What are your thoughts on chemistry?

2020-12-13T16:41:21+00:00

The spark takes time. Try vetting for 2-3 months. If the spark hasn’t developed by then, it may never happen. After 3 months, if you want to get romantic then go for it.

thepanichand · 2020-12-13T16:48:02+00:00

I think it's overrated. The person I had the most chemistry with in my life became a human I wouldn't want to know today (a psycho right winger). My husband and I still had chemistry but it took a while to appreciate to what degree. Loyalty goes a longer way than endorphins.

chasingastarl1ght · 2020-12-13T16:43:25+00:00

Imo, lack of intense spark at the beginning is a good thing. Love is a slow burn not a firework. Intense spark and chemistry is how narcissists get you, you're too high on those feelings to notice the flags. I feel like a good first date should feel comfortable - you find the person attractive, you had a good time and you felt safe. But there's probably some little awkward/shy moments because you're two strangers trying to figure out if you're a good fit or not. Especially if none of you are a player used to building quick but disposable chemistry.

sassenachpants · 2020-12-13T17:08:36+00:00

Chemistry is a neurochemical con job that makes you forget your boundaries. Give it a few dates to see if you like him as a person.

EclecticBarbarella · 2020-12-13T17:19:27+00:00

For me, instant physical chemistry is normally an anxious response to uncertainty and excitement (and not the good kind). There definitely should be some kind of response when you kiss but I agree with the other commenter that a stable, non-anxious “chemistry” takes a few months to build and start to reveal itself. If you’re not feeling it after 2-3 months, I’d cut him loose but I think it’s too soon to call it just because you don’t get overwhelming butterflies when you see him.

allergictoscrotes · 2020-12-13T19:00:44+00:00

I know a dating coach who talks about this a lot, and she is very big on the idea that chemistry is something that grows over time. And often, that initial spark we feel can be a red flag, since it comes from a feeling of familiarity. Idk if I’m explain this well but basically when we have a dating pattern that is bad (like going after emotionally unavailable men) we feel that spark because it reminds us of past experiences with other men. So often when we don’t feel that spark, it’s because it’s someone who doesn’t have that toxic trait that you historically seek out. Idk your dating history obviously, so I don’t know if you do have any bad dating patterns, but if everything else about him is great, I definitely think you should continue seeing/vetting him, and see how you feel after you get to know each other better. Best of luck!

romantickitty · 2020-12-13T18:44:44+00:00

I'm going to disagree with the rest of the comments and say that chemistry is important. I don't think you should expect instant infatuation but I think a lot of times, what we consider "chemistry" is really your judgment of all the factors at play. Sometimes your brain doesn't break down exactly why you don't really enjoy talking to a guy but that lack of "chemistry" or "spark" is a tip off and later on you'll realize that he was patronizing or not really listening to you or only agreeing with you and not contributing his own opinions. And if it's physical chemistry, maybe later you realize that while he has technique, he's not actually responsive to you... or there's no technique and something about kissing him just feels uncomfortable. I think we use a lot of terms like chemistry and vibes and vague feelings because we're afraid to trust our judgment or we want something to work so badly that it can be harder to pick up on red flags but, somewhere in the back of your mind, you know something is off even if you can't articulate it.

That said, I think you should continue to see him until you're sure one way or the other.

Danigirl_03 · 2020-12-13T18:04:27+00:00

I’m team lack of intense spark is a good thing. That spark is lust and what has in my past blinded me to the red flags.

I’m doing the slow build and slow burn right now with the man I’m seeing. And it’s a lot more satisfying. I don’t have the list and spark blinding me to his flaws and the red flags. I feel like we’re building a relationship rather than diving in with both feet and hoping for the best. The slow burn and build, has way more building on the foundations and shows me what he is there for.

sewingmachinesavior · 2020-12-13T18:14:55+00:00

You want the long slow burning candle.

Not the awesome ten minutes of fireworks on the 4th of July that looks awesome, but scares animals and small children, litters the ground with debris, and takes an hour for the smoke to clear.

Also, do some reading on love as a chemical/hormonal response.

SMansdotter · 2020-12-13T19:32:53+00:00

I didn't quite feel the spark with my BF on the first date. I knew I wanted to see him again, but overall, I wasn't sure if I was attracted to him or just thought he was a nice person. The spark didn't start to set in until a few weeks later, but hoooo mama, did it SET IN.

zoradysis · 2020-12-13T18:53:58+00:00

Congratulations on your divorce and new date! It's the first date, so enjoy it. FDS advises us to vet for a while before deciding if your dates are worthy of you. Instant spark may just be lust, or so it was in my experience. A real connection takes longer than one date to develop. Best of luck and enjoy being pampered!

warinmymind94 · 2020-12-14T07:37:09+00:00

Sometimes that spark is just because you previously felt lonely or were unfulfilled somewhere else, sometimes a spark is just lusty hormones! You're smart, you divorced an lvm. People that feel a strong spark usually fall head over heels, ignore red flags, and accept lvm behavior thinking its amazing. It sounds like you're just proceeding with caution, which is very smart!

devoushka · 2020-12-14T21:01:45+00:00

Are you still physically attracted to him? If so, I'd proceed.

However if the thought of kissing him fills you with no desire or even turns you off, it probably won't work.

I also feel like if you're not feeling chemistry, chances are he's not either, which doesn't bode well.

malloryor · 2020-12-13T16:22:20+00:00

Great question! Sitting for this.

2020-12-13T23:30:48+00:00

It is personal. For me I tried the “maybe I will like him later on” approach and it never worked. However many of my friends tried it and it worked for them; they are Indian though and their culture emphasizes common goals and values and puts very little emphasis on “the spark”.

If I meet a man off OLD, I give it three dates before I feel any chemistry, and by chemistry I mean “he is cute and I feel like I can talk to him easily”. If it is a man I have known for months/years and I feel zero spark on date one then I don’t even bother with him.

Chemistry is important to me, but I don’t like “oh my god he is so cute I can’t stop thinking about him”. That is unhealthy chemistry. I like the “I want to know more about this person” kind of chemistry, if that makes sense.

AllieBirdL · 2020-12-13T16:24:15+00:00

[deleted]

HengroenAndLlamrei · 2020-12-13T23:08:54+00:00

I don’t see the point in dating someone if there isn’t an intense spark/chemistry/attraction. It’s what separates a platonic friend from a lover. And I’ve always felt it right away, or not at all.

Title	What are your thoughts on chemistry?
Author	AllieBirdL
Upvotes	52
Comments	29
Date	December 13, 2020 3:11 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/comments/kcc5uq/what_are_your_thoughts_on_chemistry/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/what-are-your-thoughts-on-chemistry.731443 https://theredarchive.com/post/731443

Comments