pandagirl Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 I'm of that age when all my girlfriends are getting married. And I have to say, I like the chances of them staying married. They're all incredibly intelligent, loving, funny, successful independent women, and amazing friends at that. However, I realized that in almost all of these instances, they really grew into their relationships with their husbands-to-be. One couple have been dating since their early 20's (we're all 30 now) and they both admit it wasn't love at first site or any passion when they first started dating. They just thought each other was cute and liked each other. But, they discovered their true love for each other a year or two after dating -- a long time -- and now it's so clear that they are totally in love with each other still after eight years. With another couple, the girl wasn't that into now-fiance. She thought he'd just be a summer fling and planned to break up with him when Fall came around, but they just kept on dating. She actually broke up with him two years into their relationship, because he wasn't "the one" and didn't think he was the right guy for her. But, a set of circumstances brought them back together and she began to appreciate his qualities more and truly fell in love with him. We place so much importance on knowing so *soon* if the person we are dating is "the one" or if he/she is worth the time. I admit I fall prey to pulling the trigger too quickly on whether a guy is worth it or not. I base a lot on chemistry and that "feeling," but my friends have proved to me that love only comes when you want it and nurture it. I like the idea of nurturing a relationship, rather than having those feeling of love come instantly and without appreciation. Unfortunately, I also think the older we get, the more impatient we get and rely all that much more on "instinct." Thoughts?
Cherry Blossom 35 Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 Wow, I've thought about this before too. The funny thing is that I have met a few people where the chemistry was out of this world, but where are they now??? Not with me!!! I like the idea of growing into love. I don't know. I do think that there has to be physical chemistry, though.
Nemo Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 "Growing" into love sounds like a recipe for settling. If it takes you that long to decide that you love somebody, and want to spend the rest of your life with them, then you're settling. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But it's like that treasured old hacksaw that you keep in the garage - you would never throw it away because it's the key to accessing a groundswell of memories too precious to ever part with. But the hacksaw just happened to be "there" through your ups and downs of life. It doesn't understand you, or "fit" you better than any other cutting tool. It's attachment, and not love. You have grown attached to the hacksaw, and it has profound meaning to you. That's great, but it will never infuse your soul like true love can. People settle all the time, because the alternative seems too risky. Or they're jaded from failed relationships. But by settling, you miss your one true "shot" in life to be happy. People settle because they are scared to be alone. Especially without hand tools.
prettybaby Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 You know, that's how me and my x-husband ended up together lol We LOVED spending time together and had so much fun. However, it wasn't love at first sight and although we figured that we could grow stronger feelings of passion over time, we never quite did. Yes, it was love, and solid love at that, but not the excitement you'd have with someone that comes with all the physical and emotional chemistry. Our marriage was rock solid too, and nobody saw our split coming. But we did the right thing. I think we were honest enough to face it in the end and talk about it openly. Our split was a very smooth and happy one, and we're still best friends to this day. We're both very happy that we were honest with each other and with ourselves. I do think that a lot of people are content with the safety of a smooth relationship, and good for them. But as far as I'm concerned, the initial spark is definitely important. I know what it's like to live without it, and although it's quite pleasant and easy, it still feels like missing out on something.
CommitmentPhobe Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 Yes, shared mutual attraction and compatibility and spending time together on a regular basis with the shared goal of forming a healthy relationship equates to love over time in my book. I'm not sure anyone who hasn't experienced that quite gets it.
Author pandagirl Posted December 7, 2008 Author Posted December 7, 2008 Wow, I've thought about this before too. The funny thing is that I have met a few people where the chemistry was out of this world, but where are they now??? Not with me!!! I like the idea of growing into love. I don't know. I do think that there has to be physical chemistry, though. Actually, the examples that I gave in my OP, the thing that kept my friends in their relationships was the physical chemistry in the beginning. They thought their husbands were hot, but there was no feelings of love. "Growing" into love sounds like a recipe for settling. If it takes you that long to decide that you love somebody, and want to spend the rest of your life with them, then you're settling. Not that there's anything wrong with that. But, is it settling if you are truly happy? I don't think so. It's like when best friends all in love -- I don't think that is settling -- I think it's probably on of the most romantic scenarios I can think of! I'm not saying to "grow into love" that you see this other person as just some mediocre person to spend your time with. I'm just saying that if at RIGHT OFF THE BAT you don't feel that "falling in love" feeling -- the giddyness, butterflies, et al. -- it doesn't mean you can't eventually fall in love with them. There has to be the ingredients there from the beginning, but then it can grow into something bigger and stronger.
