Dating someone for their character vs physical attraction?

May 24, 2015 4:21 PM

How to convince oneself to make the right choice

There are three people I've been casually dating (extremely casual as in we haven't even kissed and only see each other every few weeks, but yes, I know they are interested in dating me) in the past few months. How do I convince myself to pick the right person? ( female, 27, feminist, straight)

The two people that like me are very solid good people, responsible, mature, caring etc. They never make the move because they are extremely shy and we are all super busy with grad school, but I know they are trustworthy, nice, caring, have a bright future. The third person is someone I met from the internet and have only seen twice but I have a huge crush on even though he seems not that serious about me and doesn't have his career figured out and is not half as accomplished as the other two. There just seems to be this vibe about him that I find irresistible. He treats me well, he's just not serious like the other two. He's kind of a free spirit type who has traveled a lot and spent less time being responsible but also seems like a good guy.

I'm not the kind of person that can share my heart with more than one person. even the less intense physical aspects of any relationship such as hand-holding and kissing, mean a lot to me and make me develop an attachment; in other words hard-core monogamist here. So how do I navigate this absurd situation where there are two solid, good people interested in me that would treat me well, but I don't feel much fireworks for (except for rationally knowing that they possess an extraordinary character), and there is a third guy who is less reliable, less serious but for some reason has this irresistible vibe and I want to kiss him?

Ultimately I want to have a real relationship and possibly get married in the next 5 years (I'm 27), so I'm trying to figure out the right choice in this situation? I didn't get into this situation on purpose it just kind of happened. I don't want to pass up the opportunity for something real by getting distracted by a shiny pretty thing, but how do you start something when you don't have the feels?

posted by winterportage to Human Relations (32 answers total)

Find a guy who is intelligent, responsible, cares for you, and to whom you are attracted.
posted by amro at 4:25 PM on May 24, 2015 [18 favorites]

Best answer: You can't discount physical attraction/sexual compatibility, but a good rule of thumb in any situation like this: don't mistake insecurity or uncertainty (yours) for intensity, and don't mistake intensity for intimacy.
posted by blue suede stockings at 4:27 PM on May 24, 2015 [31 favorites]

a good rule of thumb in any situation like this: don't mistake insecurity or uncertainty (yours) for intensity, and don't mistake intensity for intimacy.

Similarly, don't confuse drama for deep feelings. It might be none of the three are great for you, but the language you used to describe the third person isn't very positive, and has strong hints of drama on the horizon.
posted by Dip Flash at 4:31 PM on May 24, 2015 [11 favorites]

Best answer: Are you the kind of person who tends to self-sabotage? For some people, "this person is available and a great choice" tends to produce disinterest while "this person isn't really available and isn't really a good choice" produces attraction. (I will never forget the person who was So Physically Unattractive To Me when they were diligently pursuing me and then became very alluring once they gave up and went away - that was when I was young and foolish and self-sabotaging, but it was a real thing and very bizarre to experience even at the time.)

Also, why not do some visualization? Who usually attracts you? Look around at the coffee shop, etc - learn to figure out what is physically attractive to you in general. Perhaps this is not the case for you, but IME many young AFAB people tend to get so wound up in all kinds of socially problematic narratives that we have real trouble actually tapping in to organic physical attraction. Maybe none of these three are a good fit.

(Also, make some journal entries so you can look back in ten years with nostalgia for that time when you had three people on a string.)
posted by Frowner at 4:36 PM on May 24, 2015 [13 favorites]

None of them. You need someone who is into you and has good character, AND to whom you are attracted.
posted by J. Wilson at 4:38 PM on May 24, 2015 [9 favorites]

I vote none of them!

YES. Physical attraction is HUGE. The two who sound like keepers lack chemistry with you.

Keep looking. It'll work out!!
posted by jbenben at 4:39 PM on May 24, 2015 [12 favorites]

Best answer: Maybe you need to find a guy who has lots of good qualities and isn't shy. Always choose the healthy puppy. I feel like you might respond better to a guy with more self confidence.
posted by janey47 at 4:40 PM on May 24, 2015 [4 favorites]

Or date the third guy and have fun with it and learn about yourself, but don't expect it to last.
posted by J. Wilson at 4:40 PM on May 24, 2015 [9 favorites]

If you're ever trying to choose between a number of people and none of them seem like the right choice, it is because none of them are the right choice. Keep looking for a person who is good, responsible, caring, treats you well, and is also irresistible.

