Monthly Archives: September 2010

Friending on the Job

I have two friends starting new jobs this week, and today I heard of another one who just scored an offer.

The first week in a new office is at once an exciting and terrifying thing. You’re the new kid in school. Sure, you’ll know everything about these people eventually—what they eat for lunch, which dentist they go to, what instrument they played in high school marching band—but for now you’re just trying to remember names. And, more importantly, get them to remember yours.

We spend approximately 40 hours a week with our coworkers. That’s a lot of time to feel lonely if you don’t connect to anyone in your office. In fact, research has found that when Americans are asked to choose between having a best friend at work and a 10% raise, friendship wins out easily.

I’ve made close friends in all the jobs I’ve held. But it took time. Upon arrival at each office I was so eager to establish friendships immediately that I most definitely was the awkward girl trying to weasel my way into social circles. As I write this, I’m cringing at the memory of attempting to befriend someone at my very first full-time job, and it was totally one of those trying too hard situations.

“Hey, so, um, watcha working on?”

And then I proceeded to tell her my whole life story because, you know, why not.

Not that she’d asked.

So my advice for my new worker bee friends is as follows:

First, make yourself visible. You want your new colleagues to remember you’re there, so they invite you to lunch and include you on a group project. In the office especially, people are so wrapped up in their own lives that out of sight really is out of mind.

Second, don’t insert yourself for no reason. Though you want to be visible, you don’t want to be intrusive. Jumping in others people’s conversations—“Hey guys whatcha talking about?” (not that you’d do that)—screams Andy Bernard.

Thirdly, do your job, do it well enough, and relax. As long as you’re not burning down the office or forcing anyone to stay late, you’ll make friends eventually. Taking the relationship out of the office takes time, but for now you just need an on-the-clock friend—someone you can recap Modern Family or your weekend with. She may not be a BFF (yet) but that relationship is equally as valuable.

Remember being the new guy at work? Any tricks for establishing workplace friendships? Anyone think the office and friendship shouldn’t mix?

4 Comments

Filed under The Search

The Hard Facts: Are You An Introvert?

It’s Research Wednesday! Where I share the latest, or most fascinating, in the science of friendship.

“While extraverts spend more time overall in social activities than introverts do, the two groups do not differ significantly on time spent with family members, romantic partners, or coworkers. Moreover, extraverts and introverts both report a mood boost from the company of others.” (“Revenge of the Introverts,” Psychology Today, Oct. 2010)

I am not an introvert. Officially, I know this because I took that Meyers-Briggs test recently and was deemed extroverted. But unofficially, I’ve always known—I like socializing too much.

For years I’ve misunderstood introversion. I thought being an introvert and being shy was the same thing. Introverts wouldn’t understand my search, I figured, because they didn’t understand the big deal about friendship in the first place.

I was wrong.

There’s a significant difference between being shy and being introverted. As Psychology Today explains, introverts spend time alone because they want to while shy folks would love to be social but don’t know how. “An introvert and a shy person might be standing against the wall at a party, but the introvert prefers to be there, while the shy individual has no choice.”

Also, introverts benefit from close friendship as much as extraverts do. Everyone gets the same jolt of energy from hanging with people we connect with on a deep level.

It’s a vital tidbit. When I started this quest I thought my friendship frustration was the curse of extroversion. If only I didn’t crave the company of others, I thought, I’d be so much happier. Turns out there’s no escaping it. Introverts need friendship too, they’d just rather have a thoughtful one-on-one than a dinner with a million people talking at once.

This should also serve as a reminder that introversion is not an excuse for giving up on friendship. A reader once left a comment saying she always bails on plans with her friends—specifically female friends—because she is an introvert and finds being a part of the female group dynamic draining. She didn’t understand the “high” of spending time with pals.

Being that I don’t identify as an introvert, I can’t purport to know what’s going on inside this reader’s head. But I would venture to guess that it’s not friendship that exhausts her, it’s the large groups. All the research I’ve read, and the majority of the anecdotal evidence I’ve heard, says introverts do feel a “high” from socializing. It’s just that an introvert’s idea of fun “socializing” is different from an extravert’s.

