Is Chemistry Stronger Than Physical Attraction?

[notwhoiusedtobe]

Over the years I've come to find out I'm on that sapiosexual wave like @PlutoEighth mentioned, without a doubt.

I actually married a dude I was not sexually attracted to When I was much younger. I was in IT at the time, he had the troubleshooting skills and was genuinely sweet and charming.

Looking back on every relationship I've had with maybe one exception, my attraction came as a result of having good conversations and finding out compatible aspects of their personality over time.

Sapiosexual huh?I had to look that up. The definition reminds me of this...I could be wrong, but I would think not being physically attracted to someone would lead to more companionate love or even just liking over time?

 

[Spike Tarantino]

is there a gender identity that you respond to more than others??

Great question.

Yes, I am overwhelmingly attracted to masculine/male traits. That is one common thread to an otherwise scattershot history of attraction.

 

[wet landscapes]

Great question.

Yes, I am overwhelmingly attracted to masculine/male traits. That is one common thread to an otherwise scattershot history of attraction.

super interesting! Physically or personality wise or both? You like them big macho bodies?

 

[Spike Tarantino]

super interesting! Physically or personality wise or both? You like them big macho bodies?

Surprisingly, no I've only ever dated one "muscly" guy and he turned out to be abusive, which is a shame because a lot of perfectly nice swole-brehs have to deal with that stereotype

Physically I'm not picky about height at all, but I'd say I prefer a dude with a Lil size to him, because I'm not a petite woman.


Although I am pretty progressive, the more traditional gender role and personality is what I dig

-secure/confident
-Leadership oriented
-Mechanical/Infrastructure inclination.

 

[wet landscapes]

Surprisingly, no I've only ever dated one "muscly" guy and he turned out to be abusive, which is a shame because a lot of perfectly nice swole-brehs have to deal with that stereotype

Physically I'm not picky about height at all, but I'd say I prefer a dude with a Lil size to him, because I'm not a petite woman.


Although I am pretty progressive, the more traditional gender role and personality is what I dig

-secure/confident
-Leadership oriented
-Mechanical/Infrastructure inclination.

sorry you had to go thru that
those traits combined sound like a cool guy

 

[Spike Tarantino]

Sapiosexual huh?I had to look that up. The definition reminds me of this...I could be wrong, but I would think not being physically attracted to someone would lead to more companionate love or even just liking over time?

Nice Graph

I would say you're right, I'd term it companionate love based on these concentric circles. We were definitely commited, and shared close, intimate contact....but


... I never liked seeing him naked, tbh

 

[Spike Tarantino]

sorry you had to go thru that
those traits combined sound like a cool guy

Thank you and no sweat. In my line of work, I work with many people who have been abused. It gives me more tools to help them recover, because I can empathize with their pain more deeply.

Hopefully that cool guy can quit bullshyttin and scoop me up so we can enjoy a dope existence one day, he'd die happy

 

[CinnaSlim]

I love the Salon. So many cool people and great conversation.

 

[Draje]

I dunno about stronger but I feel like genuine desire is a far more immediate and "in your face" high than the one that chemistry brings but it's also dissipates a lot quicker.

Chemistry is that slow burning kinda high. Lasts a long time and it might not feel as potent, initially, but when it finally clicks and its mutual...

 

[notwhoiusedtobe]

Although I am pretty progressive, the more traditional gender role and personality is what I dig

-secure/confident
-Leadership oriented
-Mechanical/Infrastructure inclination.

It's funny, I think more traditional gender roles work well for male/female relationships and I consider myself non-traditional.

But when it comes to F/F relationships, I don't like the idea. I've always had a leadership mindset, probably too independent/too aloof and I like to work with my hands/fix things....but I don't want to handle everything and being submissive is fine by me. But most of all

When I scream "spider!" I want a woman to show up on some point at that bytch like while I'm
I was raised in BK, though, so I can handle chaotic situations, hood shyt, and mice ....but no rats

Nice Graph

I would say you're right, I'd term it companionate love based on these concentric circles. We were definitely commited, and shared close, intimate contact....but


... I never liked seeing him naked, tbh

So you just played it off? I couldn't do it. Looks aren't everything, but like others have said there needs to be a level physical attraction. I just find it interesting that there's an elusive element that can heighten attraction.

 

[notwhoiusedtobe]

I dunno about stronger but I feel like genuine desire is a far more immediate and "in your face" high than the one that chemistry brings but it's also dissipates a lot quicker.

Chemistry is that slow burning kinda high. Lasts a long time and it might not feel as potent, initially, but when it finally clicks and its mutual...

I think that would be infatuation (passion without intimacy) according to that chart.

Do you think chemistry can spark that sense of passion/desire, too?

 

[Draje]

I think that would be infatuation (passion without intimacy) according to that chart.

Do you think chemistry can spark that sense of passion/desire, too?

To a certain degree but I'm of the belief that "raw desire" passion, that "I see this person and I'm instantly turned on" will FEEL stronger than the chemistry-powered desire.

It's not actually stronger but the high is more noticeable and apparent.

 

[How Sway?]

Yes

*wipe forehead*

 

[Rawtid]

Good question. I would lean more towards yes. I think the more natural your relationship with someone, the longer you'll be able to tolerate them regardless of how they look.

 

[PlainSight]

To a certain degree but I'm of the belief that "raw desire" passion, that "I see this person and I'm instantly turned on" will FEEL stronger than the chemistry-powered desire.

It's not actually stronger but the high is more noticeable and apparent.

You just react to a different kind of chemistry, that's all. For some people, it's a slow burn, for others it's an explosion. It's the same for me - both girls I'd been with, the attraction was fairly explosive, I was fukking within hours. Now of course, they were both physical, somewhat short-term unions, so a long-term union would require a lot more maneuvering as far as other elements of compatibility are concerned. I became friends with one of the girls on the basis that there was a good level of communication and humor as well as sex. That indicated to me that I may need a lot of mental stimulation and verbal communication in relationships. So mental chemistry is desired - but it still needs to be somewhat quick and fiery for me to take notice!

For others, not so much.