Chemistry, how important is it?

[Sam Spade]

I am perpetually baffled by how every time this topic of chemistry comes up, the thread is overwhelmed by female responses about how important it is etc., while there is not a single male response along these lines. There's something wrong here .

 

I don't even know what "chemistry" means. All I know is that if I find a girl attractive and she has a good attitude, and we have fun together, that's more than enough to build a good relationship upon, given compatibility in life goals etc. On my end, i realise that girls like both a bit of edge/danger and stability/sweetness, so I keep it mixed. But to call it chemistry and equate it with some mystical atribute of a relationship rings no bells with me .

[Hkizzle]

I am perpetually baffled by how every time this topic of chemistry comes up, the thread is overwhelmed by female responses about how important it is etc., while there is not a single male response along these lines. There's something wrong here .

 

I don't even know what "chemistry" means. All I know is that if I find a girl attractive and she has a good attitude, and we have fun together, that's more than enough to build a good relationship upon, given compatibility in life goals etc. On my end, i realise that girls like both a bit of edge/danger and stability/sweetness, so I keep it mixed. But to call it chemistry and equate it with some mystical atribute of a relationship rings no bells with me .

 

Exactly, chemistry is something women put a lot of importance on because it's something they are biologically geared towards. They feel it when they find a man that they find has high value. Men don't feel it nearly as much. Maybe head over heels over a girl but in the first couple of years and even then I don't hear men refer to chemistry.

[D-D]

As a guy, I'd have to say chemistry is hard to describe. For me personally, I have tried dating someone that I don't really feel attracted to physically, and it never worked out. I think so far as I feel at least some level of physical attraction, them I just focus on getting to know the other person. I think chemistry has to included both some level of physical attraction as well as some form of compatibility between the personalities.

[Hkizzle]

As a guy, I'd have to say chemistry is hard to describe. For me personally, I have tried dating someone that I don't really feel attracted to physically, and it never worked out. I think so far as I feel at least some level of physical attraction, them I just focus on getting to know the other person. I think chemistry has to included both some level of physical attraction as well as some form of compatibility between the personalities.

 

That's because it fits into the profile of how men generally put more importance into visual attraction, and women more into personality. Of course men still find personality important, but what the different sexes agree on as important differ slightly.

[Devil Inside]

Hey Hkizzle I see you are current on the laws of attraction...smart man.

 

As a man I would define chemistry as an unconscious link to the other person. It the nonverbal cues you get that are just out of your awareness that draw you to a person. You know that one person that has just "got it" and you can't exactly put your finger on it. It is also individual, I have been so attracted to women that my friends wouldn't even consider hanging out with and vice versa. For me there has to be a physical attraction for their to be chemistry, I have types, but I have felt chemistry with women that definitely didn't fit my usual mold. I also agree that someone can learn the art of creating attraction.

[Hkizzle]

I also agree that someone can learn the art of creating attraction.

 

You know a lot more men believe this than women as well for some reason.

 

For some reason whilst the female self help relationship genre is much bigger than the ones for men, usualy pick up artist books, the ones for women are not very systematic.

 

I was thinking of writing a systematic book for women but not sure it would even sell since women are not very receptive to the idea of artificially creating chemistry.

[New Again]

A lot of people, especially women use the terms chemistry /sparks /connection.

 

People generally feel chemistry though because they've fallen for someone that creates perceived high value in their minds. The thing is the way in which we judge value is from our evolutionary past and highly unrealiable to achieving happiness.

 

For example, a high value man is generally a man that's confident and fun to be with, but that has very little correlation to whether he is going to be a good partner or not. A high value female is a woman that's generally physically attractive and seen as hard to get, again traits that have almost zero correlation to whether she will be a good partner.

 

How do you view chemistry, and when you think about it how does it positively or negatively impact your love life?

 

Didn't read the whole thread, just the OP and the first few posts - so far seems I'm pretty different from everyone who responded.

 

For me, chemistry is very simply sexual attraction. I experience that before I fall for someone.

 

Some people just totally rub me the wrong way, and there's absolutely no reason for it. If you asked me why I instinctively dislike such a person, I couldn't tell you. It's just the opposite type of chemistry.

 

The more I read, the more I think I just view relationships and romance much differently than most people here.

[Devil Inside]

You know a lot more men believe this than women as well for some reason.

 

For some reason whilst the female self help relationship genre is much bigger than the ones for men, usualy pick up artist books, the ones for women are not very systematic.

 

I was thinking of writing a systematic book for women but not sure it would even sell since women are not very receptive to the idea of artificially creating chemistry.

 

I think men believe in this more because it is easier for men to create attraction. Women are largely attracted to a man's behavior, where men are largely attracted to looks. It is a lot easier to behve in a different manner then it is to change your appearance.

[Hkizzle]

I think men believe in this more because it is easier for men to create attraction. Women are largely attracted to a man's behavior, where men are largely attracted to looks. It is a lot easier to behve in a different manner then it is to change your appearance.

 

Right, so when women refer to chemistry they are refering to something that is mainly to do with the man's personality, and to a much lesser extenet his looks.

 

It's just describing something in layman terms, when in fact most women filter out men with the same process.

