The situation is more complex when there is no reciprocity and only one partner wishes to persist in the loving relationship. Here the value of persistence can be doubtful as it conflicts with respect for the other's choice.

The ideal of never giving up is abundantly expressed in many stories, novels, movies, and songs. Consider, for instance, the following song by Dido:
"I will go down with this ship
And I won't put my hands up and surrender
There will be no white flag above my door
I'm in love and always will be."

In this song, the person is ready to sacrifice his life in the attempt to make his love persist. If the value of love can justify taking your own life, it can easily be perceived as justifying certain behaviors intended to prevent such a loss. Such behaviors can include stalking, surveillance, intimidation, harming oneself and the other, and verbal and physical abuse. Such behaviors, which are part of romantic persistence as well as romantic harassment, are in accordance with the refusal to take no for an answer, a response that is so positively evaluated in Romantic Ideology.

It should be noted that romantic rejection constitutes a significant blow to one's self-image and persisting in pursuing this love might appear to offer some hope of reversing the other's decision. However, it can equally lead to despair and to avoiding any further involvement in such a potentially stressful and painful situation. Romantic rejection is likely to cause a variety of reactions and romantic harassment is merely one of them.

College students who were interviewed reported employing the following behaviors when they were romantically rejected: More than half of the sample reported waiting outside for the person who rejected them, more than 20% reported calling and hanging up and following the person. Even intimidating behavior was found to be relatively common, with 30% of men reporting such behavior. Verbal aggression was reported by a quarter of the sample, and physically violent behavior was reported by over 10% of both of men and women. More extreme acts of aggression were much less common, but some such incidents were reported. (see here)

These kinds of behavior cannot then be considered as characterizing merely a small portion of behavioral responses; rather, refusing to take no for an answer is found to be a normative one that receives profound support in our culture. When love becomes one-sided, it appears that other social norms are cast aside and overruled. It is not merely that people engage in a wide range of stalking-related behaviors when they are romantically rejected, but in fact the line between normal commendable persistence and obsessive illicit stalking behavior becomes blurred.

As a result, stalking proves to be a phenomenon that is difficult to define. While it is generally defined as a pattern of harassing or threatening behavior, it also seems to include anything from benign attempts at courtship to assault and murder. Thus, it can be seen as a part of a spectrum of activities that merges into normal behavior, often around the aspiration to reestablish a relationship.

Stalking-related behaviors may vary in nature and severity, but they all share a common motive: An oblivious attitude to the other person's desires, interests, and emotions. Being oblivious to reality is indeed a characteristic of Romantic Ideology. When reciprocity is eliminated from romantic love, the selfish-rather than selfless-side of love becomes prominent and explicit.

Persistence, which underlies such behaviors, rarely receives social disapproval-in fact it is more often glorified; countless books, movies, and songs have suggested that persistent efforts are eventually rewarded by success. Armed with several dozen such stories, the lover knows not to give up on love. So he keeps on trying and sometimes even murders his wife. Persistence is a thin line on which to walk.

Romantic communication is often ambiguous and involves emotional pretense, which often increases uncertainty and mystery, thereby magnifying emotional intensity. This makes romantic communication less sincere and hence less trustworthy and can even lead to romantic harassment (see here).

In analyzing the major reasons for romantic harassment, people might focus either on the subject, that is, the person who harasses, or on the object, that is, the person who is harassed. The legal system considers the subject to carry the main (if not the full) blame. However, Romantic ideology and our culture in general praises persistence in maintaining and promoting love, part of which is the behavioral results of refusing to give up, and there is some criticism of those whose romantic language is not fully clear, causing the other to become confused about his normative behavior.

We may cope with this dilemma by adopting moderate behavior in both directions. We should not give up the minute our beloveds think they want to leave us. It could be that their wish is temporary, based upon transient factors that do not reflect the beloved's genuine wish. So we should carefully and tenderly examine the profoundness of the wish and not immediately give up on our love. But if the beloved's wish persists and our (nonviolent) efforts to change the beloved's wish have failed, we should decrease these efforts both in terms of their frequency and the type of activities involved.

There is no golden rule to guide us in such cases, but the direction is clear: Our behavior should express our wish to stay within the relationship and should involve no coercion. And the longer the beloved's rejection persists, the less persistence should be the lover's behavior. We should respect the other's persistence by becoming less persistent ourselves.

The above considerations can be encapsulated in the following statement that a lover might express: "Darling, try to persist in your efforts to enhance our love and my love for you. But if it does not succeed, give up and search for a new love."

Adapted from In the Name of Love: The Romantic Ideology and its Victims (written with Ruhama Goussinsky)