Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry

Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LorraineCA -> Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 8:34:05 PM)
I had a submissive that seemed very intelligent. He claimed he had a PhD in Psychology and I would sit and listen to this guy talk for hours and hours. He claimed most relationships fail and the reason they fail is because people are looking for chemistry up front. And if there wasn't any chemistry in the first or second date the person isn't interested in continuing it. He claimed that we need to stop looking at the physical features and get to know the person's personality. Don't look for chemistry and if there is chemistry walk away from the relationship. He claimed that most of us come from unhealthy families and this chemistry is reflecting the relationship we had with our Dad and/or Mom, which is unhealthy. We fulfill our childhood in our partner if there is chemistry right away. I don't have any training in Psychology so I apologize if I'm not explaining this correctly. Or if you think I know what I'm trying to say please say so. So when you date look to see what her/his personality is. Does this person listen? Short temper? Etc. Once you do that then see if chemistry develops. It may take months or even years. You need to see the beauty within. Would you agree with this premise?

TheHeretic -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 8:38:57 PM)
I want to see a woman drunk, before I get too deeply involved. Forget waiting months or years to "see the beauty within" - I want to know if there is an ugly bitch hiding in there, and the sooner the better.

Spiritedsub2 -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 8:59:01 PM)
My experience would support this premise. The problem is that I can't imagine anyone, including myself, being willing to invest months in a potential relationship to see if real chemistry develops. If it happens over time sort of accidentally in the course of regular events (which happened to me) then it can be amazing. But that is really a crapshoot.

MistressDarkArt -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 9:27:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Spiritedsub2 My experience would support this premise. The problem is that I can't imagine anyone, including myself, being willing to invest months in a potential relationship to see if real chemistry develops. If it happens over time sort of accidentally in the course of regular events (which happened to me) then it can be amazing. But that is really a crapshoot. I agree whole-heartedly. In 55 years I have NEVER had chemistry develop after long months or years of getting acquainted if it wasn't there early on. My benchmark is three meetings with a person. That is not to say I'll get physical with a person that soon but if by the third date I don't begin to eagerly visualize that man naked and close to me I know it simply won't happen.

LorraineCA -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 9:31:52 PM)
How do you know it simply won't happen after three dates? You wouldn't be open to the possibility that the chemistry may develop after 5 dates?

MistressDarkArt -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 9:38:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LorraineCA He claimed that we need to stop looking at the physical features and get to know the person's personality. Don't look for chemistry and if there is chemistry walk away from the relationship. He claimed that most of us come from unhealthy families and this chemistry is reflecting the relationship we had with our Dad and/or Mom, which is unhealthy. We fulfill our childhood in our partner if there is chemistry right away. Would you agree with this premise? I don't agree that we should walk away from immediate chemistry. We should enjoy that chemistry before acting on it as we gradually get to know the other elements of the person. I also don't agree that we should stop looking at physical features that please us. Why limit ourselves to just good looks/physical attraction OR function with no chemistry? We can have chemistry AND a fulfilling, well-functioning connection. Your guy is either trying to sell you on his worth when you're not physically attracted, or he's read the wrong books. Don't settle.

tj444 -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 9:42:52 PM)
I think there needs to be a certain amount of attraction for anything to grow.. trying to force something doesn't work.. you can like a person but if the attraction isn't there, its really not going anywhere, imo.. But, I have had times when I thought there was a lot of chemistry, and now if I feel that, I hold back cuz I need other things, like good compatibility in various aspects, and stuff like that.. Just great chemistry alone is a one night stand kinda thing (even if it lasts a few months/years).. Imo, you need a good balance, enough attraction/chemistry, compatibility, similar views, goals, hobbies, likes, dislikes, sexual likes & similar level, etc.. I think a reason why many(?) relationships fail is cuz one person grows in one direction and the other person grows in a totally different direction.. then you wake up and realize you don't know each other any more..