[Elrey]

I'm a man and I think chemistry is sexual attraction and compataility, emotional compatability, and intellectual compatability. I married a woman that I didn't have all these components with 9 years ago and we separated a year ago. She's wonderful person, but I was unhappy for years. I had tried to be logical and "sell" myself on her. She is supportive, kind, great family, a great mother, etc. I thought that was more important than the chemistry. Boy was I wrong. Both character AND chemistry are important! I am certain of this now (therapy helped. Lol.)

 

Ironically, after separating I met a woman and fell in love. Amazing chemistry. On every level. Then she just stopped seeing me. She would still text and call (often when intoxicated) to tell me she missed me, wanted us to be together, that we "get" each other, and that the sex was amazing. But she would not commit to seeing me again! See was all over the place and obviously confused. I figured out that despite feelings for a man, many women (especially when younger) have certain dealbreakers in ther heads when deciding on a long-term partner. For her, I believe it was the fact that I'm a single dad. Could be some other things as well. She is letting those things trump her strong attraction (both physical and emotional) and her connection with me. She had never imagined falling in love with a divorced father of a 4 year old. It doesn't play out in her plan.

 

I have noticed that it takes life experience and maturity to realize that the only thing that matters is character combined with chemistry. Just as I realized my mistake eventually, I believe she will as well. Sad really. Many older women have told me that they or their girlfriends made the same mistake and later regretted it.

 

Oh and to those who say that chemistry dissapears. It can. That's why you need to work at it. If you work at it, it never entirely goes away. Maybe stabilize is a better way to put it. I met a man who had been married over 30 years. He said he still daydreams about his wife. So it can happen!

[Trialbyfire]

I think the reason why many men on LS can't/won't admit to the three elements of chemistry, is insecurity or a lack of internal insight.

[Isolde]

Not all women go for the archetypal alpha male and to base an entire theory on that, is a gross oversimplification.

[Sam Spade]

I think the reason why many men on LS can't/won't admit to the three elements of chemistry, is insecurity or a lack of internal insight.

 

 

As far as you are concerned, all men (or women) who disagree with you on anything have something wrong with them .

[Sam Spade]

I'm a man and I think chemistry is sexual attraction and compataility, emotional compatability, and intellectual compatability. I married a woman that I didn't have all these components with 9 years ago and we separated a year ago. She's wonderful person, but I was unhappy for years. I had tried to be logical and "sell" myself on her. She is supportive, kind, great family, a great mother, etc. I thought that was more important than the chemistry. Boy was I wrong. Both character AND chemistry are important! I am certain of this now (therapy helped. Lol.)

 

Ironically, after separating I met a woman and fell in love. Amazing chemistry. On every level. Then she just stopped seeing me. She would still text and call (often when intoxicated) to tell me she missed me, wanted us to be together, that we "get" each other, and that the sex was amazing. But she would not commit to seeing me again! See was all over the place and obviously confused. I figured out that despite feelings for a man, many women (especially when younger) have certain dealbreakers in ther heads when deciding on a long-term partner. For her, I believe it was the fact that I'm a single dad. Could be some other things as well. She is letting those things trump her strong attraction (both physical and emotional) and her connection with me. She had never imagined falling in love with a divorced father of a 4 year old. It doesn't play out in her plan.

 

I have noticed that it takes life experience and maturity to realize that the only thing that matters is character combined with chemistry. Just as I realized my mistake eventually, I believe she will as well. Sad really. Many older women have told me that they or their girlfriends made the same mistake and later regretted it.

 

Oh and to those who say that chemistry dissapears. It can. That's why you need to work at it. If you work at it, it never entirely goes away. Maybe stabilize is a better way to put it. I met a man who had been married over 30 years. He said he still daydreams about his wife. So it can happen!

 

So, what didn't you like about your wife, and what kind of "convincing" did you have to do??? The point is that there is a subtle, but important difference between trying to talk yourself into something that you don't actually like versus being actually happy, though not necessarily in the unicorns and cupcakes mainstream cliche, hallmark style. In the former, of course there is no point to pretend, but the latter, IMO is a solid ground for a long and happy marriage.

 

So, are you happier now than you used to be with your wife?

[Trialbyfire]

As far as you are concerned, all men (or women) who disagree with you on anything have something wrong with them .

Nope but there's no doubt that to deny something that's blatantly there, is insecurity in that you self-protect by attempting to have the upperhand, thus control, within relationships. That's sad if you think about what a viable relationship is comprised of.

 

Sure, there's the odd man who can't feel but they're few and far between, primarily sociopaths.

[Sam Spade]

Nope but there's no doubt that to deny something that's blatantly there, is insecurity in that you self-protect by attempting to have the upperhand, thus control, within relationships. That's sad if you think about what a viable relationship is comprised of.

 

Sure, there's the odd man who can't feel but they're few and far between, primarily sociopaths.

 

Like I said .

[Rudderless]

I think the reason why many men on LS can't/won't admit to the three elements of chemistry, is insecurity or a lack of internal insight.

 

Why just men? Most of the women on this thread don't agree with your made up theory either.

