Sweetleaf wrote:
If chemistry and sexual attraction are the same thing...why is it you can have sexual attraction without chemistry?
I believe if you have sexual attraction toward someone, then there's Chemistry; and if there's Chemistry then there's sexual attraction - hence why I believe they're exactly the same but one sounds cooler and more mystic
.
You probably define Chemistry as compatibility? I believe many are equating Chemistry to compatibility here. True, you can find someone hot without being compatible with you.
It's also a term not equally popular between men and women, you see women use it
way more often - and men, not only aspie men, find it hard to 'get' the concept and what it actually means; you can find in all sorts of love forums men asking what Chemistry actually means.
Chemistry is not often equated to compatibility among NT women though, they often explain it as the 'spark' that happens
on the very first date with certain person - it doesn't grow, it is either there or not on the first meetup- if it's not there then they reject the man because they feel no Chemistry with him; if it's lacking then end of story. You never hear of a case of a woman saying "I felt no chemistry at all with him before....but later suddenly I felt chemistry with him".
So it's something pre-determined, and instant - so it can't be compatibility because it requires time to know the person well before knowing whether he's compatible with or not.
As its name indicates "Chemistry" is supposed to be chemical-based, it's like a drug, so...biologically it's hormone-based, it's instinct, animal and irrational - doesn't all this ring a bell? (hint hint: sexual attraction).