One of the defining features of limerence is the tendency to idealise your limerent object. You see them as Special with a capital S, different from ordinary people, extraordinary in their attractiveness, uncanny in their magnetic appeal.
Limerent idealisation is a complex thing, though. It isn’t that the limerent is completely blind to the flaws of their LO, it’s just that those flaws somehow don’t matter. LO could be callous, self-centred, rude to shop workers, unhygenic, promiscuous, unreliable, dishonest, or crude – but those flaws get sort of mentally erased from your internal picture of them, or perhaps overpowered by the euphoria of excitement about how they make you feel. It’s as though the light that they shine with is so bright you can’t really see into the shadows clearly, even though you know they are there lurking in the background.
Perhaps a better term for this would be “flaw minimisation” or “optimisation”. You know the flaws exist, but for some mysterious reason they don’t emotionally register. If there is blindness, it’s willful blindness.

The neuroscience underlying this phenomenon is hard to understand. It seems as though cognition (i.e. the ability to perceive and process the sensory evidence of their flaws) does not trigger the usual emotional response, as though the communication between your executive and your emotional centre is muted or drowned out by the clamour of reward seeking. But things can get even murkier.
The lure of the shadow
What if the flaws that we willfully ignore can get tangled up in the subconscious and actually make the LO more attractive? What if the flaws… titillate?
We all know bad boys are bad news, but they are also exciting. We also know that bad girls are trouble, but it’s intoxicating trouble.
The psychoanalysts would have a field day with this – why transgression can be attractive, why we are drawn to risk, why the forbidden fruit is more appealing. Libido is an enigma. Why can we become limerent for someone who apparently contravenes our moral or philosophical principles? Why do opposites attract? Are we insincere in our beliefs, or just perversely drawn to the taboo?
Whenever I start to ponder these ideas, I always think of a scene in the film “You’ve Got Mail”. You might not think it’s the most obvious source of philosophical enlightenment, but that’s only because you underestimate the skillset of Nora Ephron.
The set up for the scene is that two characters, Kathleen and Frank, have been a couple for some time and have settled into a complacent routine. Frank is a left-wing journalist with socialist political views; Kathleen is apolitical, and runs a bookshop. For the sake of the plot, the characters have to separate, but it also has to play out amicably, so as to not lose our sympathies as viewers. Here is how the breakup happens:
I’ve always liked that exchange:
Kathleen: “Is she a Republican?”
Frank: “I… can’t help myself”
…partly because Greg Kinnear’s delivery is great, but also because it highlights the gulf between who we think we should like, and who we are actually drawn to.
(Spoiler: Against all expectations, would you believe, Meg Ryan’s character actually ends up with Tom Hanks’s character!)
So, we have a curious kind of nested phenomenon – at one level we minimise LO’s flaws, but at another level, maybe those flaws are part of what causes the glimmer in us? Maybe, instead of idealising away the poor character of our LO, we are actually falsifying our own preferences – lying to ourselves about what we really want at a subconscious level?
The long term consequences
Whether you are glossing over irritants or kidding yourself about what you are really attracted to can have profound effects on how a limerent relationship plays out. It’s important to become aware of why you are minimising LO’s faults: are you doing it to maintain a falsely optimistic opinion of them, or are you doing it to shroud hidden urges in yourself?
If the issue is one of an overenthusiastic public relations programme, then eventually you’ll start to admit that LO isn’t all that attractive after all. Once the limerent fog breaks, you’ll become irritated by their eccentricities and disagreeable habits, and find your patience tested. Limerents in that position then have to make some decisions about whether they want to compromise or negotiate, and do the usual weighing of costs and benefits to whether the relationship on balance is worth persevering with.

In contrast, if you are actually attracted to people who you think you shouldn’t be attracted to, then the problem becomes more serious. Even once the limerence fog fades, you will still be attracted to those flaws. You may intellectually know that you are better off without them, but your glimmery subconscious still responds to their dark cues. Instead of trying to live with their annoying habits, you end up in a state of weird dissonance where you are subconsciously snared, but trying to break away from the connection.
You are trying to argue yourself into leaving someone unhealthy that tantalises you, rather than arguing yourself into sticking with someone you can finally see clearly.
To return to You’ve Got Mail: Frank’s relationship with Kathleen fell apart because of trivial but ultimately decisive differences in temperament that did not carry the initial excitement into long-term love. In contrast, his dark attraction to the Republican TV host threatens future limerence fireworks…

An interesting topic, for sure. There’s this part on Hermann Hesse’s Steppenwolf where the protagonist, Harry Haller, mulls about his tendency to live in clean, orderly, middle class houses despite how much he supposedly hates the levity of the bourgeoisie.
I’ve always identified a lot with that passage. I grew up in a very conservative, very middle class household, who held what we could call “bourgeoisie values” in very high regard. I didn’t exactly rebel against it, but I’ve certainly drifted away from that lifestyle: I’m vulgar, I swear a lot, and I had friends jokingly call my fashion sense as “hobo-like”. I’m an atheist, and while I consider myself a rather apolitical person, I’ve always felt some affinity for leftist ideas.