If you really can't find people that you are attracted to who have all those qualities, then it may be worth examining what is going on there. But right now your sample seems pretty small, so I wouldn't worry about all that just yet.
posted by sockermom at 4:41 PM on May 24, 2015 [4 favorites]

Just because you have three options doesn't mean you have to choose one of them.

Also, why do you have to choose one right now? You're barely dating any of them. Go on more dates.
posted by sm1tten at 4:41 PM on May 24, 2015 [3 favorites]

Yeah, it doesn't sound like you should date any of them.

My newest (and therefore, hopefully, most mature) dating and relationship philosophy is something like "what will be, will be"

I know it seems like you should make a choice, but I really don't think you have to. Just keep going out, with them or others, and the best option will reveal itself.
posted by Locochona at 4:50 PM on May 24, 2015

I agree with the above posters that the likely best answer to "which of the three?" is "none." I find it strange, personally, that you're going about this kind of thing in what seems to be a kind of goal-oriented, feature-comparison manner. It sounds like you're buying a car or something. Find someone who is compatible with you and wants the same/similar things from a relationship. If you don't like the two who are interested at the moment as romantic prospects, don't lead them on. I would say don't make marriage in itself a goal, as that tends to be a recipe for disaster in itself (instead of finding someone that you want to marry you might find someone and marry them to fulfill that goal, which is a horrible idea.) In fact, having someo e say marriage was a "goal" of theirs is a total red-flag.
posted by hypercomplexsimplicity at 4:56 PM on May 24, 2015 [6 favorites]

If you're anything like me then, no matter how good a partner looks on paper or how great that person's personality is, if there's no physical attraction or chemistry then it's impossible to force yourself to pursue any romantic relationships with them. It's very unnatural to me to pick a boyfriend from such a logical and rationale standpoint. I have to at least want to kiss them. So my advice is keep looking. You're bound to find a good guy that you also want to kiss. You recognize that you don't want to waste your time with the 3rd guy but you don't realize that if you got with one of the other two it would most likely be a waste of time too bc sooner or later you'll get bored of them and realize you want someone you're passionate about or at least attracted to!

So my advice is either keep looking or have fun with the 3rd guy. Realize that he's not good long term potential but learn from your relationship and interactions from him. That way you'll learn from your experience and the next attractive vagabond that comes around that doesn't have the other more responsible qualities you want won't seem so enticing.
posted by CheeseAndRice at 4:56 PM on May 24, 2015

Best answer: The third person is someone I met from the internet and have only seen twice but I have a huge crush on even though he seems not that serious about me and doesn't have his career figured out and is not half as accomplished as the other two. There just seems to be this vibe about him that I find irresistible. He treats me well, he's just not serious like the other two. He's kind of a free spirit type who has traveled a lot and spent less time being responsible but also seems like a good guy.

So, I am familiar with the "hot flaky noncommittal dude," believe me. But this does not sound like that dude. In fact he sounds perfectly dateable to me.

He's "not that serious about you"? You've met him twice and never kissed! If he WERE "serious about you" at this point it would be sort of a red flag.

It almost sounds like you feel you have to convince yourself not to like this perfectly nice dude who you are attracted to, just because he's not a nose-to-the-grindstone type and you feel you shouldn't date someone like that.
posted by showbiz_liz at 5:02 PM on May 24, 2015 [6 favorites]

If you have to date one of them, date the third; people you like mostly on paper don't make for good relationships. Also, as an academic currently dealing with the delightful fun of an international relationship- dating other academics is not always easy. While it is convenient to have an s.o. who understands your academic focus (and maybe even some of the details), none of you will have much control over your future locations if you stay in academia. So the good-on-paper guys may not even be that great on paper.

