Girls often seem to refer to multiple traits they are looking for in a boyfriend:
>funny
>driven
>patient/attentive
>loyal
>...
Although they say this, the fact that they often fall for relationships which are (to an outsider) abusive / bound to fail / not following the above guidelines, shows that they are intrinsically very irrational. Possibly even more so than men.
So if these guidelines are often empty expressions, the reality of what girls want from a relationship is
>chemistry
Even if girls bring this term up it is almost never clear or in the least concrete:
>I am looking for chemistry
>We need to click
>He didn't have that 'special something', you know.
But if chemistry is by its very nature so illusive that even the people looking for it, cannot define it:
>What are they even looking for?
Or is it really just a numbers game, where one hangs out at the venues where there is the highest probability of meeting your 'type of girl' (which is much more concrete imo) and just engage with as many as possible until there is a match based on the arbitrary nature of 'chemistry' the girl sees in you?
>What is 'chemistry'?
>Why do girls keep on using a term they don't understand themselves?
>How do guys 'improve chemistry' and is it even possible?
>What are your experiences with 'chemistry'?
97% of women really just want a man who will step in and tell them what to do. 90% of the men who understand this, and know how to do it, are selfish jerks who know they can get more than one woman.
Most women don't really know what they want, or at least they won't honestly express it in a conversation with a man. Stop trying to appeal to their logical, sensible side. Aim for her emotional, impulsive side and you'll do a lot better. Women want to be thrilled. The checklists are meaningless
>>17264608
>bound to fail
all relationships are bound to fail, stop acting like you could make a life long commitment work.
>chemistry is not clear or concrete
have you ever had chemistry? if you had you know thats as clear as it gets. there are people you are naturally interested in, for reasons you cant explain. sometimes they arent even your type or you might find them ugly in a way. often times their good looks help push that chemistry.
you do need to 'click'. stop acting like romance should be a simple mathetmatic equation.
>what are they even looking for?
someone that makes them feel special. no, going out of your way to make someone feel special isnt the same thing. there are natural reactions between two people that cant be explained. thats the whole point of love.
are you aying you've never had a crush on someone before? you never knew someone and couldnt really say why they were the special one, but you knew it was them?
you can walk into a room filled with pretty girls, but only one might give you the butterflies.
Chemistry has to do with both how you are alike and how you are different, as well as some subconscious stuff that may have to do with your parents and upbringing, nationality, and even a little bit of genetic influence
>>17264644
94% of statistics you see on the internet are made up on the spot
>>17264655 >>17264608
I'll give an example.
My ex was out of my league but she was crazy for me and I was crazy for her because we had near perfect chemistry. Our backgrounds were as much alike as they were different. I'm a quarter mexican, with my grandpa as the full mexican but he acts white. She was a quarter mexican, with her grandpa as full mexican and he also acted white. Both liked golf and suburban, responsible living with their wives.
However, as a child she grew up really poor and was abused by her stepfather in shitville florida before she moved out to oklahoma. I grew up poor for quite a while before my dad moved up to middle class, after my mom died when I was 6.
We both had traumatic childhoods and a great deal of mental issues, but our company seemed to take it away. She brought out the best in me. No joke, I became extroverted when I was with her while she was also the quiet but reaaaaaallly attractive one.
I think subconsciously she fit in perfectly in the spot of my mother which kept me, and I don't know what I was to her but I definitely kept her centered.
Sorta an explanation of chemistry and what goes in to it, but there are stuff even I can't dig up that went into it
>>17264688
Oh yeah, and we were both high achievers in high school. However, she was the try hard that had set goals in mind while I was lazy and breezed through it without direction. That difference was a part of it as well
>>17264693
I loved how she made me feel and act and she loved how she could let go and be herself around me
CHEMISTRY
>>17264644
> emotional, impulsive side
Is that something which can be 'learned'?
>Lets go on a trip. Why. Just cause, bae, now hop in the fucking car.