Yet all my LOs have been quiet, demure, and conservative women (not necessarily on the political sense, although a couple of them certainly are). Whenever I was with them my brain kept telling me “You two are like oil and water, even if by some miracle you end up together, that relationship is doomed to fail”. And then I brushed off those concerns, saying “Meh, we’ll manage to work something out”. I remember reading (on a comment on this blog) about how our parents’ behavior during our childhood sets subconscious examples in our minds about what ideal masculinity and femininity looks like, and that we always tend to look for partners that we feel are of similar socioeconomic status as us. There’s probably some truth to that.
“The love of this atmosphere comes, no doubt, from the days of my childhood, and a secret yearning I have for something homelike drives me, though with little hope, to follow the same old stupid road.”
Benjamin,
“I remember reading (on a comment on this blog) about how our parents’ behavior during our childhood sets subconscious examples in our minds about what ideal masculinity and femininity looks like … ”
I’m wondering about that, as I have made every attempt to live differently from my parents, who were rigid, structured, middle class and looked like robots to me, going to the same job every day, day in and day out, year after year, eating dinner at the same time, watching the same tv shows, whose idea of taking a chance was going to a different restaurant … whereas I have never been married, never wanted kids, never stayed at a job more than a few years, moved around all over the country and can fit everything I own of importance in my car. I was recently contacted by a guy I spent some time with about a year ago. I wasn’t limerent for him but definitely had a crush on him. And he lives in the same town he grew up in, has worked for the same company for 10+ years, is one of the people at work who’s in the in crowd and has been promoted. He’s completely mired in the system. (And my last LO is very much like him.) Why did I like this guy? Why did he like me? I’m looking for Marlon Brando, not Ward Cleaver. 🙂
I took the other life path Marcia, and while I am happy with it, there will always be a big part of me that hankers after your lifestyle. There is definitely something to be said for eschewing the standard western risk-avoidant, restrictive, materialistic way of life and “following your bliss” instead. Sigh.
Song of the Day: “The Pretender” – Jackson Brown (1976)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ROK1-VvOQ0
Marcia,
Do have a concept of a “forever person?” Where are you looking for Marlon Brando and what would you do if you found him? It’s not that a person who matches your lifestyle doesn’t exist but I think they’d be rare. I think that Tinder profile would be pretty narrow.
Which Marlon Brando are you looking for? The “Wild One” Brando? The “Godfather” Brando? The “Last Tango In Paris” Brando? The “Streetcar Named Desire” Brando? Or, the “Apocalypse Now” Brando? You have a lot to choose from.
“Female seeks Male who’s…with minimal baggage, financially independent or having portable credentials, who’s willing to forego deep attachment with location and new people, and willing to relocate just because. Must look good in motorcycle jacket”
I have a cousin who sounds a lot like you. The kicker in her case was she inherited a lot of money from a distant relative which gives her a lot of flexibility. I like her. My 24yr old daughter sees her as a role model. My wife sees her as a threat to good order and discipline.
I honestly don’t know how someone can live their entire life within 25 miles of where they grew up but I know a lot of people who do. Some of them are very well-travelled and cosmopolitan but they always come back. Others are pretty provincial and seldom stray. I don’t understand the strength of the ties they have but I don’t have to.
Hi Scharnhorst,
“Do have a concept of a “forever person?” ”
Well, it sounds vague, but someone I’m really turned on by and someone I respect as a man. I’m not so much looking for a person who wants to move around a lot as someone with a strong sense of self (he must have a friend or two and a hobby or two that has nothing to do with me; I do not want to be someone’s social secretary), a feeling of FU to conventionality and his employer (at least when he’s not at work!). We all have to drink the Kool-Aid to make a living, but why does everyone else my age seem to ENJOY it? 🙂
“Where are you looking for Marlon Brando and what would you do if you found him? ”
I don’t think he exists. If he does, he’s 25! The Wild Ones. Not for the way he looks. Just his attitude.
“Female seeks Male who’s…with minimal baggage, financially independent or having portable credentials, who’s willing to forego deep attachment with location and new people, and willing to relocate just because. Must look good in motorcycle jacket”
That’s funny. Made me laugh.
“I have a cousin who sounds a lot like you. The kicker in her case was she inherited a lot of money from a distant relative which gives her a lot of flexibility.”
Well, I don’t have much money. That is the trade-off for following your bliss, as Allie says. It’s not blissful. I don’t necessarily recommend this lifestyle. I just start to feel trapped after about 6 months at any job. There is nothing I want to do every day, all day, day in and day out. And on top of that, be told what to do all day, and worse of all, spew the company corporate gobbledygook. That is the worst part of all. I don’t give two sh*** about the company mission. (I mean: Does the company care about me?). I just want a paycheck. Now, the people who are good at navigating all that make at least 3 times what I do.
“My wife sees her as a threat to good order and discipline.”
Exactly. 🙂
“I honestly don’t know how someone can live their entire life within 25 miles of where they grew up ”
You just described my last LO. Lives in the same small town he grew up in, just miles from his extended family. Married his high school sweetheart. Has worked for the same company for decades. I could never figure out why he showed the slightest interest in me. Walking around with him at work was like being with the mayor. Everyone knew him, and being well-liked was very important to him.
Marcia,
This one’s for you. It sounds like you’d make the right guy a delightful companion. But, he’s probably not going to be an “off the rack” kind of guy.
