Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When people are inexperienced about relationships, they tend to only focus on physical attributes. Its also a biological instinct to seek out the most beautiful person one can get into a relatioship in hopes to procreate. But that's just not reality, since not everyone is physically beautiful (in what is perceived beautiful in society).
In the past when I was younger, I didn't put too much stock into chemistry, nor too much into looks, either. I just wanted to date, and get to know as much women as I could. "Get a feel for them", if you will
I didn't know how important chemistry could actually be until Ive gone through many failed relationships not based on chemistry.
But you have chemistry with opposite sex friends why not date them?
Chemistry is a vague term to describe attraction when you can have chemistry with a lot of people of the opposite sex
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken1982
But you have chemistry with opposite sex friends why not date them?
Chemistry is a vague term to describe attraction when you can have chemistry with a lot of people of the opposite sex
Speaking for me, obviously:
Because chemistry isn't enough, and it isn't synonymous with attraction. It needs to be there, but there is chemistry with good friends too. There can be chemistry with a person without attraction (it just isn't romantic chemistry), just as chemistry can make someone more attractive. There can also be attraction without chemistry at times (though this rarely happens to me and it generally dissipates, but not always). Also, you may have interpersonal romantic chemistry but not sexual chemistry. And also, people aren't always free to date when you are. Or, in addition, you can have chemistry with someone and not be compatible, or not want the same things.
Chemistry is needed, but it isn't enough. No one component, or two components, are enough for a relationship to make. A lot of things have to come together to make it work, which is why there are far far far more misses than hits.
I think more men will "put up with" a beautiful woman who has issues, than there are women who will "put up with" a good looking guy who has personality issues.
As I have said before "A woman's beauty is her wealth, but a man's wealth is his beauty".
Likewise, a gal who is hot, but has no real earning potential, is desirable to many men, but a good-looking beach bum or pool boy has limited appeal compared to the gal.
Also, "adequacy" - for many, it's more important that a potential mate have at least adequate looks, adequate intelligence, etc, compared to one who is HOT but dumb. Perhaps more important to score "above 4" in all scored categories, than to score a "10" in just one.
I've said before that I don't really rank conventionally good looks very high in priorities for partner selection, and I still think that is true.
But if I contemplate my friends, especially my female friends, I realize that if I know two women and both of them are pretty annoying. Like they won't shut up over stupid things and ramble on at the mouth in some manner that's irritating for instance. I MIGHT feel more negatively, more quickly, toward an ugly looking person than a beautiful person in that situation. I do believe I'd come around to cutting off and shutting out the pretty one, but I might give her slightly more of a chance. (EDIT: Trying to figure out why that is, since I've never thought about it before--I suspect it might have to do with social group dynamics and pressures.)
But as a bisexual I'm kind of lame, and my interest in women does have more appreciation of their beauty than my interest in men does. I've only ever dated 6 women and they've all been beautiful. Many more men, of a vast variety of appearances.
I actually judge too-polished, too-good-looking men negatively sometimes. So the ugly annoying guy, I might give more of a chance to, maybe because I figure that he's just socially awkward and no one else takes the time to know him, maybe he's a decent dude...but the pretty-but-annoying guy, I'll dismiss immediately.
I can't really discuss in context of relationships though, the only partner I ever had where I put up with really bad behavior, it sure wasn't because he was good looking. It was because he was the father of my kids and I was trying to make that work.
Do you suppose that's what women are saying about you, too?
But Catz that is true. If what's on the outside is not attractive to YOU how can a person care to get to know someone for what's on the inside of him or her?
Can you truly be with someone who you are not attractive to just because you enjoy that person's conversation? Or just because that person is sweet and has a good heart? Or just because of some other great attribute/characteristic?
I don't kiss characteristics/feelings/conversations. I want to kiss, hug, fondle, enjoy a good looking woman.
But Catz that is true. If what's on the outside is not attractive to YOU how can a person care to get to know someone for what's on the inside of him or her?
Can you truly be with someone who you are not attractive to just because you enjoy that person's conversation? Or just because that person is sweet and has a good heart? Or just because of some other great attribute/characteristic?
I don't kiss characteristics/feelings/conversations. I want to kiss, hug, fondle, enjoy a good looking woman.
It has been argued that men have a stronger need for visual attraction. Yet I've seen some really ugly women get men, so...I dunno.
When I'm evaluating men I've got a broad threshold. If he's not hideous, he's just ok or "meh" looking, I am still willing to spend time talking with him. He will have a chance to reveal to me if he's got awesome traits beyond his looks. He'd have to be pretty super awful looking, like on the extreme end of obese or emaciated or disfigured, to not get that far. However, very often men who are traditionally good looking come off as possibly pretentious or something to me, or perhaps too young. I have female friends who go after the "firefighter" type young guys and I'm like "ugh, no." And a good energy in conversation will turn me on, WAY on, in ways that no one's appearance can.
This seems hard for guys to understand, but maybe it's also because guys are often expected to make that first move, so before the first word gets spoken, you're the ones using your eyes to evaluate prospects and choose who you want to talk to. I didn't have my first hours-long hangout and talk with my now-boyfriend because I spotted him and started talking to him. He sent me a message and I liked his words. He asked if I would mind if we spent some time chatting at a social event, and I was like "sure, why not?" At what point did I look at him and decide if he was good looking enough? I didn't. Not really.
When I'm evaluating men I've got a broad threshold. If he's not hideous, he's just ok or "meh" looking, I am still willing to spend time talking with him. He will have a chance to reveal to me if he's got awesome traits beyond his looks. He'd have to be pretty super awful looking, like on the extreme end of obese or emaciated or disfigured, to not get that far. However, very often men who are traditionally good looking come off as possibly pretentious or something to me, or perhaps too young. I have female friends who go after the "firefighter" type young guys and I'm like "ugh, no." And a good energy in conversation will turn me on, WAY on, in ways that no one's appearance can.
I'm much the same way. I dated tall guys, short guys, skinny guys, different ethnicities, bald guys, guys with hair, even dudes with not so great teeth (clean and brushed, but discolored and/or crooked), beards, clean shaven... My only real dealbreaker was extreme obesity.
Pretty boys? Meh.... I leaned toward thinking they probably relied too much on their looks and never really had to develop good relationship skills and attitudes.
My SO's main attraction was his honesty and transparency, as well as the fact that his interest in me was based on various similar interests and personality compatibilities, not just MY looks.
but I would not want nor take a poor conversationalist nor a bitchy person, as you describe OP. I could forgive (and have in one case) some other things though. Has to be a smart educated person though.
I think you guys also missed a point.. staying within your league.
don't go for someone beyond your league
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
