TheFinalWord Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 What's more important? Chemistry or Compatibility? Or do you have to have both? How do you define chemistry and how do you define compatibility? For me physical chemistry can grow if I can find one feature about the person attractive and the compatibility is strong. For a lot of people though they have told me they know instantly. If it's not there instantly it never will be. Which is it for you? Instant chemistry or progressive chemistry (or both)? For myself I have had instant chemistry, but a lot of times when that happens it is pure physical which causes me to ignore red flag compatibility issues. So I tend to like progressive chemistry better for myself. I feel I can control my physical infatuation and better assess if the person is good relationship material. Link to post Share on other sites
FrustratedStandards Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 Both are very important, but it seems almost impossible to find both in one person. I can't say that one is more important than the other. If you have chemistry but aren't compatible, it won't work. If you are compatible but don't have chemistry, it won't work. I think maybe what you mean to ask is, "If you had to choose one, which would it be"? Link to post Share on other sites
Author TheFinalWord Posted February 8, 2012 Author Share Posted February 8, 2012 Both are very important, but it seems almost impossible to find both in one person. I can't say that one is more important than the other. If you have chemistry but aren't compatible, it won't work. If you are compatible but don't have chemistry, it won't work. I think maybe what you mean to ask is, "If you had to choose one, which would it be"? LOL Yes, that was worded a bit awkwardly. I hit submit accidentally. I guess what I'm mainly asking is do you guys lean more towards instant chemistry, or are you a more progressive chemistry type? Link to post Share on other sites
ditzchic Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 I think you really need a balance of both for a successful long term relationship. Personally, I value chemistry over compatibility. If the chemistry and compassion is there I can get rather bendy on what I find compatible. I've tried to date guys I was really compatible with but there was little to no chemistry. I always get bored. There isn't enough differences to explore to keep me interested. I have a short attention span though. Hopefully, I can meet someone who provides a nice mix of chemistry and compatibility next time around Link to post Share on other sites
FrustratedStandards Posted February 8, 2012 Share Posted February 8, 2012 There is no such thing as "progressive" chemistry. It's either there or it isn't. It can't just develop overtime. Trust me, I've tried. Link to post Share on other sites
Author TheFinalWord Posted February 8, 2012 Author Share Posted February 8, 2012 I guess the main reason I'm asking is because of a recent situation. The girl that blew me off sent me a text saying she didn't feel chemistry. It's made me think a lot about my own values and the way I process dating. For me (I didn't tell her this) there was not instant physical chemistry with her, i.e. when I saw her I wanted to just rip her clothes off She was a bit stockier than I normally prefer. However, she had a nice smile and hair. I felt that the physical chemistry could grow primarily because our compatibility was so high. We shared so many things like values, desires, goals in common it was uncanny. I think 10 years ago I would have dismissed a girl based on whether she was instantly hot, but now I find it is so rare to find strong compatibility that I definitely rank that above chemistry; as long as they have some physical part about them I find attractive. Aw, perhaps I am getting older and wiser? Or maybe I'm settling and being stupid. It's definitely made me think a lot...about what I'm looking for and maybe I need to re-evaluate what I consider as "settling". Link to post Share on other sites
xxoo Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 She was a bit stockier than I normally prefer. However, she had a nice smile and hair. I felt that the physical chemistry could grow primarily because our compatibility was so high. We shared so many things like values, desires, goals in common it was uncanny. I don't know if you are talking about chemistry or attraction. Are they the same thing? I think they are different. You can have great attraction, but little chemistry. The attraction is physically based, and disappears if the physical changes. Chemistry goes deeper, and is less physically dependent. As a woman, I would not want to be sexual with a man who did not feel deep attraction to me. Getting naked is such a vulnerable thing, I at least want him blinded by lust . If I were the woman in your situation, and I didn't feel attractive in your eyes, I'd break off the romance, too. Compatibility is a broader issue. Core compatibility is a must (the big stuff like-do we both want kids?), but we don't have to have everything in common. We do have to be sexually attracted to each other. Link to post Share on other sites
Oxy Moronovich Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Can someone explain what's the definition of chemistry and compatibility? Aren't they the same thing? Link to post Share on other sites
xxoo Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Can someone explain what's the definition of chemistry and compatibility? Aren't they the same thing? Think of compatibility as lists on paper--do we share interests? Beliefs? Goals? Chemistry is the spark that lights the paper on fire. If there is no spark, it doesn't matter how compatible you are. If there is enough spark, it doesn't matter that you have NOTHING in common--for a little while, at least. Eventually, compatibility does become more important. Link to post Share on other sites
Andy_K Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 can someone explain what's the definition of chemistry and compatibility? Aren't they the same thing? Not really. Compatibility is whether you have the same views on kids/marriage/cohabiting/holidays/housework/hobbies and whatever else might otherwise cause friction in a relationship. Chemistry is whether she enjoys spending time with you more than anyone else, and/or wants to rip your clothes off. Link to post Share on other sites
