Super nice guy, but not enough chemistry?

[SweetGirl28]

I need an intense attraction, butterflies and all. Otherwise I lose interest.

I've found it if I didn't feel the chemistry and kissed someone, it wasn't felt in the kiss either.

So..........wait until you kiss and see what you feel then :) That might be bad advice, but I do it.

Then again here I am single because I desire that chemistry and get myself in trouble :)

Maybe this guy will be Mr. right for you! He sounds good. Give him a chance.

[Batya33]

I need an intense attraction, butterflies and all. Otherwise I lose interest.

I've found it if I didn't feel the chemistry and kissed someone, it wasn't felt in the kiss either.

So..........wait until you kiss and see what you feel then :) That might be bad advice, but I do it.

Then again here I am single because I desire that chemistry and get myself in trouble :)

Maybe this guy will be Mr. right for you! He sounds good. Give him a chance.

I don’t th No you’re single because you desire that chemistry. I do think people who desire that chemistry from the first meet or first dstevget in their own way because of an assumption that if you’re not on fire the first meet you never will be. Often thats a faulty assumption and you might be passing up someone who you’d have intense chemistry with if you were open to getting to know the person a bit more.

It’s interesting how sometimes there’s the assumption that looking for a husband especially at a certain age requires settling for less chemistry or picking a “nice guy” - sure some women do that and some of them are content with their choice. Depends what you want. I wanted to want that and after a few broken engagements realized it wasn’t going to work for me that way as much as I wanted to be married. Settling down is not settling.

[SweetGirl28]

I don’t th No you’re single because you desire that chemistry. I do think people who desire that chemistry from the first meet or first dstevget in their own way because of an assumption that if you’re not on fire the first meet you never will be. Often thats a faulty assumption and you might be passing up someone who you’d have intense chemistry with if you were open to getting to know the person a bit more.

It’s interesting how sometimes there’s the assumption that looking for a husband especially at a certain age requires settling for less chemistry or picking a “nice guy” - sure some women do that and some of them are content with their choice. Depends what you want. I wanted to want that and after a few broken engagements realized it wasn’t going to work for me that way as much as I wanted to be married. Settling down is not settling.

 

Understood. I do know that I have passed up some really great guys because I didn't feel that excitement, and sometimes

I wonder if that's just a block I have because I'm not looking for marraige and kids. I have my daughter, I've been married. I do want long term , but not marraige necessarily. I know several women who take the first guy who crosses their path because they can't be alone. I can be, I don't depend on a man to be my life or support. I can say the nice guys without the chemistry are the ones who tried the hardest though. The ones I get attracted to are attentive but they don't go out of their way to shower me, and I like that. I don't like to feel suffocated and on a pedestal, it annoys me to no end lol

If I had given a certain couple of men a chance, maybe the chemistry would have sparked, but maybe it would have just gotten comfortable and I would have mistaken it for chemistry? I don't really know but I do know I'm open to overlooking the need for intense physical attraction because that's what gets me in a tough place :)

[Batya33]

Understood. I do know that I have passed up some really great guys because I didn't feel that excitement, and sometimes

I wonder if that's just a block I have because I'm not looking for marraige and kids. I have my daughter, I've been married. I do want long term , but not marraige necessarily. I know several women who take the first guy who crosses their path because they can't be alone. I can be, I don't depend on a man to be my life or support. I can say the nice guys without the chemistry are the ones who tried the hardest though. The ones I get attracted to are attentive but they don't go out of their way to shower me, and I like that. I don't like to feel suffocated and on a pedestal, it annoys me to no end lol

If I had given a certain couple of men a chance, maybe the chemistry would have sparked, but maybe it would have just gotten comfortable and I would have mistaken it for chemistry? I don't really know but I do know I'm open to overlooking the need for intense physical attraction I ubecause that's what gets me in a tough place :)

 

I understand -just to clarify -I'm talking about giving it about 4 dates or so -not longer.

