Do certain qualities of a bad friend tend to get brushed under the rug, or is one extreme simply favored over the other?
When we highlight unacceptable qualities of a bad friend, we usually gravitate towards things such as infrequent or slow response time and no or low effort. I want to be clear in saying that those things are true while also bringing to light the polar opposites that don’t get enough attention.
Yes, some of these may even be quite…controversial, to say the least.
Even the internet sphere, through my own digging, does a poor job contrasting the qualities of a bad friend, where the focus seems to be fairly one-sided. My hope is that this post may make someone go, “Oh, I never considered it that way,” or to at least be aware that there are two sides to every coin.
Obviously, this is just a snippet of the many qualities of a bad friend, so drop me a comment and share something you think doesn’t get enough attention.
These 10 qualities describe a bad friend, but they’re talked about the least
They lose their mind when you don’t respond fast enough
We’re quick and instant to throw our hands up, especially in today’s social media craze and text-obsessed culture and exploit a bad friend for not texting back right away or fast enough. Without even a second thought, we feel our time is more valuable and respectable than another’s. When, I say, a bad friend is also someone who can’t disconnect and expects those and the world around them to be as hyper-connected as they are.
We’ve done ourselves in with the capability to connect with people instantaneously at our fingertips at all times to the point we can’t even fathom a response-time taking minutes let alone hours. And many are using this to their advantage, as if they’re pointing a gun to people’s heads saying, “You are without excuse – 15 seconds, or else!“
I know I’m going to get so much heat for that.
And I’m also aware of those who are conflicted and frustrated when dealing with someone who takes days, weeks or months to respond. Believe me, I can relate, too, but there are equally those who basically malfunction when a friend doesn’t text them back instantaneously.
These two situations are being lost in transition, and the line is becoming increasingly blurred. We’re defining a bad friend as someone who isn’t connecting or reconnecting (responding, communicating, reciprocating connection) based on our individual expectation and, frankly, capacity.
Consequently, we’re unrealistically raising the bar on others and ourselves to meet our social fulfillment, resulting in this hyper-dependent state of constant or instantaneous communication.
They’re possessive of your time and availability
Quick question – how guilty are we of monitoring other people’s [free] time? You know what I’m talking about, and social media does a pretty good job of turning people into watchdogs while condoning and normalizing it. That being said, in addition to that question, have we ever been triggered by that little green dot next to a friend’s profile when they have yet to respond to your message?
At what point do we start making presumptions based on how we feel and then assuming authority of other people’s time or availability? When we’ve reached a level of being able to monitor people’s online presence I think is when we’ve entered into a losing battle of caring (and knowing) too much about what other people are doing.
A well-renowned quality of a bad friend is someone who doesn’t make time for the friendship. We won’t necessarily say someone who makes too much time is bad – that may be unanimously considered unhealthy. Still, I would question whether we know what that even looks like when we can easily describe a bad friend who makes no time.
What about the friend who is authoritative or possessive of how much time you spend together and your availability – meaning, your free or spare use of time? This quality of a bad friend – “your time is mine,” – is ever-increasing and it’s right under our noses.
Excessive effort suffocating the friendship
It’s already understood, as mentioned in the beginning of this post, that low or no effort in friendship makes a bad friend. We’ve even gone as far as to decide that a low maintenance friend is a bad quality, but I challenge that in another post.
I also address the presence and persistence of love bombing in friendship, which is often revealed through excessive effort. I also believe love bombing qualities are viewed as desirable in friendship with there being much more emphasis on the opposing, low-effort qualities.
Except, an unrealistic and harmful amount of effort can result in friendship suffocation (or burnout) then detachment and withdrawal. This means that someone making an excessive effort in the friendship likely does so with manipulative intent, or for reasons pertaining to jealousy, possessiveness, codependency, insecurities, abandonment issues, etc.
Yet, we don’t typically point the finger at the friend who makes an excessive effort; therefore, it’s not necessarily labeled as a bad quality since that would make the opposite untrue.
Both can exist and be true at the same time.
They expect an identical twin
According to the majority, we would likely all agree that a good friend is someone we share commonality and similarities with, right? That’s easy, and it’s written all over the walls. Likewise, it’s usually how we end up calling our best friend our “best” friend.
Real talk, though – is it possible we’ve stretched that a bit too far? Do we solely label a good friend based on those things, to the point that any differences (subtle or distinct) would nullify that definition? Would we still consider someone a good friend even if we disagree with them or differ on certain things? How about when a friend evolves with life milestones, experiences personal growth, or makes some “changes” over time?
I didn’t state it right away, but I’m starting to notice a trend of people being labeled as bad friends simply for their personal growth. Sure, while not all change can be good, I’d say a bad friend is someone who criticizes or discourages change in order to maintain conformity.
A bad friend is also someone who expects others to be just like them on every level and extreme levels. There are literally people out there that can’t and refuse to associate with others of a specific party, side, group or worldview and will only surround themselves with people identical to them.
God forbid you have a life and other friends
I’m to be extra careful when wording this one, but a bad friend is someone who doesn’t insert you into their life or include you as part of the group. From a broad standpoint, I can totally get behind that statement, which is why I left out specific wordage that will help make my point on this one.
But God forbid you have a life and other friends…ready for it…apart from them. A good friend will honor being a part of (that is complimentary to) your life while understanding and accepting that you have friendships separate from them. I know I’m going to ruffle some feathers of specific people by saying that a bad friend is also someone who claims (and feels entitled to) a much larger stake in your life.
