Passion, Emotional Intimacy and Commitment and the likelihood of relationship success

1) How significant is sex to a successful relationship?

I suppose that depends on the people involved in the relationship and how important they believe sex is to their relationship and of course, how you define "success". I tend to define success in terms of mutual partner satisfaction with the relationship (including the minimization of and successful resolution of conflict) which should lead to relationship longevity. Perhaps the central element here is that both partners agree as to the importance of sex in their relationship or have the skills to negotiate a compromise acceptable to both parties. For instance if one partner wants frequent sex and the other desires sex infrequently, then there will be conflict in that relationship. I think the same holds true for anything that a person values in a relationship. If the partners 'wants' aren't congruent, there will tend to be conflict.

2) Do relationships based on sex have greater longevity than relationships based on love?

First, I'm not convinced that longevity is a good measure of the success of a relationship. Having a good relationship should covary with relationship longevity, however, I'm sure there are many long term relationships that continue even tho I wouldn't classify them as 'good' relationships. (By 'good' I mean mutually fulfilling/satisfying).

If we're talking here about romantic relationships, which tho not explicitly stated is implied in the narrative. Let me first describe some research on love that I've been a party in that indicates that 'romantic' love has three dimensions that correspond to Sternberg's Triangular theory of love. The factor structure goes something like this:

Passion:	Euphoria, physiological arousal, sexual attraction, Energy
Emotional Intimacy:	Openness, can talk about anything, honesty, understanding, trust, forgiveness, sharing, respect
Commitment:	Devotion, Commitment, Protectiveness, Loyalty, Security

If this is an accurate representation of the concept of love, then I think a more important question could be:

Are relationships that develop from predominantly the emotional intimacy dimension of Love more likely to develop into long term, mutually fulfilling/satisfying relationships than are relationships that develop from predominantly the passionate dimension of love?

I tend to think that we are biased physiologically, thru socialization and thru the structure of in-person courtship to initiate relationships based predominantly on the passionate aspects of love.

Physiologically: We have evolved physiological responses such at sexual attraction, arousal, feelings on infatuation, and love that act as mechanisms to promote pair bonding and procreation and thus continuation of the species.

Socialization: in US culture we are steeped in the 'love at first sight' paradigm. Also, the majority of females require love and/or public commitment to legitimize being sexually active and this tends to foster the mislabeling of physical arousal as love rather than as lust. We're socialized to be ashamed of having sexual needs but to accept our emotional needs more easily. Again...physiological arousal/sexual attraction becomes acceptable when it's called love.

The structure of in person courtship predisposes characteristics such as physical attractiveness and physical attraction to be salient in the choice of a relationship partner. In looking for a romantic partner, we generally choose to continue interacting with someone whom we find attractive. Physiological responses (the passion dimension of love) such as arousal, euphoria, infatuation etc., kick in and we label these responses as being love. 75% of college students in one study of mine indicated that they were in love with their current partner by the 5th date. Is it possible to know someone very well in 5 dates?

Anyhow the point I'm getting to is:
I think that relationships that are initiated predominantly based on the passionate aspects of love should have less of a chance of long term survival and mutual partner satisfaction than those based on the emotional intimacy dimension of love simply because one is emotionally invested in the relationship *prior* to knowing if you and your partner are compatible. In my opinion, if a relationship develops based on the passionate aspects of love, it's the luck of the draw whether or not the person you're in love with is compatible. After the passion/infatuation habituates is there anything left (Emotional intimacy) on which to base the relationship. So if the emotional intimacy and compatibility are there, then the relationship will succeed.

If we agree that all three aspects of love must be present in sufficient amounts for a relationship to be the best that it can be then I suppose my answer to: Are relationships that develop from predominantly the Emotional Intimacy dimension of Love more likely to develop into long term, mutually fulfilling/satisfying relationships than are relationships that develop from predominantly the passionate dimension of love?
is...
Only if the passionate aspects are also in place.

---