Comments

1. Lovisa says

   January 10, 2026 at 2:24 pm

   Interesting article. Thank you for compiling your research into digestible material, David. This is obviously a subject of passion for you, and I’m curious where your interest comes from. I don’t think you’ve shared your story on LwL. I’m curious if you’re here because of a personal experience or if it’s purely academic for you.

   Reply

   • David says

     January 10, 2026 at 8:15 pm

     I started life as a musician (I’m 36) and an independent recording engineer. I basically quit music around 2014, when Kesha’s allegations against Dr. Luke surfaced. At the time, I was a Dr. Luke fan, and was thinking of moving to LA to try to get into that music production scene (not coincidentally, where my LO at the time lived). I was already not so much a fan of what the LA scene was promoting, but this left me in a place where I was questioning a lot of things in life.

     At the time, I started studying psychology and moral philosophy instead (as a hobby), I suppose to figure out what the good life is really supposed to be.

     I would consider myself to be a kind of poet, I guess, but I became interested in getting things “right”. Traditionally, art, literature and mythology has been a source of values. Songwriters are in the business of influencing psychological states (by reinforcing certain emotions, giving advice, or at least influencing self-talk), yet it’s rare nowadays to see anyone putting any real effort into what they’re doing with that. Most music now promotes either one or another (vacuous) ideal, because the artists don’t actually know anything. It’s either unhealthy, unrealistic, or overly preachy.

     The current environment doesn’t incentivize my musical interests with this, so I don’t really publish anything anymore.

     But anyhow, I would consider myself a knowledgeable artist.

     I took on a project of writing Wikipedia articles on love, because I found that internet articles about it are quite bad. They’re almost always written by people who don’t actually know anything, so they’re just confusing and useless. The few articles which are written by actual experts (people with romantic love degrees) tend to be buried in search results. People who don’t know anything about romantic love (even if they have a psychology degree) tend to say very silly things about it.

     Wikipedia articles are written differently from academic papers, so editors aren’t really “supposed” to be scholars. A Wikipedia article is supposed to just paraphrase more or less exactly what the citations say. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:EXPERT

     I wrote this article here for Tom, because there just aren’t very many articles on the internet talking about this kind of thing. Most of what I learned about it, I read in books. I’ve been researching romantic love for two years now.

     Realizing what the semantic issues are turns out to actually be important to understand what anyone is talking about, both in terms of scholarly sources, and also what regular people are talking about online. If somebody has a different conception of what a term like “romantic love” or “infatuation” means, then we might really have no idea what anyone is talking about before trying to understand the meaning of their words.

     Dorothy Tennov talks about it in her book, but she doesn’t do a great job explaining the full backstory.

     Reply

     • Lovisa says

       January 10, 2026 at 10:17 pm

       Thank you for sharing your story, David. I see that you had at least one LO which I guess was the spark that triggered your interest in limerence.

       I enjoyed getting to know you and I wish you luck with your adventures outside of music (or inside of music if you go back to it).

       Reply

       • David says

         January 14, 2026 at 7:06 pm

         I guess that you’re fishing for a story about limerence… My recent LO, I decided to take up jogging to pass the time, and I ended up jogging so much (for hours) that I hurt my knees and had to go to physical therapy. I still have chronic knee pain some years later.

         I also walked around downtown looking for a building to jump off, but couldn’t find a suitable place. I discovered the situation online with limerence a few years ago, and ended up working on this instead of that.

         I lost friends after trying to confide in them about limerence, I went to therapy and the therapist didn’t understand, I was put on drugs that didn’t work (and actually gave me a side-effect that was permanent after discontinuation), the whole nine yards I guess.

         Like a lot of people around these parts, I grew up with relational traumas, and I don’t usually like talking about this kind of thing to be honest, as I’m more on the fearful avoidant end of things.

       • Lovisa to David says

         January 14, 2026 at 7:45 pm

         Wow, I’m not sure where to begin. Thank you for adding details to your story. I see that you prefer not to talk about these things and that’s totally fine. Please only share what you feel comfortable sharing.

         I have concerns about your desire to jump off a building. I wonder if the medication played a part. Maybe it did, maybe it didn’t, either way I want you to know about a fantastic resource in the United States. PLEASE CALL 988 when you’re struggling. I’ve called them many times on behalf of my daughter and sister. They are wonderful! PLEASE DON’T TURN A TEMPORARY STRUGGLE INTO A PERMANENT MISTAKE!

         As for your jogging injury, ugh, how frustrating. I love running and I get so frustrated when I can’t do it. You have my sympathy.

         Best wishes!

       • Marcia to David says

         January 15, 2026 at 2:43 am

         David,
         “as I’m more on the fearful avoidant end of things.”
         I consider myself an avoidant as well. Do you have an SO? It’s my observation that most of the partnered limerents on this site have either an anxious or a secure attachment style. But the few of us who are single (and may have been for a while) are avoidants.
         That may be another limerent topic to explore.

     • Serial says

       January 11, 2026 at 3:00 am

       I remember the book The Psychology of Romantic Love by Nathaniel Branden. Some of my college classmates read it for a course, so I bought my own copy and read it at least once or twice.

       But then the Internet came along and nowadays, Google—instead of pulling up lots of relevant search results—will give you “10 ways to know someone is in love with you” that are actually regurgitated by AI from some other webpage, which is buried several pages into the results.

       Reply

       • David says

         January 12, 2026 at 1:26 pm

         There’s a whole crowd of websites which popped up over about the last ten years I think (Simply Psychology, Psych Central, Verywell Mind, etc.) which are featured prominently on Google results, but their content tends to actually be low quality. They tend to be banned as citations on Wikipedia, along with websites like Healthline and Cleveland Clinic which aren’t reliable either. People outside Wikipedia don’t usually know this.

         It’s unfortunate that psychology content on the internet tends to actually be unreliable. The authors of these articles tend to have only read just a few things, and miscommunicate or promote an ideological position. (Only domain experts are reliable for a given subject in psychology.)

         I don’t know if it’s an SEO thing, or that search engines prioritize these websites on the backend, or that people just click on them often without knowing they’re low quality.

         I have Nathaniel Branden’s book as well, although I prefer the account of history in Love Sick by Frank Tallis. Branden has some extra details, but Tallis isn’t a social constructionist. Tallis is more of an account of how people came to think limerence is a ‘true love’ that should lead to a relationship, and he also has evolutionary theories.

         Branden makes the claim that romantic love doesn’t exist in certain tribal societies, but there was a famous study (Jankowiak & Fischer, 1992) which many/most scholars agree refuted that.

         The cultural stuff is important to talk about though. I see it often lurking in the hidden assumptions behind limerence content. For example, I see critics try to distinguish limerence from “healthy” infatuation, as if there is a “healthy” form of infatuation. (Even if there was a clear difference, any infatuation could become limerence if it’s reinforced the right way by the situation. It’s like trying to distinguish between “healthy” and “unhealthy” drug addiction.) “Romantic” ideas are so embedded that hardly anybody understands the difference between fact and fiction. In Tennov’s era, the criticism was actually more intelligible, because critics of falling in love did not have romantic beliefs. Their argument was more that we should not think that “love” means “being in love”, and culture was an early developmental theory.

2. Limerent Emerituss says

   January 10, 2026 at 3:37 pm

   Is there any current discussion of defining limerence in the DSM? Maybe Tenov’s criteria could be modified to get the usual “5 of 9” standard for a diagnosis.

   Limerents would get their own code therapists could use to bill insurance companies!

   Reply

   • David says

     January 10, 2026 at 7:06 pm

     Some people have tried to propose diagnostic criteria, but the problem is they don’t do enough research and they don’t understand how something like that could really be defined.

     Any type of definition that revolves around distress or distraction turns out to be normal (or common), according to all the surveys. Tom’s survey (32%) is one example, but there are others.

     Another survey looked at “unrequited love” and found that 20% of people had experienced it more than 5 times, according to the following definition:

     “This study is concerned with the experience of romantic love. This experience is sometimes called “being in love,” “obsessive love,” “infatuation,” “lovesickness,” “puppy love,” or “having a crush.””

     “***When one is experiencing this emotion, it has been described as having one’s emotions on a roller coaster, finding it difficult to concentrate, and thinking constantly about the person with whom you are in love. The person is said to have the power to produce extreme highs and lows of emotion in you, depending on how he or she acts towards you.***”

     “Sometimes this feeling is reciprocated, and the two people may be considered to be “in love” with each other. Other times, a person may feel this way toward someone who doesn’t return the feeling (unrequited love). In this case, the object of one’s love is sometimes highly unlikely to return the feeling (e.g., one’s physician, teacher, professor or therapist, or a celebrity such as a movie star or a rock musician). and sometimes it is simply a member or your social group who simply doesn’t feel about you in the manner you feel about them.”

     (The paper also begins with a discussion of limerence.)

     https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229984645_Mutual_and_unrequited_love_in_adolescence_and_young_adulthood

     That survey also found that the mean duration was 3-6 months (across all people, not just the 20%). Based on some other surveys as well, I would interpret it as meaning that a lot of people have “crushes” or “infatuations” that feel like limerence (they have a hard time concentrating, get extremely depressed, and so on), but it tends to dissipate.

     All of these as well (crushes, infatuation, limerence, whichever we call them) can lead to relationships sometimes.