“We’ll Sing In The Sunshine” – Gale Garnett (1964)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xOOFDQOqDg
“someone I respect as a man… strong sense of self (he must have a friend or two and a hobby or two that has nothing to do with me; I do not want to be someone’s social secretary), a feeling of FU to conventionality”
Mmm…yes I like the sound of that Marcia. Someone able to look after themselves perfectly well without me, and thinks for themselves rather than follows the crowd. My SO is like this. I respect my LO greatly but he is very much straight and conventional. I wonder if I am excited by the thought of him behaving out of character just for me.
Scharnhorst,
“We’ll Sing In The Sunshine” – Gale Garnett (1964)
I like the song. Thank you. But a YEAR? A whole YEAR? That sounds long-term. 🙂
It’s not that I’m opposed to staying someplace. There just is never any compelling reason to. And moving to a new town is like going to a new hair stylist … I always imagine that this is going to be the hair stylist who will finally understand my hair, who will give me the haircut to end all haircuts and transform me into the woman I’m meant to be. 🙂 … Of course, there is no such hair stylist, as there is no such town. But one can dream.
Allie,
“I wonder if I am excited by the thought of him behaving out of character just for me.”
I definitely had fantasies that my last LO was dying for the right person to show up and kick him over the edge. He was straight and conventional. That I could be that person. But I think in my situation it was all projection. I don’t think he wanted any of that and didn’t have it in him. I don’t think he even thought about stuff like that.
“But a YEAR? A whole YEAR? That sounds long-term. 🙂”
Fine, I can work with that.
“I will never love you
The thought of love’s too bleak
But though I’ll never love you
I’ll stay with you one week…
And when our week has ended
And I have gone away…”
Better?
Scharnhorst,
Maybe 3 months? A week seems a bit cheap. 🙂
“Maybe 3 months? A week seems a bit cheap. 🙂”
Some people are just high maintenance…:)
You do realize there are no words that rhyme with “month.” Thank heaven you didn’t say seven months. No rhymes for seven, either.
“I will never love you
The months we’ll share are three
But though I’ll never love you
You’ll have some fun with me…”
Scharnhorst,
Well seven and heaven.
I don’t have enough tricks to last seven months. 🙂
Benjamin,
Have you read https://livingwithlimerence.com/dealing-with-conflicting-desires/?
There’s a discussion of Hesse there. My aunt wrote her Master’s Thesis on Hesse although she focused on “Siddhartha.”
Thanks, Scharn. Lots of food for thought in there.
I too read Beneath the Wheel when I was around 17. Had lots of presure from my own studies back then, so I found it very relatable.
It’s been years since I read Steppenwolf, so I don’t remember much of it. But that little part about the araucaria and the spotless parquet floor always resonated with me.
“LO could be callous, self-centred…promiscuous, unreliable, dishonest, or crude”
Yes, he certainly was. Also intelligent, engaging and humorous.
I had been in a sexless marriage for years and I was looking for the opposite of my future ex.
I wanted sex and wanted to feel desired. LO did those things and limerence happened after uncertainty and barriers.
LO isn’t a decent person. I found this out over time. I was in a rush to feel again.
As an article on this site advises, be careful who you give yourself to. An immediate connection should not be heavily relied upon. Time and knowledge of a person is invaluable to our overall well-being.
I can relate with this Beth. I agree – never let your emotions rule, head and heart must concur before you really let someone in.
My only bad relationship started on the rebound after my first and only experience of true heartbreak. I learned a never-again-ignored life lesson from that.
It took over three years to see who my ex truly was. Before then he had every quality I was looking for in a partner. In the end he as the opposite and became who he said he would protect me from. I’m trying to figure out how to even trust my own judgement on potential partners in the future.
Have you read: https://livingwithlimerence.com/narcissist-los/
The answer to that starts with what attracted you to him in the first place. Was this a one-off event or a pattern? Anybody can be taken in by a Cluster B once. Not all of them are over the top “too good to be true” types. The more they tilt toward Anti-social Personality Disorder (sociopaths), the more subtle they’re likely to be and the better they are at identifying and exploiting your vulnerabilities. Those kind do go after their victims for sport. Borderline waifs can appear totally benign but can still suck you dry.
If you do enough research, you can usually get some idea of what was going on. But, the root causes can go back a long way and to address those, you probably need a pro.
My exgf, LO #2, had an affinity for cheaters. The idea that all men were cheaters defined her world view and her relationships confirmed it. I was the outlier. LO #4 had an affinity for Narcs. She never met a Narc that she didn’t try to rehabilitate. She said her father was a Narc and her mother was a Borderline. LO #4 is a PsyD and can make that call.
As long-term romantic partners, those women were projects. I spent 5 years with LO #2. I knew from the beginning that she had trust issues. I thought I could turn her but I was wrong. I’m married and never got past an EA with LO #4.
I know LO #2 remarried recently. I have no idea what LO #4’s relationship status is. I have no idea if either of them changed for the better. If they didn’t do any serious work, the odds are that they didn’t and those issues will continue to influence their current relationships. Maybe fatally, maybe not.
It was how my wife didn’t make me feel that made me realize that she wasn’t like my exgf.
LE,
You ever think you were a one-off for somebody else? I wonder if I ever was. Like: She’s not my usual type but my usual type is trauma, so I’ll try her. I did that in college. Decided I should be dating a nice guy. But I swung way too far, a complete 360, from my usual situation. He was too nice.
“You ever think you were a one-off for somebody else?”
