FWB and Personal Preferences

polytheparrot

polytheparrot

Member
For those who don't know the acronym FWB its Friends With Benefits

From what I know looking into poly relationships, this relationship type is very tailored to different personal preferences. Probably it applies the same with other types (romantic, platonic, work-related, etc.), but definitely it's super detailed/specific with the poly set up.

For me, I try to keep things as simple as possible. I'm not the type to ramble on unless when asked for a more detailed explanation. I don't look into the poly terminologies as much, but I apply the one that works for me dating separately and having a FWB set up.

That's what I'm getting at. What I consider a FWB is more than just friends having sex. For me it can also mean a friend with these benefits: abundant resources, higher knowledge, vast connections, etc.

As for personal preferences, I'm going to say this straight. If I'm dating someone, I need to be physically attracted to that person. That's the cake as a whole. The cake layers, frosting, flavor, and decorations sum up the personality, hobbies, common interests, and common outlooks. Having those things give that cake substance. So I don't understand why being honest about this gets criticized (at worst berated)... (even worse, physical attraction is mentioned with lingerie/magazine models, film/porn actresses, or sex dolls/workers)

So am I accurate with I mentioned? Let me know what I missed.
 
You missed the history of the term FWB. Sure, you can expand it to include other benefits if you like, but most people who are millennial or older will take it as code for friends who have sex.

As for being attracted to people you have sex with...that's normal and of course you can state a general "I'm only going to have sex with people I'm attracted to, and I'm looking for multifaceted attraction."

If you start to say, "I'm only physically attracted to the physique of underwear models (etc.)," then yes you'll get criticism - from those who can be bothered doing so, the rest will just avoid you. It's not clear from your post if this physical requirement is a part of *your* 'cake' or if people are assuming you are looking for a model physique when you try to talk about attraction. Perhaps communication is the bigger hurdle?
 
Evie said:
You missed the history of the term FWB. Sure, you can expand it to include other benefits if you like, but most people who are millennial or older will take it as code for friends who have sex.

As for being attracted to people you have sex with...that's normal and of course you can state a general "I'm only going to have sex with people I'm attracted to, and I'm looking for multifaceted attraction."

If you start to say, "I'm only physically attracted to the physique of underwear models (etc.)," then yes you'll get criticism - from those who can be bothered doing so, the rest will just avoid you. It's not clear from your post if this physical requirement is a part of *your* 'cake' or if people are assuming you are looking for a model physique when you try to talk about attraction. Perhaps communication is the bigger hurdle?
Click to expand...
Yeah I do have physical preferences I find attractive:
- thin, slender, average, or toned
- youthful facial features
- height below or max 5'10"

(I mentioned that and some equate those physical preferences to the ones who tend to have them: models, actresses, sex dolls/workers)

Does the female need to meet all three? Yes, that's ideal for me. But after those requirements are checked off the other things come into play like personality, hobbies, common interests, and common outlooks. Personality and common outlooks I think are the biggest factors since I don't like dealing with egotistical, narcissistic individuals.

I know for the most part that FWB is seen as a sexual friendship. If that's what most want to see it as, it's their view of the term. For me it can be more than that. 🙂
 
Personally, my preferences are eyes I want to get lost in, a smell that I can't actually consciously smell but is just perfect when you get that close* and if the stars align, someone who can also put me where they want me (martial arts training goes a long way lol). But most importantly, it's the energy of the person on an almost spiritual level. I have been drawn to people who I wouldn't call physically attractive because of that je ne sais quoi. Jimmy Carr would attest that it's competence. I think it's more that being energetically attractive is so much more... more... than being physically attractive. Sometimes, it's that they make me laugh. Without fail, they give me butterflies. Whatever you call it, they're the ones I want to get to know more. To flirt with. To have sex with. To share deep conversations with. Usually in that order.

*proven that this is a sign of compatibility for procreation, even though I don't do that.
 
The *benefit* in FWB referred to sexual relationship, precisely, when it was coined.

You can expand its definition, but it may cause confusion when you talk to others, so remember to clarify your idea about it. :)

It's totally OK to date ONLY people whom you are "physically" attracted to. Maybe you are so busy that you want to make better use of your time. Maybe you just have too many options. (Lucky you.) Or you do it for other reasons. Or maybe there is no need for any reason because it's a basic right. No one can force you to date them.

It's also OK for others to speak of their critics, because there have been so many people who sexualize and objectify real humans under this excuse. It's understandable that people doubt if you can't see the human in your girlfriends.

I think the key is to be nice to everyone, even if you feel no physical attraction, if the critiques are from them. And be easy when others disapprove. People don't always understand other people.

But if you see the parameters more than the human in your gfs, maybe it's not the best way to build relationships with others.
 
Jeambo said:
I think the key is to be nice to everyone even if you feel no physical attraction, if the critiques are from them. And be easy when others disapprove. People don't always understand other people.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I make sure that I treat others kindly, whether there's physical attraction or not. There are a few female friends that I find attractive, but the platonic setup is fine by me, as they are either fine single, or they're already in a mono relationship. Each person has their own criteria of what they look for in a partner and relationship.

I think the meaningful relationships start out from friendship, but that's just me.
 
I'm just not getting your question(s) from your initial post [scratching head], if there are any. Um. Could you clarify?
 
Don't get it either.

I think OP distinguishes between a friendship and a FWB/relationship based on physical attributes rather than on core values, fundamentals and interests. It's no problem to say that how someone looks is important to you and you have a preference when you take it to another level.

Am I close?
 
LaminarFlow said:
Don't get it either.

I think OP distinguishes between a friendship and a FWB/relationship based on physical attributes rather than on core values, fundamentals and interests. It's no problem to say that how someone looks is important to you and you have a preference when you take it to another level.