     The problem I’ve always seen with people who try to argue limerence is a disorder (and define it in terms of “distress” or “impairment”) is that they never understand where these kinds of things are actually demarcated. They always claim they aren’t saying all “infatuation” is a disorder, but then actually end up arguing that it is, when they actually describe how they think “limerence” is defined.

     Now, there’s also a phenomenon of “unwanted” or later stage limerence, where the character of the experience shifts, and the mechanics are more like OCD. https://livingwithlimerence.com/the-pain-of-long-term-limerence/

     But Tom and I are the only people who seem to understand how this probably works and what it is. Nobody who is talking about putting limerence in the DSM is talking about this (or even seems to know about it at all), that I have seen.

     Restricting the diagnostic criteria to just long-term limerence is also counterproductive in terms of helping people, in my opinion. I have definitely seen people on the subreddit who needed help right away (just a few days or weeks in). On the other hand as well, I have seen people describing being in limerence for a long time (17 years) and getting into a relationship with an LO and having it actually go well.

     It’s complicated to define exactly what is supposed to be “pathology”, because while it seems like a mental illness, the purpose of it is to motivate forming a relationship. And that is actually adaptive (potentially). Another issue is that uncertainty theory predicts that people who were in limerence longer had some level of reciprocation, which would mean that longer limerence doesn’t necessarily equate to being more pathological.

     It’s all a problem with the idea that anybody who could use help from a clinician must be considered “pathological” or “abnormal”. It is also a problem with the conflation between psychology and healthcare, because the insurance company only wants to bill for disease.

     If clinical psychology could/would see just anybody who needed help with love, then there’s no need to argue pedantically over definitions like this.

     Reply

3. LaR to David says

   January 10, 2026 at 11:14 pm

   David,

   Great to read your post.

   I’m going to grossly over-simplify some bits here for argument’s sake. I have long since come to a conjecture that (at least for the half of the population who are limerent tribe), limerence and love start as the same thing. And that this thing is motivated by a drive to pair bond, so is essentially biologically healthy.

   (I mean the above point at a population level. At an individual level, some people undoubtedly have misguided radars where it comes to who to pair bond with. But that is just as likely to cause painful love, as to cause limerence.)

   To me, the difference between love and limerence is how it then progresses from that initial infatuation state. Without barriers, and if both parties share the feelings, the relationship progresses and the love, with any luck, develops – then nobody talks of that situation as limerence anymore. But when couples stay deeply in romantic love with each other, they *could* be said to stay limerent for each other, even if for a very long time. It is just that the feeling is reciprocal.

   The sort of limerence we hear of on sites like this is nearly all of the other – barriered or unrequited -kind, that can’t develop into longer-term love. This is why limerence can seem problematic or as something worthy of a diagnosis. What limerents are really experiencing is barriered love. The limerence develops like a hunger in someone with no access to food. Or to put it better, they can see the food but can’t touch it.

   I am not au fait with all the literature that you are, but are any of the people you’ve read making that claim, or anything near to it?

   Reply

   • David says

     January 11, 2026 at 10:09 pm

     I can think of a couple things that might be relevant. You can tell me if this answers what you’re wondering, I guess.

     With whether limerence develops into a relationship, there’s going to be two main factors: one is the probability that the attraction turns mutual, and the other is (in simple terms) whether the relationship turns secure over time.

     I’ve written a few things about this:

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reward_theory_of_attraction

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limerence#Ecstatic_union

     (And you might be surprised at how many sources I have tying these concepts to limerence, the way Tennov defined it.)

     Another way to talk about the differences is in terms of Robert Sternberg’s triangular theory of love (a taxonomical theory), which says that types of love are composed by combining three components: passion, intimacy and commitment.

     Sternberg relates his concept of “infatuation” (which is passion by itself, without intimacy or commitment) to limerence.

     Sternberg refers to passion with intimacy, but without commitment as “romantic love” (using a classical type of definition), in relation to stories like Romeo and Juliet (who were passionately in love, with mutuality, but did not have a relationship).

     (Tennov did not make a distinction like this, however, and considered Romeo and Juliet to be ‘mutual limerence’. Actually, Sternberg’s own comments about limerence are not entirely consistent either.)

     When passion, intimacy and commitment all occur together it’s called “consummate love”, in Sternberg’s taxonomy.

     How relationships go is complicated though. Whether love feelings linger in a positive way is more than just being reciprocated.

     There’s an “obsessive” passion (e.g. limerence) but also a more “harmonious” kind of passion (where people say they’re “in love”, but they aren’t as obsessed), and they are known to follow different mechanics. Ideally limerence would turn into companionate love (friendship/liking) or harmonious love, but it can also stay as obsessive love if e.g. the relationship is insecure.

     If you’re in limerence with a person before a relationship, it’s hard to predict what would happen if you got into one. The interactions you have with the person inside vs. outside a relationship are different, except maybe in a case like limerence for a close friend. Imagine falling into limerence with a coworker because of their delightful humor, but then you actually get into a relationship and it turns out they’re a slob at home and you argue over where to go for dinner. To predict if a limerent relationship would work, you would have to think about these things ahead of time, instead of examining feelings.

     When it comes to clinical ideas, Susan Peabody has a taxonomy of ‘love addicts’ which specifies that a few fall for unavailable people. Peabody is a founder of LAA, rather than a scholar.

     The diagnostic ideas I’ve seen for limerence always revolve around mental states (the level of obsession), which I think is not useful by itself because it’s actually tied to the situation, and this might or might not have potentiality. I’ve seen some people say they got into a relationship with an LO even after some time and it went perfectly well.

     Reply

   • Sammy to LaR says

     January 17, 2026 at 3:38 am

     @LaR,

     Forgive me for answering a question not addressed to me, but I’ve been thinking about this very topic for a while now, and would like to contribute my three-hundred-and-fifty-two cents. 🙂

     Basically, after a great deal of thought, I’ve reached the following conclusion.

     Limerence is DEFINITELY something one doesn’t want to experience – not unless four conditions are met. The four conditions are as follows:

     (1) Both limerent and LO are single i.e. no divided loyalties or super-obvious barriers to consummation

     (2) Both limerent and LO are free to act i.e. they can immediately start a relationship, and will not delay the starting of that relationship

     (3) Both limerent and LO have some kind of romantic attraction to each other (so they can enjoy all that passion, or whatever passion is called nowadays).

     (4) Both limerent and LO are compatible with each other, and this compatibility is independent of romantic attraction. (So they have something to unite them when the passion starts to wane, as it inevitably will, in a committed relationship).

     Reply

     • LaR to Sammy says

       January 17, 2026 at 4:30 pm

       Sammy,

       I’ve written you a more detailed reply down the bottom re defining limerence, but just to say I’d 100% agree with these criteria.

       Reply

4. Serial says

   January 11, 2026 at 2:53 am

   That description of college students being unable to do their assignments, get up on time, etc. basically describes how I would get right after a breakup with someone I loved. It also happened 15 years ago after the breakup of a friendship (which was also a LE). With my various LE’s over the years, I think usually I can get through the day without obsessing over the LO, but there will be periods—usually related to something going on in the relationship to the LO—where it waxes and wanes. Something disruptive will happen and I’ll be in that funk again. But most days don’t get that way, which is how I can manage it for years.

   Reply

5. financegirl says

   January 11, 2026 at 3:52 am

   This is so true. Limerence can totally screw up your academic career if you’re not careful. The first time I experienced limerence was when I was in business school. I was majoring in accounting and I met a CPA who was just 5 years older than me through my church. I became obsessed with him and I thought I needed to marry him to get the right connections and to help me in my career. I dumped a PhD student for him, but the CPA ended up rejecting me. My grades started to suffer while I was lovesick for the CPA. And this is why I can never go to grad school.

   Reply

6. Marcia to Dr. L says

   January 14, 2026 at 7:51 am

   Dr. L,
   I don’t know if you know this, but you’re referenced quite a bit throughout a video I just watched. “Love or Limerence?: SATC Video Essay.” It’s about the relationship between Carrie and Mr. Big on the Sex and the City tv series and movies. From The Blue Curtain Club.

   Reply

7. Adam says

   January 14, 2026 at 3:14 pm

   Articles like this, philosophy on love, experiencing limerence, and fictional literature all make me envious of aromatics somedays.

   Reply

   • Sammy to Adam says

     January 17, 2026 at 6:29 am

     @Adam.

     “Articles like this, philosophy on love, experiencing limerence, and fictional literature all make me envious of aromatics somedays.”

     One of the impressions I get from David’s article is that historically “romantic love” wasn’t meant to lead invariably to pair-bonding. It wasn’t meant to be the one socially-approved route to reproductive success. That’s all modern nonsense. Blame these faulty ideals on Disney movies, if you like. 😜

     Historically, romantic love is some exalted feeling that, say, motivates a knight to perform noble deeds on behalf of some fine lady. But he wasn’t meant to marry the lady or have an affair with the lady. The lady was a different social class, and wouldn’t be seen dead in a coffeeshop with the knight. Not least because coffeeshops didn’t exist. Also, these noble ladies were usually married (to noble men).

     Then along comes the twentieth century. Romantic love has become democratised. In fact, romantic love has become something of an entitlement. Everybody wants a piece of the romantic pie. Everyone believes they deserve a marriage based on passionate love, endless excitement, nonstop thrills, etc.

