Dear Eric: I have a long-time friend (with benefits) from the past who is still in my life, though platonic. He lives a very comfortable life without the monetary struggles I deal with day to day.
He would like for me to move in with him and he offers a better financial situation than what I am dealing with.
However, it comes with the price of services, which I no longer desire to fulfill. I don’t want to commit to that, but I still care for him deeply. Is there another solution that would make both of us happy together?
– Benefits Negotiator
Dear Negotiator: This friendship is not a game of Plinko, and the price is not right.
He may think that his solution is innocuous, even ingenious, but your survival shouldn’t be dependent on sex, especially sex you don’t want to have anymore.
Living together is going to be complicated because he’s made part of your relationship transactional. Even if you say you’re going to keep it platonic, will he honor that or will he push that boundary?
Ask yourself whether this friendship is right for you. If you’re struggling financially, shouldn’t he help you without asking for something in return? For now, I think you’d best maintain separate houses and separate benefits plans.
Dear Eric: I’m a straight woman and good friends with a gay male. Lately, I’ve wondered if we could be more than friends.
He has not been in any relationship or dated anyone since we met three years ago.
I’m willing to ask if he’d consider it but not at the cost of the friendship. What should/could I say to him to gauge the possibility?
– Curious Companion
Dear Companion: My memory is a little hazy, but it seems like Jennifer Aniston starred in a movie about this exact scenario at least twice in the early-2000s. It never really worked out.
Now, we live in the future and sexual orientation is a spectrum, but I have a lot of questions.
Are you attracted to him?
Is he attracted to you?
I could go on with more granular questions about your friendship (and the movie career of Jennifer Aniston), but those are the baselines.
You two are, presumably, very close. Interrogate your feelings. Is it platonic love or something deeper? If it’s the latter, then being honest about your feelings, respectfully, isn’t going to damage the relationship.
Say, “I think there’s a deeper connection between us and I’m curious about it. Do you agree? Do you feel the same way? Are you willing to explore that?”
Then accept whatever answer he gives you, even if it’s “I’m very gay but I like you as a friend.”
Dear Eric: My brother and my sister-in-law called me to tell me that their granddaughter wants to come to a university in my city. They told her she would have to depend on me for a place to stay and financial help.
The issue is I rarely talk to my brother, by his choice, and I have never met his granddaughter. I do not even know her name!
Further, it appears he has told his wife that he helped pay for me to go to college. That is a boldface lie!
When I said no to their request, they got angry. Since I rarely talk to them anyway, I really don’t care what they think. However, they are trying to lobby the family that I should be willing to help “family”. I have no intention of changing my mind.
How should I handle queries about my decision when other family members call with questions?
– Neither a Borrower Nor a Lender
Dear Lender: People love to spend other people’s money, don’t they? Must be nice!
When family calls to lobby you, ask them how much they’re contributing to the family fund to help this granddaughter. If the answer is “nothing”, then that’s exactly how much they can tell you about this matter.
Dear Eric: Your response to No More Age Talk (July 9) was good, however, there is a better way to document age-related workplace discrimination: on a nonwork-computer (because employers act as host to company LANS and can access the information).
The documentation should be prepared each evening when the employee gets home, entering the date and, if possible, time of the comment/conversation. The employee should also note who was present, what they were talking about, what they were wearing and any personal details (vacations, family circumstances) that were discussed.
There is solid social science about the attribution of credibility increasing with details. The recorder should never exaggerate accuracy, because a jury is instructed that if a witness is proven to be false in part, they may be considered false in toto.
– Former Attorney
Dear Attorney: Thanks for this thorough advice!
(Send questions to R. Eric Thomas at eric@askingeric.com or P.O. Box 22474, Philadelphia, PA 19110.)