 

I have a single friend -at least I think she is -in her 50s. I met her in her 30s. She said that when she met men she had sex ASAP to see if they were compatible. And if the sex wasn't great she moved on. To me that was a pretty good recipe for being single. And jaded and bitter. Her best sex apparently was with a married man. It ended because he committed suicide and she blamed his wife. She once emailed me excitedly because she'd met a man who was too young for her but she proclaimed him "perfect" for me -because he had dark hair and blue eyes and I'd told her once that that was a "type" of mine. So that's where her mindset was -a guy was perfect for me because of his hair and eye color.

 

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about -the inordinate focus on sexual chemistry that must be there when you don't even know the person and right away or the person moves on. (Or requiring sex with a near stranger to be amazing or it's over). Nothing wrong with it just limits the dating pool and those who take this approach shouldn't complain about how it limits the dating pool -but that standard/approach obviously hurts no one so more power to the people who enjoy that!

[Annia]

just make sure unsure dates don't turn into an unsure relationship.

 

This is the most important thing. It's ok to have a few more dates to evaluate the situation and have fun, but always be honest with yourself and with him and don't jump into an actual relationship trying to feel things you don't feel now down the road or with the expectation that it changes while in the relationship.

[Annia]

Me too, Sportster, me too.

 

Me three lol

[katrina1980]

This may sound crazy but sometimes I think the more we hope or want to feel that "chemistry" with someone (let's say someone we met on a dating site wherein the sole purpose is meeting and feeling that chemistry/connection), the more we WON'T feel it.

 

The "pressure" to connect on that first meet/date is enough to kill any potential attraction/connection; at least that is how it's been for me when I did OLD.

 

Had I met the SAME person spontaneously, at a club, out and about or wherever, where that pressure wasn't there, it's quite possible we could have felt it!

 

For me, I usually feel it immediately. That's not to say he's right for me, only that I'm feeling a certain "energy" with him, that I don't feel with other men.

 

That said, I may give it 2-3 dates just to be sure something wasn't blocking it from happening like nerves or something, but that's never worked out really.

[figureitout23]

Define chemistry. It sounds almost like you have chemistry confused with high intensity drama. Also, when you say things like that you are bored with your normal life.....you will inevitably end up getting with another psycho because he brings in the adrenaline rush you are craving. Consider that there are better ways to get your adrenaline hit - sports, hobbies. Find something to do that excites you and makes you feel alive at least an hour or two per day. Once you do that, you'll find that your interest in psychos drops to zero.

 

Anyway, chemistry to me is simply he is either doable or he isn't. Takes but a second to figure that out and for me personally, it doesn't change with time. Chemistry is a more physical, primal sort of a thing. It's either there or it isn't. However, in your case OP, I'd give things a few dates since you already know that your perceptions are skewed the wrong way.

 

Agree 100% with this and was disappointed it got lost in the shuffle. People who are still in that codependent mindset will find normal an utter and complete turn off. Until you fix yourself you'll only be attracted to chaos.

 

I really enjoy when regular posters ask for advice because we have a much bigger picture and can give advice based on that.

[Starlight925]

Agree 100% with this and was disappointed it got lost in the shuffle. People who are still in that codependent mindset will find normal an utter and complete turn off. Until you fix yourself you'll only be attracted to chaos.

 

Define chemistry. It sounds almost like you have chemistry confused with high intensity drama. Also, when you say things like that you are bored with your normal life.....you will inevitably end up getting with another psycho because he brings in the adrenaline rush you are craving. Consider that there are better ways to get your adrenaline hit - sports, hobbies. Find something to do that excites you and makes you feel alive at least an hour or two per day. Once you do that, you'll find that your interest in psychos drops to zero.

 

Anyway, chemistry to me is simply he is either doable or he isn't. Takes but a second to figure that out and for me personally, it doesn't change with time. Chemistry is a more physical, primal sort of a thing. It's either there or it isn't. However, in your case OP, I'd give things a few dates since you already know that your perceptions are skewed the wrong way.

 

Thanks to you both for bringing back up DancingFool's post.