Maybe, probably not. I can count the number of “significant women” in my life on two hands with fingers left over and most of those never left the gate as a relationship. As a dismissive-avoidant, suitable candidates scared the living crap out of me and were to be summarily dismissed.
I’m pretty sure I was an outlier for LO #2. 3 of her prior relationships involved her either cheating with a married man or being cheated on. She said that my immediate successor cheated on her. There’s some circumstantial evidence that she poached her roommate’s BF (LO #2’s first husband.)
After we broke up and LO #2 told me that my successor was cheating on her I told her that I never cheated on her.
She said, “I know. I don’t think you’re capable of it.”
I’d like to think that her comment was a tribute to my integrity but it could have been her subtle way of saying that I didn’t have the balls for it.
Aside for that, the only other possible candidate was the love-bombing SIL of a coworker that I spent a glorious week with but was another unsuitable candidate for an LTR. We only spent one week together and the whole acquaintance lasted less than 3 months.
DrL said, “There is nothing so alluring as a damaged soul you’re sure you can fix.” – https://livingwithlimerence.com/the-glimmer-givers/
Now, when I see a damaged soul, I just grab some popcorn, pull up a chair, and watch the train wreck.
I didn’t mean he was significant. Just something to try. Like now I’m thinking I maybe should try a younger dude. If I can attract them. Why not? Your people do it all the time. 🙂 Short-term, though. Last short-timer was 8 years younger, but that’s not really a significant age difference.
This is a topic near and dear to my heart. LO #1 has a couple of minor flaws (hey, no one’s perfect). I could see them. But one of the things that was interesting was that they made her seem more attainable and less out of my league. Reminding ourselves about LO’s flaws is supposed to help us get over our LOs, but in my case it had the opposite effect.
LO #2 is a little different. Some of her “flaws” are kind of a turn-on in a way. She is a decent human being, no question about that, but she is just a little bit of a “bad girl” in some ways too. For one thing, she is a smoker. I am not a fan of smoking at all and several people in my family died of lung cancer, but there is a certain appeal that some women (including LO #2) have when they smoke. I cannot explain it, but I looked it up and I read an article that said smoking kind of adds to a woman’s “bad girl” image to a certain extent and marks her as being a bit non-conformist and rebellious. All things being equal, I would prefer that she quits (for her sake and because I just don’t like secondhand smoke), but there is a certain appeal about it that I can’t entirely explain. Perhaps because it’s so different from me? Also, she was recently engaging in some fairly promiscuous behaviour. In some ways, I was jealous, but I recognize that I don’t have a leg to stand on in objecting to anything she does (and I do think she should be dating anyway), and on some level it was kind of a turn-on because it shows she obviously wants and enjoys sex.
That’s a good thought, VL. Another way that idealisation of flaws can influence limerence.
You see the flaw intellectually, but react emotionally with some relief/happiness as it makes them less universally attractive (meaning that other people desire them less, which makes your connection even more special).
“You see the flaw intellectually, but react emotionally with some relief/happiness as it makes them less universally attractive (meaning that other people desire them less, which makes your connection even more special).”
My LOs were the opposite. I assumed that because I found them so overwhelmingly appealing, a lot of other women did, too. In my mind, all they had to do was walk into a room and point at someone. I think that feeling ratcheted up the jealous, which ratcheted up the uncertainty. My last LO was very flirtatious, so I have no doubt he had other women on the hook. I had one LO in college, and I met him through a friendly acquaintance who was also sweating him.
I think the smoking example is a really good illustration of the (slightly slippery) point I was trying to capture in the post.
For some people, if the LO smokes it is a flaw to be glossed over, because they don’t like the smell, secondhand smoke, etc. If they end up in a relationship, it will be an irritant (figuratively and literally).
For others, the smoking is part of the subconscious cues that cause the glimmer. If they end up in a relationship, the smoking will be a complex mix of attractor and irritant.
Thanks Dr. L. “Flaws” in LOs can certainly work differently, depending on the limerent and the LO. What can seem like a flaw in one person is charming in another, and flaws can help bring people down to earth in some ways when they make us realize they might make them more attainable and less out of our league. I also appreciate the point about liking someone who doesn’t necessarily have universal appeal.
A very good post here Dr. L. I think it’s been the most troublesome aspect of limerence for me in the past. My LOs are generally available but inappropriate, so there’s been a couple of occasions where I’ve been in an LE, which becomes a PA and moves towards something more established…
All that while I’ve played the typical limerent role… understanding of ‘issues’ (there’s always issues), forgiving of flakiness or unreliability, minimization of incompatible lifestyle etc. I basically appear like somebody who is putting a lot of energy in… and so LO proposes going further and I keenly agree…
-then suddenly the light dims, and the shadows lengthen… idiosyncrasies become acts of stupidity, or vanity, or arrogance. Unpredictability and ‘being a free spirit’ becomes unreliability, laced with growing frustration… and worst, my ‘we are star crossed lovers fighting to make something truly epic happen between us…’ becomes ‘…what the f*ck have I done? This is never going to work and I don’t want this…’
Now I’m sure the reality is that LO is neither batman nor the penguin but the change is my attitude happens at dizzying pace, and for my part has triggered some pretty poor behaviour.
