|
Post by isthisit on Mar 7, 2019 9:33:12 GMT -5
Well, yesterday’s question didn’t elicit much response. You were all either really busy or didn’t like the question. Here is the one for today. Some background- a friend and I were talking about this yesterday and had a difference of opinion. I thought I’d throw the question out to all of you to see what you think- In your opinion- what is the difference between attraction and chemistry. Which is more important? Can you be attracted to someone but find no chemistry? How about vice-versa? I’ll give you the context of our conversation once I hear back from all of you. An interesting question. For me, attraction is something you can rationalise and explain, and chemistry is something that can't be rationalised. Chemistry is either there or it's not. I am sure we all have the experience of wishing chemistry was there with someone, while acknowledging that it isn't. I will be interested in the responses of others though.
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Mar 7, 2019 9:36:53 GMT -5
Well, yesterday’s question didn’t elicit much response. You were all either really busy or didn’t like the question. Here is the one for today. Some background- a friend and I were talking about this yesterday and had a difference of opinion. I thought I’d throw the question out to all of you to see what you think- In your opinion- what is the difference between attraction and chemistry. Which is more important? Can you be attracted to someone but find no chemistry? How about vice-versa? I’ll give you the context of our conversation once I hear back from all of you. An interesting question. For me, attraction is something you can rationalise and explain, and chemistry is something that can't be rationalised. Chemistry is either there or it's not. I am sure we all have the experience of wishing chemistry was there with someone, while acknowledging that it isn't. I will be interested in the responses of others though. I forgot the second bit. I'm not a great lover of the word 'or' in relationships. It has to be both for me.
|
|
|
Post by angeleyes65 on Mar 7, 2019 9:45:57 GMT -5
I think you can be attracted to someone or at least find them attractive and not have chemistry. Example in high school there were two brothers both extremely good looking. They hung around with my group often I ended up kissing one of them and it was like kissing my brother. No chemistry even though I wanted there to be. So we agreed to just be friends On the opposite side I met a guy online I really liked his personality and was attracted to him on that level. When he sent a picture it didn't really pull me in. He wasn't bad lookingi just felt no physical attraction looking at his picture. We met anyway. And just listening to him talk and his smile he became more attractive to me. But I still didn't think it was going anywhere. He kissed me and I thought my head was going to explode. So much physical chemistry! I'm still with him almost 8 years later 😍
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Mar 7, 2019 12:21:45 GMT -5
When I am attracted to someone that means I enjoy their company and presence. It may be due to how they look or what they say or how they act. It doesn’t mean I want to fuck them or be physical at all with them.
When I have chemistry with someone, my pussy gets wet when I’m around them. I may not even like them or know them but my body responds to them. It really is chemical and seems based on smell. I had that reaction once to a stranger standing next to me on a train. His smell turned me on. It was an immediate physical reaction.
|
|
|
Post by h on Mar 7, 2019 13:06:57 GMT -5
Well, yesterday’s question didn’t elicit much response. You were all either really busy or didn’t like the question. Here is the one for today. Some background- a friend and I were talking about this yesterday and had a difference of opinion. I thought I’d throw the question out to all of you to see what you think- In your opinion- what is the difference between attraction and chemistry. Which is more important? Can you be attracted to someone but find no chemistry? How about vice-versa? I’ll give you the context of our conversation once I hear back from all of you. In my view, attraction is just visual or passive. I can find a complete stranger attractive even if I never speak to her. Chemistry involves interaction between two people. I would compare it to two chemicals in a science experiment. No Chemistry happens until you mix them up. Chemistry depends on interaction.
