|
|
|
|
|
| | No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?Page 2 of 4 (1, 2, 3, 4) | | i think nice is over-rated...it is just one step above polite..."not nice" just shows a lack of upbringing...so i wouldn't date someone for that alone...you have to find someone who you look forward to seeing again for whatever reason..otherwise, you are just wasting your time and theirs... | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 6:27:03 PM | | I can be attracted to a man instantly but that doesn't mean we'd necessarily be a good match. There have also been men I've like when I met them, although not in a romantic way, who I became more attracted to as we got to know one another. I don't think it's a question of having to feel attraction immediately as opposed to feeling absolutely NO possibility of attraction immediately. There are many people who fall into the 'possible' realm. Those are definitely ones that I would want to date for a while and see if something develops. If there is a strong feeling of negativity regarding becoming involved with a person, then I'd let them know right away that it isn't happening for me. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 6:36:05 PM |
No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Then we'll probably just be friends. I'll know it on the first date. I'll give a 2nd date to see if I was wrong. But first date will tell me what I need to know. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 6:40:33 PM |
This idea of instant attraction, or it's old name, love at first sight, is a currently popular idea. People buy into it. Then they live by it. Then they make it come true.
I don't believe in it.
Sure, you may find someone unappealing right away. And someone may be extremely attractive to you at first sight. Big deal, it does not confer the ability to predict the future.
Brilliantly put.
Personally, after years of knowing someone, I've one day realized that I really like them and find them attractive. They grew on me. I got to know them.
My parents met through a small group of friends in college, over a period of time, not through a series of formalized dating rituals.
As I understand it, this type of socializing is still common. You hang out with like minded people, without the pressure that comes from dating, and over time, as you learn about someone, you pair up.
Yep. | |
|
E_keys
| | Joined: 10/3/2009
Msg: 30 | |
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 9:09:57 PM | I lived 38 years never encountering anyone I wanted to fvck on the 2nd date. I liked them, they were nice, I got used to them - I even married one. (A fine person, we're still friends post divorce.) Finally I met a couple of guys who rang my bell right away. The things we did didn't last, but I was crazy about them at the time, and I can't imagine going back to scenes of repeated "niceness" dates waiting for a feeling that's never going to happen. So, I'm pretty much thinking to stick with the chemistry-only thing for a while.
YMMV. Two people who both do or do not need/want insta-chemistry will be more compatible with each other than one yes and one no, I would think. | |
|
| |
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 10:00:14 PM | Chemistry works differently for different ppl.
That being said ...
I tried the approach mentioned by the OP on one account and am convinced otherwise. If it isn't there -- it will never be there regardless of how "nice, polite, great" that person may be. Like someone said in previous post here, to me, chemistry sorta has a mind of its own. .... You cannot force it or just "make it happen' like that. It's either there or it isn't.
I pretty much used the "no chemistry no second dates" approach up until recently. I met this guy... cute, attractive, polite, super nice. So even though I honestly found his personality a bit bland I thought, why not give it a chance beyond just one or two dates?? Because, as said -- he did seem like a great guy after all. So ... we dated/hung out for nearly a month. ... I hate to sound shallow but -- to me it seemed like kissing was the final say that there really was no chemistry there. Didn't feel that butterflies-in-stomach thing. I felt like I was just playing out a role in a badly scripted movie.
So I broke it off. Sure during the short duration that we were together, he demonstrated himsef to be a really great guy and all (I mean, he nearly always never let me pick up the tabs - even when I insisted. Offered to take me out and initiated stuff for us to do. I wouldn't be suprised if he'd bend over backwards probably just to please me!) YET despite this -- without the vital spark of chemistry -- sorry, but all those actions of goodness from him really did not do anything for me at all. I felt like I was just hanging out with a really good friend. And that was it. ... If I carried it on any longer, I felt that I would only be misleading the both of us.
So I am not going down that road again wasting two ppl's time anymore.
