FORUMS > Dating & Relationships Forum Rules

I avoided using the term "love at first sight" because I'm curious to see whether people believe that something "milder" exists. Often, you'll hear people say, "I went on this date with this guy who was very nice, good looking, well-adjusted, etc, but there just wasn't a spark."

I know that there are lots of people who will say that it is a _requirement_ for there to be an initial spark, and that even if there is good chemistry, the absence of said spark is a deal-breaker.

I'm beginning to wonder if those of us who believe in the "spark" are setting ourselves up for failure. I equate the spark somewhat to infatuation, which we all know can be quite temporary (perhaps even analogous, but not identical to the concept of eros). Immediate genuine deep feelings after a single meeting, while possible, I think, are rare; it's just that sometimes the person we're infatuated with coincidentally turns out to be someone we develop deep feelings for, and we may not be aware of the transition between superficial infatuation to deeper emotional investment.

Of course, "the spark" is an ambiguous term, and open for interpretation, so this thread _could_ get tricky.

I also wonder of the people who are in LTR's, whether the fact that they're in a "good" relationship changes their belief about the spark.

I'm going to say that I beleive in it, because I had an experience with it but beleiving in it doesn't make it a requirement for me at all.

I dated my ex for a year, and we broke up 2 weeks ago, and getting back together quite soon...

It started when I first saw him across Quad in my school, I saw him, knew he was gay, and instantly knew I would like him until I left the school. I went on his myspace, checked his comments, lookd at his pictures...I had a major crush on him. Less than a year later from that intial spark I had found in him...We were madly in love and still love each other right now.

So I beleive in it...definately.

How about the converse situations:

1) Good chemistry, no "spark" but still a successful relationship with deep feelings (i.e. love) that develops

2) A strong "spark" but no development of a further relationship aside from the initial phase.

I think "spark" is a requirement in a LASTING relationship. The lack of "spark" doesn't necessarily mean a relationship cant work, but you're setting yourself if you settle for less than that "spark."

I believe in it, but haven't exprienced the 'spark' thing yet... in fact, I start out disliking most of my crushes until I suddenly like them. Sounds kinda romantic though.

'A good start is half the success'... so I guess the spark just gets people starting off on the right foot?

My previous "great love of my life" (prior to my current boyfriend) was a guy that, when we first started dating, was MUCH more into me than I was into him. I thought he was cute and nice and fun... but it was more like "I'll date him for the sex and entertainment" than anything else.

Gradually, though, as the months wore on and I got to know him better, I fell for him VERY hard, and for a long time after that relationship I considered him the best thing that had ever happened to me.

So I guess my point is, sparks are nice, but they are not necessarily correlated with success of a relationship.

OK, here goes..

Love at first sight. yes, we both believe it exists, simply because we think anything is possible in the realm of relationships.

Something milder, aka 'spark'. Yep, that too.

As a requirement? No, because we know people that fell in love with their good friend - years after they met.

Good relationship, bad relationship, no relationship, believing in a 'spark's significance is, we think, independent of your relationship status.

We believe that having that 'spark' is definitely auspicious.

-us

Definite YES!

I'll never forget being in line at the grocery store at 9 p.m. It was a dreaddfully long day and was buying nothing but crap for my supper.

The guy in front of me was purchasing a fine assortment of very healthy food. He forgot his dicount card and turned to ask if he may borrow mine. The spark flew right there! We were chatting and I mentioned that I was so tired I wish I could just go out to eat with someone instead.

It was such a fleeting moment and as he gathered his bags, he thanked me for the card and began to leave. I was such a chicken shit but just quickly said,"UM?" and he turned around with a smile and said ,"yes?". All I could do was say,"Have a good night."

Never forgot that moment and kicked myself for not being more forward. Live and learn.

Well, I believe in that cerain spark, where you first see the guy and feel intensely attracted to everything about the guy. I also believe there are varying degrees of said spark and that hot guy does not = spark.

26mileman:

You say "yes", but your story really says nothing about "deeper attraction."

