A few weeks ago I went on my first "real" date since the incident. How did it go you ask? Um....not so well. I am normally a little nervous on first dates, but I was so nervous that I had to slide my hands under my thighs to keep them from shaking. Not surprisingly, my trembling like a school girl did little to endear me to the poor man. He let me know that he didn't think there was sufficient chemistry for him to further pursue me. Naturally I was disappointed because he looked so good "on paper" (meaning we have compatible spiritual beliefs, he is intelligent, has a good sense of humor). But honestly, I think all of the trembling was a physiological reaction indicating that I'm just not quite ready to date again just yet. So, it's just as well that there was no "chemistry".
All that had me thinking about the idea of "chemistry". For me, chemistry is something that is rarely, if ever, instantaneous. Actually it is rarely something that I would feel strongly after one date. I seem to need to interact with someone more than that usually. The two examples I can think of where I felt that "zing" or "chemistry" within the first date didn't lead to good things for me because I seemed to allow my "feelings" to diminish reservations and "warning signs". I seem to do better when the "chemistry" is a bit slower in the development. So, generally, I will agree to more dates to give things a chance to develop. But, people are different. Some people want to feel "chemistry" right away.
It brings many questions to mind:
- Is chemistry just about attraction?
- Do you feel chemistry instantly, or does it take time to grow?
- Is chemistry necessary for a good/ successful marriage?
- Can chemistry last?
- Would we be better off paying less attention to chemistry when looking for a potential spouse?
I want to hear what y'all think.
17 comments:
"Is chemistry just about attraction?"
I don't think so. I think chemistry is a intuitive sense of compatibility. Of common likes dislikes and ways of handling things. Opposites may attract, but it's likes that stay together.
I think a sense of chemistry becomes more reliable as one gets older. Maybe it is different for women, but for me as a younger guy, feelings and perceptions of chemistry were not reliable at all, and were too easily mixed up in other things like hormones and sex drive and such. 15 years hence, however, the hormones don't rage quite so much and my sense of chemistry is tempered with a greater self-knowledge and simple experience and is thus a better guide for mate selection.
"Do you feel chemistry instantly, or does it take time to grow?"
Both. With Mrs Wapiti, I felt an initial chemistry that grew over time. Now I can't imagine being without her.
"Is chemistry necessary for a good/ successful marriage?"
Oh, that's a hard one. And you're talking to a guy that's done so well at marriage that I'm on my second one.
I think it helps, but is neither necessary nor sufficient.
Feelings come and go, but what really counts is commitment.
"Can chemistry last?"
Yep.
"Would we be better off paying less attention to chemistry when looking for a potential spouse?"
Probably, but that depends on how much stock a person puts in it in the first place.
Chemistry is one indicator among many. I was 33 when I met Mrs. Wapiti. By then, I had a pretty good idea in what I was looking for in a wife, what I definitely wished to avoid, and what I required as far as my needs were concerned. But I also realized that my ability to use my own wits to select a wife was suspect and had a horrible track record (0 for 1), so I did a lot of praying and consulting of The Man in the final analysis.
Learner,
It still grieves me about what happened to you the last time around. I hope you do find someone that is a great match for you.
About the chemistry thing: I've tried the date-before-friendship thingy. It doesn't work. I think if people want chemistry, they better make friends with the opposite sex first. Over time with friendships, the mask comes off, acceptance is developed, and warm fuzzies have a real taproot in mutual respect. All the good marriages I know of started off as friendships. Even Candace Watters started that way with her husband, I believe.
That's the real chemistry: A ceramic-like material that holds up under the intense heat of adversity.
EW,
Thanks for your input. I think this is a well put description: I think chemistry is a intuitive sense of compatibility.
I do think that age influences how women look at chemistry too. Though I think it is more likely about life experience than decreasing hormones since women typically experience greater sex drive after their 20s.
It's hopeful for me as a single person to hear you talk about your marriage and Mrs Wapiti :)
Anakin,
Thank you, I appreciate your kind words.
I like this: That's the real chemistry: A ceramic-like material that holds up under the intense heat of adversity.
This is way, way outside my realm of expertise, but I'll throw down some comments anyway.
I think "chemistry," at least as it often seems to be thought of and referred to, is a terrible indicator of relationship health. It only applies when things are going well, when two people are "clicking." Throw it out the window when the going gets tough. And that's when the strength of a relationship is really tested. I'd much rather be with someone I know I can work with and trust when the chips are down than someone I have some kind of special connection with when all is right in the world. Plus, that "chemistry" will develop in a relationship of mutual trust and sacrifice.
