RockThing Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 I just nodded my head when she said it. "I really, really like you. We had fun...and you're an amazing guy. But, I don't think there's any chemistry, right?" She says 'right' like I'm supposed to know WTF she is talking about. Thus ended a date with this very attractive brunette whom I spent quite a bit of time working up the courage to ask out. I thought we had a great night. We went into town, had white linen cloth dinner, saw a great band, headed to a late night place, then to a party, then home at 4AM. She laughed a lot during the night, touched me on the arm during dinner, and we kissed briefly at the party. Someone commented that we were a good looking couple. So when I dropped her back to her apartment, she dropped the No Chemistry thing on me as I went in for a kiss. From a guy's perspective, if a woman is hot, that's all the chemistry you need to get going - stuff is flowing around in the bloodstream if she has a nice face with a body to match. If a man is physically attracted to a woman, he'll feel chemistry. If her personality is a match, he'll feel compatible and will want to pursue her. Women, on the other hand, seem to mean something else with this word 'chemistry' than what I understand it as. I have an inkling it has something to do with what the man does or doesn't do to arouse feelings in her on a date. It would appear that she needs not only to be phsysically attracted to him, but he must initiate additional actions that will arouse her interest. But here's the rub. I did come on to her during the night, such as the kiss at the party. I know all the PUA artists talk long on building attraction, but I'm not sure this is the same thing chemistry. I talked to a woman friend about this and she says that she 'just feels it'. Thanks. That was useless. So here I am. Can someone please explain what chemistry really is. Do I have to learn some secret 'Bee dance' outside the hive or something. Help!
USMCHokie Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 "No chemistry" = she's not physically attracted to you...especially if she pulls that line on the first date...
reservoirdog1 Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 "No chemistry" = she's not physically attracted to you...especially if she pulls that line on the first date... That's pretty much it. It's just a nicer way of saying it, a way that puts the blame not on either of you, but on the situation and the combination of the two of you. For future refrerence, who was driving the agenda on that date? Was it her idea to go to all those places and stay together till 4 am? Or were they your suggestions? I ask because if they were your suggestions, rather than hers, you probably let the date go on way too long. You want a first date to end on a high note, with her wanting more. If she's prolonging things, that's okay -- it means she doesn't want it to end. If you're prolonging it, it's too much.
EasyHeart Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 "No chemistry" = she's not physically attracted to you...especially if she pulls that line on the first date... Yup. Bingo!
2sure Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 I have dated men who I have found physically attractive only to find upon further experience...that I just wasnt "feeling it". To me, thats chemistry. Sexual chemistry, yes...but a little more than that too. She said "right" ? expecting you to agree with her possibly because like myself - she believes that if real chemistry is there that both have to feel it or it simply is not there. Really its nothing you should take personally.
Author RockThing Posted September 17, 2010 Author Posted September 17, 2010 I have dated men who I have found physically attractive only to find upon further experience...that I just wasnt "feeling it". To me, thats chemistry. Sexual chemistry, yes...but a little more than that too. . As you can see the previous two posters said 'Not physically attracted' but I don't think that's the case. She wouldn't have kissed me, stayed out, had fun etc. etc. if she didn't have some interest there. I think you are closer to the bone 'Sexual chemistry, yes...but a little more than that too. ' It's trying to figure out what that little more is. Yes, I know it when I feel it, but clearly there's a gender interpretation of what chemistry is. If I a woman could explain it better at least I'd be able to understand what women were saying when they use the word 'chemistry'.
