Ask people married for more than ten years whether they're still very intensely in love, and you might expect a lot of polite laughter. In a random sample of married Americans, 40 percent of those married over a decade picked the top answer: "very intensely in love".
That clashes with the usual story, where passion burns hot for a year or two and then settles into something cosier and duller. Part of that story is true. Something does fade. But it's a specific part of early love, and what replaces it can be deeper than the attraction that started things. Along the way: why "infatuation" once meant making a fool of someone, what a rise in closeness does to desire, and why believing in a soulmate can backfire.
What fades, and what can stay
"Infatuation" comes from the Latin infatuare, "to make a fool of", from fatuus, foolish. English gave it the sense of a foolish, runaway passion in the 1620s. The word always knew what it was describing.
Early love comes with an obsessive edge: the constant thoughts, the anxiety when a reply is slow, the sense that life stops without them. That part does fade, and it's meant to.
What can stay is romantic love itself, the intensity, engagement and desire. When 25 sets of findings were pooled, romantic love without the obsession was strongly tied to a happier relationship, whether couples had been together for months or for decades. The obsessive part told a different story: it went with satisfaction early on, and with less satisfaction in long relationships.
It even shows up in the brain. When 17 people married for an average of 21 years looked at photographs of their partner during a brain scan, their partner's face lit up the same reward areas seen in people newly in love, along with areas tied to deep attachment and bonding. For some couples, two decades in, the spark was still measurable.
So when the butterflies settle, nothing has gone wrong. The anxious part of love is leaving. The rest is still on offer.
How intimacy is built
Attraction happens to you. Intimacy is something two people build, in a fairly predictable way.
When people kept diaries of their everyday conversations, intimacy came from a simple loop. One person shared something, the other responded in a way that left them feeling understood, accepted and cared for, and the closeness grew. Sharing feelings did more for intimacy than sharing facts. "Work was busy" builds little. "I felt invisible in that meeting" builds a lot, if the person listening responds well.
That's why vulnerability matters, and why it's a two-person job. Opening up takes courage. Responding well to someone else's openness takes attention: putting the phone down, asking what it felt like, and resisting the urge to fix or judge. If you're stuck for a way in, a deck of offers questions that go past "How was your day?"
Closeness feeds desire
Desire and closeness are often treated as separate, as if passion lives in the bedroom and intimacy lives in conversation. They're more connected than that.
When couples in long relationships rated their intimacy, passion and sex life every day for three weeks, the days when they felt closer than usual were the days with more passion, more sex and better sex. It worked for both partners. Passion seems to respond to a rise in closeness, which is good news for long-term couples. Feeling newly close to someone you've known for years can bring desire back with it.
Being understood is part of what makes a partner desirable. In an online chat, in filmed conversations and in daily diaries, when a partner responded with understanding and care, desire for them rose, and more strongly in women. Feeling special, and seeing the responsive partner as a better catch, explained the link. Listening well turns out to be attractive. Emily Nagoski's explains how desire works, including the kind that grows in response to closeness.
Wanting to meet your partner's needs keeps desire going too. In long-term couples who reported on their days for three weeks, the partners more motivated to meet each other's sexual needs had sex for positive reasons, like closeness and pleasure, and felt more desire day to day. Over four months, that motivation protected against desire fading, whatever the couple's satisfaction, age or whether they had children.
Why you say yes matters, though. When dating couples tracked their sex lives for two weeks, sex for closeness, pleasure or love went with more satisfaction. Sex to keep a partner from getting upset or to avoid a row went with more negative feelings, more conflict and less satisfaction. Generosity keeps desire alive. Obligation wears it down.
What couples who stay in love do
Back to that 40 percent. The long-married people who were still very intensely in love had some things in common. They thought about their partner positively, and thought about them when they were apart. They were affectionate and had sex. They did new and challenging things together. And they were generally happy with life.
None of that is grand. It's a warm thought in the middle of the day, a hand on the back, a new walk at the weekend, and a life with more in it than the relationship.
One of those habits has even been put to the test. Adults who were married or living together were asked, for six weeks, either to kiss more often or to carry on as usual. By the end, the ones kissing more reported less stress and more satisfaction with their relationship.
Doing new things together feeds desire as well as closeness. Across daily records, couples followed over time and experiments, partners who did new, mind-stretching things together felt more sexual desire, and that desire went with more satisfaction, more sex and better sex. The effect held beyond a good mood or extra time together.
When children arrive
The first baby is one of the biggest tests of closeness. Among 218 couples followed through the first eight years of marriage, parents showed a sudden drop in how well the relationship worked after their first child was born, mothers and fathers alike, and it tended to last. Couples without children drifted down more gradually, with no sudden fall. Being married longer before the baby arrived softened the drop for fathers.
A dip after a baby is common, which makes it easier to plan for. Sleep goes, time goes, and conversations shrink to logistics. The small habits above matter even more then: a few minutes a day to share something you felt, an affectionate touch in passing, a thank you for the night feed.
Commitment is more than a feeling
Feelings go up and down, even in good relationships. Commitment is what carries a couple through the down weeks, and it has a fairly clear recipe. Across 52 sets of findings, nearly 12,000 people in all, commitment rested on three things: how satisfied people were, how attractive their alternatives looked, and how much they'd invested, from shared friends and memories to a home. Together those three accounted for about two-thirds of how committed people felt, and commitment, in turn, predicted who stayed together.
Two of those three are in your hands. Feelings come and go on their own, but you can keep building satisfaction and keep investing in the shared life you've made.
It helps to drop the idea of a soulmate. In Plato's Symposium, Aristophanes tells how humans were split in half and spend their lives searching for the missing other half. Believing in that kind of destiny has a cost. People who saw relationships as meant to be, or not, were more likely to let a relationship go when the early days were rocky, and to pull away when problems came. People who saw a relationship as something two people grow coped with problems more actively.