If you’re an introvert, don’t hide behind your preference for intimate activity and quiet time. That doesn’t mean you don’t need strong relationships. We all do.

Are you extraverted or introverted? Does that trait define what you want out of friendship?

15 Comments

Filed under The Hard Facts

Shhh! Don’t Tell Anyone…

“Can I tell you a secret?”

According to some experts, these six words will turn an acquaintanceship into a friendship. Self-disclosure, they say, is the defining trait of BFFs.

When a new friend trusts you with private information, it’s flattering. Clearly she thinks you are good stock. Reliable. Loyal. She sees a future in your relationship.

Sometimes I think I should spew out secrets to everyone I meet. It could speed up our bonding process. Except for one small problem: I don’t really have any secrets.

I’ve noticed, however, that when there’s a promising connection with a new friend, I’m more willing to mention my father’s death. I don’t go out of my way to bring it up, but I don’t avoid the topic either. When a girl-date is going just ok, I fear that kind of info might halt the already forced conversation.

Though the fact that my father died is clearly not a secret, it’s a personal memory that I only share when I’m comfortable with someone. That single piece of info doesn’t catapult us to capital F Friendship, but I think it makes clear to my friend-suitor that I feel like I can talk to her.

But there’s another side to this coin: When someone reveals the most intimate details of her life upon first meeting, there’s part of me that wonders, “Why are you telling me this? I hardly even know you.” Is there a too soon for self-disclosure?

I recently came across an old New York Times essay by Ann Patchett (whose friendship memoir Truth & Beauty is on my to-read list) about Sex and the City, and whether the ladies’ close friendships are realistic. She writes, “That’s my idea of real intimacy: It’s not the person who calls to say, ‘I’m having an affair’; it’s the friend who calls to say, ‘Why do I have four jars of pickles in my refrigerator?’” This sentence sums up what I am looking for in a local BFF better than anything I’ve ever written. I don’t need someone with whom to discuss the deep stuff—it’s the minutiae I’m interested in.

Sometimes it takes talking about everything to get to the place where we can talk about nothing.

What do you think? Is self-disclosure the fastest route to friendship? Or should we hold off from revealing too much until we’ve reached a certain level of intimacy – a three-date rule, perhaps? Also, do you agree with Ann Patchett’s definition of friendship intimacy?

17 Comments

Filed under The Search

It’s All Relative

My brother moved to Chicago a week and a half ago. My mother moved here from New York a little over a year ago. I have four cousins, two aunt-and-uncles and a grandmother who live within city lines (Also a new, three-week-old first cousin once removed. Hi Samantha!) Clearly, there are a lot of us.

Alex, my brother, is an especially exciting addition to the local family. We’ve always been incredibly close. He is, as his girlfriend pointed out recently, the male version of me. Unclear as to whether she thinks this is a good thing.

I’ve heard people say they are so close with their family that they don’t need friends. Their siblings, or their parents, are their BFFs. In fact, the 2006 study “Social Isolation in America,” found that in the 20 years prior, the percentage of Americans who named at least one non-kin person as part of his inner circle went from 80% to 57%.

If I believed in the whole family-as-BFF thing, Alex would be mine. We understand each other, we have that I-know-what-you’re-thinking connection when we’re in big groups, and we’ve been through some pretty rough times together. Luckily, I’m able to put behind me the bullying-the-little-sister years.

But I don’t believe in family-as-friends. Just the other day I was telling my grandmother about this blog and, pointing to my mother, she said “Isn’t she your best friend?”

“No,” I said. “She’s my mom.”

I’m a proponent of separating family, friends and romance. They are different relationships, with different tenets. When I first moved to Chicago, I had few friends, so I spent a large portion of my time with my aunt and cousins. And while I love them and love spending time with them, I craved a world of my own. I wanted a group of friends who didn’t know the inner workings of my family and who, more importantly, didn’t care. I wanted friends who were all mine.

