What is the difference between love and limerence?

Post Reply New Topic

I think limerence is mostly another word for infatuation as they are quite similar. Given the previous definition of infatuation, I think limerence is closer to the natural way NDs pursue relationships. That's also why many had completely imaginary relationships too.

I don't agree that limerence can not lead to love. Defining love based on commitment and friendship is not sound. In fact, I see friendships and love as completely different processes with different rules & expectations. Sure, you can have (even should have) a kind of friendship and companionship with a partner, but this won't be anywhere close to a NT-style friendship.

I think that any definition of love that is not based on emotions is wrong, and both limerence and infatuation involve strong emotions, and so should be included in love. If there are no strong emotions it might be a friendship, but not love.

I've never heard of the word limerance before. I learn something new every day! I've had lots of limerances in my adult life but I didn't have a name for it until now. I still think about my main limerance person a lot. I really liked him and we had a crazy crush on each other but it turned out he had too many other limerances at the same time as me if you know what I mean. I had to stop...limerancing but I still limerance for him sometimes. I think his limerancer is overactive so he wasn't the best person for me.

I never heard of Limerence. This is good to know since I’m talking to a guy.

Nick described limerence quite well, in my opinion. It’s more literary and aesthetic than infatuation. More restrained, less violent.

Infatuation is more obsessive and could be quite unaesthetic.

This is getting confusing to me! How is limerance literary? How is infatuation violent and unaesthetic? They both sound pretty hoaky and unappealing by those terms... and very artificial. When I like someone or I have a crush I genuinely like them... it's not obsessive or violent or literary or aesthetic. It's just enjoyment and appreciation of who they are. A rational state of mind is good unless you are 13 and having your first crush on someone ...

That’s how I experience it.

If it’s “artificial,” so be it.

I appreciate “the person” when I am in limerence. Sort of like Dante and Beatrice. Or Elizabeth Barrett and Robert Browning. I appreciate the complexity of the person. In most or all aspects.

That’s a mighty stretch to accuse me of being “artificial” when I adopt someone as my muse.

When I’m infatuated, my experience is that the obsession is unpleasant, and I put the person on a pedestal too much. She’s not my muse, then. She stifles my creativity.

It’s my fault if I’m misunderstood. Perhaps I didn’t express myself properly?

Remember.....all this is quite subjective....and cannot be proven scientifically....sort of like religion, really.

And, by the way, I appreciate the simple things in life, and hate pretension, and being called pretentious for liking poetic things. The written medium sucks sometimes. I’m a simple person. In fact, in real life, I am thought of as being lightweight, a simpleton. Nobody ever thinks I’m pretentious.

I’m not upset. This is a discussion, I like kitties very much.

I didn't accuse you of being artificial or pretentious! I just wanted you to explain what you meant when you said limerance is literaryor now you use the word muse, or that infatuation is kind of violent. I didn't apply that to you as a person but I still want to know. Those words made crushes sound like they're generated by fiction or imagination, a grand impression of a person that might not even be true... Most people are really just average and we all are quite similar except for our talents or interests. In books and poetry love and desire are usually exaggerated and driven by ego so maybe that's what you meant.

I'm more of a simpleton like you said. Maybe I don't feel emotions the same way as other people but I was trying to understand the word limerance. I'm very realistic when I like someone or when I'm in love. It's based on their qualities and character including their faults, and I've never really put a person on a pedestal to make me creative like you describe. That sounds like a big responsibility for the other person. I focus more on learning who they are, instead of how I feel or what's in it for me emotionally and creatively. Maybe I'm doing it all wrong though loll.

The O and V are missing in limerence.

To Kitten Caboodle:

I’m very much a realist myself, despite what I’ve written lol. If you met me, you wouldn’t find me “literary” at all. I’m rather like Raymond in “Everybody Loves Raymond.” The actor who played Raymond grew up about four blocks from where I grew up. In Rego Park, Queens, NYC.

There are times within infatuation when a person gets so frustrated that they feel “violent” emotions. Not to be taken literally. I guess it’s more in the realm of feeling “passionate,” rather than literal violence. In my experience, the “violence” is in the frustration, in the passion I feel for a person. I don’t ever think about actually doing violence upon the object of my infatuation.

Limerence (to me, not necessarily to someone else), is less “violent”/passionate than infatuation. It’s more contemplative. One “muses” over a person. Ponders the person in one’s own mind.

I have created and used muses as inspiration in my writings....to spur me on, so to speak. Dante did, too....and many other creative folks in all manner of Art. It’s not a big deal. It doesn’t add merit to the writing. A muse is an inspiration. I believe muses have induced some of the greatest creative productions the world has ever known, though a muse, in and of itself, is not necessarily meritorious or literary.

Nobody else is responsible for my own emotions. If I have a muse, there’s no burden on the muse.

I focus on “who people are” just like you do.

PEPE!!
Thank you from the bottom of my heart! This Youtube helped, really helped my kid!! Now, this is off-topic but it's true what they say about being a mother: "You're only as happy as your least happiest child."