What's the composition of chemistry?? To me that would be: Given that there is physical attraction, there's just got to be that sense of conversation that comes naturally, being able to relate to some things in common, having that sense of humor that can be shared, our values and principles are on the same plane, our outlook in life and love are parallel.
Perhaps that may seem like too much to ask for, but unless I feel that, I am not going to jump into a relationship just for the sake of being in a relationship or just b/c he was an extremely nice person.
Some may think this is being stuck-up, stupid, mean or whatever but "niceness" alone doesn't cut it. Yes -- being nice, polite, thoughtful, considerate is all part of the basis of a great person. But character and chemistry are the other key components just as important in igniting and keeping the kiln of relationship burning.
My $0.02
 | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 10:24:03 PM | Yeah, but different people obviously define chemistry totally differently.
When I hear "instant attraction" I assume they're talking about physical.
You on the other hand 3lueseas, seem to be talking about personality and all those things you can't necessarily know on the first date.
Personally, I had a one-night stand with the guy I was the most instantly attracted to of anyone I ever met. Yes, there was *something* there, but I'm not sure that it would have lasted and I wouldn't have gotten bored with him eventually. Plus, it was mainly about his hair and body -I saw him later when he'd cut his hair and I didn't feel the electricity as much. I feel like sometimes people who glorify instant attraction have never had this experience, of actually being able to hookup immediately with someone they felt it for. I think instant attraction is mainly a psychological response to the way a person looks and acts, which is primarily informed by past experience. Yes, it can be intense, and it can even last over time, but that doesn't mean that open-minded people can't find other types of valid attraction. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 11:13:08 PM | ^^^ Yes. Physical attraction - b/c it is all about what's on the outside, is an instant thing for me too. Within the first few minutes upon meeting is enough to determine whether or not I am physically attracted to a guy. I think perhaps it is safe to say this is generally true for most ppl?
Now in regards to personality, although I don't argue that this one should require more time spent together, I can also pretty much tell within a good hour or so spent conversing with a person too -- and determine on a general scale, whether or not we would jibe.
So as said, if on the first date/meet there isn't anything there, chances are more likely than not that there will not be anything further than that down the line.
This doesn't mean though, that I rule out a possibility of the chances of "growing to like a person" either -- when perhaps there wasn't any initial sparks of attraction to begin with. .... The thing is, this mentioned circumstance usually require well, special circumstances -- typically outside the realm of dating, where the pressure and expectations of "dating" is void. .... Examples would be such as: workplaces, having mutual circle of friends, a school environment, a club or group sorta setting, and etc... environments that provide a situation where both ppl are not imposed to put up their "dating guard" so to speak. .. you know, that self-conscientious persona we all have when we are dating someone .... but in a round-about way, again -- apart from having that initial physical attraction -- it still boils down to personality and chemistry that will determine the strength of two ppl's bond & connection.
| |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/6/2009 11:54:45 PM |
What the hell is “connection” or “chemistry”? Being in lust? You have it right away or you reject that person despite there could be lots of potential and common interests? No wonder dating leads nowhere....
When shallow people say there's no chemistry/connection it is usually related to physical attraction/lust. For those who know better connection refers to a variety of things and while its hard to pinpoint the exact meaning of the word I think it involves similar interests, personalities, and the ability to enjoy a persons company without having it feel like work......a good flowing conversation without the awkward silences.
Back on topic I like to give it at least 3 dates before jumping to any conclusions. Some people are awkward during the first date mainly because they want to make a good impression and the nervousness and pressure of the moment ruins it for them. They could be the nicest person in the world but without common interests and "the spark" it all becomes a bit pointless. | |
|
| |
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 5:52:58 AM |
I lived 38 years never encountering anyone I wanted to fvck on the 2nd date.
I'm sure though that you encountered many you'd NEVER want to fvck, and you made that decision within the first 2 dates, if not minutes. See, that's a difference between men and women; men can tell very fast whether it's "yay" or "nay", but for women the typical initial states are "nay" or "maybe"; it takes more time to say "yay". | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 6:26:29 AM |
My parents met through a small group of friends in college, over a period of time, not through a series of formalized dating rituals.
