The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / Love  % width posts: 195

Love without chemistry? (Asian in love with a Polish woman)


southern 75 | 7,096
25 Jun 2010 #61
But then again, I never needed a man to depend on - I can earn my own living, thank you.

An anti-polka?
terri 1 | 1,665
25 Jun 2010 #62
I don't quite get what you mean.

Not all women are in it for what they can get - I'm only in it for the sex...clear and simple.

Money, after all will not keep me warm at night, will not whisper sweet nothings in my ear, will not look at me in that 'knowing' way, will not tell me that I'm beautiful. I could go on to tell you what money will not do...but some women will always choose money above everything else.
southern 75 | 7,096
25 Jun 2010 #63
I'm only in it for the sex...clear and simple.

Where can I find this ...simplicity?
A J 4 | 1,088
25 Jun 2010 #64
I could never understand (and will never ever understand) why women marry men ONLY for security. Many women find their partners totally repulsive, but still stay with them because they want a nice house, car, position in society.

I'd rather be lonely than to be one of them, because I actually know you can't ever buy a woman's heart.

;)

Give me a man that I fancy like hell, one that when I look at him I just want to devour every minute of every day and where I can't get enough of him - and I really don't give a damn about a nice house, car, society - at least I will ALWAYS find him attractive and want to be with him.

*blinks a few times and pinches himself*

Unlike the ones that married for security - that 'security' will one day make you feel repulsive with yourself, how low can a woman get?.
But then again, I never needed a man to depend on - I can earn my own living, thank you.

For what it's worth, you have my respect.

:)
Matowy - | 295
25 Jun 2010 #65
I'm only in it for the sex...clear and simple.

What? You could settle down with someone on the basis of sex alone? How could you find someone attractive indefinitely? I thought that sexual desire had a tendency to get bored...
f stop 25 | 2,513
25 Jun 2010 #66
Other women may not be that lucky, and they may look for security in a relationship, not satisfaction.

Couple of questions:
How much does she get out of you that otherwise she would have to pay for?
Is it possible that she convinced you that she is a 'good girl' because she is not reciprocating with sex?
Does she have your best interests at heart?
OP gg4
25 Jun 2010 #67
I could never understand (and will never ever understand) why women marry men ONLY for security.
Many women find their partners totally repulsive, but still stay with them because they want a nice house, car, position in society.

Give me a man that I fancy like hell, one that when I look at him I just want to devour every minute of every day and where I can't get enough of him

You don't understand why women marry men ONLY for security ? For me, I just don't understand why you want a man ONLY for sex, which is just a basic instinct.

Security should be understood NOT ONLY as money. It's stability of care, of love, of sharing and understanding, of RESPONSIBILITY and even sacrifice of your own need and priority for the others (including kids, not ONLY your sex partner), not ONLY satisfaction.

How much does she get out of you that otherwise she would have to pay for?
Is it possible that she convinced you that she is a 'good girl' because she is not reciprocating with sex?
Does she have your best interests at heart?

I do not need a "good girl" who doen't want sex. Sex is the basic need of a relationship, without sex it's not a relationship. We do not need to mention it, because it's already obvious. So, it's worth to talk about other needs of a relationship - which is security, and more. If you focus ONLY on sex, it's a sexual relation, not a relationship.

But then again, I never needed a man to depend on - I can earn my own living, thank you.

Give me a man that I fancy like hell, one that when I look at him I just want to devour every minute of every day and where I can't get enough of him

You never need a man to depend on ? :-)

You can earn your own living. Good. How about sex, can you earn your own sex? So, are you dependent on man, after all ?

Where can I find this ...simplicity

Simple. Terri.

because I actually know you can't ever buy a woman's heart

How about sex? How about "physical attractiveness" and "physical chemistry" ? Do you mean I can only buy her heart with these, not money?
terri 1 | 1,665
25 Jun 2010 #68
Security should be understood NOT ONLY as money. It's stability of care, of love, of sharing and understanding, of RESPONSIBILITY and even sacrifice of your own need and priority for the others (including kids, not ONLY your sex partner), not ONLY satisfaction.

yeah, yeah, yeah, and every married woman has that? Wake up and smell the coffee.

If this were true there would not be one divorce in the world. And now tell me why do we have divorces...

And what exactly is wrong with SATISFACTION alone?
A J 4 | 1,088
25 Jun 2010 #69
How about sex? How about "physical attractiveness" and "physical chemistry" Do you mean I can only buy her heart with these, not money?

Some women actually fall for personality and substance.

