how would you rate chemistry/attraction at the beginning

[Curiousroxy86]

Nobody is asking you to do grotesque. However, do consider somebody a tad shorter, or lankier; with less hair or too hairy; carrying a few extra pounds (not obese) or waaay too skinny. Just stop looking for perfect. Be open to attractive & then let your heart rather than your eyes fill in the gaps.

 

I agree. that is not a problem for me. I dont need perfect. and I generally find different types of guys attractive anyway.

[Curiousroxy86]

About 8.5 He lost points for being British.

 

really lol? I love the accents.

[major_merrick]

You still don’t find your husband physically attractive as far as looks?

 

 

I'm much more oriented to women than men. I don't really find men in general to be attractive at all. For a man, my husband looks pretty good, and his appearance avoids most of the traits that I dislike about most men. With my female partners, looks are pretty important. With my husband, that was never really a component of why we're close. We were bonded to each other long before love and sex entered the picture. Even when our romantic connection got messed up, the friendship stayed. That's what brought us back together.

[Mr. Lucky]

So, now a common theme seem to emerge: women who don't score high in the outside department, generally score high in the inner department.

 

I think the opposite is true - people scoring high on the outside department often don't score high in the inner department.

 

We handsome saints are few and far between ...

 

Mr. Lucky

[preraph]

I don't qualify to answer this either, but just wanted to say that I'm kind of dichotomous. One one hand, I've fallen for extreme lookers who were extra cool too, a double threat. But then the funniest things will make me take notice. Like one I fell for, something about his upper arm just got me and I thought it was super sexy, just seeing him for the first time. It wasn't anything remarkable. He's kind of Dick Van Dykish or Mr. Rogerish, tall and a bit too thin.

 

One, I just fell for his hair and his guitar playing. Most people didn't understand the attraction at all. I truly loved both these guys over time. It wasn't just superficial.

[GoodOnPaper]

if you are married or in a relationship how would you rate the attraction/chemistry you felt towards your partner at the beginning when you met them on a scale of 1-10 and why?

 

also how long have you been in a relationship/married?

 

Married 25+ years. I was quite torn when I met my wife - I guess that makes it a 5 on the scale? She was cute, smart, fun to be with. But my attraction was stunted by how I thought I might be viewed for being with someone very heavy. She seemed to be so much more into me than any of the few previous GFs I'd had and things just went along and moved forward.

 

Eventually, of course, I lost my hangup about what others would think about me - if you are going to be judged based on your spouse, there are a zillion other more important things to be judged on than what I was worried about. Plus, enjoying each other's company and showing kindness to and affection for one another have never waned - that has definitely been the "easiest" part of our relationship.

 

On the other hand, my state of attraction robbed me of feeling the usual honeymoon period that one is supposed to have. And when it comes to sex, her unabashed relationship enthusiasm for me never translated well into the bedroom, at least from my point of view. It's not that I think of her platonically - there has always been at least semi-regular sex. But she has always had inhibitions due to weight-related insecurities which in turn kick my "nice guy" insecurities into gear. So I guess that brings me back to the "5" I started out with.

[Curiousroxy86]

Very interesting responses so far. I have to admit If I had to guess what men were going to say I would have guessed their wives/girlfriends at the beginning were between 6-8. I am seeing 4-5 from guys so far. I did expect women to say 4-6. Very very interesting.

[basil67]

oh, wow...that's funny lol

 

So, now a common theme seem to emerge: women who don't score high in the outside department, generally score high in the inner department.

 

Maybe it's called compensation?

 

Does the same theme apply to men as well?

 

No, that's not the theme, There are plenty of single, unattractive people with bad personalites around.

 

What it comes down to is the people who aren't great looking but have a good personality do still find love. It's simply about looking past the exterior to see if the interior is good or not.

[mark clemson]

Very interesting responses so far. I have to admit If I had to guess what men were going to say I would have guessed their wives/girlfriends at the beginning were between 6-8. I am seeing 4-5 from guys so far. I did expect women to say 4-6. Very very interesting.

 

 

I've read (here I think) that the less intense relationships have more staying power. It's counter-intuitive to an extent, but for instance that attractive spouse you were initially so ga-ga over might have more opportunities to stray. Or they might be a bit "spoiled" in the sense of being used to partners catering to their whims. And of course if the spouse is TOO compliant, they might lose respect for them (in some cases) leading to a loss of affection and starting to undermine things.

 

LTRs have complicated dynamics as people and their needs change over time and being super attractive may not be the "win button" that it's cracked up to be. (Not that anyone's feeling sorry for them.)

[chillii]

oh, wow...that's funny lol

 

So, now a common theme seem to emerge: women who don't score high in the outside department, generally score high in the inner department.

 

Maybe it's called compensation?

 

Does the same theme apply to men as well?