Am I close?
Click to expand...
That's my take on OP FWB, which I would agree with it myself-- there are more potential benefits to FWB than sex. Although, as others have noted, be careful to not confuse people who may reasonably believe it just means sex.

Re: the attraction question, I also agree with what I believe PolytheParrot is saying, which I take as 'It is okay to have a type,' even if that 'type' is something which carries some social weight one way or another. To me, this is no different than a kink or other 'thing' that we probably all have regarding attraction.

OP's 'type' is:
- thin, slender, average, or toned
- youthful facial features
- height below or max 5'10"
Click to expand...

As PolytheParrot (PtP) says too, the issue with this is that it happens to fall in line with a 'type' that has been exploited (my words). If PtP's 'type' was not as aligned with social norms, then I figure no one would have an issue.

From my perspective, I would add: however, it is what it is, and some sensitivity and skepticism is reasonable to expect from others. For the record, my 'type' is similar to PtP (minus the youthful face), and like PtP, I feel a built-in sensitivity to it for the reasons mentioned. OTH, why is that my 'type?' OTH, I know that the physical attributes of my 'type' are easily forgotten when other attributes attract me. PP mentions this:

But after those requirements are checked off, the other things come into play, like personality, hobbies, common interests, and common outlooks. Personality and common outlooks are the biggest factors, since I don't like dealing with egotistical, narcissistic individuals.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if the physical 'type' must come first for PtP.

Back to my perspective: I have met people that do not fit my 'type,' but found them very attractive. I have found people attractive, where I did not know their physical attributes, but then lost attraction when I found out their physique. Others I am attracted to, and they are nothing, physically or otherwise, that I would normally think was my 'type.' These examples go on and on, so I hope this means that even though I have a 'type,' which probably does have some basis in social pressures and archetypes, I try to be aware of all this. I try to not let it stifle what I feel, whether that be for my usual 'type,' or a more visceral draw that someone may present to me.

@polytheparrot - I didn't really mean to write this all so third-person about you, and a lot of it is actually follow-up and questions for you. I appreciate the opportunity to have this conversation.
 
@Tinwen Pretty much, @LaminarFlow got what I've observed. In regards to FWB, most see it as a sexual friendship. I think the term can go beyond just sexual. It's like how others have their own take on polyamory, and the general consensus know that you're having more than one relationship with other people.

So that's how personal preferences tie in. My poly set up is likely different from the next person, and the people who I choose to be with have certain traits I like.

Overall, FWB seen as sexual friendship and poly seen as having multiple partners are true in its usual definition, but for me I think those terms can be expanded further.
 
KND said:
That's my take on OP FWB, which I would agree with it myself-- there are more potential benefits to FWB than sex. Although, as others have noted, - be careful to not confuse people who may reasonably believe it just means sex.

Re: the attraction question, I also agree with what I believe PolytheParrot is saying, which I take as 'it is ok to have a type' even if that 'type' is something which carries some social weight one way or another. To me this is no different than a kink or other 'thing' that we probably all have regarding attraction.

OP's 'type' is:


As PolytheParrot (PtP) says too, the issue with this is that it happens to fall in line with a 'type' that has been exploited (my words). If PtP's 'type' was not as aligned with social norms, then, I figure no one would have an issue.

From my perspective, I would add: however, it is what it is and some sensitivity and skepticism is reasonable to expect from others. For the record, my 'type' is similar to PtP (minus the youthful face), and like PtP, I feel a built-in sensitivity to it for the reasons mentioned. OTH, why is that my 'type?' OTH, I know that the physical attributes of my 'type' are easily forgotten when other attributes attract me. PP mentions this:

I'm not sure if the physical 'type' must come first for PtP. Back to my perspective: I have met people that do not fit my 'type' but found them very attractive. I have found people attractive, where I did not know their physical attributes, but then lost attraction when I found out their physique. Others I am attracted to and they are nothing physical or otherwise that I would normally think was my 'type.' These examples go on and on, so, I hope this means that even though I have a 'type' which probably does have some basis in social pressures and archetypes, I try to be aware of all this; try to not let it stifle what I feel whether that be for my usual 'type' or a more visceral draw that someone may present to me.

@polytheparrot - I didn't really mean to write this all so third-person about you, and a lot of it is actually follow-up and questions for you. I appreciate the opportunity to have this conversation.
Click to expand...

Isn't it kind of self-evident that everyone has a type? Some value physical over mental, some mental over physical, some need it more emotional or spiritual. It doesn't matter what kind of structure you have, mono, poly, kink, BDSM, FWB, ENM, etc., or whatever is out there. You like what you like. It's no big deal.
 
LaminarFlow said:
Isn't it kind of self-evident that everyone has a type? Some value physical over mental, some mental over physical, some need it more emotional or spiritual. It doesn't matter what kind of structure you have, mono, poly, kink, BDSM, FWB, ENM, etc., or whatever that is out there. You like what you like. It's no big deal.
Click to expand...
Yes, ou summed my thoughts nicely, with the exception that while non-conforming types are well accepted in non-conforming communities, more conforming types can be met with suspicion, and sometimes even disdain.
 
KND said:
Yes, and you summed my thoughts nicely with the exception that while non-conforming types are well accepted in non-conforming communities, more conforming types can be met with suspicion, and sometimes even disdain.
Click to expand...
I don't really understand how looks have anything to do with conforming types, unless you work in film and media.
 
Hi polytheparrot,

I would not be opposed to a FWB in principle, but I am more partial to something deeper, plus I don't think Snowbunny would want me to have a FWB. This is all okay by me, I'm not particularly looking for new partners anyway.

Regards,
Kevin T.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top