USMCHokie Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 As you can see the previous two posters said 'Not physically attracted' but I don't think that's the case. She wouldn't have kissed me, stayed out, had fun etc. etc. if she didn't have some interest there. I think you are closer to the bone 'Sexual chemistry, yes...but a little more than that too. ' It's trying to figure out what that little more is. Yes, I know it when I feel it, but clearly there's a gender interpretation of what chemistry is. If I a woman could explain it better at least I'd be able to understand what women were saying when they use the word 'chemistry'. I'm sorry that the truth isn't what you wanted to hear... From a guy's perspective, if a woman is hot, that's all the chemistry you need to get going - stuff is flowing around in the bloodstream if she has a nice face with a body to match. If a man is physically attracted to a woman, he'll feel chemistry. If her personality is a match, he'll feel compatible and will want to pursue her. Women, on the other hand, seem to mean something else with this word 'chemistry' than what I understand it as. I have an inkling it has something to do with what the man does or doesn't do to arouse feelings in her on a date. It would appear that she needs not only to be phsysically attracted to him, but he must initiate additional actions that will arouse her interest. I think you misunderstand what "chemistry" is...chemistry is mutual attraction and compatibility...you don't "feel" chemistry, as you try to say in the bolded sentence above...but you do feel attraction...chemistry is simply a term to describe attraction by both people towards each other...and it is gender neutral... But upon further examination, the girl in your situation actually does use "chemistry" in a somewhat correct manner...first, take a look at this simple set of equations: Boy attracted + girl attracted = chemistry Boy not attracted + girl attracted = no chemistry Boy attracted + girl not attracted = no chemistry When a girl tells a guy that there is no chemistry, she isn't actually lying...athough you may feel an attraction to her, she may not feel an attraction to you...hence, there is no chemistry...she just uses the chemistry line to avoid saying directly that she's not attracted...
that girl Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 She's not attracted to you. I have dated men who I have found physically attractive only to find upon further experience...that I just wasnt "feeling it". To me, thats chemistry. Sexual chemistry, yes...but a little more than that too. Like I used to work with a guy with half the office was into, but he never did it for me. Objectively, he was good looking and it wasn't a personality issue, he just didn't do it for me. When I first saw him, I noticed he was cute, but there were no butterflies and nothing he did was going to change it. She wouldn't have kissed me, stayed out, had fun etc. etc. if she didn't have some interest there. She might have. People do occassionally think "Well, I'll kiss him just to see what it is like." It sounds like she just wasn't feeling it and there was nothing you could do to change that.
denise_xo Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 This here that Hokie said: Boy attracted + girl attracted = chemistry Boy not attracted + girl attracted = no chemistry Boy attracted + girl not attracted = no chemistry
Feelin Frisky Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 ah, it's over-simplification to just say she's not attracted physically. If she weren't then why even go that far? Like someone else said, she just came to a place where she wasn't "feeling it". Who knows what that means? It just means that her rythm ain't jibing with your rhyme. It "beez" like that some times. Some women will give you a second look and some have just seen enough for them. Sometimes they cut themselves out of a good thing by passing final judgement on too little info but in my heart of heart I tend to think it's usually not such a good thing and they can see it. Life ain't fare but that's how it is. I've dumped girls too who I just didn't feel--what was it? Usually her rythm and connection, not tits and ass. I just didn't "feel it".
USMCHokie Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 ah, it's over-simplification to just say she's not attracted physically. Perhaps...then maybe it should read, "not physically attracted or otherwise not interested..."
GooseChaser Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 She's telling you that she likes you and thinks you're a good person, but she isn't interested in you romantically.
Feelin Frisky Posted September 17, 2010 Posted September 17, 2010 (edited) Perhaps...then maybe it should read, "not physically attracted or otherwise not interested..." maybe it should read: I liked your look but I just don't like YOU. Edited September 17, 2010 by Feelin Frisky
Ruby Slippers Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 For me, it takes much more than just good looks to arouse chemistry/sparks. Behavior and personality are definitely factors. For instance, I've been on dates with guys I found very physically attractive and magnetizing but felt nearly zero chemistry with, because they did not also arouse my desires on an intellectual, emotional, and/or spiritual level. For me, chemistry is just the excitement of possibility, that strong inner stirring that suggests there's a future worth exploring with this person. Essentially, it's the mating urge cranked up to a level I can't ignore. Keep in mind that women generally have higher standards for mating partners than men, since their reproductive burden is many times bigger. I'm not interested in casual relationships, so for me, just a handsome package is never going to be enough to arouse chemistry. Now, if we're clicking on many different levels, it doesn't take long for my mind to start trying him on as Mr. Right.
