Girl meets Boy. Girl thinks Boy is awesome because Boy listens to Belle and Sebastian (just like she does!) and wears those thick-rimmed poetic glasses (“but omg, I swear he’s not emo”). Boy thinks Girl totally rocks because she’s got that earring-in-the-middle-of-the-ear thing going on. Boy and Girl hang out, rent a film-noir teenage angst movie from Video Vault, play Frisbee on the Green, talk about how annoying their exes are until the questions that have been raging under the surface since the moment they saw each other from across a crowded Houston Market simply can no longer be avoided: Where is this going? Are we going to stay friends? Will we be more? Does he like me? Does she want me? Do I want him? Do I like her? Can we hook up? Can we hook up? And for God’s sake, what happened to the pasta station?

Platonic friendships. We all have that one guy we know nothing will ever happen with. We also all have that one guy nothing was ever supposed to have happened with. We all have that one guy who wants something to happen but it never will, or who doesn’t want something to happen but it will anyway, because, let’s face it, he gets horny when he’s drunk. He’s sweet, he’s generous, he’s the best friend anyone could ever ask for. But he’s that guy…not that guy, even though often we somehow end up being that girl to him. Why is that? What is this crazy thing called chemistry that doesn’t always seem to correlate with the actual “right” person, and rather frequently attaches itself to the absolute worst man on the planet for you? Age-old questions, with age-old heartache attached to them. Luckily for us here at Penn, we’ve got dedicated Psychology majors on the case.

Perspectives in Psychology is an annual journal that Penn undergraduate students created in 1998 as a medium for sharing their ideas and views on psychological issues through their own published research findings. I recently thumbed through the pages of the 2006 issue, and one study caught my eye: “Can Men and Women Be ‘Just Friends’?: A Survey Study of Cross-Gender Friendship” by K. Sichel. First off, I’d like to thank Mr. Sichel for taking the time to make one of my favorite movies ever, When Harry Met Sally, into a legitimate scientifically-based discourse. In fact, before I discuss Sichel’s findings, I’d like to take a moment to recall a classic and highly pertinent moment in the film:

Harry Burns: You realize of course that we could never be friends.
Sally Albright: Why not?
Harry Burns: What I'm saying is - and this is not a come-on in any way, shape or form - is that men and women can't be friends because the sex part always gets in the way.
Sally Albright: That's not true. I have a number of men friends and there is no sex involved.
…
Harry Burns: You only think you do.
Sally Albright: You say I'm having sex with these men without my knowledge?
Harry Burns: No, what I'm saying is they all WANT to have sex with you.
…
Sally Albright: How do you know?
Harry Burns: Because no man can be friends with a woman that he finds attractive. He always wants to have sex with her.
Sally Albright: So, you're saying that a man can be friends with a woman he finds unattractive?
Harry Burns: No. You pretty much want to nail 'em, too.
Sally Albright: What if THEY don't want to have sex with YOU?
Harry Burns: Doesn't matter, because the sex thing is already out there, so the friendship is ultimately doomed, and that is the end of the story.

**SPOILER ALERT**

Harry and Sally become best friends, and they ultimately get married. Why? Because, say it with me, platonic relationships do not exist. But don’t just take my and Harry’s word for it. It’s science.

According to “social psychologists,” as cited by Sichel, truly platonic relationships are not “evolutionarily advantageous” strategies. They “imply little chance for benefits, such as sexual access or resources.” Well we all know that’s not true. “Friends with benefits” is a phrase ubiquitous in the vocabulary of students today. And for any parents reading, “benefits” does not refer to getting help on a term paper. The point is that, the psychologists were referring to “truly” platonic relationships, i.e. no sex at all, which would clearly be highly disadvantageous to evolution. So the question becomes whether or not such friendships actually exist between men and women.

In this study, 131 Penn undergrads (82 females and 49 males) volunteered to take a survey on their opposite sex friends (“OSFs”) and their sexual and physical attraction/activity/discussion/involvement or lack thereof with them. What most interested the researchers were the gender-based differences that emerged on both attitudes and actions. The hypothesis was that men would not believe in platonic relationships. This is based on the evolutionary principle that men seek multiple sexual partners so as to spread their seed while women seek safety and companionship in order to protect their fragile damsel-selves. Therefore, men would automatically consider any blooming friendship a potential sexual prospect, while women would think of their male friends as objects of comfort and safety. So, Sichel and his team set out to ask us all whether we had a friend whom we truly did not want to bang. And the resounding response? Absofuckinglutely not.

