Does physical attraction need to be immediate? or can it develop overtime?

[Hopeful30]

11 hours ago, Weezy1973 said:

I’m assuming OP you don’t have any problems getting dates with men you are attracted to physically?

I'm not sure. 

 

8 hours ago, poppyfields said:

I knew within a very short period of time if that "spark" and energy/chemistry between us was there or not.

The instant chemistry I felt was related to conversation and generally feeling comfortable around him. I am considering if this is enough to sustain a relationship where the instant "spark" (attraction) is not there. 

 

7 hours ago, Elswyth said:

Have you ever grown attracted to a person over time?

 In many ways, but not sexually. The more sexual attraction for me, the quicker onset. I guess that answers my question. 

 

7 hours ago, Elswyth said:

Do you find him extremely UNattractive physically, or just neutral/"not very attractive"? The latter is much more salvageable than the former.

Below neutral I would say personally. The intellectual stimulation is nice though. think that's why I keep coming back...a different kind of arousal 😛 curious if it can translate into sexual...

 

7 hours ago, Alpacalia said:

Sexual attraction is different then physical attraction too.

I've never considered that. Can one exist without the other? How do you distinguish them?

 

7 hours ago, Alpacalia said:

Trust your mind and your privates will follow. It either will or it won't.

 😂😂🙏

 

4 hours ago, Stret said:

So it may happen for you if you keep the friendship going, and it might not. In either case, you can enjoy in your conversations at least. 

 

I'm not sure if platonic male-female relationships can exist? Is this considered leading on?

[Ami1uwant]

44 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

I'm not sure. 

 

The instant chemistry I felt was related to conversation and generally feeling comfortable around him. I am considering if this is enough to sustain a relationship where the instant "spark" (attraction) is not there. 

 

 In many ways, but not sexually. The more sexual attraction for me, the quicker onset. I guess that answers my question. 

 

Below neutral I would say personally. The intellectual stimulation is nice though. think that's why I keep coming back...a different kind of arousal 😛 curious if it can translate into sexual...

 

I've never considered that. Can one exist without the other? How do you distinguish them?

 

 😂😂🙏

 

 

I'm not sure if platonic male-female relationships can exist? Is this considered leading on?

You should give this 2-3 dates and see.  Many many relations woukd have ended after the 1st date because of something missing but it grew later.

 

I believe you can have pure friendship between men and women.

 

are there characteristics about him that doesn’t fit the norms of who you usually date or have interest in?

 

 

[Hopeful30]

10 minutes ago, Ami1uwant said:

are there characteristics about him that doesn’t fit the norms of who you usually date or have interest in?

I can't say I have a 'norm'. I'm pretty open.

Edited September 26, 2022 by Hopeful30

[Lotsgoingon]

Sounds like you know in your heart that this guy does not turn you on. 

My view is that attraction can grow, but usually not when we try to get it to grow. 

I think there is some confusion in this conversation (understandable). All the time I meet people and don't think they are particularly attractive.  But then I hang with them, and I find them more attractive. Not just intellectually attractive, it's more than that. It's that the intellectual energy or whatever actually increases their sexual attraction to me. I've had that happen all the time. But as far as dating, there is a higher standard and usually for that, I have to start with thinking the person is at least cute or pleasant to look at and then I experience their energy and gifts and they become really attractive. But I'm usually starting with some attraction, sort of like the attraction you might feel for a cute cafe worker or someone you see in passing. They have a nice look but you're not particularly pulled to them. You don't agonize and think you should approach them. 

It's with these people that if I then experience a good time with them that I really feel high attraction develop. 

In your case, If his good qualities could turn you on, they already would have turned you on. Put it like this: you see his strengths, you have experienced his strengths and you are still not attracted to him. That means move on. 

 

 

[Alpacalia]

55 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

How do you distinguish them?

Have you ever found someone physically attractive but not want to sleep with them, at least not instantly? 

Physical and emotional attraction connect, and boom! There is a sexual attraction between you.

I just want to also say that a friend of mine was platonic friends with her one male friend for several years (he liked her, she wasn't interested in him). It evolved into marriage and babies years later.

