Search Results: immediate attraction

It's no denying that the millennial generation tend to have an attitude of not wanting to work hard and everything must be immediate and easy to obtain. And this type of attitude tends to translate over into dating where people want that spark/click/chemistry immediately and attraction for the person right off the bat and become totally lovey dovey feeling for that person within a couple weeks to 1 month of knowing them.
And it's not surprising that people tend to jump into bed with this kind of mindset by the 3-4th date.
However, i cam across some comments by male gagers about building a relationship on this i'd like to share:

"relationship built on attraction. its shallow. love comes latter after you get to know a person. however infatuation can leave you blind to lots of things. id rather be with a women that i respect and fall in love later than to be with a women who gives me butterflies just to find out she's a shit person."

And this was true in old times. Many couples that lasted much longer than today both parties won't head over heels with each other on first meeting but learned to love and respect each other.

" Waste majority of times a man and a woman will meet and then build up a relationship from nothing. Sometimes you may even have the feeling that you would have to force yourself to like them. But love made from ground up is more stronger than something that came from a "spark."
By definition, a spark is something that goes out very quickly anyway."

"Well that spark sometimes happens later, some times its not a spark so much as a click (ie your indifferent and then suddenly your not)"

It does seem however, women are more culpable to end a relationship with a guy who is good on paper and has everything she is looking for her in a partner because he did not give her butterflies right off the bat.


Do you think this whole spark thing ruins the chance of having stable relationship?

1. Harry Potter felt his stomach flip over for Cho Chang the moment he saw her and pretty much every other time ever since (including the final book).

2. Harry always fancied her (finding her both physically and personally appealing). Note who he wanted to ask to the dance, ask out, etc. Quite frankly, in very book since she is introduced (book 3), he likes her.

3. It seems the author suddenly forgot what she had built up and instead opted for someone who made no sense in a hurry, having focused on the main plot that the romance subplot was forgotten till the last moment. Ginny is family, not fancy material (Harry displayed no interest in her whatsoever at any point, then randomly likes her, no way). People fall for people, but they still have to be physically into them initially which he wasn't.

4. With Cho there was always and immediately instant rapport between them.

5. If not Cho, then the author did give room for Hermione being a potential sexual mate. After all, she suddenly kisses him on the cheeks "for the first time" at the end of book 4.

6. Hermione actually would have been a nice touch if Cho had fallen through. She had been absolutely loyal to him unlike other so called friends (aka Ron who was nothing more than a disloyal moody leech who often abandoned Harry at moments of trouble e. g. book 4).

7. In terms of Cho, Cho always stood by Harry in book 4, and came back to support him in book 5 and 7.

8. In defence of Hermione, pretty sure Harry would have had a fantasy about her now and again. I mean, as in must have spent some time with a few of her FB photos right?

9. Harry might have simply met a brand new hottie at a coffee shop or a Quidditch match and hit it off.

10. Finally, with Hermione, there was the rapport of friendship, and with Cho the rapport of interests, the physical attraction immediate, and the spark between them.

YOU MUST CHOOSE, vote now between what is right and what is easy...