I have a question about the 'chemistry' between two people. Over the past months I have meet several women, dated a few, who rejected me or some other man because after one or two dates they did not feel any chemistry. They freely admit that they had a lot in common with the man, he was a decent, respectful guy, but no chemistry.

Why the rush for chemistry? Maybe I am a bit nieve, but doesn't chemistry often develop over time. As we get to know a person we find them more desirable, until at some point the chemistry kicks in and things fire up. It seems to me that these women who reject a good man just because there is no instant chemistry, are making life a lot harder than it needs to be.

That's how I see it too. Seems like there are lots of expectations out there that I don't "get". Or maybe its a convenient excuse.

At the risk of getting into the "weighty" discussion we had already on one of my other threads ...

Isn't the "chemistry" thing a lot like the "physical attraction" thing? No offense, but I'm constantly being told that men are very visual creatures, and that they generally do not even casually date women that they do not have an immediate physical attraction to. Keeping that in mind, I'd say that waiting until after a couple of dates to decide whether or not that attraction is there is very generous.

I know that you, in particular, have NOT held that this is necessarily the correct way to approach dating, but it is, in fact, the way MANY men (if not most) approach dating - i.e., there will BE no date unless a woman meets the minimum standard of attractiveness AKA chemistry.

I think it is possible, particularly if these women have other offers for dates, that they don't want to waste anyone's time waiting to see if "chemistry" develops if they haven't "felt it" within the first one or two dates. Personally, I have found that "chemistry" for me can quite suddenly develop with men that I've known for a while as acquaintances - generally at the point where I've gotten the opportunity to get to know them better through spending time one on one conversing. And it has SURPRISED THE HECK out of me, most of the time.

I'm assured by my male friends, however, that that is not how it happens for most men. Either they "feel it" or they don't.

I'm not sure this is particularly helpful ... sorry!

T

Teri, I disagree. Chemistry is not physical attraction, though I am sure physcial attraction contributes its part to the chemistry. It's hard to define chemistry, but when two people have it, they seem to get along much better than one would normally expect. I have experienced instant chemistry and chemistry that builds over time. Instant chemistry is certainly no guarantee of a good long term relationship by the way.

I agree about the rush, chemistry is not a good initial strategy (well, unless maybe someone really repulses you I guess). Further, what the heck is chemistry anyways (another subject). The problem isn't males per se, I have experienced the same thing back from women, which doesn't bother me a bit, just tells me I am dealing with an unworthy female (meaning she apparently can't think). Not sure if this is a real problem or not (over-application of chemisty decisions), or that males are nore guilty (but I would guess that is a fair criticism). How long to wait? I have no real idea (for a change), but I think terri made a good observation, if you like someone, and give it a chance, chemistry could kick in anytime....which seems to support the idea, that the best way to find a great mate, is make a great friend first, and then marry them (after the chemistry kicks in). Whereas looking for chemistry first is only about our procreative drives, meaning you aren't looking for a friend, just someone to make babies with....not a good basis for a successful marrige, and much less likely to be a precursor to friendship. IMO the key is making friends, not a romantic interest right off the bat.

Well I certainly have no answers. I find it interesting, however, that this "chemistry" issue seems to come up regardless if one is talking about the start of a relationship or about developing "it" further into a relationship. I'm sure there are also those who don't believe in the idea of chemistry or could care less about it.

I guess the decision for me, when heading into the dating world, would involve knowing where I stand on the issue. Then I can decide at what point, if any, "chemistry" is a concern for me in developing a relationship with a man.

I have no answers for the "chemistry" thing either...

The only sort of, kind of, definition I can give for it is this....

Do I catch myself thinking how I'd like to talk to them?

So far if I haven't found myself thinking about how much I would enjoy talking with them again, then I don't bother with date #2 or #3.

Conversation is my #1 EN and you all know what happens if #1 isn't met....#2,3,4 and 5 don't matter


RebornMan

Hey, RM ... wanna chat? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

JustinExplorer: I guess the reason why I associate the concept of "chemistry" with the concept of "physical attraction" is because that is a big part of it for me. There are people - friends - who I love to be with - share activities, conversation, etc., and who I look forward to spending more time with, but who do not interest me any further than that. There have been a few people with whom I've been acquainted that have not interested me in the slightest other than as just that, acquaintances ... but having the opportunity to get to know them better has subsequently completely changed my interest level - including my taking another look and finding physical attraction that had not been there before, and being eager to spend time with them again. The physical attraction component is a significant part of "chemistry" for me - and it has developed along with all the rest of the aspects of "chemistry", such as a feeling of "connection".

It seems like I may be defining "chemistry" in a different manner than you - hence the difference in our opinions ... although I would have to agree that it is kind of difficult to concretely define.

T

Hey now...Stop being such a cool chick or I'll have to give you my e-mail......lol

senedal@excite.com or AIM at the same name....

I am a conversationalist....what else did you expect <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Look what you forced me to do....

RebornMan
Stomping the mud so folks know I was here

I always think of "chemistry" in terms of physical attraction. For me, it is separated from the relationship. If the relationship is great but there's no chemistry, I'll only want to be good friends. (Wanna guess what one of my top needs is?)

Amazingly, looks alone doesn't guarantee chemistry. There's got to be something else. Animal attraction. LOL.

Naturally, chemistry can quickly be destroyed by LBs. That is a definite. By the time a relationship gets to the point where I don't want to kiss and make up, it's in very bad terratory.

Ditto! Maybe that's why I'm a Rhetoric major. And why I was so hurt when my H never even bothered to ask what classes I was taking, or what I was learning (that I was dying to talk about).