     It seems like there is something in nature, i.e. limerence, that IS pretty exciting in its early stages and IS meant to lead to rush-rush mating and unthinking reproduction. Maybe this limerence has been conflated with the romantic love of old? But neither old-fashioned romantic love nor the timeless phenomenon of limerence sit comfortably with the institution of marriage, because sustainable marriage requires affectional bonding. E.g. parents usually need to like each other to raise offspring effectively. Even in the modern world, only squillionaire rappers can afford to pay child support to five different baby mamas! 😇

     I think, by the time the 1970s swung round and Tennov was doing her research, romantic love and pair-bonding had become linked in the public mind. Everyone wanted to believe that they were living out some great love story. But perhaps the link between these two things isn’t as strong or as natural as we like to think. I.e., historically, “romantic love” wasn’t seen as a prerequisite to having a happy marriage. In fact, “romantic love” was probably seen as a hindrance to having a happy marriage because romantic ideology can mess with people’s expectations.

     Reply

     • Adam says

       January 18, 2026 at 1:00 pm

       Yeah Sam but without love, I wouldn’t want sex. Without sex I wouldn’t desire women in that capacity. And without desiring women in that capacity I wouldn’t be alcoholic, I think. Cause unless a guys got an accent like Idris Elba I just don’t think I could follow through. So there. That’s my 3 step program. I know Miss Lovisa will I’m missing 9 steps ….

       Reply

8. Sammy says

   January 17, 2026 at 2:49 am

   My understanding of limerence (as of the present moment) is more or less as follows. Let’s combine the insights of three different writers.

   (1) There’s a difference between “liking” and “wanting”. (Dr. L’s insight).

   Simple crushes are likely more about “liking” whereas limerence is definitely more about “wanting”. You can like someone you don’t want. You can want someone you don’t like. You can hopefully like (or learn to like) someone you also want.

   I think non-limerents often mistake “liking” for “wanting”. Because of this routine misunderstanding, non-limerents insist (incorrectly) that their romantic endeavours are no different in character to the romantic endeavours of limerents.

   These non-limerents are the pseudo-limerent non-limerents Tennov identified.

   Limerence doesn’t seem to be a disorder at any stage. Romantic love is just a messy and sometimes distressing human experience, apparently. However, in late-stage limerence, serious researchers and casual observers alike have noted that “wanting” can progress to a level where said wanting becomes overwhelming both subjectively – and, yes, even objectively.

   Consequently, it is not unreasonable to characterise the middle stages of limerence as “limbo” or “lovesickness” (“Lovesickness” is my preferred term). Nor is it inappropriate to define late-stage limerence as “person addiction”.

   (2) Intense romantic feelings can occur even when no established relationship exists between limerent and LO. (David/Shiverypeak’s insight).

   Some LwLers seem to be labouring under the delusion that they have to date their LOs or sleep with their LOs in order to secure the much-coveted highs of limerence. That’s absolutely not the case, in my humble opinion. In true limerence, one experiences hope, euphoria, crazy highs, crazy lows, intrusive thoughts, heightened libido, etc, etc, all without any dating or sexual contact with LO. Limerence is a tornado unfolding in the mind of the person who is limerent.

   On the other hand, the ability of limerents to experience intense emotions for LO while not being in a relationship with LO might be what drives a small number of puzzled non-limerents to conclude that “all limerents are stalkers”. I.e. where does the emotional intensity stem from if there isn’t any actual relationship?

   Some non-limerents must assume that intense emotions can only grow over time from BEING in a relationship with a person. According to this particular worldview, human beings don’t have pre-relationship emotions of attraction and/or fondness. Essentially, non-limerents don’t quite understand what infatuation means even though they may use the word extravagantly.

   But then, to make matters more confusing, some people report having intensely loving feelings without any obsessional component attached. (A phenomenon that Tennov herself came across). So, have these non-obsessive lovers discovered some mystical form of “healthy infatuation” we should all aspire to? 🙂

   (3) The term limerence should really only be applied to situations where there is ongoing uncertainty about reciprocation of feelings. (Dorothy Tennov’s insight).

   In other words, yes, I personally agree with Tennov’s view that limerence needs to be “unfulfilled” in order to count as limerence. Once the limerence is “fulfilled”, e.g. consummation through the establishment of a successful pair-bond, then limerence isn’t limerence anymore. It’s now simply a happy marriage, mutual romantic love, passionate love, or whatever else people want to call it.

   NB: The most common cause of unfulfilled limerence would be the limerent not being sure how the LO feels. However, LO and limerent may have equally strong feelings for each other – feelings that they know about because disclosure has occurred – but they still cannot act on those feelings due to barriers. This mutual-limerence-with-barriers would still count as “unfulfilled limerence” in my view and would thus also be “real limerence” according to Tennov’s use of the term.

   Maybe what researchers in the field of love research actually need to do in order to obtain reliable results is shift discussion away from talk of “real love” and “false love” and move discussion toward talk of “real limerence” and “false limerence”? Such a shift is unlikely to happen, however, because it’s a paradigm shift that would require researchers to prioritise biology over culture, and come up with biology-based definitions of love that make most people in a romance-idolising culture deeply uncomfortable. (Basically, no one wants to be told they’ve **cough, cough** “been doing love the wrong way”). 🙂

   Reply

9. LaR to Sammy (and David) says

   January 17, 2026 at 4:27 pm

   Sammy,
   (and David – as some of this is in response to your reply to me last week).

   I very much enjoyed this summary of the current state of limerence knowledge according to Sammy 🙂

   “Some LwLers seem to be labouring under the delusion that they have to date their LOs or sleep with their LOs in order to secure the much-coveted highs of limerence. That’s absolutely not the case, in my humble opinion. In true limerence, one experiences hope, euphoria, crazy highs, crazy lows, intrusive thoughts, heightened libido, etc, etc, all without any dating or sexual contact with LO. Limerence is a tornado unfolding in the mind of the person who is limerent.”

   This is so very true and something that we perhaps don’t acknowledge enough in this forum. Limerents get all the excitement and pain even without going the whole nine yards. Even though ‘the thing’ exists often only in the mind of the limerent, there is a *very* real ‘thing there’, in their reality anyway. It can seem as real as – or more real than – other things that are objectively real to everyone.

   “Once the limerence is “fulfilled”, e.g. consummation through the establishment of a successful pair-bond, then limerence isn’t limerence anymore. It’s now simply a happy marriage, mutual romantic love, passionate love, or whatever else people want to call it.”

   I was kind of arguing the same in a post to David last weekend. But his reply made me think again. What David highlighted (which is kind of obvious, but I’d overlooked it, and it is important for definition reasons) is that once love is consummated, it still goes off in many different directions. Some love becomes calm and like companionship; at the other end of the continuum, some love retains obsessive ‘limerent’ tendencies. I am not sure if this situation merits the same label (limerence) as does unconsummated infatuation. But it could still be characterised by barriers, uncertainty, push-pull dynamics, intermittent rewards etc. It is a kind of love, but an unhealthy love.

   It begs the question – is the point of difference for when something could or couldn’t be called limerence, actually not ‘consummation’, but instead whether the barriers, uncertainty and intermittent rewards are present (consummation or not)?

   Reply

   • LaR to Sammy and David says

     January 17, 2026 at 4:45 pm

     And further to my main points above:

     1. I just read Dr L’s latest post and if I interpret it right, it seems like he is leaning the same way – that we shouldn’t stop talking of a thing as ‘limerence’ just because it starts to blur with other concepts under the banner of love.

     2. I’m wondering if the presence of limerence (between the SOs, not for any third party) within a consummated relationship can be predicted to an extent by:
     a. whether either or both parties are ‘limerent tribe’;
     b. the initial attraction between them, pre consummation, had limerent characteristics (ie met the criteria for how a limerent would experience infatuation);
     c. the two parties’ attachment styles and how they mix together.

     I probably need to read Tennov for some answers!

     Reply

   • Marica to LaR and Sammy says

     January 17, 2026 at 6:44 pm

     LaR and Sammy,
     [Some LwLers seem to be labouring under the delusion that they have to date their LOs or sleep with their LOs in order to secure the much-coveted highs of limerence. ]

     “This is so very true and something that we perhaps don’t acknowledge enough in this forum. Limerents get all the excitement and pain even without going the whole nine yards. ”

     I don’t think a limerent has to sleep with an LO to get the high of limerence but sex with an LO does kick things up a notch in terms of anxiety about the LO and … I’m not sure how to word it … it opens another door emotionally/internally … I don’t mean in the relationship between the limerent and the LO but how the limerent feels about the LO and I think increases hopes/expectations for how the LO feels about them.

     Reply

     • LaR to Marcia says

       January 17, 2026 at 6:53 pm

       Marcia,

       “I don’t think a limerent has to sleep with an LO to get the high of limerence but sex with an LO does kick things up a notch”

       Oh I don’t doubt that for a second! But how often do we here a story on here about the limerent and LO having sex? I think Sammy made an important point though. That even without sex (ie – all these LEs documented here, like my one, that frustrate you because nothing ever seems to happen), there is still very much a ‘thing there’ which hugely affects at least one person, if not two, three or four.