Trust me, I've had many moments like that, and I am more forward... and you know what? Pretty much every single one turned out to be someone I had absolutely nothing in common with. LOL

In fact, I still remember my time at a grocery store in West Hollywood at 9 pm. We saw eachother in the aisle, kept glancing at eachother, started talking. Our eyes were roaming over eachother, each of us obviously amazed by what we were seeing. We had an incredible 30 second conversation. He gave me his business card. I still remember: his name was Christpher Ford, and he was an aspiring actor and model, and his card has some headshots on it. We both left with our hearts thumping.

A few days later I called him. The conversation could not have been more painful. We had no connection, no common interests, his conversational style annoyed me (and to be fair, mine probably annoyed him). It was incredibly disappointing -- but not so unexpected.

So for you, and anyone else who says he believes in a "deep connection on first sight", all I can say is this: make sure you're not basing it on brief encounters that you never had the opportunity to test. Chances are, if you had.... you would realize there was nothing "deep" about it.

GregStevensTX said,

"make sure you're not basing it on brief encounters that you never had the opportunity to test. Chances are, if you had.... you would realize there was nothing "deep" about it."

er, here we are...

-us

In my opinion, you can't tell if there's a spark until you've talked. Liking a guy and him liking you back is a good start, and if the guy's cute it can get your hopes up, but until he's actually opened his mouth and said something you can't really tell.

After he's talked it might happen that even though the initial conversation was good, it dwindles into a lot of awkward silences. Or it can happen that even though it started kind of weird, all of sudden he says or you say something that ignites something.

So, no, I don't believe in love at first sight. An initial spark might lead to love, sometimes so quickly it may seem you fell in love the moment you saw him, but I believe love is something far too complex to be created in just a moment by just an image.

My partner and I fell in love the day we met, and we are now in the home stretch for our tenth anniversary, so my answer is yes I'm a believer.

My partner and I have been together for sixteen years now (married seven years ago) and the first time I met him I was less than impressed. And I am being kind here. We met briefly in a bar and I decided there was no 'spark'.

After that first meeting we ran into each other a couple of times and I started to fall for him. Hard. Now I am certain that life would be meaningless to me without him.

I agree with the original post: looking for the 'spark' just sets you up for disappointment. The spark is just superficial physical attraction (not a bad thing!), but rarely the basis for a long term relationship if that is what you are looking for. Shared values, shared beliefs and hot sex are.

Yeah I have to say so I felt the "spark" once.

After a couple of exchanges, I think perhaps I should have explained my curiousity a bit more:

I think in the situation where there is a "spark" that progresses to interest and then continued interest, we tend to give the "spark" a causal status to the eventual relationship. I'm curious what people think about the "spark" being both sufficient (it's all you really need) and necessary (it must happen), because I'm wondering whether those of us who believe that it is are discounting people who might make great partners but who don't open/share as freely at first and therefore "shoot the spark in the proverbial foot".

And I should have been more specific in definining the "spark" as being related to a first meeting, not a "spark on sight" thing.

Well, we go by the axiom that the spark does have a causal status but is NOT a guarantee of a successful relationship. The spark is the key that opens a door, but one still has to walk to that door, go through it and live with what's on the other side.
There are many in the course of a lifetime that you may come across (no pun intended) that you'll have a mutual spark with when you meet, but quickly reduces to only a few once that initial delight of near psychic communication becomes complicated with the realities of each individual's personality. The danger of relying ONLY on that spark and committing to another solely based on it can result in marriages and relationships where the two have zero in common and indeed , can't stand each other but stay together for the sake of that initial spark which neither party is feeling any more. Some of our parents and some young couples today are guilty of that. heheh Co-dependency, anyone?

We often hear that relationships require compromise and sacrifice etc etc. While that's true in varying degrees, the benefits are huge when you realize those two things make you flexible, accommodating, compassionate, and are character building. You also enjoy that guy you see in the mirror each day a lot more , dare I say even become proud of your many developing emotional strengths.

HUGE caveat - it only works if BOTH people involved do this with each other. How utterly delightful to discover that your partner has engendered in you a love of dogs or gardens, or a desire to reach out to the elderly or a love of fitness which was absent before you met - emotional and intellectual dowries indeed! The spark carries with it a desire to be open to change, compromise etc etc.