I'm reminded of an Asian proverb I heard sometime back in the day. True love is like a tea kettle, starting off cool and warming over time. False love is like a burning ember, starting off hot and fading over time. I'm probably butchering it, but that's the basic gist.
"as a younger guy, feelings and perceptions of chemistry were not reliable at all"
Same here. I don't know if that "sixth sense" gets better as we get older, but for now I'm content to not rely on my own perceptions all that much.
And also, Learner, an all-time low test score of 26% ain't too bad I don't think. There were classes in college in which I was happy to break into double-digits and was thrilled to walk out of an exam having seen more than one question I knew something about.
Jesse,
Thanks for your thoughts. I like the proverb.
It's called "chemistry" because it is ...well...chemistry. Literally chemicals in your brain giving you feelings that you can't control and fell compelled to act on.
Roci,
Thanks for the input. There are a number of neurotransmitters that are released when we are attracted to someone. Our brains may become less sensitive to them over time which may be why the "rush" of falling in love typically doesn't last. Pesky feelings...
i've found this interesting since i first read it.
i think that for me, personally, there is a level of chemistry that creates an atmosphere that is comfortable and safe. when it is not there, i am like you were. i need to feel comfortable and not edgy.
i think the curve on this is personal and individual. i know some who have very long curves and some who have very short curves. i do not think there's a hard, fast rule here.
i do believe chemistry can be developed over time. and i do believe it can be immediate.
i do believe chemistry can be maintained in a marriage. there are obviously ebbs and flows to things like chemistry in marriage, and so committment, as another mentioned, must be grounded and solid and based on something more than chemistry.
i think that, over time, keeping chemistry alive is like stoking a fire, adding logs, stoking the embers. once you let them die out, you will need to light them up again. and there will be times you will need to choose to light them up b/c you won't feel like it.
i think personality plays a lot into this ... and love languages ... and the way we're wired.
Thanks Ame :) Interesting thought about the interplay of "love languages" and chemistry. Upon thinking about this I can see how it would be true for me. My #1 love language is physical touch (crazy Italians! ;)) and when I was out with Mike a few weeks ago, shaking like a leaf, I thought several times that if I could hold his hand I would probably stop trembling. I resisted the urge to do this because I thought it might be perceived as immature and since I was already doing my best impression of the trembling schoolgirl I didn't think that would be wise. I can also think of times I have felt significant chemistry with a man and how that related to touching (I don't mean sexual touching), time spent together and words of encouragement. Interesting theory Ame!
What some people mean by chemistry is the deceit of infatuation.
Chemistry comes over time.
Those seeking it are often addicted to the thrill of infatuation. Sadly, it often leaves them empty.
Hi Bri,
Thanks for the comment. I agree that some people do mistake infatuation for "chemistry" (or mistake hormones for reliable indicators of a good partner as EW said). I wonder if people who want to feel chemistry immediately think that way because they know from experience that if they don't feel it at the beginning it doesn't come in time for them?
Learner ... we're so much alike :)
physical touch is one of my top two love languages, too.
Ame,
A virtual hug for you! :)
It seems that different people may mean different things by that term, 'chemistry'; in the contexts I've tended to hear it, it has always seemed to be simply a metaphor for the spark of initial attraction, being present in two people embarking upon a dating relationship. I think of that as a necessary initial condition, but that, like any 'highs' early on in a relationship, ultimately will subside, and need to be replaced with a deeper mutual affection.
The world also likes to go on and on about 'sexual chemistry', something I've always found bizarre and incomprehensible, because, well, God made men and women for each other; why would any two married people who truly love both the Lord and each other, and thus want to please each other, not have 'sexual chemistry' with each other?
Will S,
Thanks for the comment. I agree on the sexual chemistry thing. Since God has set boundaries around sex such that believers are called to abstain outside of marriage I don't believe that He would create our sexuality in such a way that it is a crapshoot. It seems that the more sexual experience people have outside of marriage and the more "preferences" they acquire the narrower the pool of people with whom they feel sexual compatibility becomes. I don't think God would create it to be that elusive.
Agreed; according to the proper, Godly use of that gift, surely it must be a much more enjoyable thing than when improperly, sinfully used, leading, as you said, to people making all kinds of comparisons, thus making it harder for them to enjoy it exclusively with one person the rest of their life, if they should be so blessed, later on. Not that God can't heal all wounds, and work His transformative love on broken sinners, but... Sin has consequences, indeed, farther reaching than people may realize when they embark upon it.
Post a Comment