Comments on: Are Women More Likely Than Men to Require Chemistry to Go On A Second Date?

By: Sahaja

Sahaja — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:43:26 +0000

I think redhead hit the nail on the head – There is a decided difference between good looking and attractive. There are extremely in shape men that have great bodies, but we don’t find them attractive. In contrast, there are men that not models by any means that women flock around. Women pay attention to the details – very true. And when we have a gut feeling,its usually on point. So if she doent want to meet up, call it a good thing – if it was going to happen, it would have. This is time you saved, and now you can be meeting someone else – that you can connect with.

By: Roger

Roger — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:28:19 +0000

Thank you Evan and everyone else for your insights. I continue to learn new things every day!

By: redheadfromtdot

redheadfromtdot — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 03:03:09 +0000

I think that Jimmy nails it.

Furthermore:
“No chemistry” is a way of saying “lack of physical attraction”. People seem to take offense to the latter because they hear “not attracted to you” as “you’re not attractive”.

Attraction is a funny thing. It’s there or it’s not. One person can feel it while the other doesn’t. It’s hard to control.
Many of us have been physically attracted to people we didn’t like and wished we were attracted to people we did.

I’ve learned that if I’m not attracted to a guy I can’t date him even if compatibility is strong. It’s not right nor fair to either one of us, and attraction is necessary for sex. If I’m dating a guy that I have fun with, and get along well with and find compatible but I don’t want to be physical with him, I tend to date him until I convince myself to let this one go. I often hope that the attraction will suddenly appear or reappear but it rarely works that way and even then it’s not really “sudden”, but the sudden revelation of something gradual.

I’m friends with some guys that I’ve dated. If the chemistry’s not there and it feels platonic, there’s little difference between “dating” and “hanging out”.

I’ve decided that sometimes “sparks” (“stars”?) are the reaction to something new, masquerading as feelings of attraction, and then in time the feeling peels away.

And yes, how you meet is an important part of the formula.

I hope I’m making sense in my sleepy state. Forgive the rambling.

By: feelingflirty

feelingflirty — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 01:50:46 +0000

You have some wacky comments but I like it!

By: JimmyE

JimmyE — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 18:56:11 +0000

Some thoughts-

1) men are more visual and are therefore more likely to rule women out BEFORE the first date.

2) Men are expected to pursue women. Consequently there’s not much time to analyse the first few dates. If we’re having a good time, we start planning the next call and plans for the second date.

3) If a man likes a woman and finds her attractive, he’s probably going to hang about till he gets to have sex. After that, he might start to ask himself if the relationship has long term potential.

4) Women have more options in the early stages of dating, and are therefore more likely to exercise them.

5) ‘No Sparks’ is often a euphemism for more concrete factors which people are too polite to admit to (even to themselves)