       Reply

       • Marcia to LaR says

         January 17, 2026 at 7:21 pm

         LaR,
         “But how often do we here a story on here about the limerent and LO having sex? ”
         Did you want details? 🙂 (I’m kidding.)
         I think you wrote you’ve been with your SO for a decade and that you were limerent in the beginning. Try to remember how it felt after you hooked up for the first time … and then I don’t know where you were in the relationship. If you’d discussed if you were together and exclusive … but if you hadn’t … maybe you were unsure of what was going to happen next … would you hear from her again? Would you not? Sex makes the stakes higher.

         “I think Sammy made an important point though. That even without sex (ie – all these LEs documented here, like my one, that frustrate you because nothing ever seems to happen), there is still very much a ‘thing there’ which hugely affects at least one person, if not two, three or four.”
         It definitely does.

       • LaR to Marcia says

         January 17, 2026 at 7:33 pm

         Marcia,

         “maybe you were unsure of what was going to happen next … would you hear from her again? Would you not? Sex makes the stakes higher.”

         Ok – so it was after the second date. So no discussion or real security at that point. Hard to remember now because like you say it was a decade ago – but I think sex made the onward journey seem more secure / likely to happen in my head. It gave me more confidence to keep the relationship moving, and then to have an exclusivity chat within about a month. But I didn’t really have a limerent attraction to her – it was more a healthy attraction.

         Whereas with my ex (discussed with you before) it was limerent in the beginning and pretty much riddled with anxiety and uncertainty the whole way.

       • Marcia to LaR says

         January 17, 2026 at 7:42 pm

         LaR,

         “Ok – so it was after the second date.”
         You nasty DAWG! I didn’t think you had it in you. 🙂

         “but I think sex made the onward journey seem more secure / likely to happen in my head. It gave me more confidence to keep the relationship moving, and then to have an exclusivity chat within about a month. ”
         It’s the opposite for women. If I hook up with a guy on date two, I don’t know who else he’s dating or if I’ll hear from him again. Which ratchets up the anxiety. And couple that with it being an LO, and the situation is already screwed up to begin with … imagine if you hooked up with your LO … I’m not saying some of that anxiety isn’t delicious, because it is. But you are level-10 cray by that point.

         “But I didn’t really have a limerent attraction to her – it was more a healthy attraction.”
         Ah, ok. I got that wrong.

       • LaR to Marcia says

         January 17, 2026 at 9:11 pm

         Marcia,

         “You nasty DAWG! I didn’t think you had it in you.”
         I ran out of words 🙂

         “It’s the opposite for women.”
         Do you find that’s as much true with non-app dates as with app dates?

         “imagine if you hooked up with your LO”
         Your ladyship, you should not encourage such thinking 🙂 something about ‘smelling salts’ …

         But I know exactly what you mean. That would be just insane with how pent-up it has all got.

       • LaR to Marcia says

         January 17, 2026 at 10:34 pm

         Marcia,

         [“I ran out of words ”]
         “You mean you ran out of things to say to her ?”
         It was an attempted joke – because you often say I’m wordy and no action! In the case of SO, we quite quickly got to the action stage.

         “You didn’t worry your SO might have thought afterward: Well, we’re not doing that again ? Or that she might be dating other people?”
         I didn’t get that vibe, no. Of course I worried a bit, but I got good signals like she kept up the level of texting, and also on that date we’d arranged another. I guess the worry does nag away sometimes. I think I told you this before, but with the ex I became aware that she was ‘playing the field’ in the first month or so that we dated.

         “What would a woman do or say to cause you to get out your smelling salts? In all seriousness.”
         I might have misunderstood your joke with Snow about smelling salts. So what are you asking me here, if you were to put the question in other words?

       • Marcia to LaR says

         January 17, 2026 at 10:51 pm

         LaR,
         “It was an attempted joke – because you often say I’m wordy and no action”
         You do like to go every conceivable, possible angle and … contemplate. 🙂

         “I didn’t get that vibe, no. Of course I worried a bit, but I got good signals like she kept up the level of texting, and also on that date we’d arranged another. I guess the worry does nag away sometimes. ”
         And what if she didn’t like what you did? Or she thought it was just ok? Men don’t worry about that ?

         “So what are you asking me here, if you were to put the question in other words?”
         Smelling salts … something a guy does or says that makes you swoon. Melt.

       • LaR to Marcia says

         January 18, 2026 at 10:32 am

         “You do like to go every conceivable, possible angle and … contemplate.”

         Trying to turn limerence inside out and understand it intellectually, and find some common ground with others’ understandings, distracts me from the emotional part of it, which just feels awful, long and lonely.

         “And what if she didn’t like what you did? Or she thought it was just ok? Men don’t worry about that ?”

         But I can only do what I can do ‘to please’, with my knowledge and experience at any given time. Over time, we can learn what SO likes and get better at it. But you’re talking about a time (first sexual experiences with the partner) where we don’t know that. All I or anyone can do then, is be the best we can and hope they like it. If they’re choosing to play the field and find someone better, well, I’d lose. But then I’d question if someone who was doing that would be a great SO for me anyway. Wouldn’t you?

         “Smelling salts … something a guy does or says that makes you swoon. Melt.”

         Women don’t usually want men to melt 🙂 A woman could ‘melt’ me with kindness, for example. But that’s a bit of a different thing from what would make me want to take her to bed 🙂

       • Marcia to LaR says

         January 18, 2026 at 5:24 pm

         LaR,

         “Trying to turn limerence inside out and understand it intellectually, and find some common ground with others’ understandings, distracts me from the emotional part of it, which just feels awful, long and lonely.”
         Ah, ok. I haven’t written that much about LO lite because I guess I feel different. What’s the point of going over it? I don’t really feel that anyone has understood it (I don’t mean for that to sound bitchy). And it’s not going to change the situation, anyway. It is what it is.

         “Over time, we can learn what SO likes and get better at it.”
         Yes, to an extent. But sometimes something is just lacking. And I was trying to explain it to Snow but maybe not making sense. I don’t mean that it’s bad. Sometimes it’s actually really good. But it’s not great. If I’m making any sense.

         “But then I’d question if someone who was doing that would be a great SO for me anyway. Wouldn’t you?”
         Yes, intellectually. Doesn’t mean my ego wouldn’t be bruised and I’d be hurt.

         “Women don’t usually want men to melt 🙂 ”
         But we do. Maybe melt isn’t the right word but we want to knock you over. I’ll give you an example, though it doesn’t have to be leading to sex. I went over this guy’s house. It was clear it was going to be a hook up (the first time) and he answered the door and I followed him into the living room and went to sit down but he kept walking and he stood in another doorway and said, “Why don’t you come in here?” It was his room. That was a hot moment. He was dispensing with the usual protocol of sitting in the living room first and making awkward, b.s. conversation that feels like eternity is passing while finding obvious ways to get physically closer.

       • LaR to Marcia says

         January 18, 2026 at 8:02 pm

         “Ah, ok. I haven’t written that much about LO lite because I guess I feel different.”
         I picked up the impression from bits you wrote that the whole thing knocked you for six a bit (and I don’t judge – I get that), but not as much as with previous ‘big’ LOs. Correct me if I’m wrong, as I know you will.

         “I don’t really feel that anyone has understood it (I don’t mean for that to sound bitchy).”
         Got what? Your thing with LO lite, or the debates kicking around LwL currently where people are trying to define limerence?

         “But sometimes something is just lacking. And I was trying to explain it to Snow but maybe not making sense. I don’t mean that it’s bad. Sometimes it’s actually really good. But it’s not great.”
         I do get you. If there is a way to sustain or replicate that raw unpredictable passion of early ‘encounters’, I have never discovered it. I think it’s futile to think we can. It can be good in a different way but not the same way.

         You seem to be talking about gambling on whether to give up a 6 or 7 /10 in the hopes of finding a 10. We’ve said it many times before but the odds of everything lining up for a 10 are quite small.

         “Maybe melt isn’t the right word but we want to knock you over.”
         Your example you gave – I can see why that was hot. For me, and most men (I suspect), if we’re anywhere near the conditions for a new hook up, if we flipped that example and the woman said or did something quite overtly sexual unexpectedly, that would be hot. I suspect maybe women worry about not being too forward in that situation – but men would often like it.

       • Marcia to LaR says

         January 18, 2026 at 8:44 pm

         LaR,

         “I picked up the impression from bits you wrote that the whole thing knocked you for six a bit (and I don’t judge – I get that), but not as much as with previous ‘big’ LOs. Correct me if I’m wrong, as I know you will.”
         Yes and no. I wasn’t limerent for LO lite when I first met him like I was with my last big LO. And I wasn’t chasing him like I was did my LO. Or overly indulging in the feelings. I was into LO lite but I wasn’t going off the deep end. And I know a lot about limerence now. But once LO lite confirmed interest, that really affected me and all that happened really affected me. And I would pay money to hear from him. It still really bothers me. I’m not going to DO anything about it because I know, after the last big LO, that’s utterly futile. But the feelings are still there.

         “Your thing with LO lite”
         Yes

         “I do get you. If there is a way to sustain or replicate that raw unpredictable passion of early ‘encounters’, I have never discovered it.”
         I wasn’t talking about that. I was talking in general. The early days can lack something, too.

         “For me, and most men (I suspect), if we’re anywhere near the conditions for a new hook up, if we flipped that example and the woman said or did something quite overtly sexual unexpectedly, that would be hot. I suspect maybe women worry about not being too forward in that situation – but men would often like it.”
         I did something similar with LO-lite. (I learned from that earlier guy. :)) It wasn’t exact because of the location but close enough.

