low dependency relationships

Post Reply New Topic

Maybe its just that I only am there when women complain about relationships so often or that when I do it goes one way but, from anything I have heard - from guys or girls - its typically been the girl who wants the guy more available both emotionally and physically and the guy who isn't giving in because his own needs for autonomy aren't being met. I can't prove it, but from experience it seems like it goes that way somewhat disproportionately. The few times I have heard women complain that a guy is an absolute bump on a log - its really a situation where he's profoundly shy and she couldn't get him out to save her life.


I'm talking about when its already paid off. Those things tend to be enemies of the relationship, like video games or other things that can act as distractions.


That's perhaps an odd way of looking at it, nothing like what I was implying though. I think guys have more of a need for autonomy, will express it, evolutionarily as hunters we've been absenty fathers - if anything I think this is our instinctual baggage that we bring to the table. If we find a partner who needs that much time to do things by themselves or with their girlfriends - awesome, but I'm sure there are a lot of guys looking for girls who are into beer, football, and heavy metal; they're there but its typically a smaller pool.


That's pretty much the way I'd see it, yes. If its not working, we're past the day and age where we had to marry for survival. Obviously if there are children involved its much more delicate - they ultimately come first and if a couple has to work harder to work things out in that case they likely should.


Those things are game where you're at? Maybe I need to move to Louisville, perhaps its a much different culture than I'm accustomed to in Cleveland.


If you have kids they come first - that's a given, no argument from me on that.


Did I say absentee and contributing nothing to the relationship was a good thing? You'll have to point that out.


That's wholly your own thought and I wouldn't agree with it.

Who stays single longer do you think, those guys or guys who have their self-actualization wrapped around other things? I'm betting the later.

BTW, just a side comment, I'm trying to assemble what you're saying here and let me know if I have you right. I think you're saying abstractly that you at least feel that a guy in a relationship knows that he's in it to be a father, needs to contemplate that and realize that once he is a father he literally won't have time for both interests and his family, he generally has either one or the other to chose or, at best, maybe two or three hours per week to give to that interest. That's practical, perhaps completely correct. I don't have kids but, I could see that being the case.

But, I guess none of this presents a problem in what I said to 0 equals true - that this kind of desire for autonomy is a guy 'problem', in fact I think its seen as a character flaw, ie. that guys who are like this are really something on the order of grown boys rather than fully formed men. When we do rule gender role as this taboo topic where you're some type of dreaded social conservative to say that it still exists and goes strong in certain areas or perhaps is needed, its self-evident when so many girls in their 20's feel that they can't find what they're looking for in guys who are within ten years of them and the guys are - technically - living in certain ways like they're still in their late teens. Its not necessarily that guys are inherently deadbeat losers either, more along the lines of - being that we aren't as intimately tied to the family process by nature - we need more cultural guidance (and obviously - we spend millions of years out with the guys chucking spears at antelope, not fathering). Unfortunately the kind of guidance guys would need for that is currently attacked from all angles as draconian, oldfashioned, outdated, and as sexist against men as telling women that they have any role is supposedly sexist against women.

Its hard not to take it here but I have to laugh that when anyone can say that twenty or thirty percent of a population don't follow a rule that there's no such thing as a norm, that its stereotyping, and that whoever's bringing it up has some bias or ax to grind. Perhaps if there's nothing to figure out maybe guys really should just hit the bars, play video games at home, ride the quads all weekend, and stay single doing this until their 40's or 50's? After all it might be seen as sexist against men to suggest that they have something else to be mindful of.

I just meant more from a financial POV.

No. Evolutionarily, children have better chances of survival living under the protection of at least one male-
from drug usage, to prison populations, to high school drop outs, et cetera, there is a very strong correlation between being a child of a fatherless household and being involved in a plethora of unhealthy and dangerous behaviors.

I don't get it. What game?

Even without kids- it's telling that wanting a man who's "a home body" and as devoted to spending time with one another as she is means a woman desires a man to be "under her thumb".

I said nothing of you at all...nor of contributing "nothing". I said someone having to be asked to exchange individual benefit for the sustainability of the relationship is a bit odd to me- the people in relationships are there because they've chosen to share a life with another person.

Not at all- I wasn't speaking about parenthood, but about my different take on what men desire in relationships, and my knowledge of what constitutes a relationship based on where I'm from. Whether it's a couple with kids or without isn't a distinction I consider relevant- my point is the difference between "independence" and putting yourself before your relationships and family which you've chosen to have.

I don't think there's any backlash against the notion that people who choose to enter relationships should attempt to maintain them, and that men and women who have children should care for them per se. But it's extremely difficult to maintain healthy parental roles in a culture of casual sex and lack of romantic commitment- such is why intense bonding hormones are released during the act of mating, the two are so inseparable.

