Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 Nothing passive-agressive about it. You are blunt with me, i'm being blunt with you. Difference is, you're wrong (unlike in your thread, there's nothing worth arguing about here and the majority agree with me anyway),and you're only saying that to get a rise out of me. Won't work. Nice try though. Your BF was right about you. Back on topic, please.
Lauriebell82 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Difference is, you're wrong (unlike in your thread, there's nothing worth arguing about here and the majority agree with me anyway),and you're only saying that to get a rise out of me. Won't work. Nice try though. Your BF was right about you. Back on topic, please. Okay back on topic. First dates are about getting to know the other person. If you have gone out with the person (or known them before) I don't think you do feel the "same" butterflies but they come back.
Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 Okay back on topic. First dates are about getting to know the other person. If you have gone out with the person (or known them before) I don't think you do feel the "same" butterflies but they come back. So they're not necessary then at the very beginning? I'm speaking of the first, second, maybe third dates...? Did you have them with your BF at the very beginning?
Tomcat33 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 It's interesting to view reactions to posters who are agreeing and disagreeing with the OP. You seem to react negatively to those who you feel are not agreeing with you. It's just an observation, but I'm noticing a pattern in this thread along with others. People are going to agree and disagree, like I have said before, actually what YOU have said SG. Nobody on this forum is aware of anyone else's REAL LIFE experiences. Therefore nothing any poster can say to anyone else has any real credible attribution. It's just observations from postings. So SG, instead of argue its better to agree to disagree with the person. Getting defensive and upset over posts does not help you or anyone else for that matter. I don't agree. When a person posts a question or a situation for feedback they are more than like already inclined towards on side of the situation but not 100% sure of it. The point of debating the differences is undestanding if an opposing view cold actually be the better way hence posting the query to begin with. If you always just say no or yes and agree to disagree no one would rationalize decisions, they would not even think about them, they would just put a yes and no paper in a hat and draw for the conclusion. Also she SHOULD question the opposing views it makes sense consdering she is already inclined to do the opposite.
Tomcat33 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 Okay back on topic. First dates are about getting to know the other person. If you have gone out with the person (or known them before) I don't think you do feel the "same" butterflies but they come back. If significant amount of time has gone by it IS like getting to know them again since people change over time, not at the core but they change via their experiences and they change physically as well sometimes for the better even.
Lauriebell82 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 So they're not necessary then at the very beginning? I'm speaking of the first, second, maybe third dates...? Did you have them with your BF at the very beginning? Well, we actually went out on a date when we first met (about 3 years ago). He was planning on going on a study abroad trip and I was still at college, so we just kind of agreed to see what happens when he got back. We fell out of contact and then he actually IM'd me and asked me if I wanted to "hang out." We saw each other and the little butterflies came back again, but it wasn't the same "new rush" it was when we first met. It was still a wonderful "2nd first date" though.
Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 I don't agree. When a person posts a question or a situation for feedback they are more than like already inclined towards on side of the situation but not 100% sure of it. The point of debating the differences is undestanding if an opposing view cold actually be the better way hence posting the query to begin with. While I agree with this as to most posters, it's really not the case here. I'm honestly not sure what's reasonable to expect to feel at the end of a first/second date when you want to relationship to be a good (as in healthy!) one. I think (hope?) I may have set my expectations in this regard too high.
Art_Critic Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 I've never had a relationship that didn't have a great first date.. the first dates I'm talking about always have the butterfly's. Also.. I have also never had a relationship with a woman I didn't kiss on the first date.. All of the women I never kissed never panned out into anything. even after a 2nd, 3rd or more dates.. IMO..The kiss on the first date is all too important.. if it doesn't happen on the first date it won't happen later..