     • Marcia to LaR says

       January 17, 2026 at 9:55 pm

       LaR,

       “I ran out of words 🙂”
       You mean you ran out of things to say to her ?

       “Do you find that’s as much true with non-app dates as with app dates?”
       Yes. If you’ve only been on two dates … you don’t have enough information at that point to know what will happen. You didn’t worry your SO might have thought afterward: Well, we’re not doing that again ? Or that she might be dating other people?

       “Your ladyship, you should not encourage such thinking 🙂 something about ‘smelling salts’ …”
       What would a woman do or say to cause you to get out your smelling salts? In all seriousness.

       Reply

     • Sammy to Marcia says

       January 19, 2026 at 5:29 am

       @Marcia.

       I guess I should write you a serious (and not overly verbose) response to something? 🙂

       “I don’t think a limerent has to sleep with an LO to get the high of limerence but sex with an LO does kick things up a notch in terms of anxiety about the LO and … I’m not sure how to word it … it opens another door emotionally/internally … I don’t mean in the relationship between the limerent and the LO but how the limerent feels about the LO and I think increases hopes/expectations for how the LO feels about them.”

       I’ve thought about what you’ve said here. If you’re asking how intimate contact might influence the overall course of limerence, I’d say that it would only solidify, reinforce, and deepen the addiction – if you’re a person with female biology. In fact, if you’re a woman, you’re just digging a hole for yourself so deep that you’ll never crawl out of that hole alive. But you probably know this already – you watch “The Fairy”. 😉

       Persons with male biology (men) can compartmentalise sexuality a lot more easily than persons with female biology (women).

       Sexuality doesn’t hold the same meaning for a man that it does for a woman. A woman might think she’s getting close to the guy and winning him over. A man, due to his male biology, will simply “take advantage of any opportunities on offer” (assuming he is a man of poor character) without investing emotionally in the woman.

       Men seem to use a different pathway to falling in love than women do. Even in the best of times, sexuality isn’t that pathway.

       Guess we now know what SATC’s Carrie Bradshaw and pals (with the sole exception of Charlotte York Goldenblatt) were all doing wrong? 🙂

       Reply

       • Marcia to Sammy S says

         January 19, 2026 at 8:00 am

         Sammy,
         “I’ve thought about what you’ve said here. If you’re asking how intimate contact might influence the overall course of limerence, I’d say that it would only solidify, reinforce, and deepen the addiction –if you’re a person with female biology.”
         But why wouldn’t this also happen for a man? I mean, if he was limerent. (To be clear, I’m not disagreeing that your side is quite capable of meaningless, emotionless sex. Hint: So are women. 🙂 But if limerence or even strong feelings were involved, why wouldn’t sex have the same effect on a man as a woman?

   • Sammy to LaR says

     January 18, 2026 at 5:28 am

     @LaR.

     I’m not sure if I’m following your line of thought… 🙂

     Are you saying you think isolating limerence from other forms of love is a worthwhile thing to do? Or are you saying isolating limerence from other forms of love is probably a waste of time since the average human won’t care about said distinctions anyway?

     I think Tennov’s big breakthrough was that she discovered there is this very distinct thing called limerence – a very distinct thing that can be studied and understood and reliably broken down into components. Her second big breakthrough was noting that limerence isn’t actually “love”, but in all cultures is often called “love”. Limerence is more akin to a … motivational drive.

     I think learning about the concept of limerence is a big relief to most limerents.

     Maybe this will help you clarify your thoughts? There used to be a reader at LwL called Beth. She thought that in limerence, the limerent feels like they need the LO “on a cellular level”.

     I guess one can feel they need someone “on a cellular level” both outside of a relationship and inside of a relationship? So one can be in a relationship with LO and still limerent for LO, sure. Fenna might say the ongoing limerence is a result of the limerent not feeling safe and secure in the bond, so the nervous system of the limerent party can’t settle down over time, which is the ideal outcome of bonding.

     I think Beth got rather cross and upset and frustrated with people here at LwL because she thought people who can apparently successfully contain their limerence aren’t actually in limerence. They’re just engaging in dysfunctional relationship dynamics! 🙂

     Reply

     • LaR to Sammy says

       January 18, 2026 at 11:10 am

       Hi Sammy,

       In the case of your example, how would you define ‘contain’ in the sense that Beth meant it?

       TLDR: Limerence as more of a motivational drive state than as a form of love (or as a disorder) makes good sense to me.

       Longer version: My line of thought has veered around a bit. I’ll try and lay it out.

       Going back, I have regularly argued this point “once it’s consummated, it’s no longer limerence, but rather something else to do with relationship development”. Part of me feels the word ‘limerence’ needs to be held aside, because ‘bad limerence’ (the sort that doesn’t meet that list of 5 criteria you posted to me yesterday, so turns into later stage toxic addictive limerence), deserves its own word … or at least to be kept separate from the limerence *within* a consummated relationship.

       I kind of argued that in my initial post to David near the top of this thread.

       You said something similar yesterday – I’ll quote:

       “Once the limerence is “fulfilled”, e.g. consummation through the establishment of a successful pair-bond, then limerence isn’t limerence anymore. It’s now simply a happy marriage, mutual romantic love, passionate love, or whatever else people want to call it.”

       However, David’s reply to me and then DrL’s new post yesterday have made me think a bit differently – that actually ‘limerence’ can be present even within a ‘loving’ relationship – as you put it:

       “Fenna might say the ongoing limerence is a result of the limerent not feeling safe and secure in the bond, so the nervous system of the limerent party can’t settle down over time, which is the ideal outcome of bonding.”

       If I have inferred bits right, that’s also roughly how Tennov saw it (? – correct me if I’m wrong).

       DrL yesterday seemed to be arguing for a wide view of limerence:
       “Tennov chose to invent a new word, limerence, to separate the specific emotional state that she was describing from all the more familiar words for describing love […] Rather than repurposing an existing, ambiguous, word for her own concept, she demarcated exactly what she meant.”

       “Unfortunately, the great benefit of having a definite term can be diluted by people using it in variable ways. This is why I find arguments that limerence is just passionate love, or love addiction, or obsessive love, or a symptom of BPD, or a precursor to stalking, irritating.”

       I’m reading from what DrL says, that he doesn’t think we should try and pin down ‘limerence’ too narrowly, but instead see it as a word to describe the heightened emotional state. Following that would mean I’d need to abandon my attempt to say that limerence isn’t really a thing once two people are ‘in love’ or ‘in a relationship’.

       The great insight from DrL’s latest article is to recognise that we’re all (as limerents) grafting our (limerent tribe) worldview onto the concept – whereas half the population (non limerent tribe) can’t even recognise the concept in their lived experience.

       To summarise – I think it’s best to view limerence as an emotional state characterised by X, Y, Z (which may be the presence of certain conditions, or behaviours) – that way, there is room for it to exist outside and inside relationships. In the past I have probably been skewed by my lived experience and by what is presented on LwL – which is most often the type of barriered limerence that can’t be consummated. But that doesn’t mean that’s the only type of limerence out there.

       Reply

       • Sammy to LaR says

         January 19, 2026 at 2:39 am

         @LaR.

         I’ll do my best to answer your questions. Bear in mind I’m not trying to win an argument with you – just casually flesh out some of the ideas you bring up.

         So many people in limerence act like their limerence is a matter of life and death. That’s because their nervous systems are stressed out and they’re in “survival mode”. People whose minds and bodies are stuck in “survival mode” tend to be aggressively argumentative.

         I don’t know the particulars of Beth’s case. But I think she was struggling to contain her limerence. By “struggling to contain her limerence”, I mean she was clearly experiencing a very strong level of “craving” for her LO, and couldn’t quite understand why other readers seemed more relaxed about their LOs/limerent episodes.

         I think other (female) readers wished to argue with Beth about how pleasurable they found their limerent episodes, and Beth found that upsetting because she felt misunderstood and unsupported in her own much more stressful experience.

         The concept of “consummation” is a very confusing one, because, in Tennov’s day, marrying your LO was probably seen as synonymous with “reciprocation of the limerent passion”. Tennov’s observations about limerence are very much coloured by the prevailing social conventions of her day.

         Consummation should probably really mean: “These two people have healthily bonded with each other and so their nervous systems have had a chance to calm down.”

         Of course, people can still “crave” each other while in a relationship, even crave each other in a perfectly inoffensive way. But one would think healthy bonding would usually coincide with a waning of craving feelings and a waxing of peace-and-comfort-type feelings. Basically, getting together with one’s LO in a safe and secure way should take some of the urgency/intensity out of the experience.

         Maybe some adults can experience limerence in the context of a loving relationship. But such limerence wouldn’t be subjectively distressing to them. It would just be a special part of their connection. Maybe they’d define it as “passion” or something?

         People who experience debilitating limerence seem to experience debilitating limerence precisely because barriers are in place, and their minds have passed a certain “stress threshold”. According to Tennov, adversity intensifies limerence – but only up to a point. Too much adversity and limerences dies. (No hope).

         I re-read the Wiki on r/limerence, which David/Shiverypeaks also wrote I think. He does seem to think limerence is a genuine form of love and since it is a genuine form of love, people who experience it even in its most distressing manifestations shouldn’t be stigmatised.

