yourself is the goal after all, not marriage (at least not initially!). I think the approach you take should depend on the person you are. If you are too assertive or aggressive try the “friends first” approach. If you need to grow a pair, and you know it, then PURSUE NOW!
> I think the approach you take should depend on the person you are.
I think there’s a lot of validity to this statement.
I remember in High School I used to get rather uptight around exam season when the teachers would constantly tell us that we needed to be working harder. My anxiety was obvious to my parents and so I told them what we were being told.
My Mum pointed out that these speeches were not aimed at me. I was a conscientious student and worked extremely hard already. The teachers were speaking not to me, but to those who needed to hear that particular message. I, on the other hand, needed a different message. I needed to be reminded to stay calm and to make sure I took sufficient time for recreation and relaxation.
I think that it is somewhat similar when we hear chastity talks. Some guys need to be slowed down, but other guys need a fire lit beneath them!
> If you are too assertive or aggressive try the “friends first” approach. If you need to grow a pair, and you know it, then PURSUE NOW!
Pam Diaz’s boyfriend everyone!
[applause]
Just want to point out some qualification is needed, regarding Nathan Poe’s comment on “growing a pair”:
Don’t pursue a girl because you need to prove you’ve “grown a pair.” Pursue her because you think you should.
I think it should also be added that you cannot “discern” anhything with someone unless you have actually manned up and asked them on a date. And even then, it’s just a date unless there are big, giant red flags. I think a lot of Catholics – male and female although I see it more with the men I know — use the “friends first” approach to “discern” that every girl around them is not just right for them. It seems like there is a lot of this is YA circles — really great guys and girls and everyone has somehow ended up in the friend zone…
> And even then, it’s just a date unless there are big, giant red flags.
What do you mean by this?
>It seems like there is a lot of this is YA circles — really great guys and girls and everyone has somehow ended up in the friend zone…
Why do you think this is?
I mean that a date can just be a date most of the time, but a lot of people seem to use as a grilling session instead. Don’t want to homeschool future kids? Not the girl for me. Don’t go to daily mass? Not the guy for me. I mean these things should not rule someone out. By big giant red flags I mean things like “I’m actually ok with sex before marriage” This was actually said by a guy that a friend met AT bible study when they had dinner together. THAT is a giant red flag.
And to you second question — that answer was my post itself. I think people “discern” before they ever even ask someone on a date and decide too quickly that someone is not compatible with them.
No argument here 🙂
http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/a-look-at-online-dating-for-catholics-benefits-but-also-risks/
Although I’ve never done it, online dating makes a lot of sense to me. It’s a simple way of finding members of opposite gender who are Catholic, single and looking to date someone. I would imagine that communication would be a little bit more direct and straight-forward too.
I think there are actually two ideas going on here, and both are being called “Friends First Dating”:
1) Being romantically interested in someone and creating a “friendship” with the hope that it’ll turn into something more.
2) An actual friendship that turns into something more.
An analogy: I was once involved in a fundamentalist type Christian group. I was picked out for the “discipleship team” and we were instructed to “make friends with people who seem to need Christ in their lives in order to share evangelize them”. Contrast that with : “Share Christ with your friends.” That ended my involvement with the group because it seemed very dishonest to me to create a “friendship” that had an ulterior motive (though of course, neither dating nor evangelizing are objectively wrong).
Similarly, it’s not wrong to want to date someone. But to create the illusion of a platonic friendship does seems a little sketch.
I agree with JoeQ’s comment : communicate, be assertive and confident, and accept the outcome, whether you’re finding yourself attracted to a longtime friend or just met someone.
As for me, I’m glad my husband and I were actual friends first. Maybe it wasn’t a “zoom-bam!” swept me off my feet kind of thing (though there were, and still are, plenty of butterflies), but it feels more sure than the type of relationship that starts with infatuation. This is because, I think, I knew that he knew me pretty well, and then “like liked” me enough to do something about it. And I knew him pretty well.
As my husband puts it, everyone has a “dating personality” but when you’re friends first, you have a better chance of getting to know them when they’re not trying so hard to impress.
> Similarly, it’s not wrong to want to date someone. But to create the illusion of a platonic friendship does seems a little sketch.
What would that look like?
I think it’s not so much what would it “look” like, since it would look a lot like a “regular” friendship, but what would it “feel” like, as in, what are the feelings behind it?
