Single Women and Married Men Friendships - What are the rules??

[SurreyAstronaut]

Hello - first post here so please be gentle, I need some advice on a friendship...

I am the single woman (27), until recently I worked with a guy who I get on well with. It was innocent enough and was just chats over coffee, friendly emails and occasional lunches. He is in his mid forties and married. I have always considered us to be mates and nothing more, I am not attracted to him and he has never said or done anything that implies he is attracted to me.

He has recently left our company and we have stayed in touch, although less frequently than when we worked in the same office - we email maybe once or twice a week, very standard/friendly catch up emails on what the others are up to. I had never questioned it or felt that we were doing anything wrong until recently when I mentioned to a friend that we had discussed meeting up for lunch and she told me that it was a bit weird "going out with other peoples husbands" and now I am worried that I am inadvertently breaking some unwritten rule.

Is it a big no no to meet a married friend for lunch if it's just the two of you? Am I being naive in thinking that we can carry on being friends now that we don't work together?

Haven't read the whole thread but I am a married woman with male friends, single and married. Mostly I see them without DH due to DD at home. I have so far not slept with any of them. I don't think it matters whether one or the other is single, it is basically the question 'Can men and women be friends'. The answer is yes, they can be. Not all, but some.

Yes, Surrey, I also ignore calls, but agree with Gay that my H wouldn't dream of ringing me if I'm out with friends. If there was an emergency with the DCs, he'd be more likely to ring the restaurant, like in the olden days [really ancient emoticon].

I rarely phone him if he's out, either. I think it's really bad manners if you're meant to be paying attention to a conversation and you've got one eye on your phone all the time, leaping at it, when a text comes in.

Issy I wonder why you said you would love to sleep with your new friend? Perhaps you would say that it was the kindest way of saying no thanks, whereas another interpretation might be that you want to keep open the possibility, especially as another meeting is planned? When I mentioned downthread about secrecy, this also refers to the content of the interactions. Does your H know then, that this man wants to sleep with you and that you have told him you feel the same, but won't?

I agree profoundly with you about the very different nature of friendships and my sense of this thread is that amongst the sarcasm (and especially in MotherInferior's case, the wit that also made me laugh out loud) there is huge misunderstanding about the points some of us are making. Now some posters respond by heaping scorn, anger and sarcasm and others want a reasoned debate.

The fact is that infidelity does occur between friends. This doesn't make the friends bad people and it doesn't mean that people with safe boundaries are hysterical monogamists obsessing about their partner's thoughts, actions and friendships. It doesn't mean that people can only have friends of the same gender and it certainly doesn't mean that couples must go everywhere together in tandem.

It seems to me that these points are wilfully ignored by posters who would prefer a stereotype of a jealous obsessive who polices the friendships in her relationship; her own friendships and those of her partner.

This is about safe boundaries, of the kind that you observe in your first example, Issy and most closely represent the friendships I have with my own male friends.

Years ago, I can also remember friendships that more closely resemble your second example and saying much the same as you - and would be disingenuous if I said that this was about being kind to the interested friend - rather, it represented an ego boost and a delicious buzz. This was however at someone's expense - my H's and the friend's partner, both of whom would have been less than delighted that their spouses had admitted strong sexual desire.

Pretending that friendships are always non-threatening to fidelity seems wholly disingenuous and ignores the facts and the truth. They don't have to be threatening, but in a way, the person who refuses to acknowledge the possibility is the very person most vulnerable to hurting their partner, even if they never had any intention of crossing that line when the friendship started.

Malificence: yes, I am married. Talleyrand is the first and only man with whom I have felt fully content and complete. And yes, it began with friendship, although the sex was always out there (oddly enough, not in a good way the very first time we met!).

Sorry to hijack the thread. In answer to the OP - one on one lunches and dates on a regular basis with someone else's DH could well be misinterpreted, not least by the man involved and you could easily find yourself the subject of advances. I have male friends but almost always see them in groups, or at least with their and my OHs (obviously, with the exception of Talleyrand). If my DH was regularly texting and meeting another woman/ man then I would assume there was more to it. BUT going out for one lunch with an old colleague seems pretty harmless - he may be trying to recruit you, or find out information about a rival firm. More than once in a blue moon and you would be walking on dangerous ground. Are his emails flirtatious at all? Do you feel a little frisson when you check your phone and see the message is from him? If not, then don't worry.