The way it usually goes (at least I've found) is that physical attraction is built through other aspects that spike your interest.

Someone who makes you laugh. Cultural and intelligent guy who makes you think. A person with true integrity and who is always willing to give of their time and themselves to others. Intuitive emotional person who has a good grasp of what's going on inside and around him. Someone who is attentive to your needs and considerate of your feelings. A guy with power and intensity.

Lots of qualities that can ultimately lead you to glance at a fella that you once considered less than desirable, where you're like "hey, hold up a minute."  

Personality can turn you on enough to build physical attraction, meaning the attraction can grow over time.

It doesn’t have to be pulsating the moment you meet.

If you know that you're someone that has to have that physical attraction present from the onset then it makes sense to stick to what you know. I don’t necessarily think it makes a person shallow, because attraction is important. Long-term relationships don't always begin with physical attraction. It's still there, but when things change (such as our bodies, health, hair, facial lines), our relationships become much deeper.

So you can give it another date. Or, not.

Sometimes we just know fairly quickly we aren't truly interested in pursuing anything further (and that's okay).

[glows]

1 hour ago, Hopeful30 said:

I'm not sure. 

 

The instant chemistry I felt was related to conversation and generally feeling comfortable around him. I am considering if this is enough to sustain a relationship where the instant "spark" (attraction) is not there. 

 

 In many ways, but not sexually. The more sexual attraction for me, the quicker onset. I guess that answers my question. 

 

Below neutral I would say personally. The intellectual stimulation is nice though. think that's why I keep coming back...a different kind of arousal 😛 curious if it can translate into sexual...

 

I've never considered that. Can one exist without the other? How do you distinguish them?

 

 😂😂🙏

 

 

I'm not sure if platonic male-female relationships can exist? Is this considered leading on?

I wouldn’t get too lost on semantics on this one. If you’re feeling it keep seeing him. If not, take a break and cool off. Meet others also. You may be trying too hard to rationalize this. It doesn’t require this much analyzing, imo.

[Alpacalia]

I disagree. I think she is exploring what works for her and that shouldn't be negated.

[slippinglimpse]

2 hours ago, Hopeful30 said:

 

 

Below neutral I would say personally. The intellectual stimulation is nice though. think that's why I keep coming back...a different kind of arousal 😛 curious if it can translate into sexual...

 

There is a word for this--sapiosexual (a.k.a., sapiophile)

[Wiseman2]

6 hours ago, Hopeful30 said:

I'm not sure if platonic male-female relationships can exist? Is this considered leading on?

Why not be honest with him and let him decide?. Tell him you enjoy his company but see him as a friend.

Being deceitful is leading someone on but if you are honest with him, he'll either leave or be friends. But don't play games to have company.

[Els]

7 hours ago, Hopeful30 said:

In many ways, but not sexually. The more sexual attraction for me, the quicker onset. I guess that answers my question.

15 hours ago, Elswyth said:

Do you find him extremely UNattractive physically, or just neutral/"not very attractive"? The latter is much more salvageable than the former.

Below neutral I would say personally. The intellectual stimulation is nice though. think that's why I keep coming back...a different kind of arousal 😛 curious if it can translate into sexual...

Hmm, to me the answer is fairly clear, then - he could be a great friend and muse, but not a lover or romantic partner.

I personally consider myself sapiosexual, and I do actually feel attraction based solely on intelligence. I once dated a man who was physically unattractive, but extremely intelligent, and that did get me going. Unfortunately, it wasn't really sustainable. Things felt very awkward in the bedroom, we eventually stopped having sex at all (even though we still spent time together and and went out on dates), and the sexual spark was never truly present. Eventually we just came to the conclusion that we were better off as friends.

[ZA Dater]

On 9/24/2022 at 4:45 PM, Hopeful30 said:

Met someone at a party that I feel comfortable and compatible with. However, he's not good looking. I did not feel any attraction or physical chemistry. My question is... can this develop as I get to know him? Is it possible to be physically aroused by liking someone intellectually or emotionally? Physical intimacy and sex is important to me, so I want to consider whether this is possible with someone I don't feel is physically attractive at all. 

