then would women reject him for not being needed. I guess where I am coming from is the notion that two people complete each other to form one person (as a couple). That does not sound healthy to me, and does not appeal to me at all.
I would prefer to be myself, and find someone who would remain herself, to come to a mutual and equal relationship.
Is that a major turn off or even prevent any sort of relationship. Even further, is it really so wrong? Am I somehow attempting to shortchange her orr diminish her role?
I'd just like to throw that out there to further debate, and look forward to your thoughts.
thanks.
2007-03-22 20:57:59 · 4 answers · asked by fromorto12 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
You can still be yourself and be in a relationship. But everyone changes when they begin relationships. You try new things, and sometimes you eventually come to like different things than you used to.
2007-03-22 21:01:55 · answer #1 · answered by firey_aries_gurl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no such thing as being absolutely independent in a relationship. Not such thing as absolutely not needing someone. You always need someone, thats what relationships are for. It smarks of self-conceit to think your spouse brings nothing into the relationship. At the very least, being just there for you and being yours provides some stability in you and shows they are important. You will be a horror to a spouse who thinks she has no more special place in your heart that any faceless character around.
2007-03-22 21:07:39 · answer #2 · answered by Elder 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you don't need someone,but wants in relationship.this does not make sense..Then have a nice relationship with your self...A person has to compromise,to relate herself to someone..
2007-03-22 21:09:06 · answer #3 · answered by Vannili 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
UMMM........NO
2007-03-22 21:27:23 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