Shifting through years of my dating history, from my first partner at 19 to my last partner at 31, I have realized that I date people because of a certain chemistry or because of proximity. There are very few people with whom I have felt the sting of chemistry, the chemistry of attraction, that certain high that one gets with certain people for some reason or another whether it be their dreads, their rebellious statements, the way they think, their deep intensity, or how they look on a bike.
Because I am mostly unemotional and because I just go with the flow, my friendships tend to turn into relationships through proximity not because of the attraction of chemistry. When I write attraction due to proximity, I am talking about the idea that because you see a person often enough, some type of connection happens, a connection that results in a relationship.
For example:
I frequently see the person.
I like the person.
We become friends.
We hang out.
I feel comfortable with them.
We become a couple.
Things just naturally progress into a peaceful relationship.
This is the proximity rule at work.
Then there is the other side of the card, chemistry, the type of attraction that is a sweet feeling, a heart thumping misleading feeling that my logic fears.
My brain says, chemistry never lasts.
Be practical.
Practicality is more important than some unnamed emotion.
Compatibility should win over those high feelings of chemistry.
Feelings come and go.
It is the other person and all of their faults and conflicts that you will be left with.
A friendship turned into a relationship is more stable than an attraction because of chemistry.
A relationship based purely on chemical feelings will quickly die out. Who is able to hold onto emotions? No one. A relationship formed because of chemistry is destined to fade, to die, to disappear into the passage of time. Are the memories of emotional highs worth an inevitable empty bed? Or is better to play it safe than risk attempting a go with chemistry?
I think safe is a better bet. Getting to know a person because of proximity, becoming their friend, then their girlfriend is the way to go. I have never had a long term relationship with someone with whom I had chemistry with; therefore, online dating is pointless for me.
As a woman, I can meet a lot of people through online dating, but how many of those would I click with, have some sort of chemistry with in order to continue seeing each other? Out of the hundreds of profiles to look through, which ones would I like enough to even try to get the proximity rule to start having it's influence?
When I did online dating, I would meet people and we would have one or two dinners. If there was no chemistry, why would we even try to meet again? If we never meet again, how can the proximity rule create a friendship turned relationship?
Plus, most of my relationships that started because of chemistry died early.
So in conclusion, internet dating is a waste of time for me. Why?
1. I have to meet a ton of people to narrow down the field to someone I have chemistry with.
2. Chemistry would allows us to meet again and again thus forcing the proximity rule to result in becoming friends and then lovers, but according to my dating history, relationships that start because of chemistry never last.
et voila, online dating is pointless for me.
Instead I will just play a sport, hang out with a group of people with the same interests and maybe, just maybe I will find a friend.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
A good commentary -- have you asked your students about online dating? Mine seemed to think the only reason it could be bad is if you were "cheat" = tricked or cheated on. I like your take too.
Post a Comment