         P.S. Dr. L isn’t saying we shouldn’t “pin down ‘limerence’ too narrowly”. He’s saying limerence is its own category. 🙂

       • LaR to Sammy says

         January 19, 2026 at 10:35 pm

         Sammy,

         Many thanks for the reply. It all makes sense and, of course, is accepted in its intended spirit of fleshing out debate, not anyone needing to win an argument.

         I have now dived a bit deeper into David’s Wikipedia entry to find the bit that moved my understanding to one including that limerence can persist into relationships.

         (This is the entry if anyone wants to see the full detail of the numbered references: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limerence – I added the names)

         He writes:
         “In some cases, however, just getting into a relationship by itself may still not be enough for limerence to diminish, if reciprocation is insufficient. [59, 296 – both Tennov] According to Tennov, reciprocation must be “sustained and believable”, else limerence can continue inside a relationship if the partner (LO) behaves in a nonlimerent way.[59] Limerence and uncertainty theory have also been interpreted in terms of attachment anxiety, worsening the symptoms.[297 – Carswell and Impett] [147 – Bellamy] This can be caused both by an anxious attachment style or a situation where (for example) an avoidant partner can make a normally secure person feel and act anxious [47 – Hazan & Shaver] [298 – Fraley & Shaver]”

         So by your characterisation of ‘consummation’ as *healthy* bonding, the above wouldn’t happen. But if the bonding was less healthy, then it would. David’s summary of those sources is that the probability of an ‘unhealthy consummation’ increases if a limerent gets together with a non limerent, or if either of them is an Avoidant.

         I hadn’t thought of limerence in that way too much before because, as you put it: “People who experience debilitating limerence seem to experience debilitating limerence precisely because barriers are in place”.

         I guess if we extend the meaning of barriers to include the behaviour of the other person within or outside relationships, then it kind of works!

10. Niente says

    January 18, 2026 at 4:17 am

    Thank you for your writings, David.

    Reading this I was reminded of the dual nature of Venus/Aphrodite – Venus/Aphrodite Pandemos and Venus/Aphrodite Urania from classical thought. The former, Pandemos, being of the earth and ‘earthly’ love, the latter, Urania, being of the heavens and a ‘spiritual’ love. (May be attributed to Plato but probably goes much further back).

    This form of dualism in the realm of love as personified by the goddess Venus/Aphrodite is present in all of us. Neither is better or worse, just different. While it’s not a match to limerent vs “real” love, you can see how we have been separating out the different experiences and feelings about this general concept and experience of Love for a long time. What might have changed most is the judgment in present times about which is better or worse – more or less real and therefore valid. One – Urania – by its very nature is not ‘real’, and yet it is still considered ‘true’ in its own way.

    Perhaps the real distinction between then and now is the expectation that we put on ourselves as limerents to ‘make real’ the Venus Urania form of “heavenly” love, when it’s the Venus Pandemos love that is the one that exists as manifest on terra firma…

    And, yes, wouldn’t it be great to have a love that embodied both?! I think that’s the story we are sold through all the movies, books, music, and other cultural noise… but is it truly achievable for most of us – or are we just setting ourselves up for a perpetual feeling of failure, disappointment, or ‘not enough-ness’..? It seems (unscientific assessment based on generalisations observing others) that the people who are secure and happy in love have accepted the Venus Pandemos nature of their relationships as enough, as satisfactory, even if they maintain a Venus Urania idealised love somewhere else in their psyche, or through art or religion or some other kind of mystical experience.
    Whereas limerents get stuck holding out for their Urania love interest to become their Pandemos love IRL… which is counter to its very nature – unless you’re lucky enough to find both in one person. Not impossible, but also not necessary for a loving and fulfilling relationship (I guess… 😏).

    This might also explain different cultural attitudes toward extra-marital affairs, artists’ reliance on muses, or even the Madonna-whore complex, over time and geographies. (Noting also that history in our patriarchal society has been written by men, so this is to taken into consideration. A womens’ history of the same would doubtless be quite a different read).

    I don’t know if that makes any sense to anyone else or if I’m just talking through my own issues, but thought it might be a source of interest to explore further. We humans have being doing this love stuff for a long time now, yet I’m not sure we’ve really learned much from the past. Perhaps it’s just something we have to live through ourselves as a way of learning..? “Live Love Learn”… I’m sure someone’s made that into a cushion or framed word art already 😏

    Reply

    • Sammy to Niente says

      January 18, 2026 at 10:16 am

      @Niente.

      What I find interesting is that in plenty of movies (say, from the Golden Years of Hollywood) two characters will insist they should be together, i.e. marry, because the love between them is “real”. However, this “real love” that the characters are referencing (to me anyway) always looks suspiciously like mutual limerence! 🙂

      Maybe the question one should really ask oneself is this: “Why is it so easy to mistake limerence for the ultimate and highest form of love?” Is it because limerence feels so cosmic and all-consuming and good in its early stages? Why do I suggest limerence isn’t the highest form of love? Well, it doesn’t last, to begin with. That’s a bit of a logistical problem right there. Need I say more? 😆

      I don’t think the differences between the sexes are always as massive as society likes to portray, nor as profound as individuals sometimes assume. However, limerence will definitely make one latch onto those so-called differences and magnify them way out of proportion. E.g. “Women are so impossibly fickle and so divinely mysterious!” “Men are so adorably aggressive, loud, and uncouth!” 🙂

      Reply

      • Niente says

        January 19, 2026 at 3:50 pm

        Who says that love needs to last to be of the “highest” form of love? That’s a construct you are taking as a truth.
        Love can be of an ‘elevated’ form and only last for a moment in time.
        What I’m talking of in terms of the Urania and Pandemos dualism is more about the quality and character of the experience, and where it resides in us, rather than a quantifiable duration. It’s more about the head or the mind vs the body and the physical world. Only one is “real” in the sense of material ‘reality’ although both can be “true”. We are using words in a different way.
        Those Hollywood characters, I agree, are in mutual limerence, tho I’d say they’d call it “true love”. Or, as in The Princess Bride: “wuv, twuuu wuv”… 😏
        Forever love being the only ‘true’ love is another Hollywood fiction. Or a religious one: til death do us part… Love is outside as well as inside of those boxes.

        I disagree with your last paragraph. Partly because it’s not what I was saying anyway. Try rereading what I wrote. It’s not about ‘the sexes’, it’s about culture and history (as we know it). I also disagree with your statements about limerence magnifying gendered differences. Maybe that’s the experience of some people but they’d have to be inclined to gendered stereotyping in the first place. That suggests a naivety and a lack of real world experiences with the opposite sex, which is probably a function of age or immaturity rather than limerence itself…
        Strangely you also seem to be disagreeing with yourself, or at least your previous comments in response to Marcia re the differences between people with male and female biology. So I guess you and I can both agree to disagree with you 😏

        Reply

        • Sammy to Niente says

          January 20, 2026 at 7:17 am

          @Niente.

          It is a matter of sublime indifference to me whether you agree or disagree with me on anything. As a chatbot recently told about three billion of my closest personal friends: “Disagreeing with someone is not the flex you think it is.” 😉

          I have no idea why you bring up Marcia’s name in your comment. As far as I’m concerned, Marcia and I have never agreed on anything, never disagreed on anything, and never agreed to disagree on anything. Marcia and I came to LwL around the same time, many moons ago, just about the time the ancient Egyptians were learning how to embalm domestic cats. (It really was a long time ago). 😁

          Sometimes, I joke around with Marcia because of the deep reservoir of brotherly love I feel for her. Other than that, I don’t pay any attention to her. And I certainly don’t pay any attention to anything she says. Maybe that is why my friendship with Marcia has actually stood the test of time while many of her other friendships (with both male and female LwLers) have fallen by the wayside? 😇

          I truly had no idea Marcia had fallen into the very bad habit of disagreeing with other readers at LwL. Just goes to show how little attention I pay to the social side of the blog! Marcia? Who’s Marcia? That blonde woman holding a plate of gluten-free cookies? But I mistook that individual for Trifles! (I have colour-blindness regarding women’s hair colour. Can’t tell two blondes apart). 😜

          Aside from the factors listed above, Nicente, I couldn’t engage in any kind of disagreement with you, even if I wanted to, which I don’t, because I literally have no idea what you’re talking about. You lost me at … what was it now … Verruca? Voldemort? Venezuela? 🙄

          Perhaps nobody bothered to explain basic blog etiquette to you, so I’ll quickly fill you in. Pretentiousness doesn’t go over very well here at LwL. Neither do over-inflated but paper-thin egos. Neither do bad manners. Neither do careless spelling errors. Neither does vapid ideology. Neither does verbosity. (I’d avoid Marcia if I was you. That woman is notoriously verbose! I mean, she basically writes in sentences longer than two words! Plus, don’t you think only a closeted verbose person would use a word such as “verbose”?). 🙄

          Long story short: consistently bring your authentic self to the table and always treat other readers with kindness and respect, and you’ll fit in fine. 😎

          Welcome! 🙂

        • MJ to Sammy says

          January 20, 2026 at 7:58 am

          Well stated Sammy Sams. Bravo to that comment.👏🏻

          I could not hide the smile on my face if I tried.
          😶‍🌫️😁😆

        • Niente says

          January 22, 2026 at 8:25 am

          @Sammy umm..crikey?!