But you don't have to date anyone, or anyone seriously, if you're not feeling it.
posted by nat at 5:06 PM on May 24, 2015

Go for the third guy. Don't string the other two along. Don't try to make yourself feel something for somebody, those feelings will never grow as much as you want them to and it'll only lead to an unbalanced relationship and misery for them and/or you. Have a fun, youthful fling with the third guy, knowing it probably won't last, and someday you'll meet a guy who both excites you and feels like a good match long-term.

Caution: think of the third guy like a potential narcotic. Have fun with him, but be on the lookout for problems and if it's truly not a good match but you're starting to get hooked, break it off before it becomes a real problem.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 5:09 PM on May 24, 2015 [1 favorite]

Never date anyone you have to convince yourself to date.
posted by MsMolly at 5:20 PM on May 24, 2015 [2 favorites]

Response by poster: "never date anyone you have to convince yourself to date"

what about elizabeth bennett and mr. darcy?
posted by winterportage at 5:24 PM on May 24, 2015

Best answer: I actually think it's completely reasonable to gamble on feeling sparks eventually with one of the "reliable" guys. The amount of weight you're placing on this group of characteristics suggests that it might become important to you in a longer-term relationship and that you might just get along better with someone "serious."

BUT: Whatever you decide, if it doesn't work out as you hoped, remember that this was your job: blindly pick a red marble out of a bunch of bags of mostly blue marbles. You picked from the bag you thought had maybe 15% red marbles, whereas you thought the other bags only had maybe 10% or even 5% red marbles! And darn, you got a blue marble. Maybe you were wrong and those other bags were just full of red marbles! But that is not something you could possibly have learned from drawing your blue marble. What you have learned instead: maybe some wonderful things about the care and keeping of marbles in general.
posted by cogitron at 5:29 PM on May 24, 2015 [2 favorites]

Pride and Prejudice is fiction.

I've been physically attracted to men who in general weren't the type I like best. I trust my gut.
posted by brujita at 5:34 PM on May 24, 2015 [7 favorites]

what about elizabeth bennett and mr. darcy?

You're going to be much happier in your dating life if you let go of any expectation that it's going to be a certain way. You can't predict the endgame of any of these three potential relationships, and setting them up against some idealized version of romance or especially some relationship archetype from a book is only going to result in frustration and disappointment. Don't sabotage your happiness trying to architect the perfect partnering. Let that go. It's not going to happen.

You should date the people you feel like you want to date the most, until you don't want to date anymore, because that's really all that matters.
posted by phunniemee at 5:37 PM on May 24, 2015 [8 favorites]

Best answer: Upon seeing your comment: As a rule of thumb, if you're arguing with advice to "follow your heart" one way, it probably wants permission to go the other.

I'm not disagreeing with all the advice not to settle for just appreciating that someone is a good person, without attraction. But the sparks you feel when someone is mysterious and Different From You and cute and seems to Know Stuff About Life? That's not, in most cases, the same as what would drive long-lasting attraction. It's fun and exciting and a great way to get attraction started, but maybe for you it's not the most important.
posted by cogitron at 5:37 PM on May 24, 2015 [2 favorites]

what about elizabeth bennett and mr. darcy?

She never had to convince herself she was interested in him. She was completely uninterested in him on first impression, continued to do her own thing and got to know him better, and then changed her mind. At no point did she ever say, "man, I really wish I was into this dude."
posted by MsMolly at 5:52 PM on May 24, 2015 [26 favorites]

Best answer: Convincing yourself to like a guy makes you Charlotte Lucas and the guy Mr. Collins.
posted by MsMolly at 6:44 PM on May 24, 2015 [22 favorites]

Best answer: I think the point of Pride and Prejudice is that Elizabeth is prejudiced against Mr. Darcy and determined not to like him, but once she gets to know the 'real' him, she actually finds that she likes him very much. Her internal (and external) monologue goes from being something like "Gosh, this guy's really handsome and rich, sucks that he's such a huge jerk" to "Oh. I guess I was misled about the whole jerk thing. Turns out he's actually a stand-up dude once you get to know him. AND he's handsome and rich. I actually really like him. I hope he comes back..."