I guess this goes into the realm of what some are calling “emotional chastity”. So, if you’ve just met this new girl to whom you are attracted, then go ahead and spend time with her like anyone else with whom you are creating a new friendship, but watch your heart while doing so. Are you creating this friendship with high hopes that it will turn into something more? Because chances are that you may get your heart smashed. Or are you actually trying to be her real friend, get to know her, and then go from there? This allows you better “emotional space” and also gives you more leisure to decide if the person is really someone you’d want to date.
The key is to remember that: just because you are attracted to someone doesn’t mean it’s supposed to result in a romantic relationship. You’ll be attracted to lots of people in your life. Only one actually counts. So don’t let yourself go from imaginary connection to imaginary connection, getting all wound up each time. Go for friendship, keep your “attraction emotions” reined in, and see if something develops.
To take this down the road a bit: once you’re married, it’s not as though you’ll never meet any attractive people ever again. But if you’ve already realized that, other than with your spouse, that attraction is only supposed to be the attraction of friendship, then it makes fidelity (real fidelity, of the emotional type also) just about a no-brainer.
Pingback: Catholic Dating – A Commentary — mod31
I agree with the pitfalls, and it’s your choice to still pursue as “friends first.” But you don’t exactly say what outweighs the pitfalls, other than suggesting that “friends first” is the nice think to do.
I’d include another pitfall, perhaps the biggest of all: While you’re presumptive friends, the guy DOES make a move, she says she’s not interested, but he already has an established social routine with her. He’s beyond disappointed, and then it would be fair for him to move on. But he can’t, because he’s now functionally like a male girlfriend to her, and to leave would be an embittered action. So instead of finding someone else, he’s socially tethered to her and her friends, listening to her go on about her other dating and mating options.
Hey Jeff, welcome to Restless Pilgrim and thanks for your comments.
> …you don’t exactly say what outweighs the pitfalls, other than suggesting that “friends first” is the nice think to do.
I wouldn’t use such an insipid word as “nice” 😉
The advantage of “Friends First” approach is that you get to know someone, that person’s character, personality, interests etc., prior to the big rush of hormones and emotions that come with dating. It allows you to build a solid platonic foundation, to which romance may then be added. Being able to build a relationship in that way is a big plus, in my opinion.
> I’d include another pitfall, perhaps the biggest of all…
I address this particular issue in an earlier post: Fear of Rejection.
I think you raise some interesting points here though…
If a guy is “beyond disappointed” then I would suggest that he hadn’t really being doing “Friends First”. It sounds like he’d emotionally espoused himself to this girl a long time before, rather than simply being her friend and then seeing where things went. Is this what you meant by “presumptive friends”?
Additionally, I would say that if a guy has become “functionally like a male girlfriend to her” and “socially tethered to her” then something else has also gone wrong along the way. Again, it sounds like the guy in question committed himself to this girl long before he ever asked her out.
I recently asked a friend out on a date. She turned me down. Although I had a rather bruised pride for a few days, I wouldn’t say I was “beyond disappointed”. I was discerning whether or not this would be a good direction for us and her saying “no” gave me the answer I needed! I still care for her as a friend and if she doesn’t want to date me then I have to assume she knows what she’s talking about! Instead of moping, I gave myself a pat on the back from not chickening out, and poured myself a nice frosty beer as a reward for my courageous valour 😉
Thanks, Pilgrim, for your thoughtful reply.
I’m going to try to tie this all together, so please bear with me. A couple of years ago, I briefly belonged to a young adult group, 50-50 male-female, that to put it mildly (as you put it in one of the posts) was a bit “close.”
Looking at this from a religious p.o.v., I guess if she’s the one God made for you, it doesn’t really matter how you define yourself around her. But then again, if a guy chooses not to wear deodorant for an extended period, she’ll have a harder time seeing him for his soul mate qualities, I guess. Or maybe not. But usually, it does matter how a guy presents himself and interacts.
Let’s tie a few concepts together, if I may. First, from the masculinity vantage point: In the past, men did manly things in their spare time with other men, women did feminine things with other women. Now in a practical sense (as I recall from belonging to the aforementioned group), friends first involves more of a group hang out routine, that is, with a mixture of guys and gals (perhaps interspersed with some one on one). It can easily become sort of functionally androgynous, especially because it seems like the more girly past times would take precedence, as the women are usually a bit more deferred to. Very often, as well, this type of interacting fast takes on a standard “friend zone” flavor: this would include the object of your interest pouring her heart out to you about past mistakes, heartbreaks, etc. All told, this is how a guy fast becomes like a male girlfriend. He lacks basic manliness in his interactions with her, he lacks the mystery of a potential mate (since they do stuff together all the time as part of this ‘close’ faith-based group), though in rejecting him, she usually won’t say this, and substitute it with “you’re like a brother” or “let’s not ruin our friendship.”