[neowulf]

From my own perspective, I've never felt "love" with anyone I didn't have chemistry with.

 

I've dated girls I "liked" well enough, but ultimately I found I just couldn't over look how little I felt for her.

 

Perhaps that's not the most pragmatic approach, but I refuse to lie to a woman and tell her I love her when I feel absolutely nothing like romantic love for her.

 

I've felt love perhaps twice in my life and each time I *knew* I was in love. I didn't have to sit there asking myself the question, or listing of a bunch of qualities that I *should* love in the girl I was seeing.

 

I remember kissing my X-GF of 6 years for the first time... and having fireworks go off in my head. I couldn't walk straight for a few minutes afterward, it was that strong.

 

The problem now however is that once you've experienced chemistry like that with someone, everything else feels shallow by comparison.

 

Chemistry may not have allowed us to work things out in the long run, but I have no doubt in my mind that I loved her to the very core of my being.

 

I think any future wife of mine deserves that kind of devotion from her husband.

[monkey00]

I'm a man and I think chemistry is sexual attraction and compataility, emotional compatability, and intellectual compatability.

 

I agree with your take on chemistry. As a guy I view chemistry almost as an unspoken mutual contract of trust/synchronization/raw magnetism.

 

Very few and far, of all the girls I've been with and dated over the years I've only had a small number of girls I can honestly say where we both had mutual chemistry. I agree that it's possible to manipulate the other party into having chemistry for you. I think there were times for me actually, until I realize that girl likes me or has a thing for me I usually don't think much of her. And at times when I did find out, I would fall into the chemistry trap.

 

I think though sexual attraction can come after chemistry. Even if you may not find that person sexually appealing in the beginning, you can later. It's almost like brainwashing if you will.

[Yamaha]

It's funny how nowdays people have to have this spark and chemistry to even date someone and if it's not present right from the start it will never grow and you will never become interested in that person but forever remain just a friend.

 

People have been dating and getting married for centuries and they even stayed married for a lifetime unlike the over 50% divorce rate of today. It makes you wonder if maybe we need to look in the past and find out what they had to make things work between them.

[sumdude]

chemistry = when I smell her and kiss her I can feel it from the base of my spine to the top of my skull

 

pure simple animal attraction

 

Sigh, been a while since I felt that with someone who was available..

 

That is important to me, it HAS to be there at least somewhat because sex is the only difference between a platonic friendship and a mate. If you try to make it work without it someone always ends up frustrated.

[neowulf]

It's funny how nowdays people have to have this spark and chemistry to even date someone and if it's not present right from the start it will never grow and you will never become interested in that person but forever remain just a friend.

 

People have been dating and getting married for centuries and they even stayed married for a lifetime unlike the over 50% divorce rate of today. It makes you wonder if maybe we need to look in the past and find out what they had to make things work between them.

 

To put another spin on it, why *not* try for that kind of chemistry with your partner?

 

Sure, it's not the be all or end all of relationships. But neither is a tick box list that makes you appear compatible on paper.

 

You can't *grow* chemistry. You may be able to grow attraction, but chemistry is there from the go get. You can feel it within a few moments of meeting someone. It's not logical, it's instinctive.

 

As for why couples in the past stayed married, you may want to dig a little deeper. People stayed together alright, but were often miserable. Husbands were running around having affairs all over the place. Wives having secret affairs behind their backs. Marriages reduced to nothing more than platonic open relationships.

 

If anything, I think people are trying to be true to themselves more these days. Sure it means there's more breakups, more divorces.. but isn't that better than spending a life of misery in a toxic relationship that no longer does either person any good?

[Yamaha]

To put another spin on it, why *not* try for that kind of chemistry with your partner?

 

Sure, it's not the be all or end all of relationships. But neither is a tick box list that makes you appear compatible on paper.

 

You can't *grow* chemistry. You may be able to grow attraction, but chemistry is there from the go get. You can feel it within a few moments of meeting someone. It's not logical, it's instinctive.

 

As for why couples in the past stayed married, you may want to dig a little deeper. People stayed together alright, but were often miserable. Husbands were running around having affairs all over the place. Wives having secret affairs behind their backs. Marriages reduced to nothing more than platonic open relationships.

 

If anything, I think people are trying to be true to themselves more these days. Sure it means there's more breakups, more divorces.. but isn't that better than spending a life of misery in a toxic relationship that no longer does either person any good?

 

I guess if the chemistry is the "end all" and that is what makes a relationship then why aren't we having successful ones?

[Soul Bear]

I am perpetually baffled by how every time this topic of chemistry comes up, the thread is overwhelmed by female responses about how important it is etc., while there is not a single male response along these lines. There's something wrong here .

 

 

I am very much into chemistry.

It's important!

[neowulf]

I guess if the chemistry is the "end all" and that is what makes a relationship then why aren't we having successful ones?

 

A lot of reasons. Failure to communicate and compromise would be my top guesses more than anything else.

 

An attitude of "Me first" which basically means if people can't have it their way, they bail because it's all too hard.

 

Throwing chemistry out the window in favor of platonic companionship may be something I consider later in life... but for now I think I'll stick to dating women I'm actually *into*.