In my opinion there are limits as to how much any physical attraction can grow. Perhaps you need to spend some more time with him. 

My own experience suggests its nearly impossible to overcome a lack of physical attraction. Irrespective what other good qualities one or the person may have.

[Goodguy05]

On 9/25/2022 at 12:45 AM, Hopeful30 said:

Met someone at a party that I feel comfortable and compatible with. However, he's not good looking. I did not feel any attraction or physical chemistry. My question is... can this develop as I get to know him? Is it possible to be physically aroused by liking someone intellectually or emotionally? Physical intimacy and sex is important to me, so I want to consider whether this is possible with someone I don't feel is physically attractive at all. 

Immediate 

[Lotsgoingon]

I do think platonic male-female friendships exist. I've got a number of close women friends. 

On the other hand, when people meet someone on a dating site, it's unusual for them to decide hey, let's be friends. But hey, I did try that once with a woman I met online. It was clear we didn't have much romantic chemistry but I liked her. 

I actually found this woman attractive, but she was psychologically tormented. Well when we tried to be friends, the same psychological torment that killed my romantic interest killed my friendship interest. 

Don't try to comfort this guy by offering friendship. That's patronizing and wastes time. People don't die when others say they don't want romance with us. Don't assume you have to rescue him at all. Only throw out friendship a possibility if you REALLY want that. And even then you'll need to have your guard up when you go out with him to make sure he's not trying to spark your romantic interest.

People often do that sneaky thing---I've done it. They say they want to be friends but in reality they are still trying to impress the other person into dating them. 

 

[poppyfields]

11 hours ago, slippinglimpse said:

There is a word for this--sapiosexual (a.k.a., sapiophile)

Sapiosexual is defined as:

>>finding intelligence sexually attractive or arousing.

So not sure that applies here since OP does not find him sexually attractive or appealing.

[BreakOnThrough]

I don't think women are being completely honest here, women generally know which way she views a man from a sexual standpoint fairly early on, otherwise, you are just settling based on other non-romantic qualities.  The growing sexual attraction theory is simply storybook material, leave it there.

[Hopeful30]

13 hours ago, Alpacalia said:

Sometimes we just know fairly quickly we aren't truly interested in pursuing anything further (and that's okay).

Thank you for this. I agree, and this has landed me on the receiving end of "your standards are too high" or "you don't give guys a chance". The truth is I just know, and my past experiences have confirmed that my feelings early on (with respect to sexual attraction) are usually accurate. It hurts when people accuse me of being shallow for this, and it makes me question if I'm doing something wrong. Part of the reason I am considering whether physical attraction can grow with this guy is because I've been single for so long.

 

12 hours ago, glows said:

I wouldn’t get too lost on semantics on this one. If you’re feeling it keep seeing him. If not, take a break and cool off. Meet others also. You may be trying too hard to rationalize this. It doesn’t require this much analyzing, imo.

You're right. It's just been so long that I've been with a man that I'm trying to be as open as possible to increase those odds. Part of the reason why it's difficult for me to find relations with men is because of the sexual attraction element. So many great guys, so few get me going down there. I've even questioned by sexuality because of this. Is there something wrong with me? I feel like most women have it much easier. 

 

7 hours ago, Wiseman2 said:

Why not be honest with him and let him decide?. Tell him you enjoy his company but see him as a friend.

This conversation has not been necessary so far. We've been hanging out quite platonically, so I think it would be awkward to mention "let's just be friends" when there hasn't been much indication of otherwise at this point (at least that I'm aware of). 

 

7 hours ago, Elswyth said:

I once dated a man who was physically unattractive, but extremely intelligent, and that did get me going. Unfortunately, it wasn't really sustainable. Things felt very awkward in the bedroom, we eventually stopped having sex at all (even though we still spent time together and and went out on dates), and the sexual spark was never truly present. Eventually we just came to the conclusion that we were better off as friends.