I don’t want to demean the importance of having wonderful family. When I’m in a bind, I go straight to Mom or Bro or Aunt or Cuz before I try friends. I’m certain they’d come through for me if necessary, and I don’t feel that same confidence in my new pals. Yet.

But I think everyone needs some non-familial friendships. For sanity’s sake. There’s something about being with relatives that brings out the crazy in us all. And when that happens, we need someone to escape to.

I wrote about this back when I was pondering the March sisters (and the response was fascinating!), but now that my big bro is my new neighbor, it’s on my mind again. I hope to hang with him a lot—and will always feel comfortable calling for a last-minute lunch date—but I still say he’s family, not friend. What do you think? Can relatives do double duty?

13 Comments

Filed under The Search

She’s Just Not That Into Me

I talk a lot on this blog about my friend-making successes. I dish about a waitress, or a girl sitting next to me on a plane, or an improv class full of new friends.

I’ve written less about the BFFs that never were. Ladies who never called back or stopped responding to emails or who flat out told me they didn’t think we should be friends.

I do this because I want to encourage people to go out there, introduce themselves, and invite a new acquaintance for coffee.

But the truth is that for every three-to-five people who happily accept my invitations to brunch and the like, there is usually one who brushes me off. And I get that, because there was a time not so long ago when I would have thought it was plenty odd that some random girl was trying to platonically pick me up.

Commenters on this blog are often discouraged because they did what they were supposed to do—the asking out, the following up, the saying yes—but then the potential friend disappeared. So I’m here to say that this has happened to everyone. Or at least, this has happened to me.

A girl I genuinely thought I’d bonded with stopped acknowledging my emails. To this day I still don’t understand why. Another one told me outright that our friendship wasn’t going to work out. And there’s yet another who I think may currently be passive aggressively trying to end things.

I generally take this kind of brush-off personally. Who doesn’t? But these days, when a PBFF gives me the old heave ho, I’m usually able to laugh about it. Since so many people have been receptive to my friendship advances, I don’t get too bent out of shape about those who haven’t.

You know what your grandma said about kissing a lot of frogs? It’s true. But with friendship it’s even better, because you don’t have to limit yourself to one frog at a time. You can kiss all the frogs you want at once.

Ok, this metaphor is getting weird.

What I’m saying is, if you’ve tried to pursue a friendship with one or two people and it hasn’t worked out, you can’t just bail on the effort entirely. Remember, it’s not personal. As Jon Stewart says, we’re the busy majority. Some people don’t have time for new friends.

But other people do.

So take solace in my failures. We’ve all had the not-so-great friendship adventures. But I’ll guarantee that if you continue to introduce yourself and do the work, you’ll end up with more potential friends than rejections.

And then, when the inexplicable “We can’t be friends because I don’t like people who wear purple” happens, you’ll be able to laugh. If you’re me, you’ll just plan to write about it some day.

Have you had any less-than-stellar reactions from would-be friends? If you’re on a similar search, have you had discouraging moments? How did you get back on track?

11 Comments

Filed under The Search

Parodies are The Sincerest Form of Flattery

You know you’ve reached cultural relevance when comedians start making fun of you. And Saturday Night Live is the mecca of mockery, yes? Which makes me think that getting parodied by a recently ousted SNL cast member gives a topic—one like, um, BFFness—even more street cred.

Imagine my excitement last week when the Internet took note of “Bestie x Bestie”, a new web series from former SNLer Jenny Slate and her comedy partner Gabe Liedman. I’m kind of in love with this video because, besides the sheer silliness, it reminds me of those laugh-at-anything-and-nothing fits that are the essence of friendship. Also, she says Merriweather.

(Click through to watch videos if you are reading in a feed or email.)

If you’re more interested in the Lorne Michaels sanctioned version of BFF hilarity, check out this Taylor Swift sketch. (Thanks for the heads up, Yamilette!) It’s not a bad re-creation of some best friends I’ve encountered in my day. (Perhaps I’ve even been one of them. But only at camp…)

Do either of these ring true for you? Isn’t it fun to laugh at ourselves sometimes? After all, it’s almost (so close!) Friday.

