The Friend Zone: A possible evolutionary perspective.
I was discussing recently about the idea of the 'friend-zone', and whether it actually exists or not.
To get to the point, while I suggested that most cases of being 'friend-zoned' are simply a euphemism for lack of attractiveness/interest (which the male recipient doesn't recognise and instead takes literally, leading to much confusion), it did get me thinking over whether friendship could actually be a barrier to romance, and if so, could it affect one gender more than the other?
Obviously in the real world the matter is far more complicated because by the time friendship develops between two parties there's the initial impressions which are then further modified. For the purposes of this discussion however, I'm ignoring all that and focusing exclusively on the idea of friendship being a possible barrier. I'm also considering this mostly from an evolutionary perspective in the ancestral environment, even if such instincts do not correspond to the realities of a modern society.
So let's start with friendship: is it a potential barrier to romance? I would suggest that yes, it is something to consider, especially if one actually highly values a particular friendship and pursuing a romance could place that friendship at risk if it doesn't work out. I'd also suggest that if this were true, you'd expect stronger friendships to pose a bigger barrier, though it's also possible that the increased interpersonal bond strength and knowledge of the other party could significantly help predict compatibility, countering this.
A brief interlude on reproduction and evolution. Recent culture notwithstanding (i.e. the ability of a woman to force costly child support on a man), reproduction has always been much riskier for women than for men. If you pick a bad partner, that's a lot of resources you've got to spend, not to mention the dangers of complications from childbirth. For men, a bad choice costs him very little other than a bit of his time as he can walk away.
Because reproduction costs differ between the genders, this also has a significant impact on rejection. A woman rejecting a man is essentially stating "you're not worth a huge amount of time and effort on my part raising a child". A man rejecting a women is stating "you're not worth a small amount of my time". Thus the latter is far more devastating for a woman as a social signal to others, than a woman rejecting a man.
So let's assume for the sake of argument that friendship is indeed a barrier. Would it affect one gender more than the other, and if so, what reason might this be?
If two parties are friends, then it doesn't seem much of a stretch to assume that within our ancient environment of small tribes that they'd be very likely to be directly involved in the same social circle (though admittedly the tribal one is also one in of itself).
If Alice and Bob, two friends, are involved then being rejected becomes more costly since the ability to control the information and/or give a preferred spin on it within that circle is eliminated. Because of this, that Bob rejecting Alice would quickly pass around the circle, and because Bob rejecting Alice is inherently more costly to Alice, it would do much greater harm to her perceived attractiveness and status -- even if only unconsciously -- than the inverse.
Thus if two friends date, the costs of rejection to the woman significantly increase even more over that of a man, and so a woman would be less likely to date a friend. Other factors notwithstanding.
Admittedly this is also making a bunch of assumptions about the nature of relationships in the human ancestral environment. And as I said, the real truth of the matter is doubtless complicated by many additional factors.
Hypothesis: Friendship is a potential barrier to a romantic relationship (the "friend-zone"), and women are less likely to date a friend than it than a man due to the differing costs of reproduction and the different penalties rejection imposes upon social status.
Any thoughts anyone has to offer would be appreciated.