I think the Christian tradition offers us a number of possible alternative expectations. Where people usually start is from Jesus' words Mt 22:

23 That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 24 "Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for him. 25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26 The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27 Finally, the woman died. 28 Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?"

29 Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven."

This can be interpreted in a number of ways:

1) The usual interpretation of this is there is no sex after the resurrection. This follows from the Greek influence within the early church that tended to separate the body and soul in terms of significance, disdaining the bodily pleasures of life as being a good in themselves - for example there is an early writer who suggests that God would have introduced a different way of producing children if Adam and Eve hadn't fallen! The contrast of course is with the existence of the Song of Songs in Old Testament that is celebration of sexual love, despite desperate attempts by many commentators to suggest otherwise. On the other hand we need to be conscious of the possibility that sexual activity is a way of achieving full connection with a person that the angels have another way to achieve, making sex obsolete; I remember one preacher suggesting that it might be that asking about sex in this way is like a young child asking about sex and asking whether it's as good as eating chocolate, the best thing in their life. Of course we know it's far better, but the child is bemused by this idea and asks whether you'd eat chocolate when having sex 'Surely that would make it better?'

2) The other possibility - which is has some rather problematic implications - is that Jesus is suggesting that sex remains a possibility; what's ended is the need for it to be restricted to the bounds of marriage. This means that the need for such restrictions follows from the nature of humanity's falleness, rather than from the original design of humanity. This seems an attractive option to a society that regards sex as one of God's greatest gifts to humanity in contrast to the Greek ethos. The danger is that it comes to suggest that Christians don't need to play by the rules - something which I want to totally reject, and as a result I get twitchy about mentioning the possibility...

Within the second choice we then have the issue of whether attractions to anyone other than an adult of the opposite gender is inherently disordered, and we get into issues about whether the attraction we have is a function of some desire in us that has got messed up somehow. IF that is so - and I'm well aware it's a controversial area - it makes sense to suggest that God will address the need(s) that lead to find boys attractive in a different way, leaving us less driven by the attraction beyond what is right, however we define 'right'; certainly for me being with an attractive boy is as much an emotional buzz as it is sexual - in as far as the two are truly separable. My understanding is therefore that I have come to draw emotional sustenance from relationships with boys that people would expect me to draw from relationships with my peers...

I think that the one conclusion that we can safely draw is that things will be wonderful; the promise of pleasures and wiping away every tear to me implies that things will be far better than anything we've experienced on earth. As a result I am sure that we will find all these things will make sense, probably in ways that will surprise us. All I think we need to be cautious of is finding ourselves in the position of in effect saying to God 'I demand that I have boys around me' - because if we do that we will be closed to the good things He wants for us. The danger of this is well illustrated in C S Lewis' 'The Great Divorce' where one of the ghosts visiting from heaven is only focused on reestablishing her relationship with her son - nothing else matters. Whereas she has to let go of that demand before she can move on; in effect that relationship - which seems to have been pretty damaging to him - had become her idol. And that's the risk we need to be conscious of in our attitude to boys...