It is not OK to pursue somebody fervently and then not just lose interest, but end things quickly in a panic a couple of weeks after you ‘get together’. Especially after presenting as somebody determined to make things work. The character of the LO is not really relevant, though in my case I do go for some who don’t behave brilliantly themselves. But after months of being the ‘I’m ok with your quirks, I think you’re great, imagine us… etc.’ To… ‘I need to get out of this. Right now’.
What I’m saying is… from the outside and based on my behaviour I must look like a right twat sometimes, and somebody who can behave with a very selfish approach to other people.
…and of course… then there’s the part where the limerence for ex-LO kicks back in after I’ve run for the hills.
…I liked this article because it acknowledges the harm idealisation does. Even that part of the limerent experience can be deeply hurtful if you convince somebody else you think they’re amazing, unique etc… until you don’t…
It may appear like gameplaying… but I really did feel these obsessively strong emotions… at the time… and despite the cues and signals which I ignored and then flagged up the moment I was free of the glimmer… and then equally impulsively breaking things off.
Thanks for sharing that, Thomas. It helps show the gulf between internal and external experiences.
From the outside it looks like you were all about the pursuit – not bothered by any flaws in your determination to seal the deal. Once you “get what you want,” you lose interest and dump them.
But inside, you sincerely have those swings of emotions – the initial pull of attraction that overrides any objections, followed by an equally strong counter-reaction once you are forced to confront the problems.
In a way, your subconscious is playing both you and LO.
Another good reason to strive for purposeful living…
Benjamin wrote…
‘Whenever I was with them my brain kept telling me “You two are like oil and water, even if by some miracle you end up together, that relationship is doomed to fail”. And then I brushed off those concerns, saying “Meh, we’ll manage to work something out”.’
Exactly.
Even now my LO is ghosting me I have the feeling it’ll work out while knowing objectively how vanishingly small the chance of that is…
…and knowing that were the opportunity to arise to take up active pursuit again I probably would.
This article has come at an interesting time. I had a strange experience on the train today – I saw a young man who made me feel exactly the same way my Straight Boy LO made me feel twenty-two years ago (i.e. in the early-glimmer stage of limerence). Instead of “chatting up” Train Boy, I decided to remain silent and analyse what was going on in my own mind.
Why did Train Boy give me the glimmer, the exact same glimmer as Straight Boy? There must be similarities between the two chaps, apart from the fact they’re both presumably heterosexual, so let’s figure it out:
(1) Both males are above-average in looks, without being gorgeous. (Attainable?)
(2) Both males exude good health (clear skin, not overweight).
(3) Both males made eye contact first (possible interest in me, or at least in my appearance/dress)
(4) Both males have something vaguely muppet-y about their faces (big eyes, bushy brows, expressive mouths, a bit like Guy Smiley from Sesame Street).
(5) Both males were seen wearing white T-shirts and interesting accessories. (Straight Boy had cool sunglasses and Train Boy had funky black hat).
(6) Both young men gave me a powerful sense of deja vu. (Do I know this person? Have I seen him before? Is he an old friend or distant relative?)
(7) Both times the glimmer occurred on a moving vehicle/public transport, with many other people present on moving vehicle/public transport.
I know I said that my LE with Straight Boy all started with a short story in grade twelve. But this train experience makes me realise I actually fell for him a year earlier, in grade eleven, on a school bus no less, coming back from a Physics excursion to an amusement park. (We were supposed to be studying the maths and science behind the rides).
I wasn’t particularly focused on maths and science that day. Unconsciously, I was in partner-hunting mode. Pleasant interactions with boys were already giving me a drug-like rush, whereas I wasn’t getting much of a high from almost identical interactions with girls. Straight Boy wasn’t my “first choice of potential LO” either. For a long time, I actually had a crush on another lad, who we’ll called Alpha Male. Alpha Male turned out to be unattainable. (Too good-looking by far.
And worse – he knew it). That was when I set my sights on an attractive but overall less-impressive target, the young man who eventually became my LO.
Of course, I now see this particular LE as very embarrassing, even cringe-worthy. But it’s even more embarrassing when I consider the guy wasn’t even my first choice. For a while, I conveniently forgot all about my prior crush on Alpha Male!
What Vicarious Limerent writes about his LO#1 could also apply to mine:
“LO #1 has a couple of minor flaws (hey, no one’s perfect). I could see them. But one of the things that was interesting was that they made her seem more attainable and less out of my league. Reminding ourselves about LO’s flaws is supposed to help us get over our LOs, but in my case it had the opposite effect.”
Are you often to be found chatting up men on the train Sammy? 🤔😉
“Are you often to be found chatting up men on the train Sammy? 🤔😉”
@Thomas. I hope not. Actually, I don’t really talk to people when out and about unless they talk to me first. Very shy in person. Always wait to be approached. Only in my fantasies do I chat up strangers on trains. 😛
This “encounter” was significant because it triggered a memory I guess? A memory I think I’ve been suppressing. Now I know what the memory represents – The Glimmer that set the whole limerence train in motion. For some reason, I kind of forgot about this glimmer, and didn’t connect it with the rest of the “relationship”. But every LE must have a starting point.
@Thomas. Also makes me think that in the glimmer stage, limerence IS a choice we make, even if it’s a barely-conscious choice. I.e. we’re at least passively scanning the environment for prospective mates, no?
@Sammy,
I’ve not found a new LE since learning about limerence, so it will be interesting to see if the next time someone glimmers I spot it immediately. Most of my understanding of what has happened to me in the past re: limerence has come from reading both the articles and the lived experience of the other limerents here.