Before I reveal the breakdown of the results, I need to talk about my friend Steve, whose name isn’t really Steve. Steve’s one of those “that guy”s – smart, funny, sweet, kind, but definitely not that guy for me. He and I have been friends for a few years now, and not once have I ever felt a single iota of sexual attraction for him. I know what you’re thinking, and no, neither has he. I still know what you’re thinking, and no, I’m not being naïve, he really, really has not. I know him, and I know the way he is when he likes a girl, and I know the way I am when I’m in denial of a guy liking me, which I am not in this instance. While several, if not all, of my other guy friends would probably agree to a casual sexual exploit if so propositioned, Steve would not. So, basically, I don’t believe in platonic relationships, except with Steve. Which means I do believe in them. And now, having read this study, I find my own beliefs even more confusing. Read on.

 “Males were more physically, sexually, and romantically attracted to their close OSFs than were females…[and] were more likely to report that they had maintained OSFs in hopes of engaging in sexual activity.” This statement fits with the original hypothesis. Man must go forth and multiply, after all. “On the other hand, females may actually have no sexual motivation when entering into OSFs.” After all, we need protection from the big bad West Philly Shooter(s).

Now comes the crazy part: “Females did not believe that males and females could have truly platonic relationships, whereas males did.” According to earlier parts of the study, males are in the friendship for the sex, eventually. Females are in the friendship for safety or comfort. Yet,, females don’t believe in platonic relationships, while males do. What’s going on here?

Why would men believe in sexless friendships if they’re in them for sex? Why wouldn’t females believe in them if they’re not? The study doesn’t really answer this question, other than by proposing a possible gender disconnect for definitions of “platonic”: “Perhaps males believe platonic friendships are ultimately one-sided affairs in which males are attracted to females who are not necessarily attracted to them…it must be the case, then, that females are aware that most males probably have sexual feelings for their OSFs, and that this knowledge, regardless of the females’ own feelings, makes true platonic friendships with males seem unlikely.” Those bitches.

I propose a different reason for this coital conundrum: women lie. It’s just that simple. We do. Usually, we lack awareness of our own lies, but an unconscious lie is still a lie, and is still easily detectable through roundabout questioning. This self-reported survey is a perfect example of such a cleverly uncovered ruse. All the girls who said they never, ever were attracted to their male friends are liars, plain and simple. Everyone is attracted to everyone, including several people they shouldn’t be – friends, exes, professors, family members, evil rulers of empires, you name it. And in the interest of journalistic integrity, I’ll even say this: within the past several minutes, I’ve wondered what it would be like to hook up with Steve. See? Even I lied. And you may not believe it, but I didn’t do it intentionally. Four paragraphs ago, my only thought was that I have never thought that way about Steve. But here I am, a page later, wondering. It’s inescapable. So there’s your answer. The females who said their friendships had no possibility of sex were subconsciously lying, as well as thinking about all their girl-friends whose so-called platonic friendships turned into relationships, which is why they then responded that they don’t believe in platonic relationships. And as for the men, well, that’s the sadder side of the story. They admit to being in it for the possible sex, because it’s more socially acceptable for them to be open about that, and then they say they believe in platonic friendships because they don’t want to admit to themselves that the reason their best friend Sally hasn’t slept with them is actually that she doesn’t want them, and not because they have acquired the perfect co-ed co-existence. If they were to say there’s no such thing, then they’d have to come to terms with the fact that they are the reason she’s not jumping their bones, rather than some grand ideology. Everything points to men getting the shorter end of the sexual stick here. Harry talks about how no man can be friends with a woman he finds attractive, not the other way around. And Sichel’s findings clearly reveal that it’s almost always the man in the friendship who wants more, and the woman who has to say no.

The platonic realm is the realm of ideas, of perfections, of utopian images that can never possibly come to fruition in reality because reality is imperfect. Harry knew it, K. Sichel knows it, and every single one of you knows it deep down as well. The question is: does Steve know it? I’ll keep you posted.

Sources:

Sickel, K. (2006). Can Men and Women Be ‘Just Friends’? A Survey Study of Cross-Gender Friendship. Perspectives in Psychology, 9, 19-26.

www.imdb.com