Men I need your help. What is chemistry and why do guys make us feel terrible by saying we have no chemistry after 1-2 dates?


Reply
 
Topic Tools Search this Thread
snakedoc1125 is offline snakedoc1125 Post #21  July 27,2010, 8:27am
snakedoc1125's Avatar

Newbie

Joined: Jul 2010

Posts: 34

See profile

If a man said that you don't have chemistry maybe they are just being honest with you. Take it as a positive, they might just don't to hurt anyone in that matter.
 
  Reply With Quote
jayjay is offline jayjay Post #22  July 27,2010, 8:43am
jayjay's Avatar

...things seem to have gotten quiet around here.

Sage

Joined: Jun 2008

Brownsville, TX

Posts: 10,932

See profile

I see some people say that for them 'chemistry' doesn't include sexual attraction. If that is the case.....then if you feel this chemistry why wouldn't you simply be friends with the person rather than establishing a romantic relationship?
 
  Reply With Quote
suzyblueeyes is offline suzyblueeyes Post #23  July 27,2010, 9:03am
suzyblueeyes's Avatar

is engaged

Enthusiast

Joined: Dec 2008

USA

Posts: 831

See profile

CalalumniMD wrote :
By telling a woman there is no chemistry it is a put down and implicates that something is wrong with the woman.
To me, claiming chemistry means the opposite of what you've said here. It means it has nothing to do with you, simply that the other person doesn't see the two of you as the right fit. I really wouldn't take it personally. Most likely, a person who says this is trying to be nice and indicate that there isn't anything wrong with you. Still, for whatever reason, they're not feeling it.

If chemistry were really as simple as finding someone of equal attractiveness and having a relationship, we would all just go to the bureau of attractiveness ranking, get our number, and get matched up with a similarly attractive mate. No need for dating services. Wouldn't that be nice? Unfortunately, not every person "feels it" (whatever it means to them) with every person, so it is not that simple.
 
  Reply With Quote
Cape_Codder is offline Cape_Codder Post #24  July 27,2010, 9:31am

Unregistered

Joined: Apr 2010

Massachusetts

Posts: 1,007

See profile

CalalumniMD wrote :
What's a good come back to the chemistry statement. One recent date who went back to the woman he loved, said we had no chemistry. I'm sorry, he was very, very plain and I know what I look like so that was so ridiculous. i assume chemistry is sexual attraction but a lot of men use it. One man said (from another dating site) asked to come to my home (NO!) to determine in 30 minutes if we have chemistry (I'm still laughing at that one).

By telling a woman there is no chemistry it is a put down and implicates that something is wrong with the woman.

Advise please!

Thanks much
Please try not to read into or assume comments from men such as "lack of chemistry" is intended to be a put down or, indicative that there is something wrong with you.

From a man's perspective, which is what you asked for, this type of statement is used to express that one or more of the elements of personality or attraction are lacking. Most often the term chemistry, or lack thereof is used because the person simply cannot better define what it is exactly that they don't feel, or what they feel is missing.

Letting someone know that you have no desire to date them is an uncomfortable process at best. With online dating, all too many people simply disappear or "poof", during the process of getting to know someone rather than come face to face with the other person and terminate the relationship. The match deserves credit for at least having the decency to tell you in person.

You don't need a comeback statement, accept the fact that the person does not desire to continue seeing you graciously and move on to other potential matches.

If you were in the other person's position how would you handle the situation? I would respect and appreciate a direct and honest statement like the one you received.

If you start to react with frustration or anger through this dating process over rejection, other matches will possibly sense these negative emotions and move on as well.

While some commentary provided wants you to believe that all men are misogynistic, objective analysis of the male commentary provided here demonstrates that men for the most part want to handle the situation in an honest and respectful manner. There are certain members of the female gender that want you to believe that all men's decisions concerning the choice of partners is solely factored on physical attributes. Again, realize that appearance for most people is a criteria in selection, it is not the only criteria however.