Bells Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 However, I realized that in almost all of these instances, they really grew into their relationships with their husbands-to-be. One couple have been dating since their early 20's (we're all 30 now) and they both admit it wasn't love at first site or any passion when they first started dating. Actually,this is what I'm attempting to do with this current woman I started seeing. "Grow into it" be "Friends first" There ARE some people wired this way. But apparently, people who claim to be "experts" with the "friends first" idea seem to besmirch it everytime as a very BAD idea. Apparently, if you can't get your flirt on, get her juices flowin'....you won't get her. They the BEST relationships (marriages) were the ones that started off as friends (So much for the Friendzone, right? Well how about be "Friendzoned" then MARRY the person who friendzoned you, right? At that point, it DOES make sense, right?)
Bells Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 You know, that's how me and my x-husband ended up together lol We LOVED spending time together and had so much fun. However, it wasn't love at first sight and although we figured that we could grow stronger feelings of passion over time, we never quite did. Yes, it was love, and solid love at that, but not the excitement you'd have with someone that comes with all the physical and emotional chemistry. Our marriage was rock solid too, and nobody saw our split coming. But we did the right thing. I think we were honest enough to face it in the end and talk about it openly. Our split was a very smooth and happy one, and we're still best friends to this day. We're both very happy that we were honest with each other and with ourselves. I do think that a lot of people are content with the safety of a smooth relationship, and good for them. But as far as I'm concerned, the initial spark is definitely important. I know what it's like to live without it, and although it's quite pleasant and easy, it still feels like missing out on something. No offense, but doesn't sound like a valid reason for divorcing. It's no wonder the divorce rate is so high these days. Now I could understand cheating on each other or he abused you. But , I don't know, doesn't sound like a legit reason to divorce.
prettybaby Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 No offense, but doesn't sound like a valid reason for divorcing. It's no wonder the divorce rate is so high these days. Now I could understand cheating on each other or he abused you. But , I don't know, doesn't sound like a legit reason to divorce. What the hell? lol Who are you to judge whether a couple should stay together or not? If both parties agree that it's better that way, then I don't understand how you can jump in and throw divorce rates around like it's a shame. We're responsible adults, and there were no children involved, how is that even a bad thing when we're both very happy with our choices?
berrieh Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 I think it's got to be a little of both, and I think it depends on the person. When I was younger, I spent long periods of time in relationships that were not going to work, so I tend to not want to do that again. I feel like I've learned enough about myself to eliminate potential partners without feeling bad that I didn't "give them a chance." For my money, the best time to grow into a relationship is before you're in one -- when you're either just dating or you're friends. And there's something to be said for falling fast, too, when it's right. My mother and father dated for three years, and were friends for five years before that, before they entered into a disasterous marriage; my mother and step-father dated for 6 months before moving in together and getting married shortly after, and their marriage is one of the best I've ever seen. The big difference there was, they were adults and both knew themselves very well by the time they got married. I think that's the key to picking a great relationship partner---it's having enough time to grow into your own skin and know yourself well enough to pick a relationship that's perfect for you. Sometimes we have to take our time and do that after we meet the person, when we're in the relationship or friends with them, and sometimes we've already done that before meeting them...just depends on when we meet them. That's my theory anyway. I do think that chemistry sometimes gets too much emphasis, at least a particular brand of chemistry. There are so many forms of chemistry, and I've learned to prefer a slow-burn, rather than that huge spark. At the same time, if there's no fire at all, it's not going to work either.
Trialbyfire Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 Is it better to grow into love? Real love can't be anything but "grown into". The initial attraction is just that, attraction or infatuation. You can't honestly love someone without knowing anything about them. If so, you've fallen in love with someone you, the other person or a combination of both, have created. You're headed for a serious reality check!
Author pandagirl Posted December 7, 2008 Author Posted December 7, 2008 I do think that chemistry sometimes gets too much emphasis, at least a particular brand of chemistry. There are so many forms of chemistry, and I've learned to prefer a slow-burn, rather than that huge spark. At the same time, if there's no fire at all, it's not going to work either. Totally agree. There has to be some sort of chemistry, but the kind that grows instead of hitting you with one big blast is the best kind. I think I started this thread partly because I'm starting to question my own habits of picking men. I usually only go for guys where that immediate spark/passion was present from the get go, and now I realize as I've gotten older, that I've probably passed up a lot of opportunities with amazing guys because of that. I never gave them a chance. Earlier in the year, I met a guy where it wasn't love at first site or passionate, but there was some sort of spark and I liked him and wanted to give him a chance. He felt the same way about me, but didn't want to give me a chance So, I guess, what it comes down to, is what is important and of value to an individual person. But I think the best kind of love is love in increments, because then I feel like you really *value* a person for who they are and you know the love is real.
