I read this message, but all this "truly platonic" and "platonic" is just semantics at this point. Merriam Webster defines platonic as "of, relating to, or being a relationship marked by the absence of romance or sex." If you're doing neither of the above, it's platonic. It really does not matter if one friend secretly pines for the other. If both don't agree to consensually act on it, the relationship is platonic. Period. I've proven that a solid five times with five different men I befriended for long periods of time (as in decades). I never acted on it nor did I have any desire to. If I put you in the friend zone, you stay there forever. It is what it is.

The ONLY exception to this rule for me is meeting someone who I INITIALLY was sexually/romantically attracted to: I would never try to befriend that person. It's a waste of my time and will just make me resentful anytime he talks about dating/relationships. I don't even understand why people will put themselves through that Hell. I'd rather dip out and distance myself from that person. It is entirely too easy to make one wrong move or misstep, and both of you are in compromising situations. I'd rather miss out on a friendship altogether than to be platonic friends with someone I'm into.

Check out her 4 Medium pubs: BlackTechLogy, I Do See Color, Tickled and We Need to Talk. (Doggone World and Homegrown are now on Substack.) Visit Shamontiel.com

Check out her 4 Medium pubs: BlackTechLogy, I Do See Color, Tickled and We Need to Talk. (Doggone World and Homegrown are now on Substack.) Visit Shamontiel.com