;)

Security should be understood NOT ONLY as money. It's stability of care, of love, of sharing and understanding, of RESPONSIBILITY and even sacrifice of your own need and priority for the others (including kids, not ONLY your sex partner), not ONLY satisfaction.

Sure, but didn't you just tell everyone you wanted to stay with a woman who doesn't feel that much for you? (No offense!)

And what exactly is wrong with SATISFACTION alone?

If that's what makes you happy, then there's nothing wrong with that.

:)
Amathyst 19 | 2,702
25 Jun 2010 #70
And now tell me why do we have divorces...

Because men are cheating lying b*stards who need castrating? :D

And what exactly is wrong with SATISFACTION alone?

Nothing, pure and simple..

How about sex?

We all do it (apart from men that can't of course)

How about "physical attractiveness" and "physical chemistry

they part of the many important elements that make a relationship work.

Do you mean I can only buy her heart with these, not money?

Money is just another element...that alone wont make someone "love" you or be truely attracted to you..She'll most probably like the look of your wallet though..
NorthMancPolak 4 | 648
25 Jun 2010 #71
Because men are cheating lying b*stards who need castrating? :D

Does that include those of us who don't cheat? lol
Wroclaw Boy
25 Jun 2010 #72
Thats what i was thinking, I think ShelleyS has just had bad experiences with her boyfriends/partners.
Amathyst 19 | 2,702
25 Jun 2010 #73
Does that include those of us who don't cheat? lol

It was a joke :D
A J 4 | 1,088
25 Jun 2010 #74
Because men are cheating lying b*stards who need castrating? :D

Thank you. (Ouch!)

Thats what i was thinking, I think ShelleyS has just had bad experiences with her boyfriends/partners.

Or she has a sense of humour you don't seem to get..

;)
OP gg4
25 Jun 2010 #75
Sure, but didn't you just tell everyone you wanted to stay with a woman who doesn't feel that much for you? (No offense!)

That's what I am "testing". I want to know if a "paradoxical" romance can happen in real life, or just in novel.

Have you read "Gone with the wind" ? Scarlett was in "chemistry" love with Ashley at the beginning. Rhett Butler was like a business guy, offering security to her, not the type for Scarlett. Yet finally she found out that Rhett is her real love! Rhett is lucky enough to have so many masculine characters that most women would fall for even without his wealth - but I believe Rhett in real life could not be that perfect.

they part of the many important elements

Money is just another element...

Or she has a sense of humour you don't seem to get..

Some women actually fall for personality and substance.

yeah, yeah, yeah, and every married woman has that

Perfection is unrealistic in relationship. Some element would have to be priority. Nothing wrong with whether it's stability, security, sex, chemistry, reputation, money,... Every individual has his/her own priority, right?
f stop 25 | 2,513
25 Jun 2010 #76
So, it's worth to talk about other needs of a relationship - which is security, and more. If you focus ONLY on sex, it's a sexual relation, not a relationship.

You only answered one of the questions... but to cut to the chase, I can tell you from the most personal point of view: when time comes that I am not sexually attracted to my partner, it is a sure sign of the end of the relationship. Body knows, while brain is still in denial, sort of thing.

In you case, since the relationship never had the "attraction" part, I'm thinking you are throwing in all kinds of rewards for her to continue the relationship, so you can keep hoping.
OP gg4
25 Jun 2010 #77
You're right in a pure romantic relationship. In husband/wife relationship, with kids involved, and all other life issues, responsibilities, the "attraction" may not simply come from chemistry, or physical attractiveness. It may come also from a sense of trust, security, stability. Being responsible and consistent may compensate for the lack of physical attractiveness, isn't it? Personality may outplay good looking, does it? There're certainly women who appreciate those characters and have attraction to them. I am trying to see if my (possibly future) woman would be among those.

Have you read "Gone with the wind" ? Scarlett was in "chemistry" love with Ashley at the beginning. Rhett Butler was like a business guy, offering security to her, not the type for Scarlett. Yet finally she found out that Rhett is her real love! Rhett is lucky enough to have so many masculine characters that most women would fall for even without his wealth - but I believe Rhett in real life could not be that perfect.

when time comes that I am not sexually attracted to my partner, it is a sure sign of the end of the relatiuonship. Body knows, while brain is still in denial, sort of thing

Nobody can be always ready when time comes, even they have attraction for each other. That's why people need to learn how to treat partner. It's a learning, changing process. If you have attraction to each other, and could not treat each other right, the relationship will end. Most couples come together for attraction, then part because they can't stand their partner's behaviors other than the initial attraction.