All I knew at the time was something seemingly quite ordinary became fantastic and utterly absorbing without much understanding of why, or any interest in questioning it while in those early stages of single-minded obsession. My last couple of LEs were tough to handle though realising how cyclical the whole thing had become and the inevitability of painful confusion and eventually rejection at the end of each cycle.
I hope I’ve learned to be more careful in future. Let’s see!
I don’t think I idealise that much – I don’t really need to as I seem to be fortunately wired to love kind secure men that I know well and are genuinely into me. But I do love the phrase “If there is blindness, it’s wilful blindness “… this pretty much sums up limerence for me!
Allie,
I’m pretty much the same. I’d be interested only if men showed a strong interest. They’d definitely have to pursue.
My LO did the pursuing until he didn’t when I cut off contact. My mistake was renewing contact more than once, then unknowingly falling in limerence. My brain could not do without at that point.
I’m seeing someone now. He’s handsome, sexy and pursues but not too much. We don’t have the connection that I had with LO. I think the memory is stronger than it was in actuality.
I think it is the realization that they are almost as flawed as you are that drives the limerence. If you believe you are flawed, and they are also obviously flawed too — but not “quite” as flawed as you are (this is very important) — well hell — then maybe there’s a chance!
If you have any doubts that your LO has more going for them than you do, being rejected by said LO is a pretty strong confirmation of that guess. So really, your LO IS actually a superstar — COMPARED TO YOU/ME.
This blog entry came at a timely time for me. I’ve had more insight into my LO than ever before after the last couple of weeks. What I see is, more than ever, someone who is incompatible with me in many ways. What I see in her is that sense of adventure and wildness I’ve wanted in my younger days and what I kind of lack with my SO now. Only, what I want is maybe 10 percent of what my LO probably would provide. So it helps to read these entries and read some of the above comments on those who went through their experiences.
There’s data on people who leave a marriage to marry an affair partner. The divorce rate is very high , and 2nd marriage divorce rates are high to begin with I think 75%. All LO’s are human and eventually those flaws shine through. And then you resent them and blame them for what you have lost.
Having said all that it doesn’t make it easier to just shut off the attraction switch in my head knowing and writing all of that. It makes it easier for me to endure this somewhat lonely grinding path but its not a shortcut to cutting the cord of limerence.
Arinor,
Great that you are aware of the incompatibility.
It is a grinding path. I can only encourage you to stay on it.
At some point, when limerence fades, you will ask yourself “ what was that?!”
@Thomas. “Fantastic and utterly absorbing” sounds like a good description of an LE. And I agree with you – we’re not inclined to question it while it’s happening, unless or until the really bad pain kicks in (or we keep repeating irksome patterns). I realise I’ve had many crushes, but only talked myself into the “mystical bond” thing with that one guy. I tried to imagine sex with him, but my brain wouldn’t let me go there. Such was the power of idealization where he was concerned – it was an emotional affair with virtually zero reciprocation. Still, I clung to the dream! He was a cross between Prince Charming and Christ – an absurd load to put on human shoulders and an impossible act to follow.
Sammy,
“He was a cross between Prince Charming and Christ – an absurd load to put on human shoulders and an impossible act to follow.”
I definitely thought some of my LOs were charismatic and attractive, certainly intelligent, very appealing to me, but they weren’t exceptional men. They hadn’t accomplished anything all that exceptional, didn’t have unique jobs, etc. I wasn’t trying to land Steve Jobs or Mozart. 🙂
@Marcia. Thanks for your response. I am beginning to admit, even compared to my fellow limerents, I’m wildly unrealistic in the way I perceive other people. I.e. I didn’t want someone exceptional or land someone exceptional – I sincerely believed he was “all that”, notwithstanding vast evidence to the contrary. LO in reality was quite ordinary. Prince Charming & Christ are archetypes, not dream jobs – unless one wants to work at Disneyland or star in the annual Easter Play. Haha!
Sammy,
“I sincerely believed he was “all that”,”
I think a couple of mine were “all that,” if I think about it. I mean, objectively speaking. My college LO was average looking but I went to a school that had a famous music conservatory, and he was the star there. The powers that be thought he was it. And he was also very good at approaching women. I was worried he could pick up anybody, and he definitely had a proven track record. 🙂 Now what he’s done with all that talent, I have no idea. And then the professor I mentioned … he was one of the most seductive people I’ve ever met. But my LOs after college … not exceptional … maybe I was meeting more interesting people in college. 🙂 I think limerence ratcheted up their appeal for me, all of them. The limerence haze, so to speak. But I don’t think it was strong enough to kick them into the exceptional category, unless they were.
@Marcia. Are you saying you don’t feel idealisation plays a notable role in your post-college “crushes”? That in & of itself is interesting. Maybe idealising others is a mostly youthful behaviour? I.e. a charming quality we lose with age & experience? 😋
@Marcia. What I’m getting at is – other people can have an exceptional bunny rabbit in their lives e.g. a concert pianist, and not walk around in awe of that bunny rabbit. Does that make sense? 😉
Sammy,
“Are you saying you don’t feel idealisation plays a notable role in your post-college “crushes”? That in & of itself is interesting.