Was this directed at me? I can't see how it could have been. But I would assert that guys at an alarming rate ARE foregoing love, sex, adventure, and ambition for online porn, drunken hookups, and video games.

Last edited by Bethie on 01 May 2011, 9:18 pm, edited 3 times in total.

My dad pointed something out to me a few months ago - nearly all the guys in our family (my dad's brothers, nephews, and onward) have had this in them to where if they married in their twenties it typically always ended in disaster at the expense of the children involved. I think having certain types of build and fundamental motivational structure can be very hereditary and, when you think about it - what elevates you, what depresses you, what makes you feel free, what makes you feel responsible, and so many other factors that society can't control nearly as much as you're genes will - this kind of thing has a lot of play in the issue.

I can agree- it sounds exhausting to be with someone like that, and I'd imagine they'd think me lazy or un-"ambitious" for not being similarly-concerned with self-improvement.
But then, I don't want to be with someone I'd have to "remold" to be compatible with, just someone with whom we can be ourselves and still be ideal for each other.

Oh, I wasn't trying to say he would be exhausting to be around, just to clarify, in case it came across that way. I was trying to make a joke about how he seems rather hard on himself sometimes, but maybe it fell flat.

I have the feeling that the two of you could go back and forth with analyzing and debating this all night, so I think I might just go to bed and check in tomorrow on what else you came up with.

That's fine. I think we're probably better just hanging it up - it sounds like we don't know each other well enough to tell when we're agreeing or disagreeing, so its probably just as wiseto avoid having a false argument. So much of this I think comes down to local point of reference, objects in their environments that they can point out as examples of what they mean or to what extent.

Admittedly that side of me does come from a rather dark place though. I'm kind of surprised I'm admitting this on open forum but what the heck, its not something anyone can really use against me IMO. In so many ways society's told me that I should be in a furnace, that I have no right to be alive, and its one of those things where I feel like I constantly get small reminders in little ways on a daily basis of why that is. In that sense I feel like the bar (the 'your okay' level) isn't set for me at waist level or chest level but something closer to ten feet over my head. Its not necessarily the most comfortable way to exist or feel life but I guess - just like life and society treat people very differently over the slightest details - its also likely that many of the most successful people out there have been people who felt like they needed to commit honor suicide if they came up short of exceptional. Its a disease where, for all the silver lining I still actually feel somewhat jealous of people who don't need what I do in order to feel that they have a right to dignity, respect, or a right to their existence. Mind you - I don't put that on anyone else but, kind of like what you've mentioned in terms of growing up with chaos, I think this is my own version.

BTW, I got that it was a joke. If I were to be Australian about it I'd say no worries .

techstepgenr8tion, to my surprise I so often identify with your dating/relationship problems and I'm a woman I don't know if it's due to cultural differences or just other circumstances, but most things that bother you used to be a huge problem for me too.

All my LTR before my marriage deteriorated and eventually ended because after about one year (how I dreaded that!) my partner wanted to "take it to the next level", move in together or discuss marriage and kids. Not necessarily then but they wanted a clear commitment from me that I'm willing and able to do these things. I wasn't . I couldn't live with someone, I tried it several times with disastrous results. And I couldn't cope with the level of disponibility expected from me and I didn't understand why during the time we spent in my/his place we had to do almost everything together - my boyfriends often got upset if I started reading while they watched TV for instance as it apparently meant I found their company or tastes boring. It was also expected from me to always want to spend time with/entertain their friends or family and enjoy the same activities as they did. There were many others similar expectations that I didn't and couldn't meet.

That being said, there is something that's still very important for me: I'm not clingy and I don't have whims so when I actually need my husband I want to know he'll be there no matter what and that I'll be his first priority when something serious is going on. I rarely use this "prerogative" but I don't think the trust we have would be possible if we wouldn't both knew we can rely on each other this way.

I got dumped for not being willing to meet a guy's friends.
Fine with me- he was always too busy with them to spend much time with me, anyway.

Well, it is just a fantasy in my head to live with someone very independant .. same house or appartment but rather indepently. She has one room , and I have another. Each has a job or home biz , and we have our own ways ... Maybe we get together time to time ( like breakfast or weekend lunch) and that would be enough for me. Finances are not impossible to arrange. We could share some home expenses and I could take care of all utility bills. That is OK. But personal breathing space should be respected !

However, in reality , I am married to a highly dependant wife who sees dependance as a form of love. Maybe she is like Bethie in the part where she wants us do EVERYTHING together, even watching same TV shows ..etc. That makes me ... uncomfortable, to say the least.

Most of the people I know have something 'lacking' in their lives. I know that 'enough space' is lacking in my life. But we have to do what we can to live and create some form of happines around us.