This is helpful, thank you. I suppose an element of sexual attraction needs to already be present early on to sustain a romantic relationship. 

 

17 minutes ago, Lotsgoingon said:

People often do that sneaky thing---I've done it. They say they want to be friends but in reality they are still trying to impress the other person into dating them. 

This is why I have doubts if men and women can be friends. My male friendships in the past have dissolved because I did not return their romantic interest once they expressed it to me. And you're right, I always had to have my guard up, which to me defeats the purpose of friendship. As harsh as this may seem, when it comes to having relations with men, either they're a potential love interest, or nothing at all. There is no in-between for me (with obvious exception of community relations, like colleagues, neighbours, etc.)

[Hopeful30]

9 minutes ago, BreakOnThrough said:

I don't think women are being completely honest here, women generally know which way she views a man from a sexual standpoint fairly early on, otherwise, you are just settling based on other non-romantic qualities.  The growing sexual attraction theory is simply storybook material, leave it there.

Is settling such a bad thing though? I'm at the age (mid 30s) where settling is more feasible and realistic than waiting around for a partner who matches on all levels. The biological clock is ticking, so a man with fatherly and husband qualities is taking precedence over sexual attraction and a great sex life. At this point, being able to have sex is enough. I've given up on searching for incredible sex and passion. It feels more storybook than sexual attraction through familiarity and companionship.  

[poppyfields]

27 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

Is settling such a bad thing though? I'm at the age (mid 30s) where settling is more feasible and realistic than waiting around for a partner who matches on all levels.

Imo settling IS a bad thing, because sooner or later, you will meet a man who knocks your socks off, most likely when you least expect it.

Then what?  You're stuck in a marriage with a man you are not attracted to and settled for. 

Same thing could happen to HIM.

Because in my experience attraction and chemistry between two people tends to be mutual, when that attraction and chemistry is genuine and not based on the superficial.

So you risk him meeting another woman who knocks HIS socks off.

Most people don't consider that, they only consider themselves which I think is a mistake. 

Never settle.  Love yourself, be happy with yourself, on your own.

With respect to children, please don't use a man (settle for him) for this purpose, there are many other options avaliable to single women who want children.

 

[Wiseman2]

On 9/25/2022 at 8:23 AM, Hopeful30 said:

Yes he asked me out

It was or is unclear if this was a date or you two are hanging out as friends. 

1 hour ago, Hopeful30 said:

This conversation has not been necessary so far. We've been hanging out quite platonically, so I think it would be awkward to mention "let's just be friends" when there hasn't been much indication of otherwise at this point

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Wiseman2

[Alpacalia]

1 hour ago, Hopeful30 said:

Thank you for this. I agree, and this has landed me on the receiving end of "your standards are too high" or "you don't give guys a chance". The truth is I just know, and my past experiences have confirmed that my feelings early on (with respect to sexual attraction) are usually accurate. It hurts when people accuse me of being shallow for this, and it makes me question if I'm doing something wrong. Part of the reason I am considering whether physical attraction can grow with this guy is because I've been single for so long.

No problem.

How have those experiences been for you in light of your past experiences and how early you knew?

I wouldn't recommend dating this person just because "you've been single for so long." 

That's never a good reason.

Likewise, I don't recommend letting it drag on.

A boyfriend I dated early on, I did not find him physically attractive initially because he came off like an arrogant butthole so it kind of blocked that physical attraction from developing. When we ran into each other a year or so later, things changed and it was one of my best relationships.

Just because you don't feel an immediate spark with someone, it doesn't mean you won't in the future. Attraction can grow more over time, so just because you don't feel it immediately now does not guarantee you won't later on.

It's been ONE date.

If you're repulsed by the man, that's a totally different story.

It is absolutely fine to go on a second date if BOTH of you are interested and enjoyed yourselves. If you're used to dating where there needs to be an immediate spark and immediate physical/sexual attraction, then it's better to pass on him if that's what you prefer.