Well, idealization played a role in all of my LEs. But I am saying I met more interesting people when I was in college. My college LO moved to New York to became a famous jazz musician. My last LO has lived in the same small town he grew up in for his 50+ years. Come to think of it, I can’t even remember what we even talked about. To be fair, he did keep up with current events and he was a smart person, but we had nothing in common.
Sammy,
“What I’m getting at is – other people can have an exceptional bunny rabbit in their lives e.g. a concert pianist, and not walk around in awe of that bunny rabbit. Does that make sense?”
True. Something about that bunny rabbit would have to trigger us. 🙂 But my point was … I don’t have access to exceptional people. I don’t live in that world. I became limerent for people who were within my proximity.
@Marcia. “Something about that bunny rabbit would have to trigger us”. That cracked me up. A brilliant riposte, my dear. Brilliant! I take my “fake bunny rabbit fur” hat off to you. 😋
Article of the Day: https://thoughtcatalog.com/lacey-ramburger/2021/03/these-are-the-zodiac-signs-most-likely-to-fall-in-love-with-the-idea-of-a-person/
For the more metaphysically minded among us…
I made the list!
My sign was not on that list (Leo) but I’d say I was acting like Cancer during my LE. Definitely hunting for the idea of a person. Once I found it, I filled in the gaps and made do.
I know limerence has us pursuing a feeling but I also liked who I was during my LE. I was so loving toward LO and honestly “softer.” I felt things on a deeper level.
Time, life and previous heartbreak tends to harden us. I was respectful and caring to my ex-SO but that soft, caring attitude had faded a bit.
What are your rising sign, moon, and Venus?
If you’re into it, you might be more Cancer than you think.
You should see the look on people’s faces in a business meeting when you ask them, “What did you expect from a Sagittarius rising, Cancer moon and Venus in Pieces?”
Don’t let, time, life, and heartbreak harden you. Make them work for you and refine you. Learn from them, build on them, and become better because of them. Reading the blogs, DrL could have called the site, “Living for Limerence” and not been far off.
You have to repeat something to realize they’re a pattern. “Fake it until you make it” works as long as you can survive the consequences of it not working. There’s a formal method for determining a statistical sample size. The problem with a lot of things like limerence is the consequences are too grim to allow you to run that many trials, assuming you see things that way.
Also, keep in mind, there’s a big difference between a trial and a mistake. If the circumstances don’t allow for a different result, it’s not a trial, it’s a mistake. You usually intentionally repeat trials, most people don’t intentionally make mistakes.
When I let LO #2 back into my life, it wasn’t a mistake; I was running another trial but I didn’t see it that way, then.
I have Venus in Cancer…sounds about right…!
“One of the defining features of limerence is the tendency to idealise your limerent object. You see them as Special with a capital S, different from ordinary people, extraordinary in their attractiveness, uncanny in their magnetic appeal.”
I sometimes wonder how I would have felt about my LO, had I been able to see his flaws? He must have had a lot of friends and family members who found at least some of his traits and habits off-putting. I wasn’t one of those friends. But it’s an intriguing idea – to hop in a time machine, travel back to moment of crystallisation, and see one’s LO accurately, without idealisation, in all his/her full humanity. Would one feel compassion? Amusement? Disgust? Disbelief?
As I get older, I think it’s very unhealthy to put anyone on a pedestal. If I had a teenage son/daughter, and that teenager was idealising a friend or a romantic interest, as a parent I would feel just a little bit concerned. I would worry about my child being taken advantage of due to a lack of social maturity. I think a short period of idealisation is okay, a developmental phase maybe. But, after that, reality needs to kick in to ensure any ensuing relationship is fair and balanced.
I remember when I met my LO’s mother for the first time. In his hearing, I told her she had “a lovely son”. She must have known at the time that she had a son who wasn’t always lovely, a son who left dirty socks lying around the house, for example, a son who fought with his brothers and sometimes used bad language. If only she had stopped me right there and said something like: “Oh no, dear. You are quite mistaken. My son is a bit of a ratbag! I really think you should find somebody else’s son to admire beyond all reason. Mine’s not up to the job.” 😛
Marcia,
In response to your last post, the answer is definitely “No.” When I was available, I wasn’t in a market with many candidates for casual relationships. I was a slow starter in college and the Navy kept me pretty busy for the first two years after graduation. By that time, I think I would have engaged in a casual relationship but it wasn’t what I was looking for. I had to go looking for women in the big cities of Seattle and Tacoma.
There was a brief time in the mid-80s when Time magazine published an article saying that an unmarried woman in her 30s had a better chance of dying in terrorist attack than getting married. As an OK looking male with a college education and a steady job who could coordinate his wardrobe, I hit the apex of marketability. It helped some but, nothing really came of it.
If I ever did find myself back in the market, I don’t know what I’d do. I thought I did after the LE with LO #4 ended but as time goes by, I’m not sure.
As Tanya Tucker put it:
“Standin’ beside the ocean
Throwing rocks out in the bay
I should look for companionship
But it just gets in my way” – “Dancing the Night Away” (1975)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQVNvqoASjU
I just love that song.
LE,
“When I was available, I wasn’t in a market with many candidates for casual relationships.”
My bad. I forget there are people on your side of the aisle who don’t date casually. 🙂 I always think it’s the “men are like cabs” simile from “Sex and the City.” You drive around, dating casually, until you turn your light on one day and are ready to date seriously. 🙂
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=932518317226437
But, yes, someone 15 to 20 years younger .. I would keep it casual.