          Looks like I pushed a button there. I simply pointed out that I disagreed with your reading of my initial comment (which incidentally was addressed to the author).
          And got a lot of words of “sublime indifference” in response 🤔

          Are we not allowed to disagree with each other here?

          I won’t bother explaining further myself as it’ll only provide fuel for a fire you seem to want to fan.

          I won’t engage here again either. Seems like the space has been territorialised, which is unfortunate, especially given it is Dr Tom’s space and I respect his content… But who wants to invoke *that* kind of response..?

          In any case, I am over the worst of my latest, and hopefully last, limerent episode, so I don’t “need” to spend my time here, and perhaps it’s best I don’t as it’s only a step removed from dwelling in the limerence itself.

          Best of luck to you all. Genuinely.

        • Mila says

          January 22, 2026 at 12:30 pm

          Hi Niente,

          „I won’t engage here again either. Seems like the space has been territorialised, which is unfortunate, especially given it is Dr Tom’s space and I respect his content… But who wants to invoke *that* kind of response..?“

          Hi Niente,

          couldn’t have said it better (also, my English isn’t very good).
          I‘ve been here for quite a while and got a lot of help and warm-hearted response. Now I am limerence- free, but still hang around because I got fond of the comment section since there are a lot of great people around here.
          But I think now it’s time to say goodbye to this site as there‘s random aggression floating around somehow.
          I‘m sometimes blunt too, but I think there’s a line not to be crossed, attacking posters in their personal traits instead of their opinions, for example.
          Could be that there’s some joy to be found in a tough dispute with the occasional punch under the belt, I don’t know, it was never for me, so I‘ll bow out, I guess (I also guess Sammy might pound on this opportunity to lash out or to point out our insignificance to him, no idea, and don’t care).

          Thank you, Dr. L, for all the unbelievably helpful knowledge and advice and empathy, and thank you, everyone who helped me a lot with their thoughtful responses and care, you‘ll never be forgotten in my heart!

        • Imho to Mila says

          January 22, 2026 at 1:23 pm

          Hi Mila, hope you will circle back to read follow up comments.
          I am fully with you on what you are thinking and feeling about LwL, I am just the same, although I am a bit behind you on the limerence exit path out of that pesky snail shell 😀.
          I have been engaging less here and refrained myself from coming back on some unnecessary provocative comments, as I do not want to get drawn into some discussion or debate that detracts me or brings me negative energy. I need only positive vibes right now.
          Should we let one or two persons poor etiquette, provocations and goading derail the LwL community overall though ? that is the question.
          I am sure DrL does not want this and values your views and inputs for absolute sure.

          I do not remember Dr.L bestowing a role of “LwL Character Assessor and Critic” to anyone of the community, however, Sammy feels as though he has the right to wear that crown for some reason.
          I can openly say this as he probably won’t be bothered to read my post anyway due to my poor grammar and/or not being intellectual enough.

          Please stick around Mila, at least maybe drop in from time to time. But if it’s time for you to let go I fully understand.
          I genuinely see you as a friend and many others here have been such an amazing support when I have no-one else to talk to who I could trust or understand 😘

        • Tom (Dr L) says

          January 22, 2026 at 3:49 pm

          Hi All. Thanks for your comments, but sorry that they’ve been necessary.
          You are right that the goal is to foster a welcoming environment, and while I am laissez-faire about comments generally, my one rule is don’t attack other commenters.

          Sammy: we’ve been here before. Please stop attributing motives and opinions to other posters, telling them what they think, and being so liberal with insults and provocations. They are not, evidently, being taken as playful banter.

          It’s on-the-line in the coffeehouse chatting with old comrades, but it’s definitely not welcome in the articles.

          Thanks.

        • Mila to Imho says

          January 23, 2026 at 8:02 am

          Hi Imho,

          thanks, I was touched by your post, that you still think of me, actually you were one of the main reasons I stuck around.
          Of course, since I’m very bad at letting go, I’ll check the site from time to time, I guess, I’ll check it specifically for your name.

          Apart from current lack of interest to be targeted randomly from time to time I feel that I might not be able to contribute or help very much any longer.
          Somehow limerence is a very unique state of mind, and now that I’m a bit removed from it, I notice that I start to think „sane“ thoughts and give general advice- that might sound good, but I found that it’s more helpful if someone can still completely follow a limerent‘s anguish and crazy back-and-forths.
          „Normal“ comments can be found anywhere.
          I don’t feel competent any more to comment on some stuff. Maybe it’s also my age and changing attitudes and hormones.
          I‘m certainly less inclined to get snide sidemarks or baseless allegations on an anonymous internet forum, it seems a waste of time and, as you say, unnecessary negative vibes caught.
          If I got someone wrong and came over in that way, I do apologize.
          I‘m in the lucky position to bow out without much ado since I don’t need the site any more or at the moment, but I wouldn’t want people in real need get scared of open up here because they don’t feel safe, so I wish very much for a respectful tone and attitude here.
          Thanks Dr L for intervening!

          Imho, I’ll check in and check for posts of you, Bewitched and other posters I grew fond of, but I guess I‘ll stop commenting or posting if it’s not on your posts, and I’ll try to wean myself from checking often.
          Sorry to hear you are still struggling a bit- hope other areas of life are going well!
          Sending lots of positive vibes and of course 😘😘

        • Bewitched says

          January 23, 2026 at 9:11 am

          Dear Niente, Mila, Imho,

          I just wanted to chip in with some supportive comments. I have been around here long enough to have made my peace with this occasional outburst situation. It does still hit me in the pit of the stomach to read but I think that (for me) there is much more benefit than harm on this site. I simply refuse to be put off when someone is having a bad day and acts out, or whatever. Also, I feel that it does take all sorts and I enjoy the humourous prose between friends, teasing, etc. this helps me to ignore remarks that are clearly over the line (per Dr L’s boundaries above). Sometimes I do need to take a small break as its disconcerting, I agree.

          @Niente, please take it from an old-timer, not to be put off. You sound as though you are still recently suffering quite a lot from limerence (from your final remarks). Perhaps you can still benefit from the crowd and just cherry pick who to engage with? Coffeehouse posts are a bit more of a free-for-all, whereas the subject blogs themselves and comments underneath are more specific and helpful, perhaps. The writing in the blogs themselves really really (really) helped me when I was at my worst. So please, please, do not feel the need to leave unless its best. Don’t be alone in all of this. Some of us have no-one in real life who understands or can’t confide – I haven’t told anyone about limerence so this site acts as my sanity check.

          Also, we are a bit like squabbling kids on this site, at times. Mostly what I see is that the posters are extremely sensitive and that’s something I think all (?) of the posters share. Some of the advice on here recently has been really impressive. If I can say, I am so impressed at some of the advice and encouragement that Marcia has given to MJ, for instance, and the interactions between Adam and everyone has been so painful and raw, at times. I think it’s very brave to put this online and very helpful to read (with responses), if you’re going though something similar.

          @Mila and Imho – you are particularly close to my heart because we joined around the same time and maybe we are a bit alike. We certainly all had similar experiences of a work-related LE while partnered ourselves. But I am definitely going to keep checking-in and I hope to see you both here and there. No pressure – 😘😘😘

        • Lost in Space to Mila says

          January 23, 2026 at 10:13 am

          Hi Mila,

          I just happened to poke my head in here tonight and saw your comments 😢. If this really is farewell, then I just want to tell you that I’ve really enjoyed getting to chat with you and to know you a bit, and you’ve meant a lot to me. I’ve felt understood by you and supported by you and cared about by you, and I really appreciate you. You’ve shown me a lot of kindness, and also poked at me sometimes just enough to make me think about things differently without making me feel attacked. It’s been really nice to get to watch you work through your own limerence and come out in a good place on the other side, and I’m happy for you.

          So Mila, I hope that everything to come brings you peace and happiness and adventure and growth and joy, and I’ll always remember you warmly as a true friend and a genuinely good person. Perhaps our paths will cross again somehow, and I hope they do, but regardless, thank you for being a friend to me and a kindred spirit 😘❤️

        • LaR to Mila says

          January 23, 2026 at 4:50 pm

          Mila,

          You’ve been a really helpful presence around here for such a long time. I have benefited so much from your support, camaraderie and knowledge.

          Thank you for caring about my LE situation enough to often reach out and ask me how it’s going, and for probing me in a way that was challenging but kind. I’ve said it before but your advice was among the most helpful, even *the* most helpful as I weathered the very worst bit of the storm. It has been such a sullkrt to have you and others “up the road” from me, to keep me focused on the next steps to freedom even when they’ve felt elusive. You have also very clearly supported lots of others and are very valued here.

          I hope this isn’t a final final goodbye (how on earth am I going to get that pint of Guinness with you now? Who else cares enough about waggling?). But I also get that there’s benefit for all of us in stepping away increasingly from thinking about limerence, and that LwL can fuel that. Do what’s right for you.

          As for the comments about the need for this to be a supportive community, the wonderful Imho and Bewitched have already said it so
          well, I shan’t repeat all that. I hope newer posters (like you Niente) can see that side of LwL too. For those like me with *no* real life outlet to discuss my LE with, this place has been a lifeline at times.

          Mila, health and happiness to you and yours 😘

        • LaR typo mystery 🕵‍♂️ says

          January 23, 2026 at 4:53 pm

          Ps – I have no idea what a sullkrt is. It sounds like fun

          You can fill in the blank.