oldguy Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I think compatibility enhances chemistry a great deal. But then, so does alcohol:laugh: Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I guess what I'm mainly asking is do you guys lean more towards instant chemistry, or are you a more progressive chemistry type? I'm more 'progressive'. I'll recognize a potential synergy early-on, at the instinctive level, but it needs vetting to cause the woman to rise from the page for me. Link to post Share on other sites
tigressA Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 If there is enough spark, it doesn't matter that you have NOTHING in common--for a little while, at least. Eventually, compatibility does become more important. I do think chemistry trumps compatibility, at least for a time. I have gone crazy for guys I had nothing in common with, and my current relationship is also illustrative of that pattern. The drama that ensues is fun for awhile (especially if you like make-up sex) but eventually it drains you. Link to post Share on other sites
Dusk1983 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Unsurprisingly it's the women on this thread who value chemistry above compatibility, exactly as I find is the case in real life. The longest relationship I've had (5 years on and off, and I still love her to this day) started off with very little chemistry; infact, I would say I initially didn't even want to be naked with her. But my feelings for her grew, and grew, and grew, simply because we shared the same interests and I saw, consistently, what an amazing person she was through those shared activities. My current relationship is the exact opposite. 6 months ago I would've agreed with the women here, in the heat of an incredibly passionate and intoxicating honeymoon period, that chemistry is everything and that this was clearly the superior relationship. But now that the newness has worn off and we can stay clothed longer than 5 minutes - what's left behind? Well, it isn't exactly "uncompatibility" but more prosaic than that - we don't have the same hobbies, we lack those shared understandings, and we simply like to spend our free time doing different things. As a result we are now experiencing some extremely basic and mundane differences in our habits and behaviours that were completely obscured by chemistry. IME compatibility is everything, and until we realise that and make it our only priority, lasting and durable happiness will remain tantalisingly out of reach. Link to post Share on other sites
oldguy Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 So chemistry is hot but comparability lasts? Dah:laugh: Link to post Share on other sites
Disenchantedly Yours Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 What a good topic FInalWord! For me, I find that chemistry is less dependent on looks and more about a kind of connection I have with a man. It's really hard for me to find a man that I have chemistry with. Most men I am not attracted to, but that doesn't mean they are not attractive men. So I do consider chemistry important. And I think chemistry is just your mind and body reacting to someone else. Maybe it's the subconcious way they smell or whatever, that whole thing about having different immune systems that makes the potential for your children to be healthier. I just know that for me, chemistry has never had anything to do with looks. There are attractive men that I have not been attracted to. Like David Beckham. He is objectively attractive but I feel nothing for him. I also think that chemistry CAN be progressive. Sometimes once you get to know someone, you see them differently and they can become more attractive and more special for that reason. For the fact that it was a progressive kind of attraction. Unfortunetly for women, maybe this is more true in women then it is in men who will place a lot on a woman based on stereotypical popular mainstream looks. Men often talk about how women go for bad boys. But men do the same thing and will ignore, like you said, the red flags in a really good looking women. I also think compatibility is important. But to me, compatibility is how well you get along, not necccesarily if you have tons and tons in common. It's how you work together as a couple. And despite saying all this, and agreeing that chemistry is important, I do think sometimes people are too quick to blow off others if they don't see fireworks right away. Link to post Share on other sites
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I've had relationships with varying degrees of both. I will choose compatibility over chemistry any day. When I just have chemistry it is just constant fighting... and it eventually kills the chemistry. When I have compatibility the chemistry grows. Link to post Share on other sites
zengirl Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I think if you're smart and healthy, eventually you start to combine the two and not feel chemistry with wildly inappropriate people anymore. Generally, I've not had a lot of chemistry with someone where there was NO compatibility (which doesn't mean 'sameness' to me; complementing each other is good too!). Compatibility is more important long term. Chemistry is what you feel short-term. If you are consistently feeling strong chemistry for emotionally unavailable people, jerks, or even just people who are clearly quite wrong for you, then you have issues. I believe chemistry is both a psychological AND biological thing, so your psychological state impacts it. However, of course, you're not going to feel chemistry for everyone who might be compatible! Chemistry is necessary for a relationship, but chemistry alone means nothing. Compatibility alone can mean friendship, and compatibility can nurture chemistry in a healthy dynamic, but you need both to light a spark. Link to post Share on other sites