We have friends that were friends for years then at some point, we believe there was a spark and that friendship became something more. Some claim they felt no spark, but we often suggest that the familiarity of each other makes the ignition of 'feeling in love' or 'spark' less discernible, indeed so subtle that it goes unrecognized as such. There's this- at what moment did the two friends abruptly go from friends to loves?

My personal experience has shown that instant infatuation usually blinds me to potential problems down the road. If that spark is what your referring to, it's more likely to be a red flag for me than a positive attribute.

Every relationship I've had that was committed, was one that grew over time. The longest being over 14 years.

Now I'm old enough to realize that I ought to pay attention to those red flags. I don't need someone to make me happy. That doesn't mean that someone isn't being given an opportunity for that, but it's a matter of adding mutual happiness and not filling a void. Since infatuation is inherently temporary, it should be considered with caution particularly when you consider it's immediate power.

The huge advantage of the relationship that develops over time is that you can learn the good and the bad about your partner and fall for them slowly without the sudden surprise of a deal breaker moment.

The funny thing is this, when I feel that I'm infatuated with someone, I find the best thing for me to do is akin to the 'full disclosure' to slow down, if not stop the relationship altogether. Sort of the "Look, this is what you need to know about me..." They either stay or go at that point. Regardless of which it is, it's usually the right thing for me and/or him.

That's just me though.

We're not equating spark with infatuation. Heck, people can be infatuated with the completely and ridiculously impossible - a good example of this is infatuation with a straight guy. Like, mission impossible!

We're also not referring to anyone wanting a relationship because they feel 'incomplete'. Ideally, we bring a whole self with us when we enter a relationship for the following result:

One person plus one person equals something that is more than the sum of its parts!

Crude example: I can take oranges and pineapple and make something delicious out the combination. They are both tasty on their own. Hope that makes sense.

meninlove said

We're not equating spark with infatuation. Heck, people can be infatuated with the completely and ridiculously impossible - a good example of this is infatuation with a straight guy. Like, mission impossible!

We're also not referring to anyone wanting a relationship because they feel 'incomplete'. Ideally, we bring a whole self with us when we enter a relationship for the following result:

One person plus one person equals something that is more than the sum of its parts!

Crude example: I can take oranges and pineapple and make something delicious out the combination. They are both tasty on their own. Hope that makes sense.

I was referring to OP lean_jock74's comments about the spark possibly being infatuation as it may be in some people.
Additionally, I was referring to my own experiences in reference to the OP as well. Everyone has thier own view of what love at first sight means. I have my view and you have your's and neither has any more or less validity, except to the person that you or I am with.

Hey bigcat57,

We're going by the OP's first line, "I avoided using the term "love at first sight" because I'm curious to see whether people believe that something "milder" exists."

Love at first sight is going by a visual cue alone, before either party has opened their mouths. I'm construing that as infatuation. Though, rightly, infatuation can occur with those already spoken to, though too often communication falls by the wayside with infatuation.

Both of us agree with you: infatuation can easily blind a person. A spark, though, is a feeling of inexplicable connected-ness that successful relationships don't necessarily operate from unless it's mutual. Sparks, like infatuation (which, yes, can also be mutual) are no guarantee of a successful relationship, but a spark inspires us to open up to each other, to share our failures and successes in a meaningful way, unlike infatuation, where one can be completely struck dumb with awe, and the two parties simply get high off the presence of each other without trying to let each other know just who and what each other is.
Mergatroids, I hope that makes sense! Last thing we want to do is misunderstand or miscommunicate on this excellent topic, not mention put down anyone else's POV.

-Doug

Oh, I don't know, that whole spark thing can be way misleading. Usually that spark I feel is a sign that the guy is total wrong for me and I should run, don't walk to the nearest exit.

I met my partner over six years ago on a blind date. I really want to say there was a spark when he opened that door and our eyes met for the first time, but there really wasn't (and I think he'd tell you the same). He wasn't at all what I thought he'd look like (I think the guy that set us up waaay oversold both of us to the other :lol

We dated, took some time to get to know each other and then several months into it we had what I still refer to as The Tide Turning Date. EVERYTHING was different after that and I knew I could never be without him. Perhaps there was a time delay on our spark.