Benique Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 I guess,the older we get,the more thoughtful we become at entering any relationship...
BubblyPopcorn Posted December 7, 2008 Posted December 7, 2008 I agree with some of the others that it really does depend on the people involved and circumstances. My aunt and her husband have been together 40 years, it was instant for them but no one understood how those two stayed together they fought like cats and dogs. My uncle's personality is quiet/reserved, my aunt the complete opposite. He likes to egg people on, I remember at family bbq’s he'd come up behind you and poke you with a stick and he’d crack up over it. But at the same time he is also very relaxed whereas my aunt is not and somehow they balance each other out. My two LTR’s neither had that instantaneous “knowing” but the first one was better in my eyes. He knew and understood me completely and it was based on genuine care and concern for the other, we trusted each other completly but I don't think either of us were ready to settle down at that point, we we're in our early twenties and we both knew that was going to be our downfall.
SoulSearch_CO Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 I guess,the older we get,the more thoughtful we become at entering any relationship... True, dat.
wisebutnotperfect Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 I'm 49 and divorced twice. My first marriage was after 3 yrs of dating my second was 1 yr. Looking back on it both of them were too quick and we had not developed the deep friendship that is need to carry a partnership through tough times. Couples that I know that have stayed together through the fires have this in common, they went through difficult times together prior to marriage and they both felt that the partnership was important enough to see it through. I truly believe that at some critical point in all long term relationships there is at one fork in the road where one or both people think seriously about bailing. Before you commit to marriage people need to know that this time will come and it needs to be discussed and planned for. Be realistic and be careful of what your expectations are.
carhill Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Help me understand this dynamic. People date and have sex for a couple years and then figure out they've grown to love each other? So that's why my wife and I are on different pages. She always said sex was a recreational activity I have things completely backwards, since I've always seen sex as an expression of love and intimacy. Guess I better update my training materials For anyone who is currently married, was your spouse a friend prior to you dating? I mean a friend in the sense of someone important in your life, not an acquaintance. How did that love (and I mean genuine love) of friendship grow into enduring romantic love? I think, in concept, growing into love is great, but, in reality, it's exceedingly difficult to effect, complicated not only by one's emotional makeup but by their general attractiveness, which expands or limits their available group of potentials. Personally, I think I'll just get a cat and call it a day
Trialbyfire Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 Initial attraction and then infatuation, causes people to stick around to find out more about the other person. Love can happen, if people are willing to put some effort into getting to know the other person, beneath the superficial attraction. The difficulty is knowing who's capable of love or not, who's really sourcing below the surface and who's just, plain, superficial.
Woggle Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 When food is cooked slowly it tastes much better and when love is developed slowly it ends up stronger in the end. To me that is a good analogy. These intense whirlwind flings are like drugs because they feel good at first but in the long run they cause you nothing but pain.
