Is it bad to only be interested in romance/sex with a person?

Does it mean you don't actually care about them and are just using them, or is it a natural and ethical way to feel? It seems like people often think that if you're only interested in sex with someone, that you're using them/are being unethical somehow, but people seem to be more okay with the idea of only being interested in someone for a relationship? E.g. 'it's either a relationship or nothing', no friendship. But if you're only interested in someone if they can give you a romantic relationship, doesn't that bear similarity to only being interested in someone if they can give you sex? Both instances are cases of 'if you don't give me what I want, I'm not interested in you'. Obviously in a platonic friendship someone also has wants or needs that, if not met, they will probably end the friendship over. Eg. 'if you never respond to my texts, I won't be your friend anymore'. But not responding to someone's texts is rude, so it seems like a reasonable thing to stop being friends with someone over, whereas not having sex with someone isn't rude. Responding to texts seems like basic respect whereas sex is something 'extra'. Anyway, enough of the rambling now. There's a guy I like and have liked for 2 years now. We have not been, and probably never will be together for a number of reasons. He likes me too but he doesn't want to commit to a relationship. We have a fwb type thing though. I don't think I would want to have a platonic friendship with him. I care about him as a person and am not just interested in sex... I think if I was only interested in that, I wouldn't want a relationship. But we have never had a platonic relationship and I just... Don't think I can imagine it. I am so accustomed to us communicating in an affectionate (and often sexual) way that I don't think would work if we were 'just friends'. I guess I could tolerate a platonic relationship but I would lack interest in it. I would probably feel resentful about us not having at least something going on, even if it wasn't an actual relationship. Does that mean I'm not really interested in him?

Personally I don't think there's anything wrong about finding it hard to be friends with someone you've been in some way romantically involved in. A lot of people emotionally struggle with being 'just friends' after something more's gone on. I see where you're coming from but it doesn't mean you're not really interested in him. To me, it probably means you're interested in him too much if you can't bear the thought of being friends with him without something more.

I've been in a similar situation with guy not wanting commitment. It was rough. Not good for me. A lot of people will disagree with me but I think it's really disrespectful behaviour for a guy to lead on a girl emotionally, triggering an attainment in them, and have sex with them, which will only intensify that attachment, and to say they like them, without wanting to commit further.

Anyway 2 years long is kind of rough to be involved with someone who doesn't want to commit to you. If I were you i would cut my losses and move on before it gets anymore difficult.

Hmm, I don't know, the thing is that I'm not sure about commitment either. I think I am more invested in the relationship than he is, but I don't want to like, get married I don't think. I'm not passionately in love with him. But I like him enough to think I'd like him to be my boyfriend. I get the feeling he has a more traditional approach to relationships than me so he thinks that being boyfriend and girlfriend is a bigger deal than I do. But also, I am more into him than he is me. I'm not going to deny that. So maybe you're right and I should move on, but that's easier said than done.

Hmm, I don't know, the thing is that I'm not sure about commitment either. I think I am more invested in the relationship than he is, but I don't want to like, get married I don't think. I'm not passionately in love with him. But I like him enough to think I'd like him to be my boyfriend. I get the feeling he has a more traditional approach to relationships than me so he thinks that being boyfriend and girlfriend is a bigger deal than I do. But also, I am more into him than he is me. I'm not going to deny that. So maybe you're right and I should move on, but that's easier said than done.

I don't know, I think getting married is an entirely separate concern. Marriage doesn't mean much in terms of commitment nowadays anyway with a 50% divorce rate, and a lot of relationships without marriage last longer than marriage anyway. Just because you're not thinking about marriage doesn't mean you wouldn't readily want exclusivity/ a committed relationship with him for at least a while. Which is a fair demand.

Traditional approach? Come on, it's the 21st century. I don't think anyone really thinks about traditions anymore hah, more about what they can get from situations (sorry to be a cynic).

Everyone's scared to say it but I'm sure most people would prefer it if they could enter interactions with people in the knowledge that the other person is willing to take them seriously/ give commitment and exclusivity a go for as long as works out between them. Instead there's a culture of falling into bed with people you like with a strong fear to ever mention the words 'commit' or 'exclusivity'. At the end of the day research shows this attitude is damaging to the emotional health of at least the women in the relationship if not also the men, and that the so-called relationship between the two uncommitted suffers drastically, both sexually and emotionally. All the research shows more commitment means more trust and better sex.