You can objectify and denigrate the opposite sex as some do on these boards at every opportunity afforded or, you can find something positive to take away from each experience and move forward.

Rejection is simply part of the process to finding a viable partner.
Last edited by Cape_Codder; July 27,2010 at 9:35am.
 
  Reply With Quote
psgcooldog is offline psgcooldog Post #25  July 27,2010, 10:08am
psgcooldog's Avatar

dreams of a place called home ...

Veteran

Joined: Mar 2010

Kenton, DE

Posts: 1,146

See profile

mary_mary wrote :
And that we're too stupid to know what they're really saying: One way or another (you're too fat, too old, too wrinkled, too ugly all round), you just don't come up to my standards for my wonderful, desirable self. "Chemistry" is when you measure up to their standards of sexual attractiveness, standards that their wonderful, desirable selves are entitled to have met.

It is a tacky put-down disguised as something allegedly neutral. About as transparent as the emperor's clothes.

Is there a civil way for them to say this?

Yeah, I think a lie, any old lie, would be more civil.

But hey, they could always just say what they really mean ... and face the guffaws that would result in most cases.
So, just exactly what are you saying Mary? I should go romance Mother Theresa? (An example of very nice, and very old and wrinkled. Oh wait ... she's dead. Well, it would be un-evolved to be disinterested in her on that basis, wouldn't it?)

And women should conversely seek out the ugliest, shortest man they can find, because that would be "fair"? That's equally absurd!

I'm finding it very hard to be civil after reading your post, because your comment so reeks of self-righteousness.

Here's the deal Mary, and understanding this cannot but help you in all things: just because something is unimportant to you, does not mean it is unimportant to someone else ... and that doesn't make them wrong!
 
  Reply With Quote
Cape_Codder is offline Cape_Codder Post #26  July 27,2010, 11:22am

Unregistered

Joined: Apr 2010

Massachusetts

Posts: 1,007

See profile

psgcooldog wrote :
So, just exactly what are you saying Mary? I should go romance Mother Theresa? (An example of very nice, and very old and wrinkled. Oh wait ... she's dead. Well, it would be un-evolved to be disinterested in her on that basis, wouldn't it?)

And women should conversely seek out the ugliest, shortest man they can find, because that would be "fair"? That's equally absurd!

I'm finding it very hard to be civil after reading your post, because your comment so reeks of self-righteousness.

Here's the deal Mary, and understanding this cannot but help you in all things: just because something is unimportant to you, does not mean it is unimportant to someone else ... and that doesn't make them wrong!
Don't you understand? "men" deserve to be castigated because they have the audacity to allow physical characteristics play a part in the natural selection process. The male gender needs to become enlightened and regulate our selection process on a new premiss, that being the one set forth by those who have been previously excluded themselves from the selection process.
 
  Reply With Quote
neardc is offline neardc Post #27  July 27,2010, 11:38am
neardc's Avatar

Kumbaya, people!

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Near DC (duh!)

Posts: 7,738

See profile

Cape_Codder wrote :
Don't you understand? "men" deserve to be castigated because they have the audacity to allow physical characteristics play a part in the natural selection process. The male gender needs to become enlightened and regulate our selection process on a new premiss, that being the one set forth by those who have been previously excluded themselves from the selection process.
Bitter, much?
 
  Reply With Quote
mary_mary is offline mary_mary Post #28  July 27,2010, 11:43am

is reasonably contrary

Quick Study

Joined: Jul 2010

Posts: 127

See profile

psgcooldog wrote :
So, just exactly what are you saying Mary? I should go romance Mother Theresa? (An example of very nice, and very old and wrinkled. Oh wait ... she's dead. Well, it would be un-evolved to be disinterested in her on that basis, wouldn't it?)
Yes, exactly! That was exactly what I was saying! (Not that I'd inflict the vile Teresa person on anyone, myself, but hey, your choice!)

disinterested - definition of disinterested by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

psgcooldog wrote :
And women should conversely seek out the ugliest, shortest man they can find, because that would be "fair"? That's equally absurd!
Whatever floats your boat! Nothing to do with anything I've said, but speech is free!

psgcooldog wrote :
I'm finding it very hard to be civil after reading your post, because your comment so reeks of self-righteousness.
And I care deply, deeply, I tell you.

psgcooldog wrote :
Here's the deal Mary, and understanding this cannot but help you in all things: just because something is unimportant to you, does not mean it is unimportant to someone else ... and that doesn't make them wrong!
Oh wow. I have seen the light. I have been taught a lesson. A rather completely pointless and empty one, but whatever. I've been told.