KinAZ Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 So_Gutted's thread and my own recent dates have made me think of this idea... Assuming you're looking for a relationship that could develop into something serious, how into a person should you expect to be after a great first date? Can you even describe it with words? In the past, I've always looked for that giddy feeling, the crazy butterflies...and if I didn't have those feelings after the first date I assumed it wouldn't go anywhere and didn't see him again. However, every first date where I left the date feeling giddy resulted in a temultuous relationship, however short, and I wound up pretty hurt. So I changed my perspective so that even if a guy doesn't give me butterflies or make me giddy at first, if he has the qualities I'm looking for, I find him attractive, and enjoy his company, then I'm open to dating him to see how things develop. But will those butterflies ever come under those circumstances? Are they there at first, or never at all? I can't live without those butterflies. I'm a butterfly chaser myself, and am trying to grow out of it. For awhile, if a guy didn't make me say "OOOoooOOOooo" on site, I wouldn't want to be bothered. I'm still pretty much the same way, running in the opposite direction, when I can, if this guy doesn't have such an affect on me. And, much like yourself, I've had a number of little 3-4 month relationships which started with a bang, ended the same way, and couldn't remember the guys name 2 weeks after the break up. That instant Oolala... When passions are mutually that high in the beginning, it's usually too early for us to know the person well enough to deal with the various relationship problems rationally. We jump to conclusions, or they jump to conclusions. And little things we're not used to, or not familiar with, can more easily make us insecure. Everything is all peachy until we hit a little bump in the road, and then all that passionate energy that was once in the romance and love making is not in the fighting process. At one point in my life I was a serial dater. If a guy seemed nice and fairly attractive, I would give him a chance even if I wasn't very interested, or he wasn't exactly my type, thinking that maybe he would grow on me. Maybe it was simply because I was looking for the butterflies, but it always ended up that this guy really fell for me, and I was trying to get away. So, I cut that out as I didn't see the cause in hurting any feelings, and didn't want to lead anyone on. Even though I was always honest about my wants and feelings, still seeing a guy you're not exactly interested in at the time just makes him think you're interested. I think that is possible for butterflies to develop as you get to know a person more. There may be things you see in them later on that excite you or interest you more as you continue with the dating process. I think that at the heart of it all, we choose to love and we create that romance, even if it's just there between two people naturally, it can't survive on it's own... and I know that from experience. One way or another, we still have to work at it.
Lauriebell82 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 While I agree with this as to most posters, it's really not the case here. I'm honestly not sure what's reasonable to expect to feel at the end of a first/second date when you want to relationship to be a good (as in healthy!) one. I think (hope?) I may have set my expectations in this regard too high. I think it just depends. I think you may be just thinking about it too much SG. I haven't had a "first date" in a long time, but I used to go into a date with too much expectations, that I really wanted to have it go well. Having no expectations at all, and just going into it to get to know the person is the best way to go about it.
Tomcat33 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 While I agree with this as to most posters, it's really not the case here. I'm honestly not sure what's reasonable to expect to feel at the end of a first/second date when you want to relationship to be a good (as in healthy!) one. I think (hope?) I may have set my expectations in this regard too high. Didn't understand that sorry?
Green Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 You need to time travel within your mind... to the mindset you used to have... and then u'll get butterflies... I never get butterflies really so I wouldnt know yo
Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 I've never had a relationship that didn't have a great first date.. the first dates I'm talking about always have the butterfly's. Also.. I have also never had a relationship with a woman I didn't kiss on the first date.. All of the women I never kissed never panned out into anything. even after a 2nd, 3rd or more dates.. IMO..The kiss on the first date is all too important.. if it doesn't happen on the first date it won't happen later.. If you could quantify the butterfly level, what level would you have to reach to entertain the idea of a second date? With the ones I'm dating now, there's some butterflies...just not as many as there have been with the super-passionate relationships.
Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 I think it just depends. I think you may be just thinking about it too much SG. I haven't had a "first date" in a long time, but I used to go into a date with too much expectations, that I really wanted to have it go well. Having no expectations at all, and just going into it to get to know the person is the best way to go about it. I don't think you understand the point of this thread, LB. This isn't about expectations from the date. What I'm asking is, at the end of a date, what exactly should you FEEL in order to make a second date a worthwhile undertaking (i.e., not a waste of time).
2sunny Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 I don't think you understand the point of this thread, LB. This isn't about expectations from the date. What I'm asking is, at the end of a date, what exactly should you FEEL in order to make a second date a worthwhile undertaking (i.e., not a waste of time). i would want to feel like i'm interested in knowing more about the person. that i admire and respect them enough to have that desire to spend more time getting to know them.
Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 i would want to feel like i'm interested in knowing more about the person. that i admire and respect them enough to have that desire to spend more time getting to know them. Okay, good. I got that!
Tomcat33 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 What I'm asking is, at the end of a date, what exactly should you FEEL in order to make a second date a worthwhile undertaking (i.e., not a waste of time). The desire to want MORE of what I just experienced. It's very simple for me.
vonerik012 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 How can you not answer that yourself? Maybe because you have become a serial dater? Here is an example Let's say I meet a woman who does not internet date. I approach her out in public and start a conversation. We exchange info. She thinks of me and the situation while I am gone. I call a few days later. Anticipation is building..We go on the date. I kiss her goodnight. Anticipation for the next date is building. She is getting butterflies. Or, this same woman internet dates. I am one of 3 guys she is seeing, and one of 30 she is chatting with. We go on a date and she just looks for reasons not to see me, tries to judge me with the other guys, I am thinking of the 20 other women I met from online or am about to meet, and we say goodnight. We both go home and sign onto Myspace to chat with other new people, or she looks forward to her internet date coming up tomorrow. NO butterflies.