 

 

 

 

The more average or below girls are usually much better people , partners, a better person and heart, l noticed that even back in my 20s.

Edited July 24, 2019 by chillii

[Eternal Sunshine]

Not in a relationship but...

 

 

When I meet someone, within 2 seconds I put them into "bangable" and "not bangable" category. Not bangable will never change, regardless of personality and interesting conversation. Now, bangable can change to not if there is no personal connection and conversational chemistry.

 

 

Unfortunately the age group I am interested in (35-45) - all bangable guys are either taken or players.

[alphamale]

Not in a relationship but...

 

 

When I meet someone, within 2 seconds I put them into "bangable" and "not bangable" category. Not bangable will never change, regardless of personality and interesting conversation. Now, bangable can change to not if there is no personal connection and conversational chemistry.

 

 

Unfortunately the age group I am interested in (35-45) - all bangable guys are either taken or players.

 

[Springsummer]

Not in a relationship but...

 

 

When I meet someone, within 2 seconds I put them into "bangable" and "not bangable" category. Not bangable will never change, regardless of personality and interesting conversation. Now, bangable can change to not if there is no personal connection and conversational chemistry.

 

 

Unfortunately the age group I am interested in (35-45) - all bangable guys are either taken or players.

 

you put it very dramatically:lmao:....but it's true physical attraction is an immediate thing and can't never be changed. it's either there or not.

[alphamale]

you put it very dramatically:lmao:....but it's true physical attraction is an immediate thing and can't never be changed. it's either there or not.

 

usually it's not there

[major_merrick]

I can identify with the "bangable" categorization. I do it myself, but with other women. And my partners all have to pass the sniff test. A person's scent has to be right for me to take them seriously for long term. That's actually one way that my husband got to me and no other guy has. He smells right, and I can't describe it. And my GFs....omg I could roll in their dirty laundry for hours. Add to that the fact that they are level 10 knockout beautiful, I still can't believe how lucky I am.

[Mr. Lucky]

but it's true physical attraction is an immediate thing and can't never be changed.

 

Then I guess it comes down to the importance one places on this single aspect of a relationship. Making true and immediate physical attraction primary and paramount only stuck me with women I couldn't spend 30 days with, much less 30 years...

 

Mr. Lucky

[LauraXX]

Partly true, but for me there's () bangable () maybe bangable and () definitely not bangable. "Maybes" can turn into either of the other two categories. The "definitely nots" will never turn into anything else.

[Curiousroxy86]

Then I guess it comes down to the importance one places on this single aspect of a relationship. Making true and immediate physical attraction primary and paramount only stuck me with women I couldn't spend 30 days with, much less 30 years...

 

Mr. Lucky

 

but mr lucky were you going for 10s or was it any woman that had any kind of attractiveness 6-10 were problematic for you?

[Curiousroxy86]

Partly true, but for me there's () bangable () maybe bangable and () definitely not bangable. "Maybes" can turn into either of the other two categories. The "definitely nots" will never turn into anything else.

 

lol I dont know if I can relate to "bangable"

 

I normally reserve sex for exclusivity but I have gotten a fix from a guy I was not at all physically attracted to before and was turned off by him kissing me but he was excellent in bed. had to keep my eyes closed most of the time.

 

so technically guys who arent exactly attractive looking (like less than average) can still be bangable I guess but I wont feel the desire to be romantically involved as in a relationship

 

so my measuring stick if we are talking about the physical aspect would be "kissable", maybe, or no thank you. if I want to kiss him and cuddle then of course that would include sex AND I would want to get to know him more and spend time which I would have the desire to date and consider a relationship atleast until I see something different about the inside that would change my mind. a guy who is physically unattractive to me (a 4 or less) I wouldnt have the desire to get involved with and would unfortunately struggle romantically if I tried anyway in the name of trying not to be shallow and trying to only focus on whats more important when it comes to long term relationships. so I wouldnt even try and instead just pass him on by. but if I wanted to have another bad girl moment and he was willing I may have the best sex of my life

 

I really do wish I could overlook that though but I cant *shrugs*

[Mr. Lucky]

but mr lucky were you going for 10s or was it any woman that had any kind of attractiveness 6-10 were problematic for you?

 

Well, they were 9-10's to me, though others might disagree. And I hate to sound this shallow, but some were so good looking I was VERY motivated to make things work. Until they didn't...

 

Kind of like having a job where you're very well compensated, but you hate. Eventually you have to reconcile that disconnect...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Eternal Sunshine]

Partly true, but for me there's () bangable () maybe bangable and () definitely not bangable. "Maybes" can turn into either of the other two categories. The "definitely nots" will never turn into anything else.

 

 

This used to be true for me in the past. I used to give "maybes" up to 4 dates. 100% of the time they became a "no". Now I no longer have that category.