 

When I say bored, I don't mean that I'm bored with life. I have a lot going on. It's that, for so long, I was in a relationship where I had to stay vigilant and on my toes constantly, and once I ended that, it's like....oh wow, it's so....quiet. Bored isn't the right word, but I know it's the word I used a while back in this thread. I do have the things in life that bring excitement, but the boredom I spoke of is really just a stillness. Oh, I don't have to worry why his phone was blinging but he didn't respond in front of me. I don't have to wonder where he is, or who he's talking to.

 

I personally live such a drama-free life it's almost unreal. It's "boring", but a good boring, if that makes sense. So, there's "boredom" once he was gone, in that there is nothing to worry about. It's kind of like doing a home improvement project: crazy while it's going on, but very still and quiet once it's done.

 

As for this guy, I'll definitely go out with him again.

 

My main reason for starting this thread was this:

Do you go out with someone again when you haven't imagined even kissing them? Is it possible for chemistry to develop?

[mustlovedogs]

Have you ever met someone and you’ve developed feelings after a few months? Like a work crush or a friend crush? Because I have. I just look for an initial connection. Is conversation easy and do I think they’re cute?

[TheRawTruth]

I've learned that this is common with women. (No, I'm not a sexist pig about to generalize, just letting you know it's not unusual.) Tons of my female friends have shared stories about a lack of chemistry being what prevents them from pursuing the good guy. Listen to what you said: "He checks EVERY SINGLE BOX. But...no chemistry." Which means that what's good on paper (or even good FOR you) doesn't exactly translate to real life match. It doesn't give you butterflies. It doesn't turn you on. It doesn't have you zoning out at wok the next day thinking about him. No. Instead, it has you QUESTIONING yourself, like "What is WRONG with me? I have a (seemingly) GREAT guy, yet I have very little (if any) interest in him. How come?"

 

The answer to that question is that INTEREST AND ATTRACTION AREN'T LOGICAL. (Unfortunately.)

 

Now, I'm ALL FOR you giving the good guy a chance. It'd be much better than dealing with a d-bag. BUT, like you said, that "rush" just ISN'T THERE. But ask yourself, what GIVES you that rush? They say chemistry can't be explained (and to a degree, they're RIGHT) but think about what all the guys who DID give you that rush feeling had in common. Were any of them great on paper like THIS guy, or did they all end up being wastes of time? Did you check off any boxes or did you just go with how you felt and end up burned later? I'm curious. So I plan to respond after you answer me.

[Batya33]

I've learned that this is common with women. (No, I'm not a sexist pig about to generalize, just letting you know it's not unusual.) Tons of my female friends have shared stories about a lack of chemistry being what prevents them from pursuing the good guy. Listen to what you said: "He checks EVERY SINGLE BOX. But...no chemistry." Which means that what's good on paper (or even good FOR you) doesn't exactly translate to real life match. It doesn't give you butterflies. It doesn't turn you on. It doesn't have you zoning out at wok the next day thinking about him. No. Instead, it has you QUESTIONING yourself, like "What is WRONG with me? I have a (seemingly) GREAT guy, yet I have very little (if any) interest in him. How come?"

 

The answer to that question is that INTEREST AND ATTRACTION AREN'T LOGICAL. (Unfortunately.)

 

Now, I'm ALL FOR you giving the good guy a chance. It'd be much better than dealing with a d-bag. BUT, like you said, that "rush" just ISN'T THERE. But ask yourself, what GIVES you that rush? They say chemistry can't be explained (and to a degree, they're RIGHT) but think about what all the guys who DID give you that rush feeling had in common. Were any of them great on paper like THIS guy, or did they all end up being wastes of time? Did you check off any boxes or did you just go with how you felt and end up burned later? I'm curious. So I plan to respond after you answer me.

 

I know of many couples where the chemistry/passion didn't spark right away and they were very happy together. I met great on paper guys who absolutely didn't do it for me, and those who did. And yes there sometimes is a pattern of only feeling that with unavailable people and it's definitely worth exploring.

