After the release of the 2011 box office hits, “No Strings Attached” and “Friends With Benefits,” audiences everywhere took a closer look at what exactly it means to be a “close friend.” Like most other things in life, these Hollywood blockbusters painted a fairytale picture, or in this case, picture show, of the benefits that crossing the friendship line into steamier territory could potentially create.

But can you really have your cake and eat it too? Personally, I like to think that in our modern day society being purely platonic is possible – that we are capable of not letting our emotions cloud our judgment. However, as experience and observation show, in most relationships, this isn’t the case.

When looking at these friendships, you have to start at the root of what benefits each party is really looking to gain. When it comes to the way men and women interpret sexual encounters, women are more commonly known for linking to emotional attachment, whereas men are more commonly known for linking it to sport.

I have no doubt in my mind that if an attractive girl were to propose the idea of casually hooking up to a guy friend, he would comply. But is it possible for this proposition to be fulfilled without succumbing to a double standard? When guys get laid, it usually comes with a pat on the back, but when girls get laid, it usually comes with friends turning their backs. So, why then, would both parties agree to it? Where do their motives lie, and is it possible that they are both in it for the same reasons?

As these Hollywood fairytales go, love inevitably conquers all. But let’s gets real, we’re not Mila Kunis or Justin Timberlake, and we sure don’t live in New York City. The majority of girls at this university have getting the “ring by spring” engrained in their brains from the minute they step foot on this campus. So chances are, guys, if a girl is proposing to casually “hook up,” whether you want to believe it or not, strings are attached.

Don’t get me wrong, though, this doesn’t say this is the case for all of these agreements. It would be naive to base every “friends with benefits” relationship on a typical stereotype. It does, however, bring back the important question of what exactly each person is looking to benefit from this kind of relationship, and why he or she agreed to it in the first place.

For some people, commitment just isn’t in the cards at this point in their lives. Struggling to balance school, work, organizations, friends and a relationship on top of everything else can seem to be impossible. So in these situations, is the idea of having freedom when you need it, yet someone you trust when you don’t feel like venturing out to the meat market really that far-fetched?

My opinion is no. If you’ve got a good thing going, then why try to change it? I will advise, however, tread these waters carefully. Be sure both parties are on the same page; and even if you start off on the same page, be aware that when it comes to getting emotions involved, things could potentially end catastrophically and even be detrimental to the initial friendship that the two people once shared.

So can we have our cake and eat it too? I would say that platonic is not impossible, although the odds are not in your favor, my friend.

Samantha Romo is a sophomore majoring in public relations. Her column runs biweekly on Wednesday.