As I understand it, this type of socializing is still common. You hang out with like minded people, without the pressure that comes from dating, and over time, as you learn about someone, you pair up.
And there lies the biggest problem of internet dating - the artificiality of going on a "date" with a stranger. This is not a neutral meeting...yeah, okay, some of you claim that first date is not the first date, it's the first "meet"..well, that's just rationalization to take some of the pressure off, but okay, if it works for you, call it a first meet. However, you're still meeting under the dating umbrella, to determine whether or not you want to date. The only way to know someone is to see them in different situations, different contexts, over time. The internet gives a false sense of connection. Having a romantic dinner for a first date, is again, not real. No wonder internet dating is not working for most people. We have to decide from date 1 or 2 that we're dating, then proceed to try to get to know the person. Just the opposite of what our parents' did.
So I understand and have been in your situation JazzDaddy. It's very confusing. I dated a guy for 8 months and realized that we really didn't have any chemistry! But it was hard to end it, because he and I were great friends, could talk for hours. Unfortunately, the chemistry never materialized, and it is essential to have it for a fully intimate and sexual relationship. Sounds like you're in a similar situation. This woman could be a great friend. Some posters have said that you're leading her on...but maybe she feels the same about you? | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 6:31:45 AM | To me attraction is the first thing. If it's not there - I don't go further. It's determined immediately and it's either there or not, and if it's not there's nothing further that can be done about it.
Beyond that I look for "chemistry", which to me is figuring out if we actually get along, or click personality wise, with humor and with intelligence once attraction is established.
Beyond that it's about having the same direction and wanting the same stuff.... | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 9:38:54 AM | It's determined immediately and it's either there or not, and if it's not there's nothing further that can be done about it.
WIP, that is extremely dichotomous reasoning. Have you never had a person or thing grow on you over time? I'll assume your approach is working for you mostly, but what would happen if you resisted making a judgement immediately? If you tasted a vegetable for the first time and didn't like it, you decide immediately to never eat it again?
No, I'm not talking about a homely person growing to seem good-looking, I'm talking about not putting people in one of only two categories, immediately. Instead of saying, "I'm not attracted." Say instead, "There is a man standing there."
Not trying to change your mind, but this topic is interesting to me. Curious because you think very differently than I do. | |
|
| |
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 9:58:41 AM | Have you never had a person or thing grow on you over time?
Yeah. There was a dog once. Ugly as can be. But I grew fond of it over time. People? No. I've tried. If it's not there, it's not there.
LOVESME,
I'm saying don't DATE until you feel CHEMISTRY. What's with the TRYING?
Sorry, I'd use bold face if I could, not caps.
AGAIN: I have TRIED. It doesn't work. I don't care how 'nice' someone is. If the chemistry isn't there, they'll be a friend and nothing more. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 10:11:20 AM | To make myself more clear, in case anyone is reading my posts:
I'm not suggesting TRYING to start chemistry by DATING. I'm suggesting that you meet someone and get to know them without any dating or sex pressure. After a while, weeks or months, you realize that you are feeling attraction and CHEMISTRY.
THEN you start dating.
I guess this idea has little to do with internet dating, oh well.
LOVESME,
I'm saying don't DATE until you feel CHEMISTRY. What's with the TRYING?
Sorry, I'd use bold face if I could, not caps.
| |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 10:52:22 AM | | In addition to my other posts, which I still assert, I agree that people should not try to create chemistry just because someone is nice. This is not a contradiction. I feel somewhat misunderstood, but I tried. Some of you here have understood my idea. And it's just an idea. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 11:34:47 AM |
WIP, that is extremely dichotomous reasoning.
Call it what you want, but in my case it is what it is.
Have you never had a person or thing grow on you over time?
Not sexually, no.
I'll assume your approach is working for you mostly, but what would happen if you resisted making a judgement immediately?