I don't know that wanting to spend all your time with someone constitutes a "dependence" in the pathological sense of the word, though it can be. I wouldn't call a relationship where you only get together from "time to time" a relationship. I wouldn't even think of it as a substantive friendship. Sleeping in separate rooms? Fub-get abowt it! It would break my heart if someone I love wanted to live like roommates. Though for me, it's not an arbitrary matter of lifestyle to be forced on someone else, but a relationship where that much closeness occurs because two people can't get enough of each other.

I think it's more about finding a balance, Bethie. For instance I read a lot - what will you do, read over my shoulder? Or let's say I like to run and you hate it, should I give that up? Or you like watching reality shows and I hate them, would you make me watch even if you knew they drive me insane?

Besides knowing I can go around my business without someone constantly breathing down my neck I like the time spent together to really be *quality* time, ergo that we both enjoy it and make the best of it - if it becomes a burden it all goes to hell. You just need to find someone who can share your likes/dislikes and habits. And yes, I know how bloody hard it is.

Thanks everyone for your replies.

I was hoping this wouldn't turn into yet another gender discussion. Thing is, invariability if you mention some sort of experience or concept, you will get lot of people who are able to identify or relate to it in some way, but in my experience rarely is it the exact same thing for everyone. That is why I don't think of a common need for space in quite the same light, becuase whilst true, up to a point, when it suits many also like the trappings of a traditional relationship too. It isn't a deal breaker for them or they wouldn't be doing it. So I don't really think of what I'm talking about as just common 'maleness', etc.

Having said that, I think replies here are compelling, and I do think it is a spectrum. It is not purely friends with benefits situation, but it does not exclude that either. The main thing is it is a kind of relationship that is intended to persist like an actual "relationship" does. If we are talking about intervening periods that is different and not really out of the ordinary.

Interesting about the divorce/separation cases make a lot of sense. Personally I don't think I was ever any different. I sort of knew this early twenties, and before that I was pretty naive about everything. But it is only recently that I've really come to terms with and am content with it. I guess it doesn't really matter when and how, though. All power to LDRers.

hey namesake

I want to mention I don't want kids or a family. Families imo are destructive and something I couldn't deal with.

I'm not exactly sure why I'm posting. I guess I just want to document the fact that my AS boyfriend and I are giving this type of relationship a try. I'll try to keep this as short as possible, but here's the story:

I am NT and have quite a bit of LTR experience including a ten-year marriage. I've been with my bf for two years, but prior to that his longest relationship had been 5 months which means he's on uncharted territory at this point. We both require a lot of personal space and I am very independent with many outside interests, activities, and obligations.

For the last two years we've had a "conventional" relationship. Daily phone calls, spent several evenings a week on activities together, etc. About six weeks ago (around the time of our 2 year anniversary) I noticed my bf getting more distant than usual. I don't usually take that personally, but there seemed to be a bit of resentment included this time. So finally, a week ago, I asked him if he was bored with me or if there was some other issue. He said the two-year anniversary had freaked him out and asked for a few days to process his feelings about me and the relationship. He said he wanted to see if he would miss me. I expected the worst.

For the next three days he disappeared from the world. He didn't see friends, he didn't post on FB, he went to work and then directly home...to sort this out. On the third day he sent me a text which said, "I miss you. I hope we can work things out. I love you." This was a big deal to me because he never says those words. He shows me in a million ways, but he hasn't said "love" since 2009. I don't need to hear it, but it's nice. I also knew he'd put a lot of thought into it. So, we met the next day and he said he "couldn't function in life without me" but that he needed more space and autonomy. He knew I never tried to keep that from him but that his past experiences with women had him convinced that they need constant communication and were waiting to move in and get married. None of which I'm up for. We have no timeline. And he knows that.

The plan now is for him to only contact me when he WANTS to talk to me or see me. And my expectation is that when he does, the quality of our time together will be good. We both love this arrangement in theory. There's still a small part of my brain which has been ingrained to think that a LTR needs to get closer, that distance means he cares less, that he wants to see other women. But I know him, and I know he's honest to a fault and would never cheat (he even said, "No matter how much distance I seem to be taking, I will never be untrue."). And a relationship of this sort seems ideal to me. We're still in love and committed to each other, but we don't have to force interactions and will more enjoy the ones we want to have.

So again, I'm not sure why I'm pouring this out to you. Maybe because my NT friends will all find this terrible and never understand. And I think maybe you'll understand it better.

This kind of relationship sounds ideal for my needs (43, female, two children under 8 years old), but I wonder how one could pull it off, practically. For example, what if I'm in one of my "need space" phases and he's in a "need companionship" phase? Or vice versa? Or if I'd like him to accompany me to some occasional social activity (a party, a play, whatever) and he's not into it? How do you take the good without fostering resentment during the non-meshy times?

I'm extraordinarily independent, which is why I think I need to govern what happens when I do surrender some of that independence (in the form of companionship-on-demand). Does that make sense? I think this is why I'm alone. Too autonomous.