Sex when you are in love with someone is AMAZING!

So, yes...sex is important.

Many couples who have great sex, still split up. Sooooo..............

In a committed relationship or marriage, yeah I think sex would be very important, I want mine.

At that point why not just do away with relationships altogether?

I think intimacy is vital. Sex is great but obviously if you love someone you would work around any issues. But I don't think you can have a real relationship without intimacy.

sex is important to a healthy relationship with ONE'S SELF....unless you have some kind of "calling" (with some suspicion anyway)....what a weird question!!!

Yes, sex is REALLY necessary in a romantic, monogamous relationship.
Sex can be shared in various forms.
But sex does help to open up ways to communicate effectively with your partner and I believe that most of us understand how important that is to the survival of a relationship

i think it really depends on the people involved...if you are the type of person who needs that physical contact then sure its somewhat important...not saying that sex is more important then love but for some people sex is just as much a part of a relationship as anything else...i like sex so i would want it to be apart of my relationship with someone, doesn't mean we have to do it every hour of every day..

Depends on people.

Some don't have sex, don't feel the need for it, are still loving, affectionate, etc.

Many factors affect this.

When it's important to you, well it's important. ;)

Yes!

I can't help but sit here and wonder why any of you would want a relationship in the first place, considering that pretty much all you want is a friend anyway.

Why not do away with the "Relationship" part and stop confusing the f* out of men, yeah?

Excuse me, but what men are being confused?

Sure, some single men feel that they "need" sexual intercourse in order to have a meaningful romance, but not all single men feel that way.

Believe it or not, there are still single men who manage to have meaningful romances (that include physical affection) without participating in sexual intercourse.

Also, there is nothing wrong with a single woman wanting a romance that doesn't include sexual intercourse.

I understand that some single adults don't want to be in a dating relationship that doesn't include sexual intercourse. I get that, and I'm not telling such adults that they shouldn't want sexual intercourse.

Single adults who want sexual intercourse should date people who think likewise.

Single adults who don't want sexual intercourse should date people who think likewise.

If it is wrong to belittle single adults for wanting sexual intercourse, then it is equally wrong to belittle single adults for not wanting sexual intercourse.

I haven't seen anyone belittling anyone on this thread over their personal preferences. Also, it might help to remember that this is a survey-type thread, as in "what works for YOU?" rather than a thread for people to tell others what they should do or not do.

Just a thought.

Finally, I don't recall the OP specifying that only relationships between singles qualified for this question. Marriage is a relationship too, and I've seen marriages founder due to problems in the couple's sex life.

To see an example of belittling, read the post that appears just above my previous post.

I didn't belittle s* so you better just back the f* up off me about now. Don't like my opinion, I could give f* all, but when you start putting your own little s* into what I say...You start pissing me off.

DD, if a case could be made for F&L to have been belittling ANYONE in his post, it would be women. I'm a woman, and I don't see it as belittling.

You've made it clear on any number of threads what your views are with regard to premarital sex. By this point, I daresay many of us are getting of receiving a lecture on this subject. D'you suppose you could back off on this for a while, please? I realize that everyone has a favorite topic that gets them up on their soapbox (I do it too sometimes, unless I check myself) but really... enough is enough.

Just a polite request.

I think if you meet someone and have sex right away, it boggles your mind. You don't know if you like them for sex or if you like them for them. You have to wait awhile to have a sexual relationship and really get to know that person.
I think person jump into bed to fast without really knowing the other person. I think if we would just slow down and get to know each other maybe relationships would be based on more then just a sexual thing.

I feel the same about new relationships.

Let me use an analogy. Is it possible for a person to run one mile in less than 4 minutes?

Answer: Yes.

It is true that very few people are capable of running a mile in less than 4 minutes, but the inability of most people to run that fast doesn't mean that it's impossible for anyone to run that fast.

Now, suppose that you personally were able to run a mile in less than 4 minutes. How would you respond if another person were to tell you to stop running that fast because the other person can't run that fast? Would it be proper for the other person to tell you to slow down even though the two of you aren't running together?

No, it would not be proper for the other person to tell you to slow down. If you enjoy running a mile in less than 4 minutes, then what gives anyone the right to tell you not to do that?

Likewise, if a single woman says that she wants a romance, but that she doesn't want sexual intercourse, then what gives a man the right to tell the woman to stop advertising for a romance because she doesn't want sexual intercourse?

Like it or not, it is possible for two single adults to have a romance that doesn't include sexual intercourse (just as it is possible for a person to run a mile in less than 4 minutes).

If two single adults do have such romance, then it is an error to claim that their romance isn't a romance but a friendship instead.

If a romance for you personally requires sexual intercourse, then so be it, and I wish you well.

If a romance for you personally doesn't require sexual intercourse, then so be it, and I wish you well.

Meanwhile, I see no sense in criticizing a person for acknowledging or defending the existence of both kinds of romance.

I kind of think implying that a relationship without sex was therefore only a 'friendship' is kind of minimizing those relationships between people who choose to not have sex but do have an intimate romantic relationship

the point is that SEX is not the only type of intimacy,, and intimacy is the line between friendship and relationship,, not SEX....