 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by Alpacalia

[glows]

1 hour ago, Hopeful30 said:

You're right. It's just been so long that I've been with a man that I'm trying to be as open as possible to increase those odds. Part of the reason why it's difficult for me to find relations with men is because of the sexual attraction element. So many great guys, so few get me going down there. I've even questioned by sexuality because of this. Is there something wrong with me? I feel like most women have it much easier. 

 

I doubt there’s anything wrong with you. Take it easy and go with your gut. It’s not unusual to find it few and far between. Hormones play a role too. A lot more people sure looked attractive and interesting 20 years ago and more than half I wouldn’t touch with a 10 ft pole now. All that is tempered over time as you get to know someone. You’re giving this a chance so see how it goes. Keep in mind his interest should be mutual too. 

[Hopeful30]

14 minutes ago, poppyfields said:

Imo settling IS a bad thing, because sooner or later, you will meet a man who knocks your socks off, most likely when you least expect it.

Then what?  You're stuck in a marriage with a man you are not attracted to and settled for. 

Same thing could happen to HIM.

Because in my experience attraction and chemistry between two people tends to be mutual, when that attraction and chemistry is genuine and not based on the superficial.

So you risk him meeting another woman who knocks HIS socks off.

Most people don't consider that, they only consider themselves which I think is a mistake. 

Never settle.  Love yourself, be happy with yourself, on your own.

With respect to children, please don't use a man (settle for him) for this purpose, there are many other options avaliable to single women who want children.

I don't agree with this. I know women in their older years (40s and 50s) who didn't settle and regret it. They approached relationships with the same mentality you express here, and no one 'knocked off their socks'. (Also note that this kind of passion and chemistry does not guarantee a good relationship, marriage, or family values). These women wanted to be mothers and now it's more challenging or no longer an option. Besides, I've been looking for this type of relationship since I was 16 years old. It's been nearly 20 years, and it's time to get more realistic or to change my approach.

With respect to children, while I understand there are alternatives to natural impregnation, those approaches don't align with my personal and spiritual beliefs. I want to conceive naturally through organic means. Furthermore, I am not raising a child on my own. I understand the value and importance of a father figure, and I won't deprive my children of that for the sake of good sex. I want a family, not just a child. 

 

8 minutes ago, Alpacalia said:

How have those experiences been for you in light of your past experiences and how early you knew?

Physical and sexual attraction (when strong) has always been immediate for me. I either can't get enough of looking or I'm throbbing and need to regularly excuse myself to the washroom. I gave it 1 year with an ex-boyfriend because he was otherwise perfect, but neither physical nor sexual attraction developed and that was the reason for our breaking up. In my current situation, there is an attraction of some sort, and I'm secretly hoping it might translate into sexual attraction. My hesitation stems from not wanting to lead him on. I've been accused of taking 'too long'. Maybe that's code for "either you do or you don't, stop delaying". 

I think another poster was right, I'm wanting too hard for this to happen. Is it so terrible that I settle for the sake of genuine companionship and having a good (non-physical) time? Is it even healthy to expect a partner to fulfill you in ALL ways?

 

2 minutes ago, glows said:

I doubt there’s anything wrong with you. Take it easy and go with your gut. It’s not unusual to find it few and far between. Hormones play a role too. A lot more people sure looked attractive and interesting 20 years ago and more than half I wouldn’t touch with a 10 ft pole now. All that is tempered over time as you get to know someone. You’re giving this a chance so see how it goes. Keep in mind his interest should be mutual too. 

Thank you 🙏 I believe his interest is mutual, at least on the intellectual level (he's expressed that). I'm not sure of his sexual interest. I wouldn't be so concerned with it if we hung out in social groups. Seeing as how we've been hanging out alone, I feel more pressure to know this sooner.

[Weezy1973]

10 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

Physical and sexual attraction (when strong) has always been immediate for me.

How many of your serious relationships started with this type of attraction? I’d say I’ve felt that way a couple of times, and both turned into pretty bad relationships. With my wife, although she’s my “type”, it was a slow build until we had sex and then it exploded because we were so sexually compatible. I’ve had other experiences where any tinders of attraction were drowned after sex because of sexual incompatibility. In my mind sexual compatibility trumps pure physical attraction if your goal is marriage or a long term relationship. Not suggesting anyone should settle for someone they find wholly unappealing. But maybe instead of a 10 level of “throbbing” attraction, a 7 is good enough if they have a lot of the other qualities you’re looking for.

