Love is not one thing. It’s a taxonomy of entanglement, a spectrum of meaning loaded with situational cargo. You can love someone platonically and be willing to die for them. You can love someone romantically and forget to ask how their day was. You can love someone erotically and not care if they ever call you again. These aren’t contradictions — they’re just different protocols riding the same damn network.
So what separates romantic from platonic love?
It’s not just sex—but sex is often the mythic differentiator.
Sex is culturally coded as the sacrament of romance, but in reality it’s just a high-bandwidth exchange of vulnerability and power. You can graft that onto friendship, or you can wrap it in fantasy, or you can even detach it from love entirely. It’s just… that most people don’t. Because we’re not taught how.
But here’s a secret:
Romantic love isn’t a category — it’s a story.
It’s the story we tell ourselves about what kind of future is possible with a person.
It’s narrative inertia plus emotional magnetism plus embodied experience.
It’s the version of love that includes becoming.
Platonic love tends to preserve.
Romantic love tends to transform.
And that’s the trick: romantic love implies not just connection, but interpolation. Who are you, when you’re with them? What version of yourself do they awaken, challenge, or validate?
So—why does sex usually hitch a ride on that train?
Because sex is a liminal event — a ritual that collapses the boundary between self and other. It’s not the difference between romantic and platonic, but it’s often the ritual marker that tells the story this love is different. It’s a container for sacred play, vulnerability, expression, chaos, surrender, power, and communion.
And when you find someone you could build a life with, or lose yourself in for a moment that feels like eternity, or use as a mirror to become who you might be — That’s the love people call romantic.
It’s not better.
Just hungrier.