USMCHokie Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 For me, it takes much more than just good looks to arouse chemistry/sparks. Behavior and personality are definitely factors. I agree with you here...but I made sure to be very careful and caveat my original statement with the following: "especially if she pulls that line on the first date..." I would be confident in saying that in most cases, if you were physically attracted to a guy, you'd give him at least a second date to decide if the other non-physical factors aroused the chemistry...but if you straight up weren't physically attracted, no number of dates or amazing personality could possibly save him...so the first date is all he'd get... 1
SadandConfusedWA Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 It simply means that she is not physically attracted to you. She can't see herself having sex with you. You can't build attraction. It is either there or not. As for kiss and touching, I do that sometimes on dates. I am already not feeling it, but I think maybe if I give it a chance, kiss him or touch him for a bit - it will make me feel something. It never did. Some girls are also people pleasers and she could sense that you wanted to kiss/touch so she obliged for the duration of the date
Imajerk17 Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 You pulled out all the stops, on the first date? Day-um... It's too much. It ratchets up the pressure aspect, and if she doesn't reciprocate, there is a tendency for us guys to feel used. What did she do to earn this? You and she spending time together should be the main event of a good first date, not a fancy dinner or a great party. What did you and she talk about? What did you find out about her? What did she find out about you?
Imajerk17 Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 There also might be another guy in the picture too.
Ruby Slippers Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 I would be confident in saying that in most cases, if you were physically attracted to a guy, you'd give him at least a second date to decide if the other non-physical factors aroused the chemistry... Not so for me. I've turned down second dates with really good-looking men because I knew it couldn't go anywhere just after the first date. In one case, he was gorgeous but just... not very smart. In another, he was buff and sexy but too much of a brute, too aggressive and live wire. I felt minimal chemistry with them, and I saw no point in trying to force it. If you have to force it, it won't last, anyway.
johan Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 (edited) It means there was "no chemistry" on your date. It's a kind of jargon. She's hoping you bring some drugs on the next date. She's planning to rock your world. You just need to call her up and ask her which drugs she wants you to bring. Edited September 18, 2010 by johan
florence of suburbia Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 I agree with Ruby's explanation. For me, chemistry is a longing to get closer, a magnetism, a feeling in my body. A man can have a good looking face or body but not illicit any of that, and the reasons are not always apparent.
Feelin Frisky Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 ....but if you straight up weren't physically attracted, no number of dates or amazing personality could possibly save him...so the first date is all he'd get... So how does even one date make sense? Does a woman think: "geez, I really don't like this guy. He turns me off. I got an idea. Let's go on a date"? That's like: whoa, looks like a dog, runs like a dog, IT MUST BE A CHUBA CHABRA! So, unless this is a blind date or an on-line date where someone lied, it's a pretty safe bet that physical appearance is not the reason for a woman to not feel CHEMISTRY i.e. she's accepted the date in the first place (assumedly getting past the looks phase to the "hell, you're a putz, aren't you?" state).
2sunny Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 she may have kissed you at the party to check to see if there might be more attraction after you two kissed... sometimes once the kiss comes - you can tell if the fireworks are possible or not.
florence of suburbia Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 So how does even one date make sense? Does a woman think: "geez, I really don't like this guy. He turns me off. I got an idea. Let's go on a date"? That's like: whoa, looks like a dog, runs like a dog, IT MUST BE A CHUBA CHABRA! So, unless this is a blind date or an on-line date where someone lied, it's a pretty safe bet that physical appearance is not the reason for a woman to not feel CHEMISTRY i.e. she's accepted the date in the first place (assumedly getting past the looks phase to the "hell, you're a putz, aren't you?" state). Is it instantaneous for guys to know whether they're attracted or not? I don't think it is immediate for women unlesss the attraction is very strong. If it is only so-so but he's good looking it might take longer, since objectively he seems datable.
Feelin Frisky Posted September 18, 2010 Posted September 18, 2010 Is it instantaneous for guys to know whether they're attracted or not? I don't think it is immediate for women unlesss the attraction is very strong. If it is only so-so but he's good looking it might take longer, since objectively he seems datable. I don't know what it is for other guys but attraction toward a women is not necessarily instantaneous to me. Sure, if you're talking about a bar scene where you can't hear anything and just see flashes of female wiles, a guy might be reduced to impulse, but I'm thinking more of situations where you have a chance to see someone for more than a passing moment or two. It's really great when I get to see a women in different lights and different roles. What you don't get on one occasion is a total blow-away on another. No one is ugly really. It's really just a matter as to whether or not they continue to be transparent as if they don't register at all.
Recommended Posts