Commitment works best on that second view: a relationship as something you keep building. Sue Johnson's is built around the conversations that help couples find their way back to each other.
Even the way you tell your story matters. When a small group of 52 married couples described how they met and how their marriage had gone, those who told it with fondness, a strong sense of "we", and pride in the hard times they'd come through were more likely to still be together three years later. Stories full of disappointment and chaos came from couples more likely to have split.
Seeing yourself through their eyes
How you feel about yourself shapes how much love you can take in. People with low self-esteem badly underestimated how positively their partners saw them. Those unnecessary doubts went with seeing their partner less generously and a less happy relationship, and over time, among dating couples, the problem grew.
A partner alone can only do so much to make up for it. What helps is noticing when you're discounting their affection. If your partner says something kind and your first thought is "they don't mean it", that thought is worth questioning. Often they do.
Growing into who you want to be
Good partners help each other become the people they're trying to be. When a partner saw someone in line with their ideal self, and treated them that way, that person moved closer to their ideal over time, and the relationship was stronger and more stable for it.
It's a quiet kind of love: noticing who your partner is trying to become, and backing it. Encourage the course they want to take, make room for the new skill, and treat them as the confident person they're working to be.
Beyond attraction
Attraction gets two people started. The 40 percent still very intensely in love a decade on show that the rest can last. What keeps it going is far less dramatic than the start: sharing feelings and answering them well, letting closeness bring desire with it, choosing each other on the down weeks, believing each other's kindness, and backing who the other is becoming.
Tonight, tell your partner something you felt today, as well as something you did. Then listen to what comes back. That small loop is where lasting love is built.
Wondering what predicts a lasting relationship from the start? How to Find Your Perfect Life Partner — the signs that count, from commitment to how a partner takes your good news.
Want to talk more openly with your partner? 7 Communication Tips for Your Relationship — everyday habits for sharing, listening and being understood.
Know a couple who worry the spark has gone? Send them this. What fades is the anxious part. The rest is still on offer.
Disclaimer: This article is general information about relationships.
Affiliate Disclosure: This article contains affiliate links. As an Amazon Associate, All For Life earns from qualifying purchases, at no extra cost to you. We only link to products we would recommend without the commission.
Sources
O'Leary KD, Acevedo BP, Aron A, Huddy L, Mashek D (2012). Is long-term love more than a rare phenomenon? If so, what are its correlates? Social Psychological and Personality Science 3(2):241–249. doi.org/10.1177/1948550611417015
Etymonline. Infatuate (v.). Online Etymology Dictionary. etymonline.com
Acevedo BP, Aron A (2009). Does a long-term relationship kill romantic love? Review of General Psychology 13(1):59–65. doi.org/10.1037/a0014226
Acevedo BP, Aron A, Fisher HE, Brown LL (2012). Neural correlates of long-term intense romantic love. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 7(2):145–159. doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsq092
Laurenceau JP, Barrett LF, Pietromonaco PR (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: the importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74(5):1238–1251. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238
Rubin H, Campbell L (2012). Day-to-day changes in intimacy predict heightened relationship passion, sexual occurrence, and sexual satisfaction. Social Psychological and Personality Science 3(2):224–231. doi.org/10.1177/1948550611416520
Birnbaum GE, Reis HT, Mizrahi M, et al. (2016). Intimately connected: the importance of partner responsiveness for experiencing sexual desire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 111(4):530–546. doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000069
Muise A, Impett EA, Kogan A, Desmarais S (2013). Keeping the spark alive: being motivated to meet a partner's sexual needs sustains sexual desire in long-term romantic relationships. Social Psychological and Personality Science 4(3):267–273. doi.org/10.1177/1948550612457185
Impett EA, Peplau LA, Gable SL (2005). Approach and avoidance sexual motives: implications for personal and interpersonal well-being. Personal Relationships 12(4):465–482. doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2005.00126.x
Floyd K, Boren JP, Hannawa AF, et al. (2009). Kissing in marital and cohabiting relationships: effects on blood lipids, stress, and relationship satisfaction. Western Journal of Communication 73(2):113–133. doi.org/10.1080/10570310902856071
Muise A, Harasymchuk C, Day LC, et al. (2019). Broadening your horizons: self-expanding activities promote desire and satisfaction in established romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 116(2):237–258. doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000148
Doss BD, Rhoades GK, Stanley SM, Markman HJ (2009). The effect of the transition to parenthood on relationship quality: an 8-year prospective study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96(3):601–619. doi.org/10.1037/a0013969
Le B, Agnew CR (2003). Commitment and its theorized determinants: a meta-analysis of the Investment Model. Personal Relationships 10(1):37–57. doi.org/10.1111/1475-6811.00035
Plato. Symposium (Aristophanes' speech). Translated by B. Jowett. gutenberg.org
Knee CR (1998). Implicit theories of relationships: assessment and prediction of romantic relationship initiation, coping, and longevity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74(2):360–370. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.360
Buehlman KT, Gottman JM, Katz LF (1992). How a couple views their past predicts their future: predicting divorce from an oral history interview. Journal of Family Psychology 5(3–4):295–318. doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.5.3-4.295
Murray SL, Holmes JG, Griffin DW (2000). Self-esteem and the quest for felt security: how perceived regard regulates attachment processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78(3):478–498. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.3.478
Drigotas SM, Rusbult CE, Wieselquist J, Whitton SW (1999). Close partner as sculptor of the ideal self: behavioral affirmation and the Michelangelo phenomenon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77(2):293–323. doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.2.293