|
|
|
Post by choosinghappy on Mar 7, 2019 14:01:38 GMT -5
Well, yesterday’s question didn’t elicit much response. You were all either really busy or didn’t like the question. Here is the one for today. Some background- a friend and I were talking about this yesterday and had a difference of opinion. I thought I’d throw the question out to all of you to see what you think- In your opinion- what is the difference between attraction and chemistry. Which is more important? Can you be attracted to someone but find no chemistry? How about vice-versa? I’ll give you the context of our conversation once I hear back from all of you. In my view, attraction is just visual or passive. I can find a complete stranger attractive even if I never speak to her. Chemistry involves interaction between two people. I would compare it to two chemicals in a science experiment. No Chemistry happens until you mix them up. Chemistry depends on interaction. This is closer to what I think. Attraction is superficial. There are plenty of people I’m attracted to, but chemistry goes deeper than that. It’s intangible. You can’t know what kind of chemistry you’ll have with someone until you’re together. Attraction may be what sparks an interest but chemistry is what holds you. So yes to being attracted to someone but having no chemistry. And I think there can also be chemistry without initial attraction. Sometimes that makes someone much more attractive to you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 16:59:38 GMT -5
Question for today: Who are your kind of people? Honest, loyal, trustworthy, open, open-minded, easygoing, and lovers of music.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2019 17:03:04 GMT -5
I think attraction can be explained and is more on the surface. Chemistry cannot and goes deeper.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Mar 7, 2019 19:28:14 GMT -5
If you have compatibility / attraction with someone, your core values are pretty well aligned and the two of you are well set up to have a relationship based on mutual respect. If you ALSO have passion with that someone then you have a situation like " hello ballofconfusion and shamwow " But if you have passion toward someone, but you don't have compatibility with that someone, you are in for a whole world of hurt. There are hundreds of examples of this within this group. Indeed this group is littered with relationships where there is neither compatibility or passion. I was reading a bit of Mark Mansons stuff the other day in regard to this topic. If I can find it again I'll link it.
|
|
|
Post by flounder on Mar 7, 2019 19:56:16 GMT -5
An interesting question. For me, attraction is something you can rationalise and explain, and chemistry is something that can't be rationalised. Chemistry is either there or it's not. I am sure we all have the experience of wishing chemistry was there with someone, while acknowledging that it isn't. I will be interested in the responses of others though. I forgot the second bit. I'm not a great lover of the word 'or' in relationships. It has to be both for me. This.
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Mar 8, 2019 0:07:01 GMT -5
In your opinion- what is the difference between attraction and chemistry. My thinking is similar to h... I think attraction is more animalistic / instinct. You can be attracted to someone you know nothing about. Your mind fills in the gaps with all the best qualities. And then they open their mouth to speak. Or you finally see what they look like. And they’re nothing like the whole person as you imagined them. Chemistry is less about hormones and fantasy, and more about compatibility. Ideas, tastes, interests, passion,sex drive... Of course you can also be attracted to someone with whom you’re familiar. It’s just more likely to be genuine instead of fantasy. Heck, many of us are still attracted to people with whom we share no chemistry; we all know how well that works. And many of us have had good chemistry with an opposite-sex friend, but not necessarily attracted to them. So, I do think you need both. Attraction is like the slipcover on a book - it gets you engaged enough to find out if the contents are interesting (the chemistry). It’s hard to get far without both.
|
|
|
Post by sadkat on Mar 8, 2019 11:22:26 GMT -5
To put some context into this question. My friend has been divorced for almost 10 years. She has not been in a long term relationship for about 6 years. She is attractive and personable. We had a conversation about how she is having difficulty finding someone she can relate to long term and her despair over ending up alone later in life (she is in her late 40s). In the course of our conversation, she mentioned that she would not enter into a relationship with someone she wasn’t attracted to. The opinion I shared with her is that she was limiting herself- that she was missing out on finding great chemistry with someone she wouldn’t necessarily be attracted to. She didn’t agree with that assessment at all. She told me she knew what she wanted, understood the difference between attraction and chemistry, and was convinced that she could never start a relationship with someone she was not attracted to. As is my way, I turned to my friend Google to find information to help support my point of view. Here is what I found. (Sorry, guys- this one is directed at women but I’m sure the same principles apply). www.purecouples.org/blog/physical-attraction-isnt-chemistryWhat do you think? On a side note- I’m on my second solo trip fulfilling a bucket list item. I’m taking a break from this thread until Tuesday. Feel free to ask a question of your own!
|
|
|
Post by angeleyes65 on Mar 8, 2019 12:13:34 GMT -5
I think people's personality make them look more attractive. That's where I think online dating does a disservice. If you are looking online you might pass over or snub a approach from someone that doesn't immediately seem super attractive to you. People don't shop way above their paygrade lol. Plus some people just don't photograph well. But that if same person you scrolled by on a dating app were to strike up a conversation with you at a party and they have a good personality, funny similar likes they start looking more attractive as the conversation goes on.