MistressDarkArt -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 9:45:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LorraineCA How do you know it simply won't happen after three dates? You wouldn't be open to the possibility that the chemistry may develop after 5 dates? Not anymore (if I were looking). There have been enough longish dating periods with good men that I had no physical chemistry with to know what the outcome will be. I suppose there is a possibility of it developing on the 4th or 5th date, about as much as a lightening strike in the spot I'm standing on when it's 75 degrees and clear. But that's just me. I say life's too short; enjoy your chemistry, keep a level head, and act responsibly.

TheHeretic -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:02:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressDarkArt We can have chemistry AND a fulfilling, well-functioning connection. Or just a good fling on chemistry. [:D] There is a woman in my life that I refer to as my girlfriend, even though we split up for the final time damn near 20 years ago. The chemistry was fantastic, but we were, and would be today, completely incompatible. Incompatible meaning I learned where the line is in my brain where I will raise my hand to a woman in anger, and her standing at the foot of our bed with the biggest knife in the house, and thinking about whether the time she'd get in prison for killing me would be worth it. What we are now, is the very best of old friends.

mummyman321 -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:07:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LorraineCA I had a submissive that seemed very intelligent. He claimed he had a PhD in Psychology and I would sit and listen to this guy talk for hours and hours. He claimed most relationships fail and the reason they fail is because people are looking for chemistry up front. And if there wasn't any chemistry in the first or second date the person isn't interested in continuing it. He claimed that we need to stop looking at the physical features and get to know the person's personality. Don't look for chemistry and if there is chemistry walk away from the relationship. He claimed that most of us come from unhealthy families and this chemistry is reflecting the relationship we had with our Dad and/or Mom, which is unhealthy. We fulfill our childhood in our partner if there is chemistry right away. I don't have any training in Psychology so I apologize if I'm not explaining this correctly. Or if you think I know what I'm trying to say please say so. So when you date look to see what her/his personality is. Does this person listen? Short temper? Etc. Once you do that then see if chemistry develops. It may take months or even years. You need to see the beauty within. Would you agree with this premise? I would not agree to this premise. I do not see "chemistry" as a physical attraction. Actually it sounds like you are talking about lust and not chemistry. Chemistry in dating and in a relationship means the 2 people click, get along, enjoy each other. It is the spark the starts the relationship. Generally is comes from having some type of similarity both people can relate to. I see good chemistry as having similar likes and the two can easily related to each other.

littlewonder -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:11:15 PM)
I agree with both. When I have dated, I looked for chemistry AND personality. That's why there was always a 2nd and 3rd date if I felt chemistry or right personality. By the third date I would know if we could work or not. Why do one or the other? Why not do both?

littlewonder -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:13:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MistressDarkArt quote: ORIGINAL: LorraineCA How do you know it simply won't happen after three dates? You wouldn't be open to the possibility that the chemistry may develop after 5 dates? Not anymore (if I were looking). There have been enough longish dating periods with good men that I had no physical chemistry with to know what the outcome will be. I suppose there is a possibility of it developing on the 4th or 5th date, about as much as a lightening strike in the spot I'm standing on when it's 75 degrees and clear. But that's just me. I say life's too short; enjoy your chemistry, keep a level head, and act responsibly. This here I think is good. Basically this is my approach as well.

DesFIP -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:18:59 PM)
It is true that we look for what is familiar. And what is familiar is what we had in our family of origin. So if you were abandoned by your father, you would look for guys who also were not emotionally vulnerable to you. However, that assumes that no one ever looks at their behavior and seeks to change it. To become healthier, to grow. I disagree that all families are unhealthy though. Your parents made the mistakes they did, believing it would solve the problems they grew up with. You make different mistakes with your kids, hoping to avoid the mistakes your parents did. Beyond that, if there's no spark, I'm not going to have sex with him. Because I see no reason to have sex with a guy who doesn't turn me on, sex I won't enjoy.

LorraineCA -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:19:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mummyman321 I would not agree to this premise. I do not see "chemistry" as a physical attraction. Actually it sounds like you are talking about lust and not chemistry. Chemistry in dating and in a relationship means the 2 people click, get along, enjoy each other. It is the spark the starts the relationship. Generally is comes from having some type of similarity both people can relate to. I see good chemistry as having similar likes and the two can easily related to each other. I agree with you. If a man authentically listens to me and understands, this is chemistry for me. However, most people don't view "chemistry" like this; they view it sexually and romantically; physical attraction. I have friends that tell me, "I'm not interested in sleeping with him on our first date, but I want the desire to be there. If it isn't there, there won't be any chemistry; so why go on a second date?" I don't think people view "chemistry" the way you described it.