[poppyfields]

47 minutes ago, Hopeful30 said:

I don't agree with this. I know women in their older years (40s and 50s) who didn't settle and regret it. They approached relationships with the same mentality you express here, and no one 'knocked off their socks'. (Also note that this kind of passion and chemistry does not guarantee a good relationship, marriage, or family values). These women wanted to be mothers and now it's more challenging or no longer an option. Besides, I've been looking for this type of relationship since I was 16 years old. It's been nearly 20 years, and it's time to get more realistic or to change my approach.

With respect to children, while I understand there are alternatives to natural impregnation, those approaches don't align with my personal and spiritual beliefs. I want to conceive naturally through organic means. Furthermore, I am not raising a child on my own. I understand the value and importance of a father figure, and I won't deprive my children of that for the sake of good sex. I want a family, not just a child. 

That's fair but I am wondering now why you asked the question since, as per the above, you think settling is OK.   

In any event, you asked the question and I gave my opinion, there is no wrong or right.

With respect to bolded, there is no guarantee that even if you choose to settle, you are guaranteed a good relationship, marriage or family values.

There are never any guarantees in any relationship.  However, again just my opinion, when you begin a relationship with a high attraction (which goes beyond the physical) and a strong chemistry/energy/connection between you, when things get tough, which they will, you can both draw upon those earlier times and attempt to recapture the attraction and passion you once felt.

If you both never felt that and settled, there is nothing to draw upon and you're more likely to just toss in the towel and break up, get divorced.

But your call, it's not my place to determine what's right for you, again I was simply providing my opinion.

With respect to children, I don't believe in using a man as a sperm bank because you don't want to raise a child on your own, unless he agrees to it, specifically for that purpose. 

Again, jmo. 

 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2022 by poppyfields

[Ami1uwant]

1 hour ago, Hopeful30 said:

I don't agree with this. I know women in their older years (40s and 50s) who didn't settle and regret it. They approached relationships with the same mentality you express here, and no one 'knocked off their socks'. (Also note that this kind of passion and chemistry does not guarantee a good relationship, marriage, or family values). These women wanted to be mothers and now it's more challenging or no longer an option. Besides, I've been looking for this type of relationship since I was 16 years old. It's been nearly 20 years, and it's time to get more realistic or to change my approach.

With respect to children, while I understand there are alternatives to natural impregnation, those approaches don't align with my personal and spiritual beliefs. I want to conceive naturally through organic means. Furthermore, I am not raising a child on my own. I understand the value and importance of a father figure, and I won't deprive my children of that for the sake of good sex. I want a family, not just a child. 

 

Physical and sexual attraction (when strong) has always been immediate for me. I either can't get enough of looking or I'm throbbing and need to regularly excuse myself to the washroom. I gave it 1 year with an ex-boyfriend because he was otherwise perfect, but neither physical nor sexual attraction developed and that was the reason for our breaking up. In my current situation, there is an attraction of some sort, and I'm secretly hoping it might translate into sexual attraction. My hesitation stems from not wanting to lead him on. I've been accused of taking 'too long'. Maybe that's code for "either you do or you don't, stop delaying". 

I think another poster was right, I'm wanting too hard for this to happen. Is it so terrible that I settle for the sake of genuine companionship and having a good (non-physical) time? Is it even healthy to expect a partner to fulfill you in ALL ways?

 

Thank you 🙏 I believe his interest is mutual, at least on the intellectual level (he's expressed that). I'm not sure of his sexual interest. I wouldn't be so concerned with it if we hung out in social groups. Seeing as how we've been hanging out alone, I feel more pressure to know this sooner.

Physical /sexual attraction is not sexual compatibility.  Im not a woman but I though emotional attraction was more 8mportsnt.  Guys are better and separating the two

 

emotional attraction is much more valuable. Physical attraction can change as you get older.