Should you remain friends with someone you're in love with, but can't have?

He was just trying to ensure a clean urine sample for when that tester finally got around to collecting his sample. Nothing suspicious going on...

morans wrote:

Women are interested in money and the D. Otherwise, social positioning. You should not view women on any higher level than this.

If you only knew how sad sacky an attitude like this makes you look.

You attract what you put out there. If you don’t respect women in general, you’ll end up with women not worth respecting.

TheNoBeardRunner wrote:

Hooray for LetsINCEL wrote:

Aren't runners supposed to have hot body builds that attract ladies like flies?

Probably the opposite.

Runners have little bodies with small muscles. Further, to be a good runner, one must spend the majority of their time running, which limits the amount of time to focus on building social skills. Further further, runners are so tired and fatigued when they aren't running that they take naps, sleep 9-10 hours a night, and think about their diets with the same fervor as rich white women who have been forgotten by their husbands.

Yes but with 2/3 of all Americans classified as overweight, runners should have far better chances with the ladies than your average obese beer-swilling Netflix-addicted couch potato that is Mr. American Average Joe.

Any normal chick would much rather date a lean, fit college XC runner than a pot-bellied sedentary dad bod dude.

2 words: mick jagger

Everyone knows who you are and it is embarrassing. Stop it now while you still have a shred of dignity.

Get on with your life and let her get on with hers without you.

Shjsjs wrote:

2 words: mick jagger

And what about him? I assume you mean that he's a skinny guy with a runner's body who's good with women.

Hsjsgsjsj wrote:

Dude I saw kejelcha at the hotel after his WR

He had like 12 girls lined up outside his hotel room taking them 2 at a time

Said he was too tired for more

Not sure if this is a troll post.

But successful runners in Kenya get all the chicks.

Samuel Wanjiru had so many that his wife got furious and pushed him off the balcony. He died a womanizer's death.

Hooray for LetsINCEL wrote:

TheNoBeardRunner wrote:

Probably the opposite.

Runners have little bodies with small muscles. Further, to be a good runner, one must spend the majority of their time running, which limits the amount of time to focus on building social skills. Further further, runners are so tired and fatigued when they aren't running that they take naps, sleep 9-10 hours a night, and think about their diets with the same fervor as rich white women who have been forgotten by their husbands.

Yes but with 2/3 of all Americans classified as overweight, runners should have far better chances with the ladies than your average obese beer-swilling Netflix-addicted couch potato that is Mr. American Average Joe.

Any normal chick would much rather date a lean, fit college XC runner than a pot-bellied sedentary dad bod dude.

Correct. especially by early 30s. i got zero hot girls on the dating apps in my 20s and then suddenly by about age 32 i could get hot dates Fri/Sat/Sun nights. it becomes a numbers game after awhile, and when women realize they need a man who looks decent and makes six figures and there aren't that many of them, it's easy for the nerds to clean up. by the early 30s, most former jocks look horrible. many formerly hot women are whales as well

ewkjnfew wrote:

Hooray for LetsINCEL wrote:

Yes but with 2/3 of all Americans classified as overweight, runners should have far better chances with the ladies than your average obese beer-swilling Netflix-addicted couch potato that is Mr. American Average Joe.

Any normal chick would much rather date a lean, fit college XC runner than a pot-bellied sedentary dad bod dude.

Correct. especially by early 30s. i got zero hot girls on the dating apps in my 20s and then suddenly by about age 32 i could get hot dates Fri/Sat/Sun nights. it becomes a numbers game after awhile, and when women realize they need a man who looks decent and makes six figures and there aren't that many of them, it's easy for the nerds to clean up. by the early 30s, most former jocks look horrible. many formerly hot women are whales as well

This is why the other posters are right. Work on your Boston Qualifier time and the chicks will follow!

Suppose you are a single chick. Two of the following guys, both single men in their 20s, are hitting on you. Who would you pick? Easy no-brainer.

#1

#2

me in the 2nd photo

For married people who intend to stay faithful, this is an interesting question - what to do about all the crushes you get as you go through married life. Try to push the subjects of crushes away? Or embrace it, since it's all in your head and won't go anywhere anyway.

so I don't sit like a rock wrote:

For married people who intend to stay faithful, this is an interesting question - what to do about all the crushes you get as you go through married life. Try to push the subjects of crushes away? Or embrace it, since it's all in your head and won't go anywhere anyway.

Push them away for sure.

I think if you're "in love" with someone you can't have, you're just infatuated, which happens more easily when you're young. Real love only develops in a mutual relationship. It requires accommodation. It's usually a lot less exciting than crushes, but so much better. Once you have it, it's not so hard to remind yourself that crushes aren't the real thing. The problem married people have is when they engage their crushes and it starts to actually become mutual. Keeping someone at arm's length ensures you stay out of trouble. Depending on your relationship, you might even be able to broach the fact of your crushes. If you both have the right perspective, it can even be funny and bring you closer together. It can also give you insight into things that you might be able to do to keep things exciting for each other.

I can't see any world in which a spouse wants to hear about his or her spouse's crushes. I'd be wrecked if my wife said anything like that to me.

I think love is a spectrum...it's not one thing. I think a married person can have a long unrequited love for someone outside his or her marriage and it wouldn't necessarily be bad. People are meant to love....it's one of the things we do instinctively and crave it. Pushing platonic love out of your life out of fear might be right for some...but very wrong for others. It could end prematurely one of the great connections of a life. Just out of fear.

How it it any different from denying yourself anything that you want but can't/shouldn't have?

A car you can't afford.

A vacation you don't have time for.

A seventh beer that will compromise tomorrow's workout.

A person who isn't hot for you.

Going to work on the first really good beach day of the season.

Etc.

So maybe you stop looking at cars or stop looking out the window or dump all your beer down the drain, but usually you just get your head around it and continue on, no? So stay friends, but eliminate any thought from your mind about stealing that car or "hittin' that beach."

sadsack alert wrote:

morans wrote:

Women are interested in money and the D. Otherwise, social positioning. You should not view women on any higher level than this.

If you only knew how sad sacky an attitude like this makes you look.

You attract what you put out there. If you don’t respect women in general, you’ll end up with women not worth respecting.

Maybe. I think you ought to think about the dynamics of marriage, long-term, to see how 'love' does not remain a constant motivating force after the honeymoon period.

Do neither. Be cordial on all occasions but do no favors for this person. Be a man, transcend worrying about your status with this person.

morans wrote:

sadsack alert wrote:

If you only knew how sad sacky an attitude like this makes you look.

You attract what you put out there. If you don’t respect women in general, you’ll end up with women not worth respecting.

Maybe. I think you ought to think about the dynamics of marriage, long-term, to see how 'love' does not remain a constant motivating force after the honeymoon period.

I’m speaking from the perspective of a 20-year marriage. Sounds like maybe you are too only it went sour? Of course “love” staying constant is a fantasy. But if you genuinely like and respect each other, then you’ve got something to build on.

Look at women as inferior gold diggers, and you’ll find yourself someone that fits the description.

self-flagellation wrote:

Should you remain in love with someone you're friends with, but can't have?

No, you should not. However, most likely you are not in love with them in the first place, just infatuated/attracted. Also, that feeling will pass, so it's ok to be friends.

Most would just take a hard pass on both of them.