Untouchable_Fire Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 About 10 years ago I sat down and thought about chemistry... what it is, where it comes from... ect. I decided there were some things I could do and say to make women feel that chemistry early on. One thing that really seems to work wonders is to make sure she feels that I'm attracted to her, and that I'm not afraid to show it. I can't really fake compatibility for long... so much of that has to do with basic temperament. Link to post Share on other sites
Saxis Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Chemistry is great to start off with, and required really, but with all of the relationships I've been in, it definitely wasn't there on the first date. I've been finding that it's really important to test the compatibility before the chemistry and subsequent infatuation takes hold, so I try to delay the physical chemistry for 3-4 dates. Otherwise, I'll get attached quickly and then realize that we are not compatible. It's not worth the heartbreak... Link to post Share on other sites
Author TheFinalWord Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 I don't know if you are talking about chemistry or attraction. Are they the same thing? I think they are different. You can have great attraction, but little chemistry. The attraction is physically based, and disappears if the physical changes. Chemistry goes deeper, and is less physically dependent. As a woman, I would not want to be sexual with a man who did not feel deep attraction to me. Getting naked is such a vulnerable thing, I at least want him blinded by lust . If I were the woman in your situation, and I didn't feel attractive in your eyes, I'd break off the romance, too. Compatibility is a broader issue. Core compatibility is a must (the big stuff like-do we both want kids?), but we don't have to have everything in common. We do have to be sexually attracted to each other. Interesting answer. I think chemistry is primarily physical, but yeah also emotional/spiritual as well. Well with getting naked I agree, but I think chemistry can develop to that point although it may not be super strong at first. Not a problem with me b/c I'm not looking for sex on a first date lol I guess the moral of the story is if you have extreme compatibility and only feel a little chemistry, maybe give it more than one date before dismissing. Maybe think of it like a scale. You go meet someone and there is heavy compatibility but not heavy chemistry. I think the scale can balance out if you give it a few dates. Unless the person completely repulses you. haha I do think there has to be something there. I agree with other posters. I have felt insane chemistry with a girl but once that initial infatuation wore off all that remained was fighting. I think compatibility is something that can't really "grow" on you, whereas chemistry can if there's even the slightest spark. Link to post Share on other sites
veggirl Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 chemistry is a tricky thing. You have to be careful with it. A relationship can't last based on chem alone, we see it all the time on LS, women who are with total dbags (or vice versa) but who they "click" with sooo well that they can't say goodbye. It can be a dangerous road! I did feel instant chemistry with my current BF. But I'm wise enough (NOW) to accept that for what it is....we click, but in the long run that doesn't mean anything, it is not an indication that we'd have a good R, etc. I kept control of myself to suss out compatibility, which thankfully we also have I couldn't be with someone I didn't feel the "spark" for, but I realize the spark can fade fast, and no matter how hot that spark is, it doesn't make up for other shortcomings someone may bring to the table. Balance! Link to post Share on other sites
xxoo Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I guess the moral of the story is if you have extreme compatibility and only feel a little chemistry, maybe give it more than one date before dismissing. Oh, I agree. And I have had the experience of chemistry revealing itself after a while. But in that case, we started dating AFTER we became attracted/chemistry grew. I guess it could happen in a few dates, but I wonder if it sometimes takes really getting to know each other? Another way to describe the difference between chemistry and compatibility-- Compatibility is: I can live with you. Chemistry is: I can't live without you! The caveat of no compatibility being--can I live with you? The caveat of no chemistry being--will I one day meet someone else that I can't live without? It is an intoxicating feeling when it happens. Can make smart married people do stupid things.... Bottom line: I wouldn't marry without BOTH. Although the compatibility doesn't need to be on all levels--only the dealbreaker stuff. Link to post Share on other sites
xxoo Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 FinalWord-- I just read your post on another thread about your parents--your dad being "walmart" style and your mom being high fashion--but they love each other to death. That's exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about when I downplay compatibility. A lot of that stuff really doesn't matter, and having the same taste in clothes (or anything else) won't make up for a lack of chemistry. Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I have tried and failed to give something a chance to "spark" when initial chemistry was not there, but we seemed very compatible. I don't think that can work for me. Chemistry is necessary to get things started. Once things are underway, though, I think compatibility trumps all. It's not so much about how we match up "on paper," either. It's more about … being companionable. Liking to be in each others company, having a good and natural give and take - we can be quiet, we can be very talkative; having an unspoken sense about what the other one is feeling and if they might need a hand. Or maybe they need some space. Comfort. A nudge out of some kind of stuck. Being able to appreciate the same things at the same time, together. Now that I am thinking about it, I believe there is a big component of chemistry in attaining that level of compatibility, for me. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts