When a woman makes a big deal out of her being and “Independant Woman” that just says to me “I don’t need you”. I do believe that in a relationship it is important to feel needed by your “Partner” and wearing your independance like a badge of honor is sending the opposite message.

Speaking of the relationship being a “Partnership” would imply co-dependance.

IMO co-dependance in a relationship is the middle ground, the middle path, the way of balance between two people.

As for a dependant relationship I think it is dangerous for both parties. Someone is not getting their needs met in the relationship which will have the effect of driving them away from the depandant person. The resulting seperation would prove to be quite difficult for the dependant person to adust to.

I have dated both ultra-independant and ultra-dependant women and I must say that the relationships with the ultra-independant women were the most painful. Basically, while your together she is nuturing and developing a life that does not include you. For me this has been a relationship killer if I am thinking about the future in the long term “We” and she is thinking about the future in the “I”. However, the ultra-independant woman works very well for the casual relationship where we are both thinking about the future in the “I” and there is no real expectation of being needed in the relationship. Frankly, in this kind of relationship any female expectation that a man should need her and want her all the time is rediculous as he is probably off being an independant man himself so why should you feel needed?

Dating the dependant woman is just uncomfortable. No matter how good it might feel there is always a part of the relationship that is strongly uncomfortable. Usually, one of the two is NOT getting their relationship needs met. These have been the more unhealthy type relationships for me. And generally the dependant person ends up with the short end of the stick at the end of the relationship.

Personally, I think a relationship should be a partnership where each partner has a role in building the relationship.

Is that corny? Or old fashioned thinking? Opinions Please!

A guy’s point of view here. I want a woman who is independent but not totally independent. I know that sounds funny, but I want the closeness, the intimacy and the whole relationship package.

Who needs someone who doesn’t have the time, plays games with you, and doesn’t want to be your partner? If that’s the case, then just have the talk, be FWB’s, and continue to look for a real partner.

You don’t want to be all over each over, have no other interests etc, no life outside of each other, but you also don’t want to be almost completely exclusive of each other’s lives. What’s the point?

Wow, that really sucks, but having had my fair share of disappointments in the past with regard to independence vs. exclusivity, all I can add is that I now believe in waiting for sex til after I’m convinced that the relationship is exclusive, via words and actions, be it a few weeks or even months, depending upon my partner and my comfort level with the situation.

BTW: IMHO, independence is a state of mind and NOT an excuse to whore around; unfortunately, all too many men (and some women) nowadays twist this word to mean just that. If dependence, by contrast, equals monogamous caring for and sharing with one’s partner, be it with time spent, sexual intimacy or other displays of affection and long term commitment, then, by all means, color me dependent.

Hugs from bookyone

I became painfully aware of what I thought was a common term’s definition. Before we had sex, I asked the guy I was falling for if he had been sexual with any other woman since we started dating. He admitted he had, since he and I had not agreed to exclusivity. I asked, “If you and I become sexual, will you be sexual with anyone else?” A pretty clear question, i thought. He said, “No, I will not be sexual with anyone but you.” We did the deed.

A month later I learned after that discussion he’d had sex again with the aforementioned woman. When I confronted him with my knowledge of this, he denied any conversation of being exclusive. I reminded him of our dialogue. He said, “You and I only had sex once.[We'd actually had sex 3 times.] Being “sexual” is an ongoing relationship to me.” Give me a break! It reminded me of Clinton’s “I did not have sex with that woman.” The definition depends on the benefits to the individual.