>>17264654
>have you ever had chemistry?
not to the degree where I lost the ability to think straight. Had crushes, but they usually went away naturally like a flu. Emotion -> Rationalisation -> Went away.
>So according to your definition: No I never had a crush.
Have heard you cannot look for it.
It just happens. Which is equal to a crapshoot of probabilities.
>>17264655
This is not how girls seem to work.
>Meet guy
>scan for 5 min
>leave if arbitrary chemistry criteria not met.
Guys are for the most part less stringent when it comes to that.
We have our preferences, but:
a) they are mostly fairly concrete
b) Won't blow off a relationship possibility just because of initial 'chemistry'
>>17264688
>>17264693
>>17264700
Nice story man.
>How did you meet her?
You're seeing it wrong, OP. Girls do want the traits that you listed, but a guy needs to have a certain confidence and masculinity/assertiveness to register as a potentially interesting guy to begin with. Not in literally every single case of course, but generally speaking.
And at a young age, there are simply more guys who are assholes (aggressive, hot headed, easily offended) than guys who are just really mature, confident in who they are and with high enough self respect to not let anyone walk over them. The former qualities are easier to have and take less maturing and self realization.
It's like when you ask a guy what he likes and he says a nurturing and passionate girl, and you should hear it as "a hot girl who is also nurturing and passionate". The reason that the first condition is not mentioned is because they are so used to not even paying attention to people who don't meet it. The traits are indicative of what they appreciate in a partner they find attractive. And I'll vouch any day that for a woman, having that self esteem matters more for attraction than looks themselves (though the combination is always perfect of course).
>>17264703
>cant look for it
pretty much. kinda makes chemistry hard when you're not just being your normal living self.
you never had chemistry at all with a friend even? just someone you were naturally drawn to for reasons you cant explain?
sucks to suck, but it sounds like you are trying to be too clinical in your approach to dating.
>leave if arbitrary chemistry criteria is not met
>arbitrary
you do know what love is right? what its supposed to be? the whole point of dating and romance is to be with someone that makes you feel good.
dont get me wrong, im pro single, pro independence, fuck the disney bullshit and think getting married is dumb.
but to rationalize dating down to just
>i am a suitable male, move in with me and lets have sex frequently
is just dumb. whats the point of dating if you make it so clinical?
i cant speak for all guys but if theres no chemistry, im not interested. ill stick around for sex or a little friends with benefitting, but im not going to date someone i dont feel any chemistry with, and yeah its almost instant.
sometimes you cant even explain it. i tend to have great chemistry with girls who arent exactly 'my type'. thats just how chemistry works.
met a girl who was ideal. curly hair, really submissive, did whatever the fuck i wanted with no complaints, 9/10 gorgeous with meat only in the right places, tits and ass. ideally the perfect woman.
zero chemistry. on the other hand a much less 'perfect' girl caught my eye, lives all the way up in valencia 2 hours away from me, and shes the one that i feel the connection with.
to insist that seeking a connection is dumb is... well, dumb.
>>17264703
I think what you're talking about is the initial thing which has nothing to do with chemistry. Upon first meeting girls will only pick out your attractiveness, way of dress, confidence, and apparent social standing while guys will really just pick out the looks. Not chemistry.
You really have to start going on dates and getting to know the person to actually feel and understand chemistry friendo
>>17264731
Even on the first date you can find out quite a lot about a person, their history, interests, views, etc.
Of course not everything.
But some pointers can be extracted.
Which can in my experience already indicate chemistry.
>>17264712
We were in the same psychology class in high school. The funny story is, I was always a pussy but I guess she liked my personality from the class because I always sat back with her and her friends and worked with them for everything because we had mutual friends and she used to ride my bus. She ended up hanging out with her friend who hung out with my friend and told my friend she wouldn't mind if I asked her out to the prom, which I did nervously af. It all just went smoothly from there after I got the balls to ask her on a date.
I just recovered from a bad acne breakout for months but she didn't mind, and she was gorgeous. Goes to show some girls have souls
>>17264734
It's only a small part of chemistry. But yeah, if you want to go on a second date and not just for her looks you probably have some chemistry
sometimes you meet a girl and its fine you get along, but theres no spark.
other times you meet a girl and in thirty seconds you're already making out and you go back to your place and you spend an hour just touching each other before you even have sex cuz you just cant resist touching.
other girls feel awkward just to touch.
chemistry, despite its name, is not science as far as we know. might have a lot to do with weird pheremone reactions im sure, but as far as we can tell its just the random way people interact.
i was considered a GREAT student. not super smart, but the most well behaved. when i transfered to public school i was considered a near universal joy and teachers thought others should be more like me.
except for one. she hated me. and i hated her. not for any reason. she was nice. she did her job. but there was something about us that made us butt heads over absolutely nothing. we just could not enjoy each other.
chemistry is more than just romance. it exists on ev ery level. some people you can write a book wtih. otehrs you cant even look at. its just the way the world is.
>>17264737
I never understood how guys can go on dates just based on looks.
>Only go on dates if there is at least a trace of compatibility
>Cannot be stuck talking about her ass all night
>Never ended anywhere meaningful so far.
>>17264745
considering that the only two options are 'break up' or 'death' very few people look back at their relationships and think of them ending meaningfully.
maybe you need to change your mind frame, assuming ive read your post correctly.
>>17264745
Lol some guys are just really patient and will talk about whatever with a girl just because he thinks she's hot. She could be the most boring girl on earth but if he wants in her pants he'll fake it. It's shallow but it's pretty common
>>17264752
Not what i meant with meaningful
>longlasting
>serious
>deep
>regular
may be better terms
my bad. sorry.
>>17264743
Well from a neuropsychological and psychopharmacological standpoint it is. But let us not go there.
>Talking about norepinephrine and sertonin does not get girls
Everybody has had the person they don't like for seemingly random reasons.
>I usually rationalise these feelings of dislike. If i am not able to, I try to suppress them and only return to them if have a justified reason to do so.
>>17264759
Usually those 9/10s have nothing to talk about in my experience.
And have daddy issues.
>Shit gets friendzone quickly (especially if they find out what i do)
mental note to self
>should exploit daddy issue angle more often.
>>17264783
what was your longest lasting relationship?
you seem to be too clinical. and relationships are the least clinical thing in the world. any examination of relationships through history can show you that.
and the problem is you are being a bit willfully ignorant about it. i dont mean that to sound like an insult as ignorance is generally used. but you are choosing to believe that chemistry is unimportant when the entire history of the universe has shown its not.
you admit to having chemistry but purposely suppressing it.
why are you so obsessed with getting a girlfriend if none has ever made you so special?
what do you do?
>>17264608
A lot of young people don't know what they need or want. They want a relationships because they don't want to be alone. That's all.
They date without having standards, and stay in relationships that make them unhappy because it's still better than being lonely.
It's not about men and women - how many times do you hear your friends complaining about their girlfriends?
It is very hard to explain what "chemistry" is exactly, but as another anon said - if you experienced it, you know it.
To me, it's mostly about that feeling of being understood, when connecting emotionally and intellectually is easy - being on the same wavelength, having similar sense of humour, having engaging conversations, not having to overly explain yourself.
There's also a part of it which is purely physical attraction, for sure.
Me and my boyfriend have amazing chemistry. He's 8 years older than me, not even particularly attractive physically, but there's something about his mind and personality which is just sexy - conversation with him is easy and natural, but at the same time interesting and challenging; he knows how to tease me and how to praise me; he understands everything about me, I always understand the reasons behind everything he does and everything about him feels right for me. I feel magnetic when we talk. We can talk for 20 hours a day without getting bored, we can sit there in silence and I feel comfortable, sex with him is just the most satisfying thing I've ever experienced.
>>17264819
i think a good example of chemistry is just how... easy it all is.
the last girl i met at a campout wasnt exactly my type but it was there. we met by chance and spent the rest of the night together. we'd known each other 4 hours but acted like wed known each other 4 years, and talked about going real camping in august together.
it wasnt until after we talked about that that we realized how funny it was that we had said it.
>>17264793
>what was your longest lasting relationship?
None.
Which obviously plays into my perception of things. I am not going to sugarcoat it.
>what do you do?
Student of Cognitive Neuropsychology & Biological Psychology.
>Basically how the brain and 'chemistry' actually work.
I am not in love with the subject as it seems here. The subject just tends to make you jaded.
>you admit to having chemistry but purposely suppressing it.
One of the reasons I have never been in a relationship is that i hardly ever feel that chemistry people keep falling for (seemingly all the time). I can meet girls with similar interests and can talk with them for hours, but build little chemistry.
Walking around university, meeting many people (i did, as i used to travel a lot), I never felt that 'things' with anybody. Even if i thought i felt it, it would just fade after a while.
>I am aware that is my 'problem'
Which is why my initial question was more geared toward how to induce make chemistry in the eyes of others more likely. Especially it seems to illusive and girls keep talking about it like it where an actual, modifiable trait (like fashion sense...).
>>17264819
>>17264837
indeed very nice stories. congrats.
but falling to something like that seems very arbitrary, which lies in the nature of it.
So is it just a waiting game, to find that girl/guy who clicks? And does not make you cringe even a little?
Makes your world whole and life easy and bright.
>>17264840
>none
if you literally never had a relationship that explains a lot.
>psychology
thats great, but like you said you are using it to feel jaded. the thing is you should have a better understanding of chemistry than anyone here. yet you choose to ignore that the concept exists.
maybe you're just a sociopath, cuz that seems to be what you want to hear based on the rest of your post.
to address that last bit though, chemistry is not a 'trait'.
consider your penis for a second. i know that sounds weird, but stick with me. you have a penis like half of the human race. most of those penises react similarly, but a girl may give a GREAT handjob to you, but a bad handjob to another guy, even if the penis is super similar in length girth etc.
for no rationally known reason, your two similar penises will have different tastes. what might be a great handjob for you will be a bad handjob. for some reason this girl just 'understands' your penis. it just happens to be a good match for no known reason.
a less dumb example might be comparing it to tastes. soem people like lasagna. others hate it. for no known reason ijust fucking hate lasagna with a passion.
thats what chemistry is. some girls are going to 'taste' better to your brain for no known reason. while we may almost universally agree chocolate is great, you might chage chocolate for no known reason, and prefer red velvet. my father likes his food burnt for some reason.
either way you cannot manufacture this sort of thing, so stop trying to.
why do you even want to date?
>>17264857
>arbitrary
depends on your definition of arbitrary. like the word 'ignorant' it has a negative connotation to it.
is it random? yes. is there any rhyme or reason to it? not much. i mean im more likely to feel chemistry with a guy who has curly hair, attraction and similar interests definitely play a role and whatnot, but ultimately chemistry is mostly just random.
it is a waiting game, and a bit of a numbers game.
>does not make you cringe even a little?
no. i dont know why it would. the concept of randomly finding someone i get along with for no reason isnt cringy. cringy is disregarding chemistry and dating someone based solely on traits, cuz if you remove chemistry it simply becomes an objective view of 'the best candidate' and when tyhere is no chemistry that candidate has nothing to offer except for status.
if you are dating for status, whats the point?
>>17264865
>>17264870
Indeed I probably have a reasonable grasp on what chemistry entails in theory.
Like an engineer cannot necessarily fix a broken plane, knowing highly abstract underpinning does not make you competent at executing them.
>why even date.
Dating is an integral part of life. Closeness, intimacy, etc.
Another reason (i apologise if this seems arrogant, but please bare with me here) is that i have pretty much pursued 'self-optimisation' for a long time. Essentially aiming to become the person i consider to be 'ideal' (not in a partner, but myself):
>Martial arts for 6 years
>Get into a good university (not a good student atm)
>read a lot
>be diverse in terms of interest (from art, fashion to science and politics - just be versatile when it comes to talking)
>good public speaker
>dress well and follow indie fashion styles
>Attempt to learn 7 languages (5 were successful) to be able to talk and learn from and about people
>learn to be open and unbiased it every form of life (aim for it not possible obviously) - pop those shrooms.
>going to start gyming soon - already started to change diet to gain weight
I don't do these things to 'get girls', I just expected that (among other things) when I aim to be the best i want to be, I will eventually find a counterpart who i am looking for. This is NOT meant to imply some sort of flawlessness on my part. Doing all these things is a flaw in and of itself. Would never want a gf like this.
>Relationships should be complimentary
What i want to say is that after all this, being blocked by something as 'random' as chemistry and apparently not being able to find a potential gf because of this is very frustrating.
>So I ended up asking, what i can do to be 'better in building chemistry' which seemingly is utterly ridiculous.
>>17264977
>its an integral part of life
its not. i mean you can go your whole life happy not dating and not even really notice. if you have no sense of chemistry, no crush, no desires, then its not integral, important, or worth while at all.
you say yourself that you dont experience these things, so there is no reason to date. dating wont give you anything and ultimately you will just kind of treat it like a sibling. you are together, you have to make it work, but theres nothing that actually makes you want to be together.
none of what you say sounds like you are arrogant though. you aim for self improvement and thats a good thing. perfection is the death of spirituality.
maybe half your issue is that you kill the potential chemistry. you claim not to ever feel it, so how can anyone reciprocate it? chemistry implies that the two people are able to feel some osrt of attraction to each other, but an easy way to make someone stop liking you is to not like them.
sure there are many who go down the 'unrequired love' shtick, but especially for girls not having a real interest in them is a turn off to them.
have you considered also that your problem maybe t that you dont make a girl feel special? you are essentially saying that girls have to meet a criteria to date you. and thats not entirely wrong, we all have that, but you are not seeking out someone who makes you feel special, or someone who is special to you. you claim you are unable or incapable of feeeling such a concept.
so lets assume girls aren't 100% shallow and can pick up on things even just subconsciously. why would a girl want to date a guy who doesnt think she is better than any other girl with the same interests and body type?
think about it. what makes her 'the one' other than that shes willing to date you?
>>17264857
Falling for someone isn't something that can be explained logically. There's very little logic about it
A part of it is just a waiting game, but it's also important to learn how to be open about yourself, how to communicate who you are efficiently, how to listen to your partner, and how to understand and even embrace the differences.
My boyfriend is the whole package - I rationally can think of a thousand things I like about him, but I also love him, in a way that transcends logic. I just feel like everything he is, everything he thinks, everything he does is right. I think that our differences are what make us work because we constantly learn from each other. He's the one not because he is a lot like me, but because he is what I need to be my best self.
>>17264995
Not having felt real 'chemistry', does not mean one cannot feel the need for both physical and emotional proximity. In the same way i have friends (m/f), with whom i hang out with, smoke pot with, have fun with, I want to have that that person with who i can share that proximity with.
Then again i don't know how that would feel like, as i have never actually had a gf.
>Loneliness (despite having loving friends and family) is something which can exist outside of chemistry.
>kill the potential chemistry
I know the risk of that and have always tried to avoid that at every turn and be open to everything. I never give deliberate negative signals when one on one with anyone (especially girls). See where it goes.
>make feel special
Making someone feel special is a two way street. You only make someone feel special if they carry that deep meaning for you.
And I have never 'felt that'. Rather i have felt it, but it always went away after a while, like a flu. It is better to say, i have never been lovesick.
>criteria
as you said we all have our preferences, both physically and personality-wise. Although i openly say that i have, i never to try to make this an aim in anything i do. When interacting with girls i try to be unbiased and open to what they have to 'show', see how everything works out.
No agenda, just keep a look out for potential chemistry.
>>17265058
>i never give negative signals
again, you are too clinical. you are expecting girls to take what can at best be described as 'feigned interest' and think its good.
girls want to feel like the best girl in the world. you do not offer that in anything more than a possibly shallow way. even if you went full sociopath and tried to fake it, your posts are telling enough that you would not be able to fake chemistry.