vonerik012 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 My last example of mutual butterflies... I was in Brazil, and went out to a local bar. I met a girl and we started talking. We then decided to go to a few other places, and we ended up kissing for a long time. We made plans to meet at Ipanema Beach , Saturday at 2, (2 days later) at a designated spot. When I got home to think, I did not have her number, and she did not have mine. I wondered if i would see her again. Anticipation was building. I did not know if she would show up, and I was worried about finding her amongst 500,000 other people at the beach even if she did. I could not stop thinking about her. That day finally comes, and I am at the spot at 2. I did not see her. Finally, I see her sauntering through a crowd from afar, approaching me, but not yet seeing me. On that day, she is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen, and that image of her approaching me has been burned into my brain to this day. Although there were thousands of beautiful women all around, it was like I had tunnel vision just for her, and she was the only woman in the world. In the future we reminisced, and she confided in me that she could not sleep as she was wondering if I would show. That is not nearly the same as contacting old college pals on Myspace,or sending out 200 emails on match or POF, and then juggling a few internet guys and wondering what level of butterflies are needed to pursue a second date. It is completely incomparable, and a question that should never even have to be asked. Thats why I say get out into the real world, and meet new people. The internet medium is backwards, and although it can work for some who are willing to settle or have become addicted to how comfortable it makes them feel with the illusion of thousands of potential mates at their fingertips, a whole lot of mystery is missing from the process that creates attraction.
Bells Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 So_Gutted's thread and my own recent dates have made me think of this idea... Assuming you're looking for a relationship that could develop into something serious, how into a person should you expect to be after a great first date? Can you even describe it with words? In the past, I've always looked for that giddy feeling, the crazy butterflies...and if I didn't have those feelings after the first date I assumed it wouldn't go anywhere and didn't see him again. However, every first date where I left the date feeling giddy resulted in a temultuous relationship, however short, and I wound up pretty hurt. So I changed my perspective so that even if a guy doesn't give me butterflies or make me giddy at first, if he has the qualities I'm looking for, I find him attractive, and enjoy his company, then I'm open to dating him to see how things develop. But will those butterflies ever come under those circumstances? Are they there at first, or never at all? I can't live without those butterflies. Sounds like you're on the right track here...so many single women I've met thought there SHOULD be butterflies in the beginning, but if it's not "There" a sthey put it, they don't give it a trial run. They give up to easily. That's why it's always good to do the "Friends First" method.
StartingOver07 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 How can you not answer that yourself? Maybe because you have become a serial dater? Here is an example Let's say I meet a woman who does not internet date. I approach her out in public and start a conversation. We exchange info. She thinks of me and the situation while I am gone. I call a few days later. Anticipation is building..We go on the date. I kiss her goodnight. Anticipation for the next date is building. She is getting butterflies. Or, this same woman internet dates. I am one of 3 guys she is seeing, and one of 30 she is chatting with. We go on a date and she just looks for reasons not to see me, tries to judge me with the other guys, I am thinking of the 20 other women I met from online or am about to meet, and we say goodnight. We both go home and sign onto Myspace to chat with other new people, or she looks forward to her internet date coming up tomorrow. NO butterflies. For once I think you are absolutely spot on. Well said.
Capricciosa Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 I don't know SG. There certainly should be a level of interest and curiosity after the first date--he should be someone you could picture yourself hanging around with, talking to, and there should be some small level of chemistry. When I've had the all out butterflies, it was, in retrospect a sign for me to run in the other direction. Some schools of psychology posit that what we perceive as butterflies or chemistry that goes through the roof is actually a warning that unconsciously we are connecting through our projections and wounds (ie. person A has an abandonment complex, and person B is an abandoner--a match made in hell). Many of the books I have read recommend that a level of chemistry around 6 or 7 out of 10 is a much healthier, and anything above that is actually a red flag. I know this is counter-intuitive, and disappointing to a certain degree, but I have to say it has been my experience. Plus, people are often nervous on the first date, and are more themselves, and thus more attractive once they feel a bit more comfortable and secure. The way someone treats you consistently will make them more attractive to you--if there is at least a bit of attraction there. What do you want, butterflies or someone who thinks you're amazing, treats you well, is available and is willing to explore a relationship? So after the first date, think about whether the guy was interesting, pleasant, easy to talk to. Sounds like this guy was. And you may want to look up these two books: The Eden Project, by James Hollis, and How To Be An Adult in a Relationship, by David Richo. Both cover the topic of chemistry and how to decide what to look for in an appropriate partner in a very intelligent way.