D-Jam Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 We place so much importance on knowing so *soon* if the person we are dating is "the one" or if he/she is worth the time. I admit I fall prey to pulling the trigger too quickly on whether a guy is worth it or not. I base a lot on chemistry and that "feeling," but my friends have proved to me that love only comes when you want it and nurture it. I like the idea of nurturing a relationship, rather than having those feeling of love come instantly and without appreciation. Unfortunately, I also think the older we get, the more impatient we get and rely all that much more on "instinct." Thoughts? I think with the discussion here, both sides are right in some ways. I've been a big advocate of the mindset that those who put too much priority on "initial chemistry" only sabotage themselves in the long run. I believe chemistry is important, but I look at chemistry as that feeling you would be in a RL with this person. The problem is that too many out there, especially women, think this can be determined in as little as 10 minutes or as long as one date. I get a riot out of the women I've known who claim they will know if they would sleep with and/or marry a guy within 20 minutes to an hour. Bear something in mind...THEY'RE ALL CHRONICALLY SINGLE AND CONSTANTLY COMPLAINING HOW THEY CAN'T FIND A DECENT MAN. They all end up in one bad RL after the next, or every guy they felt a "spark" with right off the bat turned out to be totally what she didn't expect. They literally do what the nice guys do. They see someone, get all hot for them, and then imagine this guy as their perfect male, when most of the time he's nothing like what she wants. Worse are those who go all the way to marriage with said men, then later cheat or divorce because they finally came to grips that they are in love with a fantasy...not the man they married. I also have to say that based on her WORDS, prettybaby's reason for divorce was a ridiculous one. Maybe there's more to it than we know, but to just think that because there's no fireworks (despite a lot of compatibility) that one should just divorce. Not every day will be like a romance novel. Not every night will be wild sex. Not every time out will be like a wonderful date. Too many though think it should be like that, or else they leave. They are the types who think that if things are not full of good or bad drama, then it's done. If you believe it's supposed to be fireworks all the time, then I suggest never getting into a serious relationship...you'll just end up disappointed time and time again. Not to mention people you might hurt when the excitement wears off for you. I think there has to be some level of physical attraction...meaning one or both sides sees the other as attractive, even if they don't feel sparks to date that person initially. However, I think that the chances of two people feeling a deep spark right off the bat and making it last are so small that most who ride a lot on initial chemistry might want to rethink thing. Is letting love grow over time settling? It could be, but I think it depends on the context. Maybe two people hang out, go out, treat it more friendly, then a month or two later they share a kiss, emotions grow, and then they're in love. I think that's more a "normal" amount of time. However, when it's two people who met, one didn't feel anything, so they stayed friends for many years, and the one who didn't feel anything goes on a string of bad RLs and then suddenly one day wakes up "in love" with this person he/she rejected...that's settling in my book. It's also funny how many times a child born in that mix and/or older age seem to cause that. In the end, I think for all the men or women who seriously believe they can find their ideal mate within a 10 minute conversation or one date are fooling themselves. When I look at all the successful RLs out there around me...most of them grew over a period of time. Barely any of them happened upon the first meet. We can say they're settling, but if they're happy, in love, and can't fathom anyone else...then they're doing something right compared to all the lonely complainers out there who keep thinking it's supposed to play out like a movie or novel.
Author pandagirl Posted December 8, 2008 Author Posted December 8, 2008 I think there are two extremes being discussed in this thread: either all consuming passion from the beginning or a friends first situation. In my original post, I was referring to more of a gray area. Where you meet someone, and you truly do like them, are attracted to them, and there is some amount of chemistry but they aren't just hitting it out of the ballpark for you. I've found myself in these situations, and in almost every instance, I've wound up walking away, but now I realize it's because I was either too lazy to work on the relationship or scared of what might develop. When that *SPARK* is there from the get-go, the decision is already made for you -- you just go with it.
Trialbyfire Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 I think there are two extremes being discussed in this thread: either all consuming passion from the beginning or a friends first situation. In my original post, I was referring to more of a gray area. Where you meet someone, and you truly do like them, are attracted to them, and there is some amount of chemistry but they aren't just hitting it out of the ballpark for you. I've found myself in these situations, and in almost every instance, I've wound up walking away, but now I realize it's because I was either too lazy to work on the relationship or scared of what might develop. When that *SPARK* is there from the get-go, the decision is already made for you -- you just go with it. panda, is this honestly about your own feelings or is this about the guy who walked away, even though he liked and was attracted to you?
Author pandagirl Posted December 8, 2008 Author Posted December 8, 2008 panda, is this honestly about your own feelings or is this about the guy who walked away, even though he liked and was attracted to you? I think it's a combination of life events, including my friends getting married, people having babies, getting older, and, yes, that guy you are referring too. But really, I think I've just done a lot of self-examination, and since dating that guy, I have turned down three great men. All first dates and then I just walked away. I *want* to be able to give people more of a chance, but there's something stopping me. p.s. that said guy is still emailing me, and i really wish he'd stop.
amaysngrace Posted December 8, 2008 Posted December 8, 2008 I think you need an initial spark. One of interest. If they don't hold your interest from the start chances are they never will.
Star Gazer Posted December 9, 2008 Posted December 9, 2008 I've been thinking about this subject a LOT over the past couple months. I went wine tasting for a bachelorette party a month or so ago. I sat in the limo on the way to wine country, listening to the "marrieds" talk about how they met their husbands, how their relationships evolved, etc. NOT ONE felt that instant spark. Not a one. For each one of them, they "grew into it." They're all newlyweds, and sickeningly happy. I think there's something to it...
Recommended Posts