mileunderground Posted September 5, 2009 Posted September 5, 2009 I've been in a bit of a relationship rut for the last few years. I tend to become attracted to girls that are unavailable for whatever reasons, and when girls show a strong sign of interest in return I generally run for the hills. The reason for this is a long and complicated one, but needless to say I'm trying to break out of this habit. Recently I've been hanging out with this girl. I was initially drawn to her (not super attracted, but definitely some attraction there). We've hung out maybe 3-4 times. She seems like a really good person, kind, available, interested etc. I just don't have any of those butterfly feelings or sparks and am not strongly attracted to her, though something drew me to her to begin with. When I think of kissing her, I'm not that excited about it. Should I keep pursuing it even though I'm unsure if I'm interested? Part of me wonders if I keep hanging out if interest will develop, or if I should already be able to tell by now. Are the butterfly feelings and sparks overrated, and can they develop over time? I wonder if those feelings just aren't there for me because she IS available and seems like she would be a healthy option for a partner, and I am afraid of intimacy. I just want to break out of this and be in a good relationship for once. At the same time, I don't want to pursue something that I'm not very excited about. How do I get out of this rut? Thanks for listening
kizik Posted September 5, 2009 Posted September 5, 2009 Should I keep pursuing it even though I'm unsure if I'm interested? Part of me wonders if I keep hanging out if interest will develop, or if I should already be able to tell by now. You're a guy, right? "Slowly developing feelings" despite being not attracted is a chick thing. Doesn't happen with us. While I respect your consideration here, there is no way you are going to "develop interest" unless you initially want to bang her. I like to say there are two types of women in this world. 1) Those that make your dick hard 2) and those that don't. Don't ever chase one from 2), because it's a waste of time for the both of you.
Author mileunderground Posted September 5, 2009 Author Posted September 5, 2009 You're a guy, right? "Slowly developing feelings" despite being not attracted is a chick thing. Well, actually I am a gay female, so no. Unfortunately there are no good gay dating advice forums out there that I've discovered, which brings me here... Any other advice, anyone?
kizik Posted September 5, 2009 Posted September 5, 2009 I would advise you to list gay female at the top of your post next time. Um, 'cause you didn't even mention it, and these things are very gender-specific. Luck!
Author mileunderground Posted September 5, 2009 Author Posted September 5, 2009 Okay, will do. Thanks for your response anyway
SoulSearch_CO Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Mile - I got into a relationship with a guy in January of this year that I didn't really feel a spark for. Thought maybe I could develop one. No...I didn't come even close. So for Kizik to say "it's a chick thing" is BS. Broke up with him in July because there REALLY was nothing there. I cared for him, sure. We had used "ILY" and had been fully intimate. I didn't feel able to bond with him. So, no - I don't think "sparks" are overrated. I felt stronger for the guy I only went on 4 dates with in August because there were sparks. Chemistry cannot be forced. If you feel you can live without it, then do. As for me - a woman - I can't. I just don't bond.
kizik Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 for Kizik to say "it's a chick thing" is BS. Most guys wouldn't go on a second date with a girl they didn't deem "hot" or cute or something. A woman, on the other hand, seems to be willing to pursue things further despite not being physically attracted to a guy (or girl, as in this case) in the hopes of "getting there".
xpaperxcutx Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 If you're not attracted to her, then you're not attracted to her. Forcing yourself to be in a relationship or forcing yourself to make yourself like her won't make a difference. It does not matter if you're gay or not, if you don't feel anything, then it's only fair to spare yourself of any second guessing and pursue other people who will " spark' your interest.
kizik Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 For once papercut and I agree on something. Ah, it feels nice...
SoulSearch_CO Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 Most guys wouldn't go on a second date with a girl they didn't deem "hot" or cute or something. A woman, on the other hand, seems to be willing to pursue things further despite not being physically attracted to a guy (or girl, as in this case) in the hopes of "getting there". Is a big difference from: "Slowly developing feelings" despite being not attracted is a chick thing. I don't know many women that could develop something that's not there. And now, given my experience with the one and only guy I've ever pursued past a first date when I didn't feel a spark...I wouldn't ever do it again. My first post was in regards to what you said in your first post. But thanks for clarifying.
kizik Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 I think the two things I said are pretty similar. One is more elaborate. You're talking about "spark", i.e. chemistry or vibing. I'm talking about being physically attracted. Guys do not often feel "spark" without also thinking a girl is damn attractive on some level. But women have the capacity to feel this "spark" without being overtly, physically attracted to someone. This is the distinction, reiterated.
xpaperxcutx Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 For once papercut and I agree on something. Ah, it feels nice... Lol Kizik I thought we were over that. And just to clarify i didn't write to agree but merely to state the obvious.
kizik Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 So we can argue again? SWEET! PS. This persistence on the part of women to get over their lack of physical attraction clearly exemplifies the basic tenets of males being visual, females emotional.
xpaperxcutx Posted September 6, 2009 Posted September 6, 2009 So we can argue again? SWEET! Uhh... :confused: No. But let's try to move forward without bringing up what occurred in the past. Sorry for the TJ OP.
Recommended Posts