What I'm saying is that the "friend zone" is dependent on your proclamation of the friend zone. It exists in a social sphere. When a person is sexually attracted to another person and the other person is not sexually attracted to the first person, that's only half of the "friend zone."
The other half of what it means to be in the friend zone is contained in when someone says they are in the friend zone. The term is used socially, usually between men. It's intended to do 2 things:
1) Inform a friend of someone's misfortune.
2) Persuade that friend to do something about the misfortune.
Using the word friend zone only makes sense if it's used persuasively.
I'm going to stop arguing with you after this message because you're a troll and you're using a throw away account. But if you're asking "what is the friendzone?" The answer is not "When a person is sexually attracted to a person and the second person is not sexually attracted back." That's defining the term from the pursuer's perspective. The person who is being pursued is just as deserving of having the term defined from their perspective.
From a sociological perspective, the term is only used in a handful of situations. It's used to garner sympathy, but also used to shade others' feelings about the person putting X in the friend zone. As much as "friend zone" means, "X has unrequited feelings for y," it also means "X has changed the argument that Y is frigid into something reflexive in order to persuade Z to pass judgement on Y."
"Friend zone" is not a neutral term. "Friend zone" is a subjective, emotionally loaded term. It is only used if X is claiming that Y has wronged X in some way by not having the same feelings. By using the term casually, you will quickly find that you fall into a pattern of behavior or begin to view the situation according to a set pattern. That pattern is inherent in the word.
A personal example: I have had unrequited feelings for a woman. The woman sometimes went on reddit. When discussing those feelings, the woman quickly urged the conversation into the vocabulary of things like "friend zone." If I were to acknowledge such a term, I quickly fall into the category of "nice guy." When a person uses the word "friend zone" it is understood what that means, and it means something more than "unrequited feelings," it also means a number of things socially.
By deliberately skewing the conversation away from the usage of words like "friend zone," I was able to have a more honest conversation with the woman with whom I had unrequited feelings. We no longer talk, but I was not humiliated, and she was not put in a situation where she felt the need to misrepresent her feelings either to save my feelings or to hurt my feelings.
The whole idea of "friend zone" contains in it the implicit idea of active pursuit. By stating someone else has put you in the friend zone, it makes you the victim. It makes the friend zone something that needs to be "conquered," when the entire idea that such a thing can be "conquered" is ridiculous. No one is conquering anything. Y has made up their mind about X. Y is not attracted to X. That is not a project. It's not a challenge. You don't put your dick in something you're just friends with. You don't fuck your pets or your parents or your good buddies or your siblings or your cousins.
By proclaiming friend zone, the language implies continued pursuit. It sounds like a football term. What comes before the end zone? The friend zone. It's ridiculous. The term exists only in a set social sphere, and it is only used in order to persuade that action.
It is exactly a strategy of pursuit because of the implication of continued action.
I will not be responding to you again because you are using a throw away account. I have other things to do. But "friend zone" is not a neutral term, and it's not an objective term. Since it is neither neutral or objective, it forces the users of the term to engage in pursuit. The user is a victim of the term if he/she is innocently using the term as much as the person being pursued, although the person being pursued is fairing worse. By using the term "friend zone" to describe one's lack of a sexual relationship with a person, it's going to probably create feelings where the person should continue pursuing that person when the "friend zoned" person could just say fuck it and walk away.
The definition of the term you're providing is not an actual, neutral, objective definition of what the friend zone is. If someone has a crush on you, you do not say, "Oh, I put him/her in the friendzone." You say, "oh that person is a friend who has a crush on me." Or, in the worst case, "That person an ugly idiot."
The definition you are providing is only the definition of the person pursuing.