| | Instant chemistry vs slow burnPage 2 of 4 (1, 2, 3, 4) |
So if I do NOT feel any attraction to a man I should go out with him 6 MORE times??? And if I feel NO attraction to a man should I go out with EVERY one of that ask me? How does this work if we are removing the attraction? And does that mean I should date the guys I am repulsed by?
Agreed. There has to be middle ground and some sort of common sense. I may not dismiss someone after 30 minutes, but there's no way I'm dating anyone 6 times to be absolutely sure I'm not attracted, nor should someone I'm "meh" about have to hang out with me that long to find out it's a no. Who wants to date this badly and has this kind of time? Sheesh. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/25/2012 7:14:53 AM | | Maybe not 6 times, but how about 2-3 dates after the first meet? For me, after 2 to 3 real dates I'm either infatuated or I'm done evaluating. I don't consider it a waste of time but rather a lesson, because everyone I date always teaches me something even if the lesson is sometimes painful to learn. JMO. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/25/2012 7:58:43 AM | | Over the years I've been on hundreds of meet and greets and only a handful have ever made it to a real date...just one. Usually I've done all the evaluating needed on the first meet. No point wasting my time and energy on someone I know will never be a match. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/25/2012 8:12:59 AM | Maybe not 6 times, but how about 2-3 dates after the first meet? For me, after 2 to 3 real dates I'm either infatuated or I'm done evaluating. I don't consider it a waste of time but rather a lesson, because everyone I date always teaches me something even if the lesson is sometimes painful to learn. JMO.
BicyclingGal
Can I ask a couple of questions about this 3 dates before you know. What makes you accept an offer from a guy? Now I am assuming you arent attracted to him and you really dont know much about him since it is a meeting WHAT makes YOU say "sure I will go out with you"? And after you are on this date and you are sitting there listening to him tell you how he cleans his toenails or how his ex wife was a total B or That he loves something that bores you to tears. WHAT makes YOU feel a need to say YES I WOULD LOVE TO GO OUT WITH YOU AGAIN???? Third Do you also pluck out your eyelashes one by one?? I think that would be less painful than sitting around a guy I am neither physically or mentally attracted to. But that is me. I am baffled ONCE again by the dating habits of the POFer. Help me understand. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/25/2012 3:45:46 PM |
instant chemistry.
life is far too short and time too precious,
for me to rely on a "slow burn" attraction...
I tend to agree usually the one that might be the slow burn never gets to even a spark.. lol | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/25/2012 4:00:34 PM | How about something in the middle? Instant chemistry just sounds to 'eager' but I guess it could happen, yet, don't want the 'slow burn' either or I'll be taking my marriage vows on my deathbed.
I like balance. See how it goes and let life take its' course.
What is it with this 'meet and greet' crap, anyway? Is this for people who are too afraid to use the word 'date?' What the heck is wrong with people today? Uggghhh..... | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 12:21:20 PM |
What is it with this 'meet and greet' crap, anyway? Is this for people who are too afraid to use the word 'date?' What the heck is wrong with people today? Uggghhh
I know....so dumb!! | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 2:03:19 PM | Scottish, I'll try to respond as best I can to your questions.
"What makes you accept an offer from a guy? Now I am assuming you arent attracted to him and you really dont know much about him since it is a meeting WHAT makes YOU say "sure I will go out with you"?"
I don't know why you would assume that I wasn't attracted to someone whom I agreed to meet in person. That's not true. I only meet with those to whom I'm somewhat attracted, either physicially or intellectually, and usually both, since brains and education are very important to me. E-mail and phone conversations can reveal a lot of information, both positive and negative. I would accept an offer to meet if I were attracted and wanted to know more -- if I were curious and intrigued and thought there was possibly "something there" worth exploring -- the possibility of a relationship. Sure, at an early time I wouldn't know much about him, and that's why I would want to meet in person, to find out more.
"And after you are on this date and you are sitting there listening to him tell you how he cleans his toenails or how his ex wife was a total B or That he loves something that bores you to tears. WHAT makes YOU feel a need to say YES I WOULD LOVE TO GO OUT WITH YOU AGAIN????"
There have been only about 2 dates in the past 4 years where I was bored with the conversation on a first meet, and those dates were 2-3 years ago before I'd perfected my screening process. And on one of those dates I did learn a lot about scanning electron microscopes and their capacity to pinpoint defects in metal casting, so it wasn't a total waste. :-) When it's clear from the first meet that I'm wouldn't be interested in him, I don't go out with him again. And if I'm on a date where the conversation is boring, I try and change the subject to something more interesting -- I don't just sit there and listen to him go on and on.
"Third Do you also pluck out your eyelashes one by one??"
Nope, I'm kinda attached to my eyelashes. I do pluck my eyebrows, though.