Tomcat33 Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 My last example of mutual butterflies... I was in Brazil, and went out to a local bar. I met a girl and we started talking. We then decided to go to a few other places, and we ended up kissing for a long time. We made plans to meet at Ipanema Beach , Saturday at 2, (2 days later) at a designated spot. When I got home to think, I did not have her number, and she did not have mine. I wondered if i would see her again. Anticipation was building. I did not know if she would show up, and I was worried about finding her amongst 500,000 other people at the beach even if she did. I could not stop thinking about her. That day finally comes, and I am at the spot at 2. I did not see her. Finally, I see her sauntering through a crowd from afar, approaching me, but not yet seeing me. On that day, she is the most beautiful woman I have ever seen, and that image of her approaching me has been burned into my brain to this day. Although there were thousands of beautiful women all around, it was like I had tunnel vision just for her, and she was the only woman in the world. In the future we reminisced, and she confided in me that she could not sleep as she was wondering if I would show. That is not nearly the same as contacting old college pals on Myspace,or sending out 200 emails on match or POF, and then juggling a few internet guys and wondering what level of butterflies are needed to pursue a second date. It is completely incomparable, and a question that should never even have to be asked. Thats why I say get out into the real world, and meet new people. The internet medium is backwards, and although it can work for some who are willing to settle or have become addicted to how comfortable it makes them feel with the illusion of thousands of potential mates at their fingertips, a whole lot of mystery is missing from the process that creates attraction. This is exactly what I was refering to a few pages back you are stuck on how a situation makes you feel not how a person does. All the factors you described create the attraction for you not the woman. Thanks for giving that as an example it proves my point perfectly. I've had plenty of those situations in my travels I even had one guy show up on my doorstep in my home town a month later whom I met in another country. He lived in a different country an we met in a different country all together. Well it was much of what you just described. But guess what when he was in my element in my home town in my surroundings, the excitement wore off rather quickly and I realise I had NOTHING in common with this guy. Situation vs person. Think about it.
Author Star Gazer Posted August 30, 2008 Author Posted August 30, 2008 I don't know SG. There certainly should be a level of interest and curiosity after the first date--he should be someone you could picture yourself hanging around with, talking to, and there should be some small level of chemistry. When I've had the all out butterflies, it was, in retrospect a sign for me to run in the other direction. Some schools of psychology posit that what we perceive as butterflies or chemistry that goes through the roof is actually a warning that unconsciously we are connecting through our projections and wounds (ie. person A has an abandonment complex, and person B is an abandoner--a match made in hell). Many of the books I have read recommend that a level of chemistry around 6 or 7 out of 10 is a much healthier, and anything above that is actually a red flag. I know this is counter-intuitive, and disappointing to a certain degree, but I have to say it has been my experience. Plus, people are often nervous on the first date, and are more themselves, and thus more attractive once they feel a bit more comfortable and secure. Thanks for your input, C. That's all very interesting, and what I've been thinking subconsciously for a while now: that strong butterflies are a bad sign...particularly when it comes to abandonment. I've had those crazy butterflies for the guys who are abandoners, and I have abandonment issues. Perhaps butterflies isn't really even the right term, more like stomach-doing-backflips, and not really in a pleasant way. You and the psychological theory are probably right - a chemistry level in the 6-7 range initially is probably a lot healthier. It provides enough attraction to continue seeing each other, while allowing yourself to be true to yourself and comfortable getting to know the other person. You're also right that it's a little disappointing, BUT it's calming at the same time. The way someone treats you consistently will make them more attractive to you--if there is at least a bit of attraction there. What do you want, butterflies or someone who thinks you're amazing, treats you well, is available and is willing to explore a relationship? I definitely want the latter. So after the first date, think about whether the guy was interesting, pleasant, easy to talk to. Sounds like this guy was. He totally was. IS. And you may want to look up these two books: The Eden Project, by James Hollis, and How To Be An Adult in a Relationship, by David Richo. Both cover the topic of chemistry and how to decide what to look for in an appropriate partner in a very intelligent way. I'll check them out. Are those the books that reference the theory you mentioned above? I'm really interested in those too.
norajane Posted August 30, 2008 Posted August 30, 2008 You're also right that it's a little disappointing, BUT it's calming at the same time. It's not disappointing in the long run. Those butterflies are anxiety, not chemistry. If you find yourself with someone you are comfortable with and enjoy talking with, you'll soon find things you admire about him. And he'll become more and more attractive to you - the chemistry will grow even if it doesn't smack you in the face on the first few dates. You won't feel the anxiety butterflies because he will FIT you and you will FIT him. But that does not mean you won't feel chemistry, or that you won't fall in love. Falling in love with someone without anxiety is a whole different thing and it feels great. You won't be disappointed.
Recommended Posts