Chemistry and the Double Standard

Lately, my friends and I have been discussing chemistry in dating. Actually, the lack of chemistry. Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines chemistry as: “ a : a strong mutual attraction, attachment, or sympathy <they have a special chemistry>”  or “b : interaction between people working together; specifically : such interaction when harmonious or effective <a team lacking chemistry>” Let’s walk through this scenario.

Girl meets Guy. Guy is everything on paper: educated, no kids, never married, good job, etc. (or whatever Girl thinks is a positive attribute). Girl and Guy go out and share same interests. But there is no chemistry. Girl tries to make it work, but to no avail, Guy just doesn’t do it for her. And maybe Girl just doesn’t do it for Guy.

What happens then? What does Girl do?

Well, the average person (woman) will provide this solution, “Girl, you better get that man! Guy meets the requirements, right? Well, what’s the problem?”

My answer? Eh…it’s slightly difficult to answer so I’ll tell you my frustrations. Question: Who said just because a man and a woman who both look great “on paper,” they must be linked romantically? That doesn’t have to be an automatic result. As I get older, I understand that the superficial things I used to look for in a mate are no comparison to those things that I should be looking for. Example: Big baller, shot-caller vs. dependable, trustworthy dude. I get that, but  I atleast have to be able to look at him (in the face) and be attracted to him.

Sometimes, “it” is just not there, and it’s okay for women, especially, to accept that and move on to someone else. “It” isn’t always sexual energy. It can be just the mere want to be in that person’s presence. The need to have a conversation with him/her. I don’t think chemistry should be forced for the sake of filling some vacant relationship slot before our self-imposed “expiration date.”

I also find it sad that those same reasons  a woman would be given to date a man she doesn’t like would never be applied to a man. It’s taken me this long to figure out that men win because they are specific in what they want in a woman. They may not have a list like Chilli’s, but they are very consistent in the type of woman they date and marry. Example: I know a guy who was married to a short light-brown skinned woman with natural hair. They divorced, and I swear his current girlfriend fits the same description. (Other factors may play into that, but you get it.)

Sure, men may have an advantage since we supposedly outnumber them, and a “good man” is hard to come by. However, I don’t know of many men who are “settling” on what they want for the sake of just having a woman. Maybe I’m wrong. I don’t know every man. Do you think there’s a double standard in dating and relationships between men and women? Also, do you think chemistry is needed to have a successful relationship? It is something innate or something that can be learned over time?


One thought on “Chemistry and the Double Standard

  1. Isn’t that the whole confusion; isnt that the point of this article? Can a relationship work without chemistry. I believe it really depends on the person. You can have “chemistry” with a man or a woman who is mentally or physically abusive or you can be with a person you trust, who is genuine however that chemistry isn’t there. Trial and error; ill try it out with the “trust worthy” guy whom i have no chemistry with and let you know if it’s better than my last relationship which lacked a lot of essential good quality yet always had the chemistry. – FEFE

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s