To think 'no spark' means absolutely nothing?

Would you rather: 'you're boring, and I'm never going to have sex with you or want to speak to you again' ? Because that's what I meant whenever I've said that.

It seemed kinder.

It's difficult to understand if you haven't felt a spark with someone and it isn't necessarily a fleeting feeling, it can last on a physical, emotional, intellectual level. Maybe OP has never felt that sort of connection with anyone.

It is interesting as I've had relationships with people I would describe as having that spark and those where it's absent. I would describe that spark as that sort of thrill, that initial attraction and, for me, ability to banter and flirt easily with. But I've also had beautiful moments where that energy differs, where there has been comfort and ease and generally more calm in a relationship.

I'd say now with my husband we have both. Although there's been times in the relationship where it's been more onw than the other or one might be altogether missing.

Look, for whatever reason someone doesn’t want a relationship with you. That’s fine. Move on. There are other fish in the sea.

no one owes you a big explanation

I don’t know, I still get butterflies if I see my husband unexpectedly - like we are going home from work at the same time and I see him turning right at the traffic lights I’m waiting to turn left at. 24 years in.

OP - no spark is a polite way of saying you’re nice enough, I’ve nothing against you but you are not for me.

I think it would be rare to be used if people genuinely get on with you and find you sexually attractive. I'd imagine that they are being economical with the truth about the attractive bit to be polite. Sometimes people say it because they think they could do better though. They think you're nice enough, attractive enough, but want to hold out for the 'wow!' Imo this can often be delusional on their part, but they learn that from experience I guess.

Feelings and attraction are two different things you can feel instant attraction to someone ,but having feelings and caring about them can take time.

Sexually attracted and had stuff in common does not guarantee a connection. I think that's the point.

It's about chemistry I think, being on the same wavelength. Not just finding them physically attractive, but connecting mentally / intellectually / emotionally in some way. Usually when you have that chemistry, you are more likely to find them physically attractive too, they aren't unrelated. But it's quite intangible and not as rational as 'we get along ok'.

This is daft, you know full well OP what a spark is - its not some abstract thing or excuse. You either feel it or you don't. I think you get a vibe from someone pretty quickly.

Yes, but how many one-on-one dates would you agree to go on with a person you don't really find that interesting? If there's no spark (i.e. no attraction, no special interest in that person, no connection) then I don't feel like seeing that person again, really. It would be different in a group, or friends-of-friends situation, in which you may see that person other times without the pressure of it being a "date" and with a choice to talk to other people too. But in OLD, if there's no spark then that's it, surely. It's the opposite of generic rubbish for me, it's a very honest, very clear and specific reason why a person does not want to keep seeing me, or me them.

No the butterflies thing doesn't last that long ,but if you are not feeling any attraction in the very early days than that doesn't bode well for the future
It's difficult to explain attraction because cits either there or not.

Personally I think that a spark is more than fancying someone or wanting to sleep with them. I've been on several dates where I've not felt a spark and for me that is that I couldn't see myself in a relationship with that person or not having common interests etc.

This might sound naive but I don't understand how you can find someone sexually attractive, get on really well and be compatible but have no spark? The butterflies thing really doesn't last that long, I just don't know what's missing if you fancy them and like their personality/get on

Because objectively they may ‘tick all the boxes’ and so you imagine that you’d fancy them but then in reality find that you don’t.

It's just very generic, I know it works for a lot of people but I guess it's not something I believe in

So, you’d be happy to sleep with and contemplate a relationship with anyone who either asked you on a date, or you went in a date with? Otherwise, it means you’d be happy to move forward with anyone, which is okay I guess if that suits but but seems a tad odd tbh.

You can like someone, enjoy their company and recognise that they are objectively attractive but just not feel a romantic 'spark' when you're with them. It could absolutely be used as a lazy, easy excuse in some situations, but I've definitely met people who have been perfect for me on paper, and very nice to look at, but I've felt nothing...not sure how you would explain that in a more 'meaningful' way really.

What don't you 'believe' OP? I don't get it.

I think it’s a reasonable characterisation? Some people just make you feel excited because you fancy them, others just don’t. It’s not always easy to pinpoint exactly why or what it is. “Spark” characterises that magnetic excitement you get when you are first getting to know someone you really fancy.

Ultimately however some one dresses it up it means the same thing and it's better than being rude
It's akin to the " it's not you it's me"
In reality it really is you ,but people are trying to sugar coat it.