{If you’re having trouble seeing the videos you can watch them here and here}

5 Comments

Filed under Everything I Know I Learned on TV

The Hard Facts: You’re Damned If You Do…

It’s Research Wednesday! Where I share the latest, or most fascinating, in the science of friendship.

According to a new study, popular people tend to catch the flu first. When the flu is going around, people at the center of social networks—those who are named as a friend by others—come down with the virus about two weeks earlier than a randomly selected group of people, the study found.” (“Study: Popular People Get Flu First”, CNN.com)

There are approximately one billion reasons why maintaining friendships is good for your health. Don’t believe me? See here, here and here.

But, as author Gretchen Rubin always says, the opposite of a great truth is also true.

And so it is with that in mind that I alert you to this recent study, which basically says if you’ve got a lot of friends, you should expect to be the first to get sick. It makes sense of course—the more popular you are, the more people you interact with and the more germs you are exposed to.

In this particular study, researchers (the very same ones who alerted me to the genetic factors of popularity) tracked the spread of H1N1 flu (the Swine!) at Harvard. But scientists are now considering the implications of these findings on a much grander scale.

“Monitoring the health of…socially connected people could serve as an early warning system for flu epidemics and outbreaks of other infectious diseases,” the article says. After all, getting a two-week head start on a sickness is a mighty large lead. “Identifying a group of central individuals…would provide a simple way of tracking and fighting epidemics, especially in self-contained settings such as college campuses and military bases.”

You know those people who are always under the weather? The amount they call in sick has become an office inside joke? Now I need to pay special attention to who they are, because I always figured it was either the ones with young kids or the slackers, but maybe it’s the social butterflies. If I can watch their health patterns, perhaps I’ll know when to start taking preventative measures.

If we’re weighing the health pros and cons of friendship, I still say you’re better off with a lot of social connections. You don’t need a million BFFs, mind you, but the more effort you put into meeting new people, the healthier you’ll be in the long run.

Until you get so popular you catch the early onset Swine.

4 Comments

Filed under The Hard Facts

Caution: Objects May Be Lamer Than They Appear

Yesterday was Matt’s birthday. For the next seven months I will be married to an older man. Scandalous.

The search for the just-right card is perhaps the hardest part of any birthday celebration. And because I am a perfectionist only when it comes to the things that don’t really matter, I looked in three different places before picking one out.

During my search I came across a card I’ve seen once before and almost purchased both times. The cover reads: “I’m much more interesting on my blog.”

I haven’t actually bought this card because I can’t figure out the occasion for giving it to someone. Should I buy it as a warning, handing it out to people I meet in this corner of the Internet? We’ll meet for a bite to eat or a drink and before opening my mouth I’ll hand them the card as if to say, “Don’t get your hopes up.”

Or maybe it’s for the aftermath of a bad girl-date. As in, “Sorry we didn’t hit it off. Maybe I’m not who you expected.”

During the months of this search, I’ve met some women with whom I seem to totally click via email. And then when we meet… nothing. It’s as if our cyberselves are a perfect match, but the real life versions not so much.

I’ve never done the online dating thing—Matt and I met before I’d even heard of Match.com—but I imagine you could run into the same issue.

When it comes to modern-day relationships, romantic or not, there’s so much emphasis placed on our online personas. We’re expected to be interesting but not self-important; funny but not trying too hard; friendly but not cheesy; revealing but not to the point of overshare. If you’re not a blogger, than you no doubt have felt the pressure on Facebook or Twitter or even Evite. I recently decided to reject all the pressure to be witty when RSVPing to an online invitation, and now I just click “yes” or “no.” I was literally spending full minutes at my computer screen trying to think of the perfect quip. I had to throw in the towel.

When it comes to online representations of ourselves, we have all the time in the world to craft the perfect profile. But if the fabulous person you’ve described isn’t you, then it’s a big fail.

Another blogger recently wrote about people who were disappointed in meeting the real her after reading her blog. How unnerving to think that who we actually are might not live up to the hype.