[Starlight925]

I've learned that this is common with women. (No, I'm not a sexist pig about to generalize, just letting you know it's not unusual.) Tons of my female friends have shared stories about a lack of chemistry being what prevents them from pursuing the good guy. Listen to what you said: "He checks EVERY SINGLE BOX. But...no chemistry." Which means that what's good on paper (or even good FOR you) doesn't exactly translate to real life match. It doesn't give you butterflies. It doesn't turn you on. It doesn't have you zoning out at wok the next day thinking about him. No. Instead, it has you QUESTIONING yourself, like "What is WRONG with me? I have a (seemingly) GREAT guy, yet I have very little (if any) interest in him. How come?"

 

The answer to that question is that INTEREST AND ATTRACTION AREN'T LOGICAL. (Unfortunately.)

 

Now, I'm ALL FOR you giving the good guy a chance. It'd be much better than dealing with a d-bag. BUT, like you said, that "rush" just ISN'T THERE. But ask yourself, what GIVES you that rush? They say chemistry can't be explained (and to a degree, they're RIGHT) but think about what all the guys who DID give you that rush feeling had in common. Were any of them great on paper like THIS guy, or did they all end up being wastes of time? Did you check off any boxes or did you just go with how you felt and end up burned later? I'm curious. So I plan to respond after you answer me.

 

Great post, gives me a lot to think about!

 

For a lot of women, I think that the rush, the "chemistry", comes from a deeper issue relating to childhood wounds of their father not being fully present, so they equate that eggshells feeling with a longing for the love of their father, that they never fully got. There's a psychological theory (Harville Hendrix wrote a lot about it) where we try to fill that void left by the one parent we felt the void with. So, for many women, it was a father who was absentee/alcoholic/anger issues/etc.

 

For me, I had (have) the opposite in a father. My father has always been truly there, in every sense of the word. I have the opposite, an emotionally distant mother. I've done lots of work, therapy, etc., to uncover these issues, but it makes me a bit unique.

 

I've had some terrific guys in my past, who were the "great on paper" guys, who I let go. They went on to marry nice women, and they are (seem) happy. I now look back and realize what I did in letting these great guys go!

 

So to answer your question (bolded in your post), they too were "good on paper", because admittedly, I'm a dating snob, so there are many things I look for before entering a relationship. It wasn't until later that I saw bad behaviors. Admittedly, though, I look back now and realize the red flags were waving long before I left some of those relationships. One lie should be one lie too many, but I stayed. One personal put-down should be one too many, but I stayed.

 

But, as I said, I've been with some amazing guys, who were both good on paper, and great to me. Yet I left. So I knew I had work to do, which is definitely an ongoing process.

 

What I'm working on now is, am I putting this guy in the same category as the great guys who came before him, but I left and realized later they were great guys? Or is it truly just a lack of attraction and chemistry?

[Starlight925]

I really enjoy when regular posters ask for advice because we have a much bigger picture and can give advice based on that.

 

I enjoy when regular posters ask for advice too, and I wish we'd see more of our regular posters doing so.

 

But I know that a lot of them are in happy relationships, just happy to share their knowledge, so they just don't have anything to ask about!

 

I came to eNA because I was googling the heck out of what was going on in my relationship, and I've stayed because it's helped me.

[Annia]

My sincere hope is that we've just got different definitions of "chemistry," and that we're not talking people legitimately dating someone for months or even years without a genuine romantic inclination toward them-- and by them, I mean them, as in Scott, Peter, Jane, Rosa, and not essentially a mold that fits a checklist. Now if you're someone who comes from a culture of something like arranged marriage, where there is a strong and mutually understood implication that your romance will pretty much above all come as a product of time and labor, I can much better understand it. But, speaking personally, my conscience would rack me if I were sitting across the table on a third date, much less months or years into things, and I knew the woman was into me while I was still in some indefinite process of digging up chemistry toward her. And I pray if the roles were reversed, the lady would do me the very basic courtesy of a coup de grace.