FieryOpal -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:36:40 PM)
In my experience, sexual chemistry doesn't have to have an immediate lightning bolt effect and could unfold throughout the course of the date, but if it's not palpable within a few hours it rarely materializes further on down the road. I will know fairly quickly whether my date gets relegated into the friend zone, and not based on physical attraction alone. An appealing personality will overshadow mediocre looks in most instances. A good-looking man who is egotistical and arrogant becomes instantly undesirable and therefore unattractive in my eyes. I wish I could say I've ever given it 3 dates, but I honestly can't. But, of course, I don't rush into meeting someone on a date either. We have to first connect on an intellectual level and develop a rapport first. By the time I do meet him in person, I'll know by that first date whether there is any potential for embarking on an intimate relationship. If I can't imagine myself in bed with him, forget it. I've tried it differently in the past and made rationalizations instead of trusting my gut instincts, and it's never worked out right. That's just how I am--decisive.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 10:53:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mummyman321 I would not agree to this premise. I do not see "chemistry" as a physical attraction. Actually it sounds like you are talking about lust and not chemistry. Chemistry in dating and in a relationship means the 2 people click, get along, enjoy each other. It is the spark the starts the relationship. Generally is comes from having some type of similarity both people can relate to. I see good chemistry as having similar likes and the two can easily related to each other. This is the way I look at things, also. I promise not to go through the whole list but, if a lady can engage me, we're off to a really good start. I am not discounting physical attraction but ... I was in a heavy metal band in the 80s and I got more ass than a toilet seat. They all looked like the girls in the 80s videos and la-di-da. It meant *nothing* ! Now, I prefer to meet a quality lady that, physically, may have a few miles on her but, unlike the proverbial "bad road", it's more like "a smooth ride".

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 11:08:44 PM)
FR What if you come from a stable home with parents in a highly functional and successful marriage. I have good relationships with my parents still, they have a wonderful loving marriage after thirty years. As creepy as the whole 'subconsciously dating your own parents' things sound, I could do a lot worse than replicating my childhood home - it was safe and full of love.

EdBowie -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/10/2014 11:25:39 PM)
For thousands of years, in thousands of places, arranged marriages were the norm, and they 'worked' as well as anything could, with or without chemistry.

sexyred1 -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/11/2014 12:23:15 AM)
People often confuse.chemistry with compatibility. It's completely different. Chemistry is a pull of attraction, it is sexual, sensual and how they make you feel, you usually know by date 3. Compatibility is things in common, ease of conversations, shared sense of humor,similar values and goals. It's how someone treats you. Sadly, these things are not usually present in one person, or, not in the right percentages. I have outrageous chemistry that lasted over 10 years without compatibility and I was with someone perfect for me in compatibility with zero chemistry on my part. He treated me great, but I could barely sleep with him. It's sad when these things don't work. You cannot take traits from column A and B like a Chinese menu.

myotherself -> RE: Most Relationships Fail Because Of Chemistry (1/11/2014 12:39:12 AM)
I agree with Red and Mummyman - I favour compatibility over chemistry every time. BUT there needs to be some chemistry or it's never going to work, and in my experience of dating this chemistry is apparent in the first date. If it's not there, it's not there, no matter how many dates you go on. I dated a guy several years ago that I had huge amounts in common with. He was easy to talk to and we laughed a lot. But I didn't want to have sex with him, and there was no way he was right for me in a D/s sense. I went on about 8 or 9 dates with him and we became great friends, but you can't create chemistry if the basic elements aren't there. Similarly, I dated a guy with whom I had crazy chemistry - we could barely keep our hands of each other! But apart from that we had very little in common. Again, we dated a few times until we both realised that there was so little compatibility it was a fairly empty experience.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.589844E-02