Glad I took the time to see how things developed instead of relying on my initial reaction.

i believe in "spark" lol, i don't think its the most important thing in developing a relationship though

How necessary is it for "a spark" to be there for your to make the decision to see someone a second/third time?

Sparks are nice since they start small and have potenial to ignite something fiery. That's why they are called sparks. LOL. It takes effort and a few other things to keep a spark going and to make it bigger.

I do believe in sparks. I believe you can meet someone and hit things off very well. How else do you explain one-night stands (minus alcohol). LOL.

Hmm very interesting topic.

meninlove's comments strike several chords with me, and I agree that different paths are available based on how the attraction to someone begins.

For instance, my last relationship built out of familiarity from being around each other with some common interests and compatible personalities and dogs. It went well for a while, and for several years was fine and I was happy to see him, but ultimately there wasn't a strong enough connection to weather more emotionally taxing times.

Now the guy I've been dating and getting to know now has progressed completely differently.

We met, I thought he was nice enough, easy on the eyes, and fun to be around. We hung out a couple more times, and suddenly I realized I was going to miss not seeing him when I went off on a week's vacation.

When I got to see him again, after a bunch of fast messages and notes to each other when we could while I was gone, I saw him again and I swear it was as close to fireworks going off being with him that I could ever have reasonably imagined. I've never had this sort of feeling for someone and, sort of like bgcat said, it threw up flags for me. But instead of taking them negatively, I simply used that as my own emotional and mental pauses to make sure that I didn't get too swept up and infatuated that I glossed over things.

And I actually dunno what will happen, although I think I know what I want from him now and have a pretty strong idea of how I'd like it to progress. He and I talk about everything and can tell when the other needs to talk but isn't sure how to bring it up, we've both been going over the issues we know would be problems for us at some point, or reasons to cause the sudden 'wtf' moments (since naturally, there are some circumstances to work with for us), but we're taking them in stride.

And did I mention we're both floored at how we feel towards each other? And how neither of us know how to describe just what we feel together because it's kinda overwhelming on one side, but still something we can sit back and discuss our situation with each other completely?

Heck he'll probably read this at some point (I've pointed out a few topics on here as they're relevant to things we've talked about) and nothing I've said will be news to him, as it should be. But at the same time seeing the discussion surrounding it from other people helps us both in realizing just how crazily different every situation can be.

So really, I'm a convert into thinking that it's not just the romantic stories in books, and that something can suddenly go off and spark or intensify a relationship. It shouldn't be all that the relationship is about, or life in general will tear you apart, but if it's a strong core feeling you can hold on to when things get rough or you can't be with them right at that moment, then damn run with it.

absolutely


But you still have to work to have success with the one who sparks you.

Yes, I definitely believe in instant attraction, although in my case, it only seems to work with straight friends.

Three of my closest friends are guys I had an instant connection with. These are guys who seemed like a best friend from day one. I've lost touch with one after he got married and moved away, but the other two I'm still very close with after more than 15 years.

i believe 'love at first sight' is immature but good chemistry on the other hand is something else, it's like finding a person who dances to your tune, it happens very comfortably and naturally

I don't know if I would say love at first sight, rather love at first contact. Love at first sight reveals that you find the other guy attractive and someone you would want to know. Any "feelings" at that point may just be lust (for lack of better terms). Love at first contact could be at the same moment or some time later when you actually meet the guy, look into his eyes for the first time. A person really, I feel, can not fall in love based on a picture or a sighting of someone because you don't know what makes that guy click. What kind of a guy is he? What is his personality like?

That is why I think "love at first contact" is better. It takes in the whole package!

Do I believe you can fall for someone like this??? You bet!!! I fell for the first guy I was ever truly in love with this way. He was my most recent boyfriend. We would still be together if cancer had not taken him from me... With him, it was instant attraction and love on both parts. We adored eachother from the beginning. The kind of feeling that when you know you will see him or talk to him, your stomach gets butterflies and you are just so excited for that to happen! I really do miss him so much!

Anyway gentlemen, YES! it does happen - be prepared because you just don't know when it will happen!

I didn't, until I met my current BF. Something just clicked with him. I didn't think anything would deter me from enjoying my slutty ways.

i believe in it