>you only make someone feel special if they carry that deep meaning for you
nope. sometimes just having chemistry makes people feel special. it CAN be a two way street and should be, but if you dont fee lany chemistry at all, any the girl might have felt is pretty quickly zapped.
>>17265068
Indeed.
Faking interest and giving the simulating interest is something i feel i can do very well. Also a learned skill.
>Which i usually don't have to do, because i can find interest in virtually everything.
>Faking chemistry, probably not as easy. But will look into it.
>Making girls feel special.
In terms of physical things (like restaurant, venue, etc) this is usually not a problem, as i usually a in the fortunate position not to need to worry about my expenses.
When talking, i can (as said above) show genuine intrigue and interest.
>In my experience that is not very good, as it opens up to exploitation and friendzoneing.
>>17265041
>waiting game.
This is probably what it boils down to. 'Killing time' in between meeting the special person.
Girls always seem to make it seem like it is something we guys can influence and manipulate in their favour. This puts driven people (like myself) in the position to want to find something which is not there.
somewhat disingenuous if you ask me.
>pic: that dreamy guy.
>>17265147
>the special person.
There is no "special person". Don't misunderstand me. There are some people you will connect better than you do with others, but there is not a soulmate. Probably if I didn't meet my boyfriend I would have met someone else.
Chemistry is something you can manipulate, in a way, maybe, by exposing yourself and showing who you truly are. I have met more people I clicked with after I worked on myself and I managed to show others my personality. Things didn't work out because they weren't right on different levels, but we clicked.
>>17265147
'genuine interest' isnt what we are talking about. making someone feel special comes from them knowing you hold them above other girls. its not easy to fake, and you saying you do this through various means doesnt change a thing.
it sucks to suck, but women dont feel special cuz they know you dont have feelings for them.
having 'genuine interest' in everything just makes you seem friendly even if you make your intentions clear it doesnt make you come off any better than you do in these posts. clinical. unattached. uninterested.
to be honest thee way you compose yourself in this thread seems a lot more like 'an act' than anything you are planning to do, so i dont imagine you do things as well as you say you do.
cuz none of em worked.
>>17265147
>disingenuous
just becuase you interpret chemistry as something manipulatable doesnt mean its their fault.
they arent being insincere. on the contrary, youve made it clear time and time again that you are insincere.
>>17265219
>>17265214
I feel that we live in a society where acting and 'flexibility' is asked of you. Which in turn undermines genuine emotion.
People portray dating as a game - The dating game - and in every game there are rules to follow. He who can work this rules to his advantage has the highest likelihood of winning.
We want all want genuine, honesty - but we want to be treated 'as the special snowflake'.
>Following other people's advice already make you 'ungenuine' because you are following other people's advice, instead of following your own gut.
You guys have given me genuinely great input.
But accuse me of being insincere and i understand that.
The truth of the matter is that you guys have shown me that i cannot be desirable until i can feel genuine chemistry.
And you guys have also said that it is something explainable, unknowing and random which can not be generated.
>So what am i supposed to do?
>Just continue going on dates and hope for the best?
>>17265214
>so i dont imagine you do things as well as you say you do
True. I don't.
It works very well for general networking purposes.
>Building vitamine B
And it was clear mistake to try a similar (not identical) approach when it comes to dating.
Then again, in my study (Psychology) I am surrounded by beautiful girls. But none of them stand out to me. Even when i talk to them, they do not strike me as 'emotionally appealing'. There is no chemistry.
I have been looking for chemistry everywhere i go. But have also been told that chemistry is something which comes to you. Not something you can seek out.
>>17264608
Women get off to being dominated and being treated like shit. All that "funny, driven, loyal" shit is just so they can upkeep the "not a shallow whore" image. A Chad with no job and no drive to do anything can have dozens of girls pining after his cock.
>>17265512
this
>>17265512
>t. Virgin
>So what am i supposed to do?
>Just continue going on dates and hope for the best?
>>17266063
yes
