A reason to use
limerence rather than a Romantic form of
love:
We've had discussions here about what the word/concept "love" means. One thing we've all probably experienced with the monogamous is the notion that
love is a scarce resource. That is of course absurd to us, because the same people will often blather on about how "love is limitless!!!" & they
loooove all their kids & relatives & friends & neighbors & churchmates & Decent People Everywhere.
In short: choose either "love is limitless" or "love is only for ONE." If the latter, then tell us about the people you've cut loose, like how you stopped loving your spouse when the baby was born.
Right?
So maybe they have it half-right: if not actually infinite, love CAN encompass quite a few people. That (to me) says that "love" is being used in
at least two incompatible definitions.
(And, being a
symbolic interactionist, I see where maintaining this muddiness helps keep people from looking too closely at the concept "love" & therefore serves to protect both Romanticism & Monogamism from intellect.)
Establishing a longterm partnership depends on the sort of "love" associated with "best friend" status (& maybe a familial/experiential element as with closest sibling).
Limerence, though, is
obsessive -- there's that "one & only" component.
It's impossible to be "100% focused" on more than one project at a time (so you can maybe obsess about twins, or a pop band, or something, but NOT each of the involved individuals).
One factor that can cause limerence to fade is increasing realization that the obsessive object isn't making moves to run away. But IME, the Romanticism in which we've been raised has made clear all along that IT'S NOT LOVE unless there's that sweaty, clammy, nervous, fearful component.
So, people really do go out & have affairs in order to "renew the spark" with their spouse.
Their infidelity brings back the uncertainty.
I believe that some who decide to "try poly" are doing much the same thing.
The problem, though, is what happens if they succeed in finding a new object for limerence? That means that the partner
can't be the LO. And if half of a dyad finds a new LO, that means this partner becomes the LO for their extant partner AND maybe for their LO.
The cult of Romance is silent on how to handle these situations.
The casualties show up here, & expect us to rationalise their "marriage+" through a lens of actual polyamory.
Separating limerence out from "love" is a big step toward discussions that are both sane AND empathetic.