 

Now if you wanna talk stages, such as knowing you like them and wanting to get to know them more for the enjoyment you felt with them then rather than basing it almost exclusively on how much you might enjoy being with them in the future, all while being grounded enough to not think immediately, "S/he's the one," of course give that "chemistry" time to evolve. But if there are seriously a bunch of people out there who, while looking at someone in the eyes, think "meh," and then look at a piece of paper with their stats and think "well... good enough," I'm about five seconds from calling every single friend I've got and telling them them to stop dating. There are cheaper and less time consuming options.

 

To again disclaim, I do realize some people will agree to less than enthusiastic 2nd or 3rd dates with the idea maybe there's something there that simply didn't come out during the first go. Not my style, but fair enough. I'd say do the guy or gal the favor of suggesting something light on their time and wallet, but otherwise, no harm in testing the waters. But going to the extreme it seems a few have isn't something I could advise in good conscience.

 

I don't see the problem in going out for example for 3 dates if on the first one there were no "chemistry" there, but more than a few dates, I don't think it's going to work or that the "sparkles" will come up after that. 3 months seem to much to test the waters. I also agree on keeping it simple on the "testing dates". And most importantly, not stringing people along and after the "test trial" be honest with them that you don't see a future with them and don't leave them hanging or "ghost" them. Or even even the whole "but lets be friends", because I don't think that's the original intention of the other person.

[Annia]

I definitely found him attractive. We met for about 2 hours, and the longer we talked, the more attractive he became. He was open, easygoing, and a total gentleman.

 

Thank you for your feedback!

 

And thank you RetroMama77 as well, as it seems you know exactly what I'm feeling. Yep, it was co-dependent, addicted to the highs & lows. This one, just from this meeting, seems so.....normal.

 

When I first met the last guy, it was all butterflies and stomach flips. Within the first week, I found out things about him that should have stopped me in my tracks. This just feels....simpler.

 

After being in an abusive relationship, I confess that I felt that I "missed" the drama. As if being with someone well adjusted and mentally and emotionally healthy without the ups and downs was weird to me. This is an unhealthy pattern that you need to fight. The best relationships and long lasting are not the ones that raise you and drag you and with so many adrenaline spikes and push and pull.

 

Of course someone might be attractive, nice and very good in paper and you still don't feel anything for them or that primal attraction we call chemistry (we can feel chemistry to people we objectively don't find so attractive and not feel none towards people we find gorgeous) and so it's ok and your right to break it of. There are some people that we simply can't get into, and it has nothing to do with them as a person or their lack of qualities.

[figureitout23]

Read wrong

[mustlovedogs]

After reading this thread I’ve decided to delete my online dating profile. I clearly have no chance with anyone.

 

What??? Why???

[Annia]

After reading this thread I’ve decided to delete my online dating profile. I clearly have no chance with anyone.

 

Why? Please don't fall into the victimhood of "I'm such a nice guy and still they don't look at me".

[mustlovedogs]

If you aren’t sure you’ve felt chemistry, then you haven’t.

 

It’s the butterflies. The anticipation. The hope they will lean in for a kiss. The endless banter, the flowing conversation.

 

I think your issues are more your attitude.

[Starlight925]

I have no idea but after having seemingly good conversations on first dates I was hit with the no chemistry. I honestly believe chemistry is a woman thing and I’m not even quite sure what it is. But it’s time to call it quits. Dating is a depressing negative experience. I just don’t have enough of what women want. Rereading this thread reinforces that even more.

 

Dating is tougher these days than ever. People have too many options, too easy to just swipe to the next profile. So on that subject, I completely agree with you!

 

But both people have to feel something. Have to feel that desire to see each other again, that thing where you're so excited when their name pops up in your phone.

 

The reason I started this thread was because I recently ended a relationship where I initially felt so much chemistry, and then, just like a high school chemistry experiment, it blew up. In my past, I've dated (married!!!) great guys where I didn't feel enough chemistry, and I left, and I look back and realize what a mistake I made. So I started this thread as a way of hopefully moving past this stupid need for so much "chemistry" and dating someone who is just an honest-to-goodness, nice guy.