I like the clip!
My light went on at 25. It wasn’t so much as I wouldn’t have dated more casually, it was that I was never in a place that had many options for casual dating. You have to encounter LOs somewhere. The more you date, the more you’ll find.
Ever see “An Officer and a Gentleman?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Qcz_WeP1s
I drove past those ships every day for over 20 years on my way to work. I dated a few “Puget Sound Debs,” none of whom looked like Debra Winger. The dating pool in Kitsap County, WA is limited and the competition is fierce.
LE,
“My light went on at 25. ”
25?! Good gravy! I remember having a conversation with a guy I was dating who said, “I am 24-year-old guy …” Meaning: he was all over the map. Some ex-girlfriend had reappeared, and she was a stripper. Mere mortal woman can’t compete with that. 🙂 I don’t remember meeting a lot of guys in their mid-20s whose lights were on.
“Ever see “An Officer and a Gentleman?””
Of course. It has Richard Gere. Although I prefer “American Gigolo.” More to see 🙂
Marcia,
When I said my “light went on at 25,” it was that I was looking for a serious relationship. I wasn’t actually looking to get married and start a family, per se. I’ve always been a “one woman man.” I can’t handle more than one woman in my head at a time. I tried it once and it doesn’t work for me.
I met LO #2 on a blind date set up by a professional acquaintance that I shared with her parents. The first real date I remember was her taking me to Hiram’s On The Locks for my 27th birthday. We broke up a week after my 31st birthday. I was married at 32. I was 40 when my first child was born.
I have to wonder that my first adult relationship turned out to be with an LO. The odd logistics of our relationship allowed it to develop and playout as it did. Had the logistics not been the way they were, I doubt the relationship with LO #2 would have ever gotten off the ground.
In retrospect, I wonder if LO #1 was a true LO as she didn’t elicit the same emotions in me that LOs #2- #4 did. LO #2 awakened my inner Henry Higgins and that stayed with me.
The thing about being Henry Higgins is that you have to find a complicit Eliza Doolittle, whether she knows what you’re doing or not. Pygmalion didn’t intend to fall in love with his creation, he just did.
LE,
“The thing about being Henry Higgins is that you have to find a complicit Eliza Doolittle, whether she knows what you’re doing or not. Pygmalion didn’t intend to fall in love with his creation, he just did.”
Don’t get this at all. Doesn’t appeal to me. I don’t want anyone to redo me and have no interest in redoing someone else. In fact, it kind of skeeves me out.
Unless a man has the power to transform me into a 25-year-old maneater! I could enjoy that for a bit. 🙂 But that would be counterproductive for him … pupil does so well, she leaves teacher.
“But that would be counterproductive for him … pupil does so well, she leaves teacher.”
Yep,
But, I’ve known that since HS. If I ever succeeded in transforming them, either they’d lose interest in me or I’d lose interest in them. The goal was to leave them better off than I found them. Arrogant and narcistic, but true.
If you’re a DA, it’s not about the result, it’s about the process.
When LO #2 told me about my successor and when I later heard about her divorce, I didn’t want to get back together with her, I wanted to grab her by the shoulders, shake her, and say,
“After all the time and effort I put into rebuilding you and this is how you pay me back?! 5 years together and you didn’t learn a G– D–d thing!”
My friend, the LCSW, had a lot to say on this topic. It wasn’t complimentary.
LE,
“After all the time and effort I put into rebuilding you and this is how you pay me back?! 5 years together and you didn’t learn a G– D–d thing!”
I don’t even know how to process that. It’s disturbing.
For me to want to learn from someone, he/she has to have a quality or talent I value and be exceptional in terms of that quality/talent.
But as the student, I get to decide both of those things.
Marcia,
LO #2 never said or even implied that she wanted to learn anything from me. She allowed me to influence her. She was complicit. Same for LO #4.
LO #2 liked the way I treated her. She ran off a list of things I’d done for her and how they made her feel special, attractive, and desirable. She said I was the first person who ever pursued her. She said that she was still a nurse because I was there at 0300 after she almost killed a patient. I didn’t cheat on her. But the nicest thing she ever said to me was, “You taught me how to stand up for myself and I’m grateful to you for that.” Score one for LE!
She knew exactly what she walked away from and explained it.
“I was afraid that one day you’d wake up and not want to be with me. If I gave myself to you and you left, I’d be devastated.”
So, for her to go back to her old ways of hooking up with guys who’d cheat on her or whom she could cheat with was kind of insulting. It wasn’t like she knew other types of men weren’t out there, she chose not to pursue them. She went right back to what she knew and felt comfortable with.
But, in those days, I didn’t understand Attachment Theory, Personality Disorders, and how deep those things run, so it didn’t make any sense then. At least now, I have a plausible possible explanation for how things turned out and that nothing I could have said or done would have altered the outcome. Getting that monkey off my back took decades but if feels great!
LO #4 said that I’d been “a rock” for her while all the crap was going down. She said that she’d always be grateful to me for opening her eyes and would miss my support and encouragement. Score another one for LE!
Some people will allow you to influence them and some won’t. We try to influence people every day for different reasons. Power is the ability to exert influence.
Most people don’t understand what power is and how it works.
Marcia
I am not sure we need to admire someone to learn from her or him.
We just need to accept that their way is better.
Admiration, as you say, requires a different level altogether.