Have you ever met someone online—dating website, facebook, or just via email—who seemed totally different when you met in person? Have you ever felt the pressure to be “on” online? Do you every worry you’re more more interesting online than in real life?

23 Comments

Filed under 21st Century Friendships, The Search

Things Are Getting Official

I’m not saying we’re changing the world here, people. But we might be changing the world.

Just last Thursday, we discussed the lack of friendship vocabulary. In the comments, one of you made a call for “proper terminology that will inevitably be added to Webster.”

And then, the very next day and as if in direct response, the editors of the New Oxford American Dictionary announced they added some new words and phrases. Topping the list?  BFF.

BFF n. (pl. BFFs) informal a girl’s best friend: my BFF’s boyfriend is cheating on her.
— ORIGIN 1996: from the initial letters of best friend forever.

Oxford says BFFs are female specific. But they also included a male version.

Bromance n. informal a close but nonsexual relationship between two men.
— ORIGIN early 21st cent.: blend of brother and romance

And how about this vital addition?

Frenemy n. (pl. Frenemies) informal a person with whom one is friendly despite a fundamental dislike or rivalry.
— ORIGIN 1950s; blend of friend and enemy

Unfortunately they didn’t use any of these prime examples of classic frenemy quotes.

What have we learned? Ask and you shall receive. Now that we have the attention of the good folks at Oxford, I’d like to propose a few other words and phrases to be included in the next round.

Frenvy n. A feeling of discontented or resentful longing aroused by a friend’s possessions or by the close relationship between a friend and someone else.
—ORIGIN 2010; blend of friend and envy

Girl Crush n. An intense but platonic infatuation that one heterosexual woman feels for another woman whom she admires or with whom she would like to be friends.
— ORIGIN 2005, The New York Times

Girl Date n. The initial meeting of two potential female friends.
— ORIGIN 2010

PBFF n. informal A person who one doesn’t know very well, but who one believes has the potential to be her best friend forever.
— ORIGIN 2010: from the initial letters of potential best friend forever.

What am I missing? Any other friend-related words you’d like formally recognized?  Speak now, Oxford may be listening.

7 Comments

Filed under 21st Century Friendships

What Cost Love?

I’m breaking my own rule here, but this new research couldn’t wait until Wednesday. It’s too fascinating.

Think true love is priceless? Think again. According to Oxford University researchers, led by Robin Dunbar (the anthropologist behind the 150-person max social network), the cost of a romantic relationship is exactly two friendships.

According to the study, the average person has an inner core of five friends (the people we see at least once a week, the ones we count on in a crisis), but as a new romance grows, those numbers change. “People who are in romantic relationships, instead of having the typical five [individuals] on average, they only have four in that circle,” Dunbar told the BBC. “And bearing in mind that one of those is the new person that’s come into your life, it means you’ve had to give up two others.”

When I cited this to a colleague yesterday she seemed unsurprised. She lost a friend when she started dating her husband, she said, because that friend had just gotten out of a relationship and was bitter that anyone else was happy and in love.

Friendships end, or diminish, for various reasons when it comes to romance. Maybe your BFF doesn’t like your significant other (or vice versa). Or maybe she doesn’t want to hang out because she hates feeling like the third wheel.

Researchers chalk the lost friendships up to time constraints. When you’re dedicating a chunk of your schedule to romance, girl-time gets whittled down. And as soon as you stop seeing friends consistently, “emotional engagement starts to drop off, and quickly.”

Now that we’re aware of this friend-for-romance tradeoff, we should probably do something about it.

If you’re in a romantic relationship, remind yourself of the importance of platonic ones. They’re meaningful especially when you’re in love. Nothing kills passion like talking to your man about the TMI stuff. He doesn’t want to hear about bodily functions, or how your butt looks in those jeans, or your 800th analysis of the conversation with your mom last week. That’s what BFFs are for.

Have you lost friendships due to romance? What should people do to avoid this relationship evil? Is it possible to maintain close friendships and a quality romantic relationship, or should we just accept we can’t have it all?

8 Comments

Filed under The Search