Do you think sex must be involved in a romantic relationship?

If they're both asexual...? Then I would think they're more friends...

But eventually, yes, there'll be at the very least the wantings of sexual contact. It can be possible that neither, while they wouldn't mind having sex, have no actual interest; I know a good majority of the time I don't want sex. I'm too busy, too tired, and I just rather cuddle.

Your friend says no interest; you say not wanting. There's a slight difference, in that no interest is never ever couldn't even consider it, not wanting is not now. So... depends how you both actually meant it.

I was actually considering this today. What are the qualifications for a familial/platonic love versus a romantic love? What I eventually landed on was that a romantic relationship doesn't have to include sex, as some healthy marriages do not. I had a harder time figuring out what, then, separated a platonic love with a romantic love. It was very depressing to think that romance is strictly sexual, so I decided that there had to be something else to differentiate. Is it that you find someone who you really work well with, and who you were not forced to be with through familial obligations? Then what makes it more than a friendship? I'd hate to say sex. Maybe it isn't sex, but affection. Confusing, eh?

Very very good question.

You can love someone romantically but it will eventually lead to sex. I really have a hard time believing that someone being romantic with someone will not eventually have some sort of intimate feelings for the other. Some sort of sexual passions and desires will develop.

I do believe people can be friends without having sex but you must have clear boundaries. Romance can not be in those relationships. Romance is important in love, sex, and deep personal intimacy.

To be really short and sweet, that's the best part of same sex relationships. You get to trade off. I don't always have to be the girlfriend all the time. But it works differently in each relationship. Some actually do take on "traditional" gender roles. Others, go more with the flow and just let the relationship develop as it will. It depends on the couple.

Sex is something that should only come into play once a couple is completely exclusive and intending to marry one another. It is a way to express the deepest of love, not something you do just because you're physically attracted to someone. I think it is necessary to sustain a very long term relationship and definitely a marriage.

If they're asexual then sex doesn't matter that much to them right? My definition of asexual could be wrong though.

IMO sex is something special between to people who love each other very much. Its not a MUST but i guess it helps in a relationship.

I misread the question, silly me.

I think it is possible, but only with people who don't want sex. Different people in the same situation might have sex. Sex is not a necessity, it is only a bonus (or some might call it). Love can be physical attraction, but that doesn't mean sex. Some people just don't like sex, no matter who they love.

I think that most people desire sex in a relationship, so unless both you and your partner are asexual, sex is highly important for a relationship.

depends what you mean..... if you are just talking about waiting till marriage i guess but if you just mean never wanting to the answer is definetly not.

i think its possible too..... but without that attraction developing eventually- i dont know where is going..... yes it can take time-