In a recent LinkedIn post, Emily Lyons, founder of a matchmaking agency with over a decade of experience, challenges the conventional notion of a dating ‘type.’ Lyons argues that rigidly adhering to preconceived preferences might be hindering individuals from finding genuine connection, often mistaking familiarity for chemistry.
Lyons opens her post by referencing the widely publicized relationship between Selena Gomez and Benny Blanco, highlighting how Gomez initially knew Blanco for years without romantic consideration. This pre-existing familiarity, she suggests, was filed under a category other than romantic possibility until a shift occurred.
“Your type is a list of everyone who hasn’t worked out yet.”
This provocative statement sets the stage for Lyons’s core argument: that what people often believe to be their ‘type’ is, in fact, a pattern of relationships that have not yielded lasting success. She observes a common phenomenon in her matchmaking work where clients, upon meeting someone outside their usual preference, often exclaim, “He’s just not what I normally go for.”
The Illusion of Familiarity
Lyons contends that this adherence to a ‘type’ can be a significant roadblock in the search for a compatible partner. She posits that familiarity can be a powerful, yet deceptive, force in initial attraction.
“What you normally go for has a track record. You’re currently living in it. Familiarity does an excellent impression of chemistry. Sometimes the butterflies in the first four minutes are recognition. A pattern you’ve felt before, showing up in a different person, and not usually a good thing.”
According to Lyons, the immediate sense of comfort or excitement someone feels upon meeting a new person might not be genuine chemistry, but rather a subconscious recognition of a familiar emotional or relational pattern. This pattern, she implies, is often one that has not led to fulfilling relationships in the past.
The Role of Matchmaking
Drawing from her extensive experience in matchmaking, Lyons explains that her agency frequently encounters individuals who are quick to define their ‘type’ even before a thorough consultation. This often involves specific physical attributes or a very particular feeling they expect to experience.
Lyons encourages daters to reconsider their rigid adherence to these predefined checklists. While she acknowledges that genuine connection cannot be forced, she advocates for giving individuals a chance beyond the initial, often-misleading, first impression.
“Nobody should talk themselves into wanting someone. But stop deciding in the first four minutes, or even before you give them a chance.”
Her advice suggests a more open-minded approach to dating, urging individuals to look beyond superficial criteria and familiar patterns. By challenging the concept of a fixed ‘type,’ Lyons aims to help people broaden their horizons and potentially discover more fulfilling connections.
Re-evaluating Romantic Blueprints
Lyons’s insights prompt a broader discussion about how personal history and past experiences shape our romantic expectations. The idea that a ‘type’ might be a self-imposed limitation, rather than an indicator of true compatibility, is a key takeaway from her post.
“Your type has had a lot of chances.”
This concluding remark serves as a direct challenge to those who find themselves repeatedly in unsatisfying relationships. Emily Lyons’s perspective, grounded in years of professional experience, offers a compelling argument for re-evaluating the criteria we use when seeking a partner, suggesting that breaking free from a rigid ‘type’ could be the key to unlocking more successful and meaningful romantic connections.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Emily Lyons on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on August 16, 2026 | View original post on LinkedIn →