I shall now go forth and, uh, multiply or something.
 
  Reply With Quote
Cape_Codder is offline Cape_Codder Post #29  July 27,2010, 11:46am

Unregistered

Joined: Apr 2010

Massachusetts

Posts: 1,007

See profile

neardc wrote :
Bitter, much?
Not bitter, just tired of hearing the same unending rant that men need to ascribe to a different selection process dictated by a small minority of the opposite gender.
 
  Reply With Quote
psgcooldog is offline psgcooldog Post #30  July 27,2010, 12:13pm
psgcooldog's Avatar

dreams of a place called home ...

Veteran

Joined: Mar 2010

Kenton, DE

Posts: 1,146

See profile

mary_mary wrote :
Yes, exactly! That was exactly what I was saying! (Not that I'd inflict the vile Teresa person on anyone, myself, but hey, your choice!)

disinterested - definition of disinterested by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.



Whatever floats your boat! Nothing to do with anything I've said, but speech is free!



And I care deply, deeply, I tell you.



Oh wow. I have seen the light. I have been taught a lesson. A rather completely pointless and empty one, but whatever. I've been told.

I shall now go forth and, uh, multiply or something.
I'll take "disinterested", definition #2, for $100 please.

No, Mary ... I think that very little after your comment about free speech is true, other than the fact that I did, indeed, try to tell you something.

Re-reading your reply, I realize that I'm faced with an experienced flame-war bomb-thrower. I'm not, and I have no wish to become one.

You obviously have much practice at this. Why?
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply


« I'm a newbie...help me out | Relationships | The bandage was pulled right off tonight... »
Topic Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:
seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:


How did you hear about us?


Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“The tennis ball story is a good analogy, RD, and that's how I interpret "gut feeling" -- a conclusion/sense of something that's a thought, not a feeling; though it will have feelings associated with ... ” –  Sassafras54

Join the “Is Your Gut Leading - or Misleading You?” discussion

“Agree. Given where you are emotionally, I would cease all communication with Mr. Trade Show. You're vulnerable. He's up for a challenge. It's playing with fire. You'll be in a bad place in the ... ” –  emma_hazards

Join the “Received lovely email from former poofer” discussion

“How about phone calls, then?” –  barbarella_42

Join the “Advice on Response time” discussion

“I have never spoken to a woman like he has. Yeah, I have never spoken to a woman like that either. It is a hard call to whether he is just as jerk, or whether he is a player. Both are feasible ... ” –  ScottK

Join the “So, men. Explain this to me, please!” discussion

“I have come to this same conclusion. Thank you.” –  bibittyboo

Join the “Confused about date #2” discussion

“Harmonygirl, I do not usually make up my mind on blanket situations but instead would examine each one on it's own merits, so I cannot answer your question. However, just in the going about of daily ... ” –  Ephemera

Join the “Atheism, Religion and Tolerance” discussion

“I was ok until the kiss on the cheek part....That doesn't sound like your defenses were up at all... It's one thing for a guy to walk up and start with the cheesy lines....But as soon as I say, "no ... ” –  Ingytravel

Join the “So this guy walks into a bar . . .” discussion

“ No. It is not wise. You have to throw all your eggs into one basket for love to work at all. Relationships are inherently riskier than careers. You can't use the same rules. You might lose ... ” –  harnomygirl

Join the “Becoming Exclusive” discussion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:56pm.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0