The "Spark"

We've all heard someone say, "We had a nice time but there just wasn't anything there... no spark."  The spark is that mystical, magical thing that we're all searching for - the thing that makes it more than just friendship and good conversation or purely physical attraction.  It's that feeling you get that makes you happy and excited to see someone again or talk to them again.  To me, the spark is more important than meeting my "criteria." I value having chemistry with someone because I believe it's something that you either have or you don't. I don't think it's something you develop over time.  You're either physically & emotionally attracted to someone or you aren't.


This is how I've felt for a very long time, and then I read something the other day that said the spark was something invented by men as a reason to not see a woman again after a one-night stand or whatever.  Somehow, over time, we began believing this nonsense and now we're out there searching for something that never even existed in the first place.


Wait... what?????


All this time I've been going through life, meeting people and determining a romantic future based on something that may not even be real?  That sucks!  Just last week I told Musicmaker that he was a nice guy but there wasn't anything there (in response to him asking me if he did something "off-putting" when we met in person... no, but your use of the term off-putting isn't really helping your chances).  Does this mean I should have grinned & bared a few more meetings/dates with him to see if we developed something?  He acted like a dorky high school kid; I haven't been attracted to one of those since, well, I was in high school.  Should I stick around and wait for him to develop some confidence?  That's a waste of his time and mine (not saying he'll never develop confidence, but there's a good chance some other girl finds his dorkiness/lack of confidence endearing). But even beyond Musicmaker or the guys of the online dating world, there's also a whole host of guy friends I have who are merely platonic friends, with no mutual attraction that would ever make it something more.  I know guys with feelings for me that I don't share for them, and guys I would absolutely consider boyfriend material who think of me as nothing more than a friend or the sister they never had (I know, it's all very When Harry Met Sally).


My mom would say, "Stop being so mean and give him a chance."  I would argue that I thought I did give him a chance.  We sat at that coffee shop/bookstore/restaurant/etc for a good bit of time, enjoyed whatever we enjoyed at said establishment, had a nice conversation, and parted ways.  And when a friend or family member asked me how it went, I said, "We had a nice time. He's a smart/funny/cool guy. I wouldn't date him, though. Just wasn't feeling it."  Was I supposed to be feeling it?  Or should I give it another shot (or 2 or 3) and wait to feel something?  I think that, at the very least, I should leave thinking "I'd like to see him again" as opposed to "meh... it's ok if I don't see him again or if I don't see him for a good while."

This has been on my mind for several days now and I just don't know what to think.  Is chemistry or the "spark" something you either immediately have with someone or never will have?  Or is it something that develops over time, coming after friendship?  Have I been going about this the wrong way, dismissing or preferring guys based on some misconceived fairytale-type fantasy of how love should be?  I know love is something that grows, but does attraction work the same way?  Maybe I'm naive in my thoughts, but I still think that you either like someone or you don't and that chemistry doesn't develop or come about through some rom-com sort of aha! moment.  I like the feeling of butterflies in my stomach and being giddy like a schoolgirl, and I don't think that's such a bad thing.