much smarter then me needed!

[stellinacadente]

Can someone please explain to me how can you tell  the difference between a friends with benefits situation and a romantic involvement is???

I mean... you read things like : "I want a friends with benefits situation, to hang out, go out to dinner and activity partner"...

that sounds like a relationship to me...

what you siblings think?? )

[pieces o nine]

I think friends with benefits  implies no feelings of exclusivity, possessiveness or jealousy in either party; a relationship implies exclusivity and the knowledge that the partner can be be hurt by infidelity or decisions made without regard to the other's needs, hopes or feelings.

[Griffin NoName]

Never heard the phrase so haven't a clue.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I think "friends with benefits"  is a euphemism for:

"let's just sleep together to relieve our respective sex drives, and hang out now and again, but not take it beyond that superficial level into something resembling an actual emotional commitment". 

I see these as situations when one or the other party either has commitment issues, or is avoiding commitment.

In some cases, one or the other participant does not consider the other person "marriageable material", but would rather have that (settle) than nothing at all or being alone.

But that's just my 2 and a half cents worth... but it's not as valuable as even that. 

What I find amusing, is that among the older crowd, you often saw this sort of thing, but the case was usually called "an arrangement", and neither party was really all that interested in remarrying.

As I grow older, I see the attraction....

[Opsa]

A romantic involvement involves love, and "friends with benefits" does not.

[Swatopluk]

One is also called mutual masturbation service
Romantic relationships can be totally unphysical (apart from what happens in the brain(s) of course).

[stellinacadente]

Thank you for all your valid and to the point answers.

My question though was to clarify what NSA or friends with benefits actually is....but it was more to understand where does the line stand.

I admit that I have been in a few of these "arrangements" (Bob I love the new term ) and it always ended up that the other party violated the rules of engagement by jealousy or declaring feelings...

now it might just be my darn stupid luck or maybe there is no really such thing as NSA or friends with benefits and, if there is, it has an expiration date??

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I suspect, such things are nearly always one-sided, as is all too often the case with human affairs.

For if it were not so?  Would not the situation blossom into an actual ..... relationship?

So, yeah, I'd agree these things will end sooner or later, and I'd also wager, they will end with one or both parties getting emotionally mangled.

[Opsa]

Yes, much as we try to separate our minds from our bodies, the two tend to get pretty tangled up, sometimes.

[stellinacadente]

Glad someone agrees with me... was starting to think completely coocoo

[Darlica]

I don't think there is an explanation that fits everybody.

I'll say you can do other things too with a "friend with benefits", explore other common interests, work out, go to the movies or whatever. You might even be exclusive (well at least honest  ) but the romantic love isn't there, this is not "let's buy a house and raise kids sort of relationship". It's more like a mutual scratching of itches, instead on chasing onenighters you stick with the same partner.

I don't think there is an expiration date on a relationship like that, not more than on any other kind of relationship anyway... Not as long all involved knows and agrees about the rules of the game anyway.

That's my 2 cents.