        • Mila to Bewitched says

          January 23, 2026 at 8:35 pm

          Hi Bewitched,

          thanks for your kind words, you‘ve been a big help all the time, and I still imagine us three sitting down for a cosy coffee and talk, it would be so lovely…
          As I said to Imho , I’m bad at letting go completely and will check in from time to time, and definitely look out for your posts and reply to posts of people I know if I feel I really have got something to say. I just think I‘ll stop to post actively and try to check the site less regularly.
          I hope you are out of your woods and weeds for good and are able to work with your XLO without further emotional confusion or resentment.
          I wish you all the best, dear Bewitched!😘

        • Mila to Lost in Space says

          January 23, 2026 at 8:50 pm

          Hi Lost in Space,

          thank you for your warm post, you managed as always to put your words in the exact order to touch my heart.
          I still have your post from back in May copied in my notes app and I have reread it many times during my way out of limerence, because you hit the nail on the head with such wise and beautiful words. I was quite knocked over by the ability of a stranger to explain to me the true nature of my grief and situation better than I could see it myself at the moment.
          I‘ll be eternally grateful for that, and I‘ll remember you as some kind of helping angel or spirit whispering the right words at the right time and flying away again. Thank you for having been that guardian angel and a true friend!

          I really care for you and your story, which means also for your SO and LO, although it makes me very anxious and sometimes a bit angry at you, and that’s one of the reasons I’ll keep checking, especially in a few months when your LO might leave work. So if you‘ll post then, maybe I’ll catch it, but cannot guarantee.

          „Perhaps our paths will cross again somehow, and I hope they do“
          The thing is, if our paths will cross again elsewhere, we won’t know!
          Or do you think we would?
          Probably only if it’s in writing and I’ll recognize our fluent style or you‘ll recognize my bad grammar;)
          All the best and lots of love and good wishes for you!😘

        • Mila to LaR says

          January 23, 2026 at 9:01 pm

          Hi LaR,

          thanks to you too for your warm words and also for your helpful words and comments, and walking by my side in this limerent-for-a-friend- dilemma.
          It sure would be nice to waggle a Guinness or two with you!
          As I said to the others, I probably won’t be able to restrain myself from checking in but think my days of posting actively should be over. I do hope this was the last LE for me, and I feel more and more reluctant to make myself visible here.
          But you have to know that you are still my best horse in the race and I count on you to keep your friendship unblemished but without limerence!
          Me, I still cannot abide too much contact with my friend, and we have much less of it. I guess we‘ll always be in touch, but not any more as very good friends.
          So, I guess I‘ll look out for your story too, and also for news of the welder who‘s unattended and might be up to who knows what.

        • Mila to LaR p.s. says

          January 23, 2026 at 9:05 pm

          Also, I guess you wanted to write „support“, but a sullkrt is much more fun, as everyone knows, and I do wish we could have some with our Guinness.😘

        • Serial says

          January 23, 2026 at 9:09 pm

          I get sad when people argue here or feel they have to leave for any reason other than being over limerence. 🙁 There’s enough going on in the world right now that is distressing. This has been one place where—I may not post a lot, and lately I haven’t had time to read every day, but I read all the time to see how people are doing and laugh at the jokes. We’re just people who care about other people even when we’re not supposed to. 🙂 It’s comforting to step away from the madness outside for a bit.

        • Imho to Mila says

          January 23, 2026 at 9:27 pm

          Mila,
          Thanks for your kind words. I really wish we had somehow got together actually over drinks. The warm words of others to you, says all you need to know. Mostly, I think it’s your genuine interest and investment in others limerent journeys to will them in the best direction.
          So to satisfy your curiosity on my case, the answer is “Yes, I did” which lifted me out of indecision, with a feel-good calm outcome so far. Let’s see. Will keep you posted 😘

        • Lost in Space to Mila says

          January 24, 2026 at 1:26 am

          Aww Mila, you got me a little teary eyed reading that 🥹 You’ve always had the ability to touch my heart as well…

          That line about me “whispering the right words at the right time and then flying away again” (by the way your English is often beautiful, even if somewhat unconventional 😘) made me think about that adage about how some people are friends for a season, others are friends for a reason, and a very few are friends for a lifetime. Perhaps that’s a thought I need to apply to my LO, that we were never meant to be friends for a lifetime, but rather that we came into each others’ lives for a season and for a reason and that’s ok too and it doesn’t have to be forever to be meaningful and special and real.

          And so Mila, perhaps you and I were also meant to be friends for a season and for a reason and that’s ok too… but at the same time I also detest goodbyes and much prefer see you laters, so I’ll just say that actually it shouldn’t be too hard to keep in touch on here in the future – there’s only one coffee shop per month, so if we both agree that if we ever want to drop a message for the other one we’ll do it in a coffee shop, then it’ll be a simple matter of opening a few coffee shops and hitting control-F and searching the other’s name (much better than having to search every post spanning several months). Deal?

          So, with that little issue straightened out, I feel comfortable to say see you later my friend 😊

          With love,
          Lost in Space ❤️

        • Mila to Imho says

          January 24, 2026 at 2:45 pm

          Hi imho,

          I’m very glad to hear that you feel calm after the decision, I would have done the same (now I can say it..) since in certain cases I’m not sure if radical NC is the most helpful path to freedom. Sometimes the mind stops fretting about the same itch again and again when there’s „normal“ behavior and contact and not dramatic „won’t ever speak to LO again“.

          Paradoxically, since I decided not to be active here any more, I’m more active than ever😅, but this flurry will die down, but I’ll definitely look out for posts of you in the future!
          😘😘

        • Mila to Lost in Space says

          January 24, 2026 at 2:52 pm

          Hi Lost in Space,

          Deal! 🤝
          Meanwhile, I wish you a happy healthy time, and I am looking forward to having coffee with you some time in the future!
          ❤️😘

        • Serial to Lost In Space says

          January 25, 2026 at 2:02 am

          Just wanted to check in with you after today’s tragedy….I know you’re in healthcare and the shooting victim was in healthcare and I want to make sure it wasn’t you.

        • Serial to LIS says

          January 25, 2026 at 4:20 am

          Okay, more descriptions of him have come out and I’m sure it’s not you….

11. Sammy to LaR says

    January 20, 2026 at 4:13 am

    @LaR.

    My response to you wasn’t meant to “flesh out debate”. That’s the whole point I was making. Don’t see our interactions in terms of debate, even though you may want to clarify certain things in your own mind for your own peace of mind. See our interactions in terms of conversation – open, elegant, focused but also tangential, an exquisite rhythmic dance between two equal parties. 🙂

    One of the biggest social problems straight men have, much to the chagrin of women, is they don’t understand the art of conversation. In speaking, we are contemplating together this beautiful live animal called limerence. We are not fighting over who owns the carcass. 😉

    If you want my own personal understanding of the term “limerence”, I see limerence as a very precise term referring to a very precise thing. But I ALSO simultaneously see limerence as an umbrella term that includes, say, both bliss-producing limerence and destructive limerence, both fruitful limerence and fruitless limerence.

    Like David, I don’t think limerence is something that should be defined by its outcome, nor by whether or not it causes someone distress. Like David, I also agree that limerence simply is. It’s a state on its own. I don’t subscribe to the Snow school of thought: “Only bliss-producing limerence is limerence”. Nor do I subscribe to the Mila school of thought: “Only destructive limerence is limerence.”

    Although they’re espousing different views, Snow and Mila are both making the same rookie mistake of defining limerence solely in terms of its (real and/or desired) outcome. In espousing the views that they do, Snow is behaving like an overzealous bridesmaid while Mila is behaving like an inept therapist. 🙂

    I sometimes read the extended comments David makes on r/limerence – comments derived from his extensive forays into love research. In a past comment, he observed that limerence is something that seemed to evolve to make one throw oneself onto a person, have an oops baby, and hang around until that baby is old enough to walk on its own. Or, at least, that’s how limerence would play out in a society that allowed such things to play out.

    As you can well imagine, David’s explanation of limerence, while potentially the most accurate one we have, makes me feel terribly sad. Why does it make me feel sad? Well, David’s explanation of “limerence in terms of pure evolution” seems to preclude the possibility of healthy long-term bonding ever occurring between limerent and LO. It seems like the couple is doomed to break up as soon as the addictive spell wears off, and the addictive spell doesn’t naturally soften over time into affectional bonding – the kind of affectional bonding all social life requires.

    Reply

12. Sammy to Marcia says

    January 20, 2026 at 4:32 am

    @Marcia.

    I would respond to the most recent comment you left me. However, something tells me it’s probably inappropriate, or intentionally disagreeable in a lovely feminine way, or both inappropriate and intentionally disagreeable in a lovely feminine way at the same time. And I don’t want to give Dr. L cause to be upset with us. Haven’t we derailed enough comment sections already? 🙂

    Instead, let me share an online exchange with you that I definitely think you (and other like-minded readers) will enjoy. Crappy Childhood Fairy has a YouTube video on what attracts good men and what supposedly makes good men run…

    Sammy’s translation of a response left by apparently panic-stricken heterosexual woman viewer: “Yes … but, but, but, but … how many good men are there actually left out there?”

    The Fairy (her actual verbatim response): “You only need one.”

    I thought Anna Runkle’s response was rather cute. Maybe they should have hired her to write dialogue for SATC? 😜

    Reply