|
|
|
Post by h on Mar 8, 2019 12:18:51 GMT -5
To put some context into this question. My friend has been divorced for almost 10 years. She has not been in a long term relationship for about 6 years. She is attractive and personable. We had a conversation about how she is having difficulty finding someone she can relate to long term and her despair over ending up alone later in life (she is in her late 40s). In the course of our conversation, she mentioned that she would not enter into a relationship with someone she wasn’t attracted to. The opinion I shared with her is that she was limiting herself- that she was missing out on finding great chemistry with someone she wouldn’t necessarily be attracted to. She didn’t agree with that assessment at all. She told me she knew what she wanted, understood the difference between attraction and chemistry, and was convinced that she could never start a relationship with someone she was not attracted to. As is my way, I turned to my friend Google to find information to help support my point of view. Here is what I found. (Sorry, guys- this one is directed at women but I’m sure the same principles apply). www.purecouples.org/blog/physical-attraction-isnt-chemistryWhat do you think? On a side note- I’m on my second solo trip fulfilling a bucket list item. I’m taking a break from this thread until Tuesday. Feel free to ask a question of your own! It's an excellent article and it works regardless of gender. The only caveat I would say is that the part about sex is often taken to extremes. Don't rush into anything of course, but also, don't wait too long. You may have wonderful "mental chemistry" with someone and also find him/her attractive, but if sex doesn't work, the rest will be difficult to balance. You can share all the same interests and enjoy talking for hours, but if one person isn't interested in sex or has no desire for it, the relationship can't work.
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Mar 8, 2019 13:04:40 GMT -5
The blog sadkat referred to said: "I wrote a post last year where I talked about how when I first met my husband. I wasn’t the least bit physically attracted to him. But to my surprise (and confusion), we still ended up having some amazing chemistry. I didn’t recognize it at the time though. I kept telling myself that since I wasn’t physically attracted to him, he could never be anything more than a friend to me. So I would talk to him for hours on the phone about everything, look forward to spending time with him, all the while thinking that all I felt for him was friendship. But the more time we spent together, the more I started feeling like I couldn’t imagine my life without him in it. The chemistry we had that I thought was only an indication that we were great friends-it started turning into a physical attraction. I couldn’t understand it, and eventually I couldn’t fight it anymore. I had to admit to myself that I loved him."
I would need more information before I could agree with this. What's missing from the article is whether the writer has a mutually fulfilling sex life with her husband. Being sexually attracted to someone -- as we all know -- doesn't guarantee that even if the person also is a person whom you enjoy being around. Without that kind of sexual chemistry, people who find sex an important component of romantic love, would not be in a fulfilling love relationship with a spouse or partner.
When he asked me out, I was not sexually attracted to my now post SM boyfriend of 6 years. I didn't even think he was physically attractive. However, I thought he was a reasonably nice person who shared some interests with me and would be a good person to go out on my first date in more than 35 years with anyone beside my STBX. Over dinner, I learned things about him -- his values and life -- that made him an appealing person to me. However, I still wasn't sexually interested in him nor did I find him particularly attractive. We had a few more casual date over the next couple of months and I liked him more and more, but still didn't feel sexual chemistry with him. Then, we kissed for the first time, and the chemistry was instantly there as was great kissing. After we had experienced great sex together, I viewed him as handsome, and still view him that way. However, if the sexual chemistry those components hadn't been there, he would have been friendzoned just like I wish I had done with my ex husband. There was no chemistry with our first kiss and that chemistry never evolved.
I don't know what sadkat's friend meant by this: "She told me she knew what she wanted, understood the difference between attraction and chemistry, and was convinced that she could never start a relationship with someone she was not attracted to. "
If she means she won't go on a date unless she feels sexually attracted to a man, I think she's making a mistake. She may develop sexual attraction for the man and find chemistry with him after knowing him better including exploring some kind of sexual intimacy with him.
If she means that she doesn't pursue a relationship if there is no sexual chemistry after she has done sexual things with a man, then I agree with her that it's not worth pursuing a romantic relationship with a man whom she doesn't enjoy sex with.
|
|