In that particular group I belonged to (and am still getting over), some people equated friends first to the evangelical-style Christian courtship (with courtship being the objective after being platonic, without any dating to precede it), which is supposedly Bible-based. But throughout most of history, males and females were largely segregated according to their “roles,” and to maintain purity as well, this extended to socializing. Marriages, according to various customs, were more or less arranged by older relatives. The concept of women as peers (and vice versa) is really very novel, and belongs to this age of equality. The point being, there really is little basis to being friends first on a moral or practical level.
And most people got married fairly young, until fairly recently. Now look at the chart you posted about marriage rates. I can tell you that this more than applies to some young adult Catholic groups, especially the one I know. The funny thing is, they insist on being ‘friends first’ as sort of a formality. Look at the result.
“The advantage of “Friends First” approach is that you get to know someone…prior to the big rush of hormones and emotions that come with dating. It allows you to build a solid platonic foundation, to which romance may then be added. Being able to build a relationship in that way is a big plus, in my opinion.”
Yet this seems almost unrealistically sterile. To meet someone you’re meant to fall in love with, and to maintain a mostly neutral response to being with her is difficult to say the least. Then, she rejects him (which she quite likely will in the already-established platonic setting), which will only set off deep feelings of disappointment. He should just move on, though alas, he’s still her friend, and what about mini-bowling this Friday night? See? Even when dating, it’s still putting the cart before the horse for a guy to have “emotionally espoused himself” to her. But at least the intention is made clear that “I’m single, you’re single, let’s see where this goes” without any promise of a romance or a platonic relationship coming of it.
You have no clue how much I love this comment. I’d like to add to it.
– The friendzone is very real. Women aren’t attracted to men who lack initiative. Men need to show that they can initiate and be decisive. Being decisive means you can make an informed decision quickly. This means that a man needs to ask a girl out rather quickly. That’s what is attractive to a woman. If a man holds back and waits too long he looks like an indecisive coward who’s refuses to take risks. Women don’t like that.
– Back when my grandma was a girl, there were parish dances. The guys would chat with guys and the gals would chat with gals. After a few minutes, a guy and gal locked eyes. Within seconds (quickly), the women stood a certain way and motioned him over to her with her finger. The guy approached her and asked to dance. They exchanged names, where they lived, and what they were doing afterwards. They also got to feel each other physically to make sure they didn’t have legs growing out of their backs (kidding). After they danced a few times, the gal gave the guy the phone number, the next day he called her and set up a date and a local diner. The next day, they started courting provided there were no serious problems with them. Within six months, they were engaged, within six months of they were married. That’s how it is supposed to work. Quick, decisive, and easy.
– The reason why we pretend we want to be friends first is because we don’t want to be comfortable and we don’t trust others that easily. We live in a culture of death. We put up more defenses and we don’t like to let people in. So we want to get to know everything about that person before we take the risk start and dating them. Hmm… that kind of sounds like cohabitation. You want to get to know everything about them before you get engaged/married. That’s a recipe for disaster and no one is going to get married if this is how we do it.
– You talk about the “big rush of hormones” like it’s a bad thing. Those hormones are the signal to propel the guy to pursue the girl. That’s how God designed men. I’ve heard people say something like “wait until your attraction fades off”. That sounds extremely Puritan and not Catholic. Our hormones and sexual desire are a good thing. God gave it to us as a gift. That drive provides us a guideline as when to go in for initiation. We are supposed to learn how to control our desire and having us wait until it’s gone? That might take a while. We’re young males. If you think we’re going to be able to be chaste in this pornographic culture until we’re 30; you’re wrong. It’s ludicrous and dangerous to promote this idea. Our hormones crank at 13. Few will make it to 30 without giving in. I guarantee that. Encouraging men to “wait until we’re friends” to ask her out is a recipe for disaster. We need to get married much younger than the average age.
I truly do not believe men and women are supposed to be friends first before dating. You need to be friendly and prove that you’re not a homicidal maniac and that’s it. There does need to be excitement and attraction when you date. You should be best friends by the time you say your vows, I agree. Friendship takes a while to build; it could take months. I don’t believe for a second that women desire for men to wait months before the men ask them out. The desire and excitement has been sterilized and they won’t be attracted to them anymore and they’ll say “let’s be friends”.