Amorous Postulates, Or, Stalking With The Scientific Method.
(a) Upon sensing the presence of the subject within the immediate vicinity, the following bio feedback is registered: acute feelings of abdominal discomfort (somewhat akin to moderate indigestion), slight nausea, lightheadedness, accelerated arterial palpitations, excessive perspiration and exaggerated sensitivity to environs. The simultaneous and involuntary manifestation of these symptoms when observing a specific individual is known to the scientific community as “limerence”. It can also be termed “infatuation”.
(b) The subject is a male adolescent of normal height and weight, well-developed body structure, no profound physical alterations. All evidence points to the subject possessing reasonably good health. Please allow for a marginal amount of error, as the obtaining of medical revision results is at this time highly improbable.
(c) Where the nervous system is concerned, the subject appears to have above-average reaction time and cognitive ability. The subject is capable of learning with considerable speed, prioritizing tasks, remaining alert for extended periods and extensive problem-solving. The subject’s somatic reflex arc is also fully functioning (the autonomic reflex arc remains untested). It can be assumed with sufficient certainty that the subject is, in a word, intelligent (we apologize for using this imprecise umbrella term, but we believe that further delving into the still-controversial realm of human intelligence is not necessary). Though the full capacity of the subject is still unverified, we are satisfied that the cerebral magnitude of the subject is beyond that of the majority of the populace.
(d) The subject’s visual perception is somewhat faulty, but has been enhanced due to correction devices (exempli gratia: eyeglasses). Other than the myopia defect, the subject’s eyes are otherwise satisfactory (the sclera is free of discolorations, and the melanin content of the irises has produced a pleasing color). Despite inferior sight, the subject’s audition, gustation, olfaction and mechanoreception seem to be in working order. The subject gives all the appearances of being a lively, sane organism. Were the subject a canine, we are of the opinion that he would make an excellent companion.
(e) Unfortunately, the subject is not a Canis lupis familiaris, he is a Homo sapiens sapiens. By Homo sapiens sapiens, we of course mean the subject is an anatomically modern human, not an archaic Homo sapiens, such as Homo rhodesiensis. We cannot determine what the subject’s genetic make-up is with any precision, as we lack the funds to construct a proper lab. In any case, it is improbable that we will ever be able to obtain a sample of the subject’s saliva.
(f) It is towards the subject that we direct the “affections” mentioned in (a). This indicates that the subject, a healthy adolescent male Homo sapiens sapiens, is the “limerent object” or “object for which we feel affection”.
(g) It is not possible to determine, without a direct consultation, whether or not these “affections” are reciprocated.
(h) A direct consultation would involve total self-disclosure, and the distinct possibility of rejection. It has been decided that the unilateral termination of limerence would be unappealing for both parties involved. It would also affect scientific proceedings, and is simply not part of our modus operandi, which is primarily concerned with utmost discretion. Therefore, it is out of the question.
(i) Data has been collected during a significant amount of time to ascertain whether or not the subject has his own “limerent object”, and whether or not that “limerent object” coincides with our own objectives (id est: what are the origin and nature of the subject’s “affections”, if these exist, and do they by any chance have to do with us?) Indications of “infatuation” include pupil dilatation (note: all attempts to approach the subject in his natural habitat with the objective of measuring pupil widening have failed), pallor, behavioral confusion, body language and, in severe cases, syncope. The attainment of accurate information has proved inordinately difficult, as we are prone to extrapolating from insufficient data, which leads to premature, subjective conclusions.
(j) Subjectivity is the enemy of any scientist, but it reputably a boon for all seeking amorous ends.
(k) We have also been analyzing the females within a certain radius to conclude if they pose a threat to our attainment of the subject our study. Though the gender ratio of the environment favors males, thus granting the females a wider array from which to choose from, there have already been three recorded instances of displays of amorous interest towards the subject. The situations we envision when considering the subject sustaining a relationship with another female involve severe disagreements, and are not what one could call reasonable.
(l) In general, our own bias has made this study excessively complex. Any neutral gesture or conversation involving the subject is recalled in detail and interpreted in totally illogical manners, often leading us to believe outcomes that have little to no empirical basis. Intrusive thinking concerning the subject begins realistically but often ends as a departure from the probable. We are embarrassed to admit that, in this case, intrusive thinking is synonymous with “fantasizing”.
(m) Progression towards limerent mutuality involves a delicate, generally maddening game of social fencing. Despite various double-entendres and neatly hidden exposés of “affection”, the attainment of the desired goal remains inconclusive and, to be perfectly earnest, far-fetched.
(n) We employ the clinical scientific method, we weigh mercury in silver tablespoons, we gut the wombs of dead sheep. Though alchemy was largely abandoned in previous ages of history, it is the only branch of science we can liken our study to. This is because something (and we do not know what this something is, which disturbs us greatly) very odd happens to our bone marrow when the subject brushes past us in the corridor.
(o) The feeling this slight physical contact provokes in us is decidedly unscientific.
5 Comments