Again, if you have everything from attraction to behavior and more, that's perfection, and unrealistic.

There must be some priority. If you put your priority as security, you will find somebody attracted with a sense of security, not with physical chemistry. If you put intelligence above all, you fall for an ugly yet deadly smart. If you put sex above all, like normally done, you may forget about other things.
southern 75 | 7,096
25 Jun 2010 #78
You don't need to think so much.Just listen some disco polo and it will be O.K.
A J 4 | 1,088
25 Jun 2010 #79
Perfection is unrealistic in relationship.

I think most of us know that, don't worry.

Some element would have to be priority. Nothing wrong with whether it's stability, security, sex, chemistry, reputation, money,...

Ofcourse different people have different reasons and ideas, but for me a relationship without feelings isn't exactly what I would call a relationship. I would call that convenience or simply a one night stand. (Which can actually be very nice and passionate sometimes if you find the right person!)

Every individual has his/her own priority, right?

Sure, but it certainly helps when both partners are perfectly honest about their priorities from the start, so you don't have to find out that you really don't belong to eachother later on in life. Whatever floats your boat!

;)
OP gg4
26 Jun 2010 #80
but for me a relationship without feelings

Sure, but it certainly helps when both partners are perfectly honest about their priorities from the start, so you don't have to find out that you really don't belong to eachother later on in life. Whatever floats your boat!

It looks like my issue is not clear to you guys yet. The point is:

- Initially she does not have chemistry, or feelings. But over time, things may change. That's what I am trying to do: to spark up her feelings, with different fuel than the fuel that normally sparks her engine (and most of your engines: sex, chemistry, physical attractiveness). That what's Rhett in "Gone with the wind" tried to do too, and was successful. Isn't it romantic, what I call a "paradoxical" romance.

- I don't mind if I am going to fail. I don't mind committing my time and effort. Success is not a random thing to be taken for granted. Even if I fail, it's going to be a memory to keep, a little bitter, a little sweet, a little salty (sure I will have to sweat in this marathon). Isn't more romantic than two people simply get click with each other at first sight, have sex, and more sex, and then good bye ?

You don't need to think so much.Just listen some disco polo and it will be O.K

after the disco polo, what's next? More disco polo? Any way, thanks for advice. Yes, I like disco polo - by the way, what is it?
f stop 25 | 2,513
26 Jun 2010 #81
Have you read "Gone with the wind" ? Scarlett was in "chemistry" love with Ashley at the beginning. Rhett Butler was like a business guy, offering security to her, not the type for Scarlett. Yet finally she found out that Rhett is her real love!

I think you got it backwards, but I'm not going to try to convince you..

I also think you're trying to talk yourself into something that might not be very healthy for either one of you.
Granted, some relationships do loose the spark after a while, but stay together out of duty, responsibility, respect... trying to get back the spark. That is not your case.

In some some societies people do not have an option to marry for love, and they accept to make the best of what they got. That's not your case either.

In your case, your trying to make a woman fall in love with you but you don't think you measure up in the looks department. Very few women fall in love with looks (hopefully you are not dealing with one of those birds). You have to believe me when I tell you that the sexiest characteristics in a man is his confidence and a sense of humor.

I have a feeling this girl is not doing much for your ego.
beckski 12 | 1,617
26 Jun 2010 #82
I guess you're a beautiful, successful woman, determined, work hard, overcome obstacles, pursuing goals, strong character.

I confess, guilty to all the above charges. Hey... no one ever said Polish women were modest :)
Chrysalis 5 | 30
26 Jun 2010 #83
gg4

there're too many jokes about cuckolds. Is there any man who is brave enough to say his wife is 100% loyal to him ? Look at the kids, some of them do not look like you, or her, at all.

I'd say there are so few of these your point stands. As far as kids go, before any enter the picture I'd make any woman agree to paternity testing of absolutely all of them. If she says no she has something to hide, and if she says yes, you never have to worry about being cuckolded. That's how I'd try to neutralize the entire issue.

As for actual infidelities, I figure it's best to always give her the freedom to cheat. That will tend to earn you the same freedom, regardless if you ever act on that or even leave the house. It shows confidence, and that same freedom can give you confidence to be a dominant man.

So, gg4, I'd suggest that dominance can be another area you can work on. It's something that the Pure Brain can develop in many different ways. Come to think of it, rather like how Bruce Lee developed Jeet Kune Do in order to realize his personal method.

