The Myth of Compatibility

Post Reply New Topic

The Myth of Compatibility (Psychology Today)

For me, in retrospect, being compatible with someone is of the utmost importance.

I think it's important to enjoy similar things.

As I read this, something crossed my mind. Could it be the reason I can't find the partner is because I am honest about myself, unlike others?

As the article states, during the honeymoon stage we know the least about our partner. And said lack of knowledge is what allows us to "fill in the gaps" with the ideals that we wish the partner had, thus thinking they are perfect. Hence the honeymoon. But then when we get to know the partner better, we realize that they are not the ideal that we pictured, so honeymoon ends, and at that point a lot of people break up.

But maybe part of lack of knowledge is not "just" the fact that not enough time has passed, but also the fact that people "put their best foot forward". Or in other words, they actively "slow down" the process of letting their true self get known. But in my case I don't put my best foot forward. In my case "what you see is what you get". As a result, while for others it might take 2 months for honeymoon to end, for me it takes 5 minutes. Since I will tell all my secrets (whether it be oversharing negative information OR showing up in messy dress) within 5 minutes.

So then, to put it in honeymoon language, maybe I have everything everyone else has, just on a different time scale. Others have a honeymoon and then break up. I have a honeymoon and then break up. But the honeymoon others have lasts 2 months. The honeymoon I have lasts 2 minutes.

If a woman walks down the street who could have been POTENTIALLY interested in me, but she isn't because I am all messy, well, thats a honeymoon that lasted 10 seconds. Because other people don't show up in messy appearance until they are "familiar" with someone. In my case I do: "what you see is what you get" with me. Could THIS be my ultimate issue?

I believe that when two people "fall in love" with each other, it just means an intense desire to have sex with another person that is mutually shared. People can hook up without feeling that way, but for this to happen the desire has to be for a particular person one absolutely has to have. Unfortunately, the degree of intensity or desire for exclusivity is very often not equal on both sides, the less engaged member of the pair then takes advantage of the other. In romantic fiction, this is obvious to the reader or viewer even if not explicitly stated, the happy ending occurring when the two people finally have passionate sex, preferably fully clothed and standing up (so the studio doesn't have to pay extra for nudity).

The problem is that this phenomenon does by no means ensure success at a lifetime association. Usually the feelings fade (this phenomenon has been studied) and when it does there may be no remaining reason why the two people should stay together. People should be more willing to admit that their feelings for another person originate in their groin rather than their heart or head, then they could simply enjoy their shared intimacy without agonizing over such things as compatibility.

Earlier I started a thread stating a case for arranged marriage. For a marriage to work, there need to be some conditions favorable to making and preserving a household for life. IMO more people should consult matchmakers. The first condition, that the two people in question actually want to be married, is met by the fact that they have both consulted a matchmaker. How I would differ from the views of a traditional society in which matchmaking is common, is that I would oppose pre-marital celibacy for all genders, in fact I believe that anyone who seeks marriage as an opportunity for sex isn't ready for marriage. You should be willing to appreciate always having somebody available as a sex partner but also be ready to commit to just that one person.

I think no matter how loving you are ,you can't be with a cruel person for long. So 'compatibility' has some meaning.

Sorry to get cheesy here but I think love is more than just sex. Its also liking the other person for who they are . i fell in love with someone and later talked to women who were as attractive... but felt little for them in comparison.
You can talk with some people for hours and not get bored, and talk to someone else for ten seconds and run out of topics.

This ^^^^^

The title of the article is misleading clickbait. The article itself is relatively fine, if not very fluffy and surface level.

I feel the word "compatibility" is being given a different meaning (in the article) from what it traditionally has meant, which is lending confusion to both the article and this thread.

The article refers to "compatibility" as a girl wanting a guy with "rugged good looks" and a guy having (in her eyes) "rugged good looks." That's not compatibility; that's an aesthetic preference.

Klanka describes compatibility more accurately as someone you can talk to for hours and not get bored.

For somebody on the spectrum, the ability to be in another person's presence continuously for weeks (such as when on a vacation) and not stress out is even more important.

Not a myth.

I believe that the type of compatibility that's needed is the desire for both people to be together & both being willing to put forth effort into making their relationship work. I do not base relationships on infactutation/butterflys in my stomach & chemisty/sparks. I care about substantive things like mutual respect, trust, loyality, & commitment

This is consistent with my personal ideas of what is needed for a relationship to succeed.