[Eternal Sunshine]

This reminds me of what happened a few days ago.

 

 

I was on a bus in Europe travelling to a vacation spot. A man in his late 40s started chatting me up. I immediately knew he was "not bangable". But it was a 6 hour ride and he seemed interesting to talk to so I chatted to him along the way. He has a good job, owns a large house and is divorced and single. He kept complementing me and bought me drinks couple of times the bus made a short stop. He is of old fashioned culture and basically all his beliefs aligned with my own. 6 hours flew by. But... given the lack of physical attraction I have no desire to see him again. He has sent me messages since but just no way.

 

 

I wish I was one of those women where 1 can grow into 10 or 4 can grow into 8 or something. For me, 1 remains 1. Could explain why I'm permanently single.

[Springsummer]

Don't get me started...

 

A few years ago, I was studying with my laptop at starbuck, then a man came in, I was immediately attracted. He was like a 15. Perfect. More than tall, dark and handsome...

 

I kept pretending I was studying and kept looking at the screen. then I felt him walked back and forth across me. then finally I looked up and he stared straight into me and looked he wanted to devout me (sexually?). I was so shy and scared...I kept pretending studying...I also heard him dropped the mouse...after a few hours he finally left.

 

I have never met anyone attractive at Starbuck ever since. nor have ever met anyone more attractive than him since.

 

I probably will regret that forever. I don't know what's wrong with me. I guess I am just too immature, chicken, conservative, insecure....never flirted, don't know what to do it...explain why I am perpetually single as well.

Edited July 25, 2019 by Springsummer

[chillii]

Well, they were 9-10's to me, though others might disagree. And I hate to sound this shallow, but some were so good looking I was VERY motivated to make things work. Until they didn't...

 

Kind of like having a job where you're very well compensated, but you hate. Eventually you have to reconcile that disconnect...

 

Mr. Lucky

 

 

Yeah know exactly what you mean and l also hate to feel like that about things like this too , never put some number on a woman in my life, can't stand all the labels and terms around these days, well in forums anyway.

But things l like are different to most anyway so what l might consider this or that too yeah, would just go over most guys heads.

But l've never liked stunningly beautiful women l've always found they'll lack all the other qualities l love in someone, same with say models for example, they always look very plastic to me , inside and out.

Edited July 25, 2019 by chillii

[Leigh 87]

I've always needed lust at first site. I have alterative beliefs outside the norm though and I believe in past lives and all the weird stuff.... I always knew that I needed an instant spark basically. Which is exactly what occured with my fiance of nearly five years now. I have always innately associated instant knowing and instant connections as something fated. Rather than just selecting a relationship without the added depth that can only occur through a fairly instant spark....

 

It's true that more intense relationships feeling wise in terms of the spark and initial obsession and honeymoon phase can be harder relationships. But again, I feel plain sailing and easy doesn't teach me important life lessons. Lessons which I didn't manage to work out solo and only an intense relationship pushed me to address..... The feeling were far reaching enough due to the natural high that it motivated me EXTRA to change my ways...the person who made not only my life brighter but who made me happier within myself was calling out for me to bring about necessary changes. A smooth plain sailing agreeable all the time relationship just never aided me much in terms of spiritual or self development.

 

I've always been drawn to the more intense lust at first site that ends up being love very fast because I feel these sort of connections are sent to us to teach us important lessons that help us evolve. Smooth and easy all the time to me feels limiting. But I always felt that my lot in life was to get through my cr@p via relationships with men --. My fiance has allowed me to get to the bottom of the root of my deepest darkest qualities. And to better myself and head in a brighter direction. For some reason I couldn't truly workout my own demons alone and needed some help...The more intense relationship person was like a mirror that enabled me to see the worst part of myself that I then had the ability to change. I

Where as some people I believe have come here and they have worked out their issues solo, and so they don't really need the intense 10/10 attraction thing that usually precedes a challenging relationship that pushes them to work on themselves; plenty of people are already mentally sound and accomplished without the need of an intense relationship.

 

That's just my experience as someone who had love at first site that lasted long term. I always wanted this, and I got exactly what I wanted and J absolutely love it five years later it's better than ever. I was never happy with the men with whom I didn't feel an instant 10/10 attraction towards.

 

I got what I wanted.

 

I wanted the ten instant attraction and that's exactly what I got and I am so happy with him five years later. But it wasn't about looks, it was connection. We happened to both feel instantly attracted because it's natural connection. We have both been around objectively better looking people with whom we had no spark with. While we both acknowledge that neither of us are a ten in real life, that didn't stop a ten out of ten instant attraction.....

 

It has difficulties but ended up smooth sailing. But the difficulties were also necessary for both of our personal growth. So the turbulent times that seem to accompany the 10 attraction at first site relationships can dissipate end up normal and boring lol.