It's not a judgement, it's a reaction. If I am not attracted, I never will be - trust me, I've been alive long enough to know. The times I wished I was attracted and stuck it out waiting for it to kick in turned out to be huge mistakes...and ultimately hurt the guy in question who thought I was on the same page he was.
If you tasted a vegetable for the first time and didn't like it, you decide immediately to never eat it again?
Um...yes, actually. Either I have a taste for something or I don't. I decided before I was 6 years old what I like and what I don't. Cauliflower and brussel sprouts come to mind. Luckily I like almost all vegetables, so I don't miss the ones I don't like.
No, I'm not talking about a homely person growing to seem good-looking, I'm talking about not putting people in one of only two categories, immediately. Instead of saying, "I'm not attracted." Say instead, "There is a man standing there."
If I am meeting a guy to determine attraction, then that's going to be the basis for my reaction. If I am out and about and meet a guy in my travels, I look at him like the rest of the people in the place I am in, because there's no reference point. P.S. I don't have to consciously decide I am not attracted, it still doesn't matter.
Not trying to change your mind, but this topic is interesting to me. Curious because you think very differently than I do.
Vibe is vibe. You either want to know more or you don't. There's no choice there.
Granted, a lot of men tend to become attracted to women over time, so they don't understand this concept. A few get it tho...women just react to a guy in one way or another.
Now, if a man is somewhat attractive to me, and he's a good person he may become more attractive, but if he's not AT ALL attractive to me from minute 1, it won't change. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 11:37:44 AM | if you can't figure out what you want or if you know you dont want them by the third date... and still dating them, then you kinda suck for leading them on.
offer friendship and if they don't take it then its their loss. but remember knowing that one person may have more feelings for the other can really burn a friendship up. | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 11:40:48 AM | I think there is an unspoken 3-date liminal-zone (or threshold) with most people. If at the end of the third date you don't feel like going back to their place for coffee, snuggles, and a movie, it's probably time to move on.
Still, every date is different, and some people have been hurt badly or need to take things more slowly for some other reason; it's important to know the playing field before going into a game and similarly I think the key to a successful date is a pre-date interview (everyone does this, just some people do it more consciously than others). Find out what the interests are, where the zones of excitement are going to be. That way you will have something to focus on on the date, to KINDLE excitement. Maybe you both like Star Trek: TOS, but one of you likes season one best and the other thinks season three is the bomb. That could be a good conversation point. Maybe you've both read Cosmos, by Carl Sagan -- and that might not ever come up without the pre-date interview process.
Spark, connection, call it what you will, is not like lightening. Any two people could connect if the situations are right. All it takes is a grand centerpiece of conversation and an honesty of personality. Give it some effort; dig deep. Remember, love is a battlefield, many people are frightened; dating can be a high pressure environment.
I can't count how many FRIENDSHIPS I have had that have started with mediocrity and grown into an amazing relationship. Dating is no different. Stop thinking in terms of love-at-first sight (which I feel doesn't exist, by the way, only strong attraction which can seriously lubricate the development of love) and start thinking in terms of developing a meaningful friendship with this person you are considering shagging, and--provided your pre-date interview was in line and everyone is on the same page--your dating experiences should go swimmingly.
Happy hunting :D | |
|
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 11:45:01 AM | I also wanted to note that it is important what you both are doing BETWEEN dates.
Late nights chatting about the future on the phone, sacrificing work for their company? Or just ignoring them, imagining what their cooter looks like? :P It makes a difference. | |
|
| |
| No connection, no chemistry, no passion...but....they're nice?
Posted: 10/7/2009 11:56:17 AM |
Spark, connection, call it what you will, is not like lightening. Any two people could connect if the situations are right. All it takes is a grand centerpiece of conversation and an honesty of personality.
It's like that line from the movie Amelie: (goes something like this) "I've worked in a bar long enough I know the recipe for love. You know what it is? Take two regulars, mix them together and let them stew..." | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