In my experience, women get wet over dominance. Once they're already turned on and warmed up, it becomes a lot easier to please them.

king polkakamon

Of course there are polish women who like to be punished for their out of order behaviour but they usually prefer german dungeons

@king:
What a coincidence. I happen to be ethnically German.

gg4

I guess you're a beautiful, successful woman, determined, work hard, overcome obstacles, pursuing goals, strong character. Other women may not be that lucky, and they may look for security in a relationship, not satisfaction.

@gg4:
OK, here your logic fails. On top of your defensive tone, you suggest you are aiming for an ugly woman who is failing, apathetic, lazy, defeated, listless, and of weak character. In your defense, being a provider is a good thing, but it can be a delicate game to not make it look like you're trying to buy her, or that you have nothing else to offer.

An escape hatch for you could be to share her sexually. That means bringing alternative lifestyles into your marriage, but, it would also be like letting your kids and their friends come over and occasionally get drunk. At least the party is at your house, where you can keep an eye on things and not let them get any more out of control. I'd never do this, but then I'd be careful never to marry someone where that really could be necessary.

gg4

How about sex? How about "physical attractiveness" and "physical chemistry" ? Do you mean I can only buy her heart with these, not money?

You suggest that if a woman prefers attractiveness or chemistry, she is merely selling out for a different kind of coin. The problem here is that a market value is only established if both sides can agree on it first. Here it seems the majority disagree with you.

My opinion is that a woman has various inputs, and the importance she places on each input depends on the individual girl. You apply to these inputs as best you can, and if you can reach that certain threshold, which only she knows (unless you can read her), you have a chance to succeed.

GG4: I do not need a "good girl" who doen't want sex. Sex is the basic need of a relationship, without sex it's not a relationship. We do not need to mention it, because it's already obvious. So, it's worth to talk about other needs of a relationship - which is security, and more. If you focus ONLY on sex, it's a sexual relation, not a relationship.

There is a sad irony here. The argument in this thread is focused like a laser on sex with her. Shouldn't she be equally focused on that issue, in a positive way, in order for there to be true reciprocity?
A J 4 | 1,088
26 Jun 2010 #84
It looks like my issue is not clear to you guys yet.

Oh really? Well, I should probably tell you that you've made yourself perfectly clear, painfully clear even, and that I'm merely trying to make sense to you about what a relationship should be about.

Very few women fall in love with looks.

To a certain extent? I mean, who would you prefer; A skinny guy who's a bit shorter than you are, or a stronger guy who's a bit taller than you are? (Not necessarily talking about any handsome features here!)

You have to believe me when I tell you that the sexiest characteristics in a man is his confidence and a sense of humor.

I believe you, but ofcourse the wow-factor always helps.

;)
MareGaea 29 | 2,752
26 Jun 2010 #85
Without chemistry there is no love. It's infatuation :)

Very few women fall in love with looks

Hm, how do you explain that a fat guy can just about forget his chances with women while fat women nearly always find a guy? (trick question for f stop :) )

>^..^<

M-G (sore throat, no voice, headache)
A J 4 | 1,088
26 Jun 2010 #86
Hm, how do you explain that a fat guy can just about forget his chances with women while fat women nearly always find a guy?

Depends on the culture, I guess.. Did you know that Sumo-wrestlers have a God-like status, and virtually can get any girl they want? Did you know that one of my best friends is fat, but has a beautiful girl? (Some girls actually like Teddies!) Oh, and most fat girls here are very single, sorry!

;)
southern 75 | 7,096
26 Jun 2010 #87
that a fat guy can just about forget his chances with women

Can you believe that I have met a girl who told she liked short fat guys?(She was in love with my friend who tried to reduce his butt).
f stop 25 | 2,513
26 Jun 2010 #88
Hm, how do you explain that a fat guy can just about forget his chances with women while fat women nearly always find a guy? (trick question for f stop :) )

One of my bosses is a very funny fat guy. He's got many women (trouble).
Natasa 1 | 580
26 Jun 2010 #89
Can you believe that I have met a girl who told she liked short fat guys?

Yes, and with small but delicate weapon?
Motives doubtful.
I never met anybody who prefers fat over athletic (slim), but I saw many compromises.
Obese with something else to offer. Trade.

Hm, how do you explain that a fat guy can just about forget his chances with women while fat women nearly always find a guy?

Incorrect in my area. Undisciplined ones are home crying and counting calories.
Men, on the other side are a little bit less obliged to stay in good shape.
southern 75 | 7,096
26 Jun 2010 #90
Yes, and with small but delicate weapon?

Yes,a completely germanophile phantasy.

Home / Love / Love without chemistry? (Asian in love with a Polish woman)
Discussion is closed.