So, yeah. She never tries to change her mind about him because she thinks it would be good for her. She kept being prejudiced about Mr. Darcy even though it would have been good for her to be a little more open-minded and other, less-prejudiced people pointed this out. In fact, she fights really hard against the idea that she could have been prejudiced and kind of has to eat humble pie and finally admit despite herself that she knows she's wrong.

I feel like the example you're trying to make would be like Lizzy agreeing to marry Mr. Collins because she thinks it would be good for her family, even though she doesn't feel anything for him (well, actively finds him repugnant, but you didn't suggest that this was the case for you). There doesn't seem to be any suggestion that your Mr. Wickham is a cad, so there probably wouldn't be anything wrong with getting to know him a little better. Maybe at the next Assembly.

Also, people are not isolatable into individual traits; they're whole packages. If the whole package isn't doing it for you with any of these guys (not that it sounds like you've gotten to know them particularly well yet, so be careful about prejudice) maybe keep looking for someone you're actively interested in (or give a chance to the one you're actively interested in [not just physically, either]). Reacting to your "convince oneself to make the right choice" comment, there's not some kind of valor in eating your vegetables and dating some guy you don't actually like. It's not doing him any kindness. If marriage and kids are part of your nearish-term life plan, think about actively taking the initiative to seek out someone who ticks all your boxes, not just choosing from whatever not-quite-right choices happen to have dropped into your lap. I think that due to the whole cultural expectation thing, women don't tend to do this enough, and it leads to a lot of settling.
posted by spelunkingplato at 6:45 PM on May 24, 2015 [5 favorites]

Best answer: No guy with any mettle is too busy to make a move on a woman to who he's attracted. Write those losers off; save your pass on sub-par looks for a chubby bald dude with a serious career who pursues you intensely.

Internet guy sounds like he's worth getting know. Lots of awesome men bummed around a bit in their 20s.
posted by MattD at 7:05 PM on May 24, 2015 [2 favorites]

Making major life decisions based on archetypes from pre-Victorian romance novels is probably not the best way to proceed, in any case.
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 7:38 PM on May 24, 2015 [24 favorites]

It was Elizabeth Bennett and Mr. Darcy's pride and prejudice (their preconceived ideas about each other and the feelings resulting from those ideas) that kept them apart. When they were able to allow themselves to get to know each other better, their lust took hold -- but I believe it was always there -- just blocked by what they thought they should and shouldn't feel.

Similarly, it's your preconceived ideas about what love is supposed to be that's getting in your way. If you can allow yourself to see all of these men for who they really are as individuals rather than for their "characteristics," you'll be able to experience your true feelings toward them more authentically and the outcomes will evolve naturally.

In this way, making major life decisions based on archetypes from pre-Victorian romance novels can become a model strategy for you.
posted by DMelanogaster at 6:04 AM on May 25, 2015

You can meet a lot of potential matches in five years if you start trying.
posted by ead at 7:44 AM on May 25, 2015 [1 favorite]

> It almost sounds like you feel you have to convince yourself not to like this perfectly nice dude who you are attracted to, just because he's not a nose-to-the-grindstone type and you feel you shouldn't date someone like that.

That, but also: you're only 27—it's perfectly OK to date someone you don't wind up spending your life with! Most people wind up learning about relationships via a succession of them that don't work out for one reason or another; it's a mistake (in my opinion) to put all that long-term pressure on your feelings at this moment. Go for what attracts you; if it doesn't work out, trust me, it's not the end of the world. It will hurt for a bit and you will move on, sadder but wiser (to use a good old nineteenth-century cliche).
posted by languagehat at 8:12 AM on May 25, 2015

Response by poster: Alright, thank you for indulging the Pride and Prejudice example. I was just trying to illustrate the silliness of statements like 'never x' since they are kind of meaningless.

Anyways, thanks everyone who took the time to answer my question.
posted by winterportage at 12:06 PM on May 25, 2015

Ask the loins. I know personality is important but presumably you're going to be having sex with this person. Fireworks = heart flutters. Sexual attraction = when you're around me, I get a nice stirring feeling down below that I feel I want to act on. A lot. Choose someone who makes you feel that. If none of them does then don't date any (unless sex isn't important to you).
posted by ihaveyourfoot at 6:22 AM on May 26, 2015 [2 favorites]