 

Don't give up on dating because of what I started here. Instead, realize what a gem you are and wait for that nice gem of a girl who will recognize it. She's out there, but unfortunately, she's buried under a pile of swipers, always looking for next-next-next. It's so frustrating, and I get it!

[Starlight925]

Chemistry is a woman thing. It’s always women talking about it.

 

If chemistry is a "woman thing", then what it is for a man is, physical attractiveness. For a guy, he has to be physically attracted to a woman, period. If a guy doesn't have attraction, it won't go farther than friendship. I think the words are different, but it means the same thing.

 

I'm so sorry for your experiences. Dating is tough, I don't care how you slice it. I'm in my 50's as a woman, and it was tough in my 20's. It's just....not fun. People say, oh, you're single now, how fun!!! But you know what? It's not. So I completely get it.

 

And then you see your friends in these great, coupled-up relationships, and it makes it even harder, like, why can't I find that?

 

So I 1000% understand where you're coming from.

 

For my part, I started this thread because I'm trying to change this. Many of my friends, in my age group (which is yours!) are trying to change this too. Like, wait, there are these great guys we've passed up, and why? I wanted open discussion, which is what I got, so I thank you for sharing your feelings. I promise you are not alone.

[Starlight925]

I’m not a gem. The man you met meets all of your checkboxes but not the chemistry. I don’t meet all of anyone’s checkboxes and I don’t have chemistry that women must have. There just isn’t anyone out there for me. I’m truly sorry I hijacked your thread.

 

First of all, you didn't hijack. This is what this thread is about! Look, there are so many guys in their 50's on these sites, and so many women in their 50's....and why? Why do we keep seeing the same faces, year after year? I think it's because of women like me, quite frankly, who haven't given some of these great guys a chance. And a lot of the men who want a woman in her 50's, but want her to look like Demi Moore (or whatever movie star looks great in her 50's). I wanted to have an open discussion about this subject, so I appreciate your comments!

[katrina1980]

LHGirl, speaking from experience, please don't settle for just an "honest-to-goodness nice guy."

 

If you don't feel that *energy* (which is essentially what chemistry is) with a man, it's not a romantic relationship anyway, it a friendship.

 

If you settle for that, you will eventually feel emotionally empty and unchallenged, alone and well, just "blah."

 

Sure he's "there" but you will still feel alone if there is no energy keeping your relationship alive, exhilarating and passionate (not just physically).

 

After experiencing both types of RLs, I refuse to settle for anything less than a man who challenges me emotionally, mentally and even physically, and with whom there is that mutual energy/chemistry.

 

I would rather be alone for the rest of my life rather than settle for a "nice" guy with whom that energy is missing.

 

MLD described it perfectly. The butterflies (which in a long term relationship will ebb and flow), the anticipation of seeing him, walking through the door, missing him when he's gone, the endless and easy flow of conversation.

 

Why would you want anything less than that?

 

It's your life of course, but meh and blah. Would rather be alone.

[katrina1980]

hhs, sorry to hear of your difficulties but "chemistry" is not just a woman thing.

 

And it's more than just physical attractiveness, for both genders.

 

To say otherwise on behalf of all men is just insulting to them. It suggests that man are nothing more than shallow sexual predators whose goal is to bang as many hot women as they can.

 

Which may be true for some men, but certainly not all.

 

I've said this so many times, some think it's hoakie, but chemistry is essentially an *energy* generating between both people.

 

When it's genuine and not just based on the physical (which many confuse it as), both people are feeling it.

 

One person doesn't feel that energy and the other doesn't, makes no sense.

 

hhs, don't know how old you are, but I had two long term relationships in my 20s, but did not feel that energy/chemistry with a man until my third, whom I met in my late 20s..

 

Lasted six years.

 

I've felt it with other men since, am also currently in a RL with a man with whom I don't feel it and will be ending it soon.

 

Decided I will not settle for anything less.