what is "chemistry"?

Post Reply New Topic

It's like the term "Meltdown" which is virtually only known here on WP; and every one explains it so differently (tantrum, withsrawal, depession, sleeping... etc)

I haven't seen this term in any pro book about AS; nor is it even mentioned as a diagnosis criteria.

It's just something mystic-sounding made up that can mean anything.

Chemistry means the "click," and it means "mutual interests." It's an all-encompassing thing.

I go with this simple definition. It's often used to describe actors who work well together in front of the camera and are very believable onscreen as either friends or lovers. It's just a way of defining a mutual attraction and admiration not entirely definable, in any concrete or scientific sense.

It's the same thing people mean when they say they "just clicked" together. Those people you meet and feel almost immediately as though you've known them forever.

I wonder if part of the problem for autistic people and "chemistry" (or personal connection, or whatever you want to call it) is that it happens to us far less often than it happens with neurotypicals. They seem to be more likely to be able to feel this sort of easy affinity with other neurotypicals, and because they outnumber us so greatly they are far more likely to experience that feeling when they meet a new person, as opposed to an autistic person because we are so much less likely to meet another neurodivergent/unusual person with whom we "click" and whom we can understand. I know in my personal experience the number of times I have felt this kind of chemistry with someone I just met has been very rare compared to the total number of people I've interacted with in my life.

Maybe it's as simple as the odds are just stacked against us, and over time we get discouraged because we don't get to experience that "chemistry" as often as neurotypicals do (and they probably take for granted, how much more often that interpersonal "chemistry" is available to them.)

The "odds are stacked against us"---but the odds were also "stacked" against many ethnic groups for a long time. Success is not precluded just because "the odds are against us."

We have to beat the odds.

I'm not saying we should just give up on trying to form personal connections with people, I'm just saying that it being statistically less likely to happen to us compared to neurotypicals probably contributes to us feeling discouraged in that regard, and like there is something wrong with us fundamentally because we experience that kind of interpersonal connection less often than is "normal".

It's true what you say. But we shouldn't consider that fact when we are trying to connect with people.

We should use that fact to make it less frustrating should we fail.

The problem: is that people take those "facts" with them when they go out in the world. They make assumptions based upon the results of research studies. People are different than the "composite" which is obtained though these results.

We agree, basically.

I think we do agree. If we were more aware of the odds we would take it less personally when we don't "click" with people, it might help it to feel less like rejection or like a personal failure. I don't think it is a judgment against us that we are less likely to click with people, and we shouldn't see it that way.

If chemistry and sexual attraction are the same thing...why is it you can have sexual attraction without chemistry?

I've had that happen to me. I've been attracted to a person with whom I had absolutely nothing in common.

These sorts of relationships don't last, though.

I am the wolfman.

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).

thanks for all of the replies! (i actually did read through all of them XD)

yes, since i don't really understand the term, i tend to not use it myself; but when someone is speaking to me, and they use the term "chemistry," i like to understand what they mean so i can respond appropriately... (i understand this isn't always possible, but at least i try XD)

Chemistry is when some key relationship traits are similar between two people. It doesn't need to be the same traits for everybody, and the traits most likely differ between NTs and NDs.

Chemistry is definitely not sexual attraction, and it is not shared interests either.

But sexual attraction and shared interests often do induce "chemistry."

However, to some people "chemistry" is something which cannot be defined---it's just "there," a mystery which is beyond the comprehension of mortal people (almost like the conception of God).

IMO, chemistry is there already at first sight, so cannot be induced by shared interests. Also, I find a huge majority of young women sexually attractive, so that is not something that is very specific.



That's more like it. For me it usually is that they are NDs, as that is more or less a requirement for chemistry to exist.