In other words, they expect more involvement, influence and regulation in your life. This may not seem negative from a higher vantage point, but it can introduce things like jealousy, possessiveness, unrealistic expectations, abuse, co-dependency, and violated boundaries.
Also, in case you weren’t aware, it’s perfectly normal and acceptable to have different friend groups (meaning, not all your friends know each other and need to all be together). You’re actually allowed to hang out with other friends one-on-one without it dismantling your best friendship or other friends. Sure, when you share mutual friends, things can be a bit tricky when it comes inclusion without being totally irrational, but the root issue is usually insecurity from a lack of separation.
At the end of the day, a bad friend operates within a singular mentality: they come first in your life and are to be your only friend.
You’re thrown under the bus for expressing your feelings and concerns
A bad friend is someone who ghosts the friendship, abandoning you when you needed them most, and leaving you high and dry unexpectedly. Well, that’s funny. A bad friend is also someone who essentially throws you under the bus for sharing your feelings, concerns and any arising problems in the friendship.
And how often do we see that unfolding? I lost several friends that way. It’s like bringing up any discrepancy or calling out bad behavior is frowned upon or a big no-no. The fragility is real, my friends. So if ghosting is bad, somehow addressing and communicating through conflict or discomfort in friendship is…too? Make it make sense.
Moreover, qualities of a bad friend are someone who [1] refuses to (at least attempt to) talk things through, [2] can’t listen to and consider more than one viewpoint (their own), and [3] accept accountability for their part and role in the friendship (without having to shift the blame table or downplay the situation’s severity).
To them, you’re nothing other than a friend
Wait, let me explain. When we call someone a friend, do we see them for anything beyond that? No, really, because I don’t think we realize how much we put people (friends) in a singular box. We say, “They’re my friend,” as if to mean they treat me a certain way, say and do certain things, which are usually attributes of what someone brings to the table in friendship.
That being said, we classify a bad friend as someone who brings nothing (good, valuable) to the table, right?
Then allow me to say it this way: a bad friend only sees you as a friend and nothing else. To expand beyond that, a bad friend only cares about the level in which someone is able and willing to bring to the table (of friendship).
People are more than just a friend. They’re a son or daughter, husband or wife, mom or dad, caretaker or single parent, a student or employee, and a person. People are so much more than solely what they offer and provide as a friend. And in this day in age, we’re not as comfortable or willing to acknowledge that people won’t always live up to the standard we individually and subjectively define as a friend.
They shame you for changing and canceling plans
A bad friend is often recognized as someone who changes plans abruptly or unwarranted and cancels plans last minute. On a pathological level, where someone repeatedly changes and cancels plans consistently, always seems to have an excuse and with no care in the world, I can understand where the intent can be malicious or selfish.
There are obviously those individuals. And then there’s the individuals who cancel plans constantly simply because they’re afraid to tell you how they really feel (about you and the friendship). Either way, both of those examples describe individuals who have little to no regard for maintaining an honest friendship.
BUT, more and more I’m seeing people being villainized for their humanity. We’re merciless.
Conjoining with the point above, we’re far less considerate, understanding and forgiving of the fact people are not on the same path or journey let alone have other responsibilities and priorities that, yes, may supersede friendship.
We’re shaming the mom for canceling on girl’s night because her kids came down with a fever (and choosing to stay home rather than dumping her sick children on a sitter). We’re shaming the husband and saying he’s whipped for forgoing guy time in order to be there for his wife during a bad time. We’re shaming the student for choosing to spend time studying during the week instead of staying out late partying. We’re shaming people for choosing their livelihood instead of playing hooky, or because they got called into work unexpectedly.
A bad friend is still someone who goes the length to shame you for honoring your other responsibilities, priorities and duties, and that desperately needs more attention.
If a friendship is strong – with a strong foundation – it won’t crumble under the pressure in times of struggle or when things don’t go as planned (or our own way). True friendship will survive these things without keeping tabs or holding inconsistencies above one another’s head.
They receive your limits as being an attack
It’s common sense, really, for people to have limits and that their boundaries be respected. We live in a society that supposedly preaches, “Just tell me up front – be honest with me,” because, you know, a bad friend is someone who can’t be forthright.
Then what’s with the tantrums when people start being unapologetically honest? When people actually start honoring their limits, it’s then received as a personal attack. Unfortunately, a bad friend doesn’t take too kindly to a level of self-respect and authenticity when it doesn’t serve or benefit them.
For example, a friend got triggered when you informed them you wouldn’t be answering texts after work and that your phone would be on Do Not Disturb. To them, you’re suddenly a bad friend for not making yourself available at all odd hours of the night.
They’re a downright hypocrite
For starters, they preach unconditional acceptance and support. In a very specific example, let’s say your friend got a divorce and anticipates (expects, really) you to be congratulatory and celebratory about it because they are (otherwise, you’re a bad friend). That friend, that same friend, then shares their disdain about you becoming a Christian and walking in your faith. Where’s the acceptance and support then?
That. That is hypocrisy.
I actually don’t believe a person has to support everything, like in a blind allegiance kind of way, yet can still be accepting let alone a good friend. CRAZY, I know.
That’s just it. We’re more likely to point out a bad friend as being someone who is not accepting or supportive, but we’ve somehow perpetuated the, “You have to (accept/support me) but I don’t (have to accept/support you),” from differing or opposing opinions, worldviews and ideologies.
If we’re going to define certain qualities as being a bad friend, it has to be even across the board.