I guess I just try to keep an open mind, be flexible and curious, and if things aren't perfect, have as much fun as possible. I find people interesting, even if the dating thing doesn't work out. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 3:39:23 PM |
What is it with this 'meet and greet' crap, anyway? Is this for people who are too afraid to use the word 'date?' What the heck is wrong with people today? Uggghhh..
I'll answer this...I don't say meet and greet because I come from radio and it sounds like an autograph session with an artist or celebrity. I do use "meet" though because to me "date" has a romantic intent - and since I can't be romantic about someone I've never laid eyes on in person, I can only meet them first to see if there's any actual attraction (until you're there you can only hope for attraction - it's not established). Once I have met them, and there is an attraction (and it's mutual) and I want to know more then I'm all for the word "date" as now I'm romantically interested. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 5:25:25 PM |
What is it with this 'meet and greet' crap, anyway? Is this for people who are too afraid to use the word 'date?' What the heck is wrong with people today? Uggghhh
I agree with WIP. IMO the meet is something that sprouted from the Internet Dating generation(s). I simply refuse to court someone over the internet, text or phone so I don't make a decision as to asking someone on a date until I have met them IRL. I call it a pre-date. We get together to talk about whether or not we want to go on a date. The answer is usually no. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 6:18:33 PM | I'm just waiting to feel that toe curling , stomach knotting , legs shaking, breath shallow, palms sweating, pupils dialate, and groin aching kinda feeling you get when you find someone you are attracted to. *Big shit faced grin*
( I know...don't hold my breathe)
The truth is.. I've discovered I need to feel an initial attraction, spark, chemistry....whatever that feeling is one gets or it just isn't going to go anywhere. When I first started to date again, I would go on a meet and if I didn't feel any connection, I would not go out with that person again.
But as time went on, I found myself being influenced by others who felt I wasn't giving these guys, and myself, enough of a chance by limiting it to just one meet. I could see their point, it made sense to me. So needless to say, I would see them two or three more times, waiting.. and hoping for something to develop. It never did. I realize now that it was probably unfair of me to continue seeing them when my gut told me something was missing. It was a waste of time for both parties. I should have just followed my original course of action and moved on.
I'm reading a lot of mixed feelings and views on the subject. Some want a slow simmer, others are looking for an instant chemical reaction. In all honesty, I don't know what's better. What I do know is we all want and are looking for that elusive, but perfect mix of attraction and chemistry.
Anyhow my forum friends...I wish you luck and hope you all find whatever it is you're looking for.
...mae | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 8:15:27 PM |
So if I do NOT feel any attraction to a man I should go out with him 6 MORE times??? And if I feel NO attraction to a man should I go out with EVERY one of that ask me? How does this work if we are removing the attraction? And does that mean I should date the guys I am repulsed by?
The answer to that is obviously no...you don't go out 6 times with someone who repulses you nor do you go out with everyone who asks. But it seems I hear a lot of whining in the forums and around the watercooler that he/she was only interested in "one thing" and never took the time to get to know me. If the guy/gal is reasonably decent, polite, interested, and interesting what harm is there in taking it slow and giving that person a chance to grow on you a little? Do you only want to date a "perfect" person or do you want find that imperfect person who can love you perfectly? | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 8:45:59 PM | Mainly I would hate to be stuck with a guy just because I dont hate him. I am a passionate person. I would want someone I look forward to seeing and NOT a guy who is just a filler. It kind of sound like a person who is a tab bit afraid of being alone. So much so they are willing to allow anyone to fill the space as long as they arent a ax murder or rapist. I want a guy I want there, not a guy who is just there. I know it is scarry as the one may very well never show up but really I would hate to think some guy settled for me and is always looking around the room thinking he could have done better.
Blonde it really sounds like you are suggesting women/men settle. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/26/2012 10:02:13 PM | Back to the original query?
Slow burn? Instant Chemistry?
Well, in a perfect world I would appreciate a long term slow burn spiced with periodic moments of Instant Chem.
Y'all know the moments: your lover does or says something and what you're feeling at that period in time just explodes. It doesn't have to be over in a moment, but rather happen in a moment, and the effects can last for hours, days, ...
I don't know about others, much, but I know I cannot maintain prolonged high intensity feelings for a long time. Burn Out, dudes and dudettes.
TK | |
|
| |
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 5:11:19 AM | "If the guy/gal is reasonably decent, polite, interested, and interesting what harm is there in taking it slow and giving that person a chance to grow on you a little?"
Exactly. You said it much better than I did. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 5:23:25 AM | | Chemistry equates to instinct to me ..a viscereal connection is what most seek, if said person happens to also be wonderful on the "inside..voila'! | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 9:02:33 AM |
Chemistry equates to instinct to me
What do you mean by instinct? Would this be an attraction based on physical appearance? Some attraction based on pheromones? Or compatible HLA Complex?
Just what is instinct?
a viscereal connection is what most seek
Again, I ask, what does this mean. Are you still thinking "instinct" v. reasoned thought? Or if your reaction to the other person is emotionally positive then that is sufficient.
Both these elements are only those which turn my head: a pretty face, a nice smell, are our immune systems compatible (lol) only get my attention. If I can't say why I find a woman attractive it's a no go. And certainly not sufficient to base a relationship on. Once a woman has my attention I want to hear her talk, can she converse and reason; does she exude confidence in her mannerisms and physicality; is she feminine without being a doll; is she strong v. helpless; you get the drift. I'm not looking for arm candy, I'm waiting for a full meal.
Oh, there are so many women out there that will get my attention, very few maintain it.
TK
[I think that is the danger of online v. the real world. Online we get to pick and choose as if potential partners/lovers were some element in a spreadsheet. In the real world people are 3D, they not only have those features that we react to in an instinctual manner (kudos to the above poster), say in a 2D fashion, but also an element of depth, the stuff we cannot see or appreciate on a computer screen.
It is amazing that anybody finds lasting relationships online at all.
Nor that many here use PoF as mostly a community BBS for interaction.] | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 9:21:45 AM | Scottish, ou said,
"Mainly I would hate to be stuck with a guy just because I don't hate him.....I would want...NOT a guy who is just a filler. It kind of sound like a person who is a tab bit afraid of being alone. So much so they are willing to allow anyone to fill the space as long as they aren't a ax murderer or rapist....Blonde it really sounds like you are suggesting women/men settle."
In a prior message you talked about a woman "sitting there" and listening to their date talking about boring things. Now here you are talking about being "stuck with a guy." Don't you know that women have free will and can be assertive in their lives? Who says you or anyone has to be "stuck" with someone, even if you date them a couple of times to see what they're like? Your statements are just puzzling to me; they depict women as being passive creatures.
Nope, I am definitely not afraid of being alone or just dating to fill space. Nor am I needy, or need a sugar daddy, nor am I a "meal whore," etc. But people show you themselves over time. A pretty apple may have a rotten core. A piece of rock may hold a diamond inside.
This whole concept of "settling" bugs me. Those who wait for perfection ("maximizers") have been proven to be unhappier in life than "satisficers," who will choose someone who meets their criteria. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 9:40:08 AM | Instant Chemistry is the sugar of relationships.... most everyone likes it... tastes like candy... quick high that doesn't last very long... has no nutritional value...
Instant chemistry is as good a foundation on which to build a relationship, as sugar is a good foundation on which to build a nutritional diet. | |
|
| |
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 1:31:51 PM | The man I'm seeing and I had instant chemistry. We always have a great time when we're together
Will it last? Can anyone really say? Too soon to know but, I'm happy we met, and he has a personality that's very complimentary to mine, which is important | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 1:53:05 PM | Instant Chemistry is the sugar of relationships.... most everyone likes it... tastes like candy... quick high that doesn't last very long... has no nutritional value...
Instant chemistry is as good a foundation on which to build a relationship, as sugar is a good foundation on which to build a nutritional diet.
Now,there's some good clarity ! :) I feel bad saying this but the only thing that is "instant" when I first meet someone is IF there is a sort of "repulsion"---the kind I know I'm not going to kiss. :/ Others have described it differently here but it's really the same thing. I find that, for me, that there is a broad range of "types" and "looks" that gets so VERY ramped up with the presence of the real chemistry stuff, though. I enjoy getting to know all kinds of folks, too, so rarely ever feel I've wasted my time.
When real chemistry is cookin', for me, it is more about an accumulation of attractiveness. Usually by the time I am meeting someone in person, some of that chemistry has already started. On the phone a man's voice, how he chooses to communicate, smarts, his humor, the things he values, what he's learned in life, can all come across...usually I can get a pretty good sense of that before the 1st meet and then, just appreciate the process of finding out more. Letting chemistry "simmer" as we add the spices is all part of the fun. :) | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/27/2012 2:07:35 PM | I felt the burn for my ex the moment he looked me in the eyes with those amazing blue eyes. I slept with on the first date and the night before I got on a plane headed back America. I need that sweetness. When that man makes me sick enough to kill him in his sleep I need to know I will miss having sex with him.
YOU know they wont give you visitation rights to a man's penis??? BASTARDS
I believe people keep saying YOU have to choose you cant have it all. YOU know life is too short to think WOW I love him but I am not having sex with him. | |
|
| Instant chemistry vs slow burn
Posted: 7/28/2012 3:52:41 PM | ScottishHouston wrote
So if I do NOT feel any attraction to a man I should go out with him 6 MORE times??? And if I feel NO attraction to a man should I go out with EVERY one of that ask me? How does this work if we are removing the attraction? And does that mean I should date the guys I am repulsed by?
I believe the answer to that would be biased by the other party. Some men might want you to go out with them six more times before you kick'um to the curb. Me? I think, why pimp me for dinner six more times? After the first meeting, a proper,"it not you, it's me." will work just fine. If not,